Since March 1, 1950, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), separated by the Taiwan Strait, have been competing with each other to win the right to represent China in the international community. Both sides have regarded themselves as the only legitimate representative of China.
It was not until Oct. 25, 1971, when UN Resolution No. 2758 was passed, that the issue was resolved.
The resolution states that "[the UN decides] to expel forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek (
Today, the international community recognizes the government of the People's Republic of China (PRC) as the only legitimate government of China. As a result, the government of the Republic of China (ROC) has lost the legitimacy and legal right to act as the government of China.
This does not mean, however, that the PRC can can assert sovereignty over the ROC's territory. The reasons for this are two-fold.
First, the ROC refers to the Chiang regime, which had no legal claim to sovereignty over Taiwan's territory.
Second, after the signing of the San Francisco Peace Treaty on Sept. 8, 1951, Taiwan's sovereignty automatically passed to the Taiwanese people, but the Chiang regime deprived them of that right until the 10 Additional Articles of the Constitution were promulgated on May 1, 1991, during the administration of former president Lee Teng-hui (
Through that amendment, the ROC government handed back sovereignty over Taiwan to the Taiwanese people and Taiwan legally speaking became a new state.
In other words, Taiwan is a de jure independent nation.
Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States, which was written in 1933, stipulates that a state as an international legal entity should possess the following qualifications: a permanent population, a defined territory, a government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states.
Taiwan obviously meets all four qualifications. Today, the nation's government is no longer a government-in-exile, but a legal government completely of and for this nation.
Furthermore, Article 3 of the Montevideo Convention also stipulates that "the political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states."
Therefore, even if Taiwan is not recognized by the international community, Taiwanese still have the right to safeguard the sovereignty of their nation and the integrity of their territory.
Those who do not identify with the nation of Taiwan should be allowed to leave for another country.
In short, the government of Taiwan is not the "Chinese government" that Chiang's regime falsely made itself out to be, but a political community with effective jurisdiction over Taiwan, the Pescadores, Kinmen and Matsu.
No other state has the right to claim sovereignty over the territory under the effective control of this political community.
According to British barrister Ian Brownlie, the PRC claims that "Taiwan is a part of China" and that "the `mainland' and Taiwan belong to the same China" do not deprive Taiwan of statehood.
The reason is that based on the Montevideo Convention, Taiwan is already a democratic nation with de jure independence.
Wilson Chen is an honorary professor at the Graduate Institute of National Development at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
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
RSS