Chiang Shih-hsiung (江世雄) said that although a Taiwanese declaration of independence is not a legal requirement for UN membership, it is a political necessity ("Why independence is a necessity," July 9, page 8). Most commentators would agree with Chiang's assessment. However, we cannot overlook the practical problem which soon arises.
Specifically, from what country is Taiwan to declare its independence? This is the problem which confronts the Taiwan independence supporters.
The Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation, the formal Japanese surrender ceremonies -- none served to transfer the sovereignty of Taiwan to China. None of the Allies recognized any transfer of sovereignty on Oct. 25, 1945, the date of the Japanese surrender ceremonies in Taiwan.
In the San Francisco Peace Treaty, Japan renounced all claim and title over Taiwan, but China was not designated as the receiving country. The Treaty of Taipei gave full recognition to those arrangements.
Hence there are no international legal documents which can definitively show that China -- whether the People's Republic of China or the Republic of China -- holds the territorial sovereignty of Taiwan.
Have any of the Taiwan Independence groups found a solution to this problem?
Roger Lin
Taipei
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
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