Advertisement

Leak reveals UK partner severed Taiwan bird society over 'secession' fears

Taiwan bird enthusiasts protest in a Taipei park about the expulsion - Henry Lin/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock
Taiwan bird enthusiasts protest in a Taipei park about the expulsion - Henry Lin/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock

BirdLife International has suggested that it cut ties with its Taiwanese conservation partner out of fear that it would promote Taiwan’s “secession” from China, according to an internal email seen by the Telegraph.

The Chinese Wild Bird Federation (CWBF), based in Taipei and which helps protect the Black-faced Spoonbill and the endangered Chinese Crusted Tern, was stunned when it was expelled from BirdLife earlier this month for refusing to sign a political pledge not to advocate Taiwanese independence. 

The CWBF had partnered with Cambridge-based BirdLife International since 1996 to work on conservation projects. The group, which has created more than 50 Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas to protect 640 species of both migratory and resident birds, stressed that it was apolitical.

However, Taiwan – a democratic Pacific island that marks a central point along the East Asian-Australasian Flyway – is also claimed by China, which has threatened to invade if it does not agree to a peaceful takeover.

Beijing has repeatedly sought to isolate Taiwan on the international stage and increased pressure on governments, companies and international organisations to exclude it.

Taiwan's largest bird conservation group said was apolitical and dedicated to endangered birds - Henry Lin/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock
Taiwan's largest bird conservation group said was apolitical and dedicated to endangered birds - Henry Lin/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock

The expulsion of the CWBF, which had been internationally lauded for its work, upset and confused birdwatchers and conservationists when it made global headlines two weeks ago.

Cambridge-based BirdLife has not commented publicly, but in a private email to global partners, it said the decision was made unanimously by its Global Council “painfully and with sadness”.

It justified the move “to avoid wading into the perfectly understandable yet treacherous arena of geopolitical pressures and conflicts”.

In doing so, it “voted to follow the United Nations policies with regard to national sovereignty, nomenclature and related issues,” it said.

The email added: “Operational Procedures further make clear that a Partner cannot use the BirdLife name, logo, brand and/or symbols in conjunction with those of any political movement, political party, government, territory or other political unit which promotes secession from a UN recognised country.”

The organisation argued that its obligation under UK charities law was “to avoid any risk which could prevent BirdLife from achieving its aims or carrying out its strategies”.

In 1971, the UN recognised the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as “the only legitimate representative of China to the United Nations” and removed the Republic of China. The ROC is the official name for Taiwan.

However, while China claims ownership of Taiwan, the island of some 24 million operates like any other nation with its own democratically-elected government, currency and military. Its international status remains disputed.

The UK is a strong informal ally of Taiwan and the Foreign Office has supported its participation in UN and other international bodies, “where there is precedent for involvement, where Taiwan can contribute to the global good, and where there is no pre-requisite of nationhood for participation.”

In a statement on Friday, the CWBF said “we would like to reiterate that we have never taken any political stances. We are conservationists, not political actors.”

The group also released its correspondence with BirdLife and announced a name change to “Taiwan Wild Bird Federation”. Its previous name, which it had already changed three times at BirdLife’s request, had been a point of further dispute.

“We are saddened that it has become necessary to release this correspondence. However, it was the only way to address the false allegations raised as the reason behind our removal. The letters show that we always negotiated in good faith,” said Scott Pursner, CWBF’S director of international affairs.

He said the group’s exclusion meant it no longer had an “international platform for coordinating conservation efforts”.

Richard Foster, a British freelance bird guide working in Taiwan for global tour companies, called BirdLife’s actions “insulting and upsetting”.

“An, otherwise good, international organisation is blatantly doing the political work of China - yet at the same time accusing Taiwan’s apolitical bird society of being a political actor. Birds don’t know borders, and Taiwanese birders only hope our neighbours work for their protection.”

BirdLife did not respond to detailed Telegraph inquiries.  A spokeperson said: “While we still do not comment publicly on our internal partner issues and processes, I hope that the email text you sent along gives you the opportunity for a more balanced and comprehensive understanding.”