World history has a Republic of China (ROC) and a People's Republic of China (PRC) but no "one China."
The emergence of the "one China" concept has been a self-deceiving fabrication from the beginning. It is a play with words and a case of international fraud.
From the provisional constitution passed when the ROC was established in 1912 to the current ROC Constitution, there has been no mention of "one China," only the ROC. Before the PRC was founded in 1949, no one had ever said that the "one China is the Republic of China," just as no one has ever said that the "one America is the United States of America" or the "one UK is the United Kingdom."
Only after the Chinese Communist Party defeated the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and announced the abolition of the ROC Constitution and the replacement of the ROC with the PRC did the concept of "one China" emerge.
The KMT government, forced into exile in Taiwan, then borrowed two "shells" from the already extinct ROC to put into place in Taiwan -- the "shells" of the national title of the ROC and the ROC Constitution. The government also claimed that there was only one China in the world and that the ROC was the only legitimate government representing China.
At that time, the world was divided into two blocks. The US supported the ROC government in Taiwan, which opposed the communists and resisted Russia, and represented China as one of the permanent members of the UN Security Council. The US refused to let the PRC enter the UN. This situation lasted for 22 years. At that time, the illusory "one China" was apparently advantageous for the KMT government in Taiwan.
The world changed in the 1970s. As the Nixon administration adopted the strategy of "uniting with China to contain Russia," the fabricated content of the "one China" concept was altered as well. In 1972, the US and China signed the Shanghai Communique to settle their dif-ferences over the Taiwan issue.
Former US secretary of state and national security adviser Henry Kissinger came up with his famous statement: "All Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States government does not challenge that position."
From then on, an international scam created by the "one China" policy or "one China" principle has long dominated the relations between Taiwan, the US and China. It is increasingly unfavorable to Taiwan.
On Jan. 1, 1979, the US announced it would sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan, withdraw its troops, abolish treaties and recognize "the government of the People's Republic of China as the sole legitimate government of China." The idea that "one China is the ROC" was no longer tenable in the international community.
The basis of the US government's "one China" policy is that it does not challenge the position that "all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China." Once the 23 million people on this side of the Strait renounce the fictitious concept that "one China is the ROC" and give "China" back to the 1.3 billion Chinese on the other side of the Strait, the US government's "one China" policy will collapse without being attacked.
This is neither provocation nor a change in the status quo. This is facing up to the fact that there is one country on each side of the Strait, bidding farewell to the self-deceiving illusion of "one China" and putting an end to the meaningless play on words and ludicrous international scam.
Ruan Ming is a visiting professor at Tamkang University and a former special assistant to late Chinese Communist Party secretary-general Hu Yaobang (
Translated by Jackie Lin
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of