Taiwan has never been a part of China, either historically or legally, since 1895 when the Manchu-led Qing empire ceded Taiwan to Japan. Imperial Japan ruled Taiwan as a colony until 1945 when the US-led alliance defeated Japan.
By virtue of the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, Japan renounced "all right, title and claim" over Taiwan.
No recipient of the renounced sovereignty was designated. Cession of Taiwan without a recipient is neither unusual nor unique. In the 1898 Treaty of Paris ending the Spanish American War, Spain renounced "sovereignty over and title to" Cuba, but did not designate a recipient country.
Likewise, Libya, Eritrea and Somaliland were relinquished by Italy without recipient, according to the 1947 Treaty of Peace with Italy. In such cases, the renounced sovereignty naturally fell to the people of the relinquished territory.
Taiwan has therefore been a sovereign state for more than half a century. But the government of the People's Republic of China, however, has claimed the island nation as part of China since its founding in 1949, and has repeatedly threatened to invade Taiwan.
To demonstrate China's determination to Taiwan as well as to the Chinese themselves, China's National People's Congress unanimously passed its "Anti-Secession" Law on March 14.
The law authorizes the Chinese government to resort to the use of force, if necessary, to "reunify" Taiwan. What the Chinese euphemistically call "reunification" is, of course, annexation.
In its attempt to annex Taiwan by force or any other means, the leaders of China should learn from history. Since the early 20th century it has been proven again and again that annexation of another country or territory without the consent of the people will not last. As a matter of fact, nearly all such annexations sooner or later have been reversed. Let's examine some of these cases.
Claiming that Korea and Japan had deep historical and cultural ties, Imperial Japan annexed Korea by virtue of a 1910 treaty. Through intimidation and deception, the Japanese induced the Korean royal court to sign the Annexation Treaty. The Korean people, however, did not approve of the Japanese annexation; they continued to resist Japanese rule by various means.
Korean resistance culminated in a large-scale, anti-Japanese demonstration on March 1, 1919. Japan's brutal suppression resulted in the deaths of thousands of protesters. Koreans continued to suffer under the harsh Japanese colonial rule. Fortunately for the Koreans, the US and its allies defeated Japan in 1945. Korea was subsequently declared an independent state once more.
In the case of Nazi Germany's annexation of Austria, Adolf Hitler believed that German-speaking Austria ought to become part of Germany, and he did not want to allow the Austrians to decide the question themselves. Hitler's army invaded and annexed Austria in 1938, one day before the Austrian government had scheduled a referendum on the issue of unifying with Germany.
At first the Austrians thought that they would retain a considerable degree of separateness and be only gradually absorbed by Nazi Germany. They were wrong. In any case, the Allies defeated Nazi Germany and liberated Austria as well as other German-occupied courtiers in1945. German annexation of Austria lasted for only seven years.
The people of East Timor, however, were not as lucky as the Austrians. Their suffering under Indonesian rule was ignored for nearly a quarter century after Indonesian troops invaded and occupied independent East Timor in 1975. The Indonesian leaders deemed that it was their right to bring the East Timorese people under their rule.
It wasn't until the late 1990s that the international community decided it could no longer ignore the Indonesian atrocities toward the East Timor resistance, and the UN became involved. In August 1999, the UN supervised a popular referendum in which the overwhelming majority of the people of East Timor voted for independence from Indonesia. Less than three years later, in May 2002, East Timor became internationally recognized as an independent state.
The cases discussed above demonstrate that in post-World War II world, annexation of another country will not stand. In the age of freedom and human rights, the world should not and would not tolerate the subjugation of unwilling people. One former colony after another became independent after the World War II. The dissolution of both the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia in 1991 further attested to the truth that a country that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to hold together a country that was created by means of intimidation and war. China, nevertheless, has managed to hang on to Tibet, which it invaded and annexed in 1950. Against all odds, Tibetans have continued to aspire to independence.
The Chinese military brutally crushed a Tibetan uprising in 1958 and compelled the Dalai Lama and more than 100,000 of his followers to flee to India. To this day, Beijing has had to station a large police force and troops in Tibet to maintain firm control over its unwilling Tibetan subjects. Continuing harsh rule over Tibet as well as Sinkiang, formerly known as Eastern Turkestan, has undoubtedly contributed to China's image as one of the world's worst human rights violators. Annexation without the consent of the people is uncivilized. China, however, still desires to annex yet another piece of land inhabited by freedom-loving, democratic people.
Taiwan has developed separately from China for more than a century, to the extent that today Taiwan's people enjoy higher living standards and far more freedom and human rights than their counterparts in China. It is crystal clear that the great majority of the Taiwanese are strongly opposed to Taiwan's becoming part of a repressive China.
Taiwan is a democracy, and unification with China could never become a reality without the endorsement of the people through a referendum. It is also certain that if there is to be real peace and stability in East Asia in general -- and in the Taiwan Strait in particular -- China must learn to respect human rights, international norms and the wishes of the people of Taiwan.
Chen Ching-chih is professor emeritus of history, Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville and a researcher with the Los Angeles-based Institute for Taiwanese Studies
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
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath