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
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
As the highest elected official in the nation’s capital, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) is the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) candidate-in-waiting for a presidential bid. With the exception of Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕), Chiang is the most likely KMT figure to take over the mantle of the party leadership. All the other usual suspects, from Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) to New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) to KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) have already been rejected at the ballot box. Given such high expectations, Chiang should be demonstrating resolve, calm-headedness and political wisdom in how he faces tough