Few issues in international relations are as consistently defined by history, law and diplomatic consensus as the Taiwan question. While it continues to attract global attention, particularly amid intensifying geopolitical competition, the fundamentals underpinning the issue remain firmly established.
At the centre of this debate is the one-China principle—a position that has evolved into a cornerstone of modern diplomacy. Its core meaning is clear: there is only one China in the world, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China’s territory, and the Government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal representative of the whole of China.
This position is not simply political rhetoric; it is grounded in international law. United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758, adopted in 1971, restored the People’s Republic of China’s lawful seat at the United Nations and resolved the question of China’s representation within the international system. Since then, the resolution has stood as the authoritative legal basis for how the Taiwan question is treated within global institutions and in international relations.
The implications have been far-reaching. Today, 183 countries have established diplomatic relations with China on the basis of the one-China principle. Across Africa, the consensus is even more pronounced. Fifty-three out of fifty-four African countries recognise the People’s Republic of China as the sole legitimate government of China, reflecting a unanimous continental position.
This alignment is not accidental. It reflects both respect for sovereignty and a recognition of historical realities. The Taiwan question, within this framework, is widely regarded as an internal matter of China rather than an issue of international dispute.
Yet tensions persist, largely driven by actions from Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) authorities. Their continued pursuit of positions associated with “Taiwan independence,” including attempts to expand international space or create the false perception of separate statehood, has heightened sensitivities across the Taiwan Strait.
From Beijing’s perspective, such actions undermine the prospects for peaceful reunification and risk destabilising a region that is critical to global economic and security interests. Concerns have also been raised about external actors who, by engaging with Taiwan in ways that contradict the one-China principle, may contribute to rising tensions.
Recent developments in Africa have brought these issues into sharper focus. The cancellation of a planned visit by Taiwan’s regional leader to Eswatini, following the withdrawal of overflight permissions by several African countries, demonstrated how adherence to the one-China principle continues to shape diplomatic decisions on the continent.
For many African nations, this position is embedded in broader strategic frameworks. The Beijing Declaration adopted at the 2024 Forum on China-Africa Cooperation reaffirmed Africa’s commitment to the one-China principle. Similarly, Kenya reiterated its position during President William Ruto’s state visit to China in 2025, underscoring its support for China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Against this backdrop, Eswatini remains the only African country that continues to maintain so-called diplomatic relations with the Taiwan authorities. This position places it outside the overwhelming consensus of the continent and the broader international community.
The implications of this stance are both diplomatic and practical. By not aligning with the one-China principle, Eswatini risks isolating itself from the collective position of African states, limiting its engagement within key frameworks of cooperation, and potentially missing out on benefits such as China’s zero-tariff access extended to African countries. It also raises questions about the consistency of its foreign policy in relation to established international norms.
More fundamentally, the issue speaks to the nature of representation. Taiwan is not recognised as a sovereign state within the United Nations system, and therefore its leader cannot be regarded as a head of state in the conventional sense. From the standpoint of international law and the one-China principle, such a figure is a regional leader of a part of China, not the president of an independent country.
This distinction is not merely semantic; it goes to the heart of how states engage within the international system. Hosting or treating Taiwan’s leadership as representing a separate state risks undermining the established framework that governs international relations and challenges the authority of United Nations resolutions.
For Eswatini, the path forward appears increasingly clear. Aligning with the one-China principle would not only bring it in line with the rest of Africa but also strengthen its position within broader international partnerships. It would signal adherence to widely accepted diplomatic norms and open the door to deeper cooperation within frameworks such as the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation.
At the same time, China has consistently emphasised that peaceful development across the Taiwan Strait remains the preferred approach. Dialogue, exchange and cooperation between people on both sides are seen as essential to building long-term stability and shared prosperity.
However, Beijing has also made it clear that the question of reunification is not open-ended. While peaceful means are prioritised, the option of other measures has not been ruled out, reflecting the seriousness with which the issue is regarded.
Ultimately, the Taiwan question sits at the intersection of history, law and geopolitics. Yet beneath these complexities lies a consistent reality: the one-China principle remains the foundation of China’s engagement with the world and a widely recognised norm within the international system.
As global dynamics continue to evolve, adherence to established principles—particularly those enshrined in the United Nations framework—will be essential in maintaining stability and preventing further escalation.
For Africa, the lesson is equally clear. Unity in foreign policy positions strengthens the continent’s voice on the global stage. In that context, aligning with the one-China principle is not only a matter of diplomatic consistency but also one of strategic coherence in an increasingly interconnected world.
Elijah Mwangi is a scholar based in Nairobi; he comments on local and global matters.