WHAT a great opportunity today for President Chen Shui-bian (
None of the parties to the treaty intended this, which is why it is seldom spoken of. The original intention of the Allies was that after Japan's surrender, Taiwan should be returned to China, a sop thrown to Chiang Kai-shek (
This intention was expressed in the Cairo and Potsdam declarations. But declarations by belligerents do not make international law. They are simply a statement of one side's opening bid in the treaty-making process. The Allies certainly intended to return Taiwan to China. But in fact they never did. Japan, which had been given Taiwan and Penghu "in perpetuity" by the Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895, renounced its sovereignty over these territories. And that sovereignty was not passed to any other nation.
What should have happened is that Taiwanese should have been given their rights under UN de-colonization provisions to determine whether they wished to in fact stay with Japan, become a part of China, or be independent.
Of course this didn't happen. The reason why was simple. On the basis of the Cairo and Potsdam declarations, Taiwan had been given to Chiang's government to administer pending the determination of its final status. This is a legal point on which the KMT -- which has never been too refined about observing legal niceties -- has almost succeeded in brainwashing an entire nation. It has always claimed that sovereignty over Taiwan was restored to China in 1945. This is simply a lie. And it's one that Chen should expose. Given that defeated Japan was in no position to administer anything -- including itself -- in 1945, China was given the right to administer Taiwan pending a settlement of the claims of the war. The San Francisco treaty was that settlement. And neither China received anything.
Taiwan had what was essentially a regime of occupation until the early 1990s, when the Taiwanese were at last allowed to decide who should govern them. In fact not until the first democratic presidential election in 1996 can one say that the people of Taiwan had become the masters of their political destiny. In this they created a new nation, still only five years old. That so few seem to understand this is a tribute to the malign influence of KMT wishful thinking.
If the Beijing government is really a successor state to the ROC, which in turn was a successor to the Qing government, the PRC has no claim on Taiwan. It is bound by the obligations of its forerunner, they gave Taiwan away. The Allies might have gained it by force of arms, but they never returned it to China.
Nor, of course, did they give it to Chiang Kai-shek.
How we crave a speech by Chen that dispels the decadent fantasies, claims and counterclaims of both the communists and the KMT and simply states what Taiwan's position is under international law and tells China to live up to its treaty obligations. Today would have been an excellent opportunity for such lesson. Too bad it will be missed.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry