It has been 60 years since the Treaty of Peace with Japan, also known as the San Francisco Peace Treaty, was signed. The treaty has become the international legal basis for discussing the status of Taiwan following the end of World War II and it takes precedence over the Cairo Communique.
However, Taiwan’s undetermined status, as highlighted in the treaty, does not please President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), and a few days ago he reiterated his view that the Cairo Declaration and the Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty, also known as the Treaty of Taipei, both confirm that Taiwan was returned to the Republic of China (ROC).
When the US released its China White Paper in 1949, it was already clear that the US Department of State was getting ready to give up on the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government. However, US General Douglas MacArthur stressed that Chinese communism was a huge threat to the US’ position in the western Pacific Ocean and that its security operations in the region would be fundamentally shaken if Taiwan were to also fall to the communists.
Especially worthy of attention is that the Korean War broke out in 1950, when then-US secretary of state John Foster Dulles was still in Tokyo negotiating a peace treaty with Japan. Three days later, on June 27, then-US president Harry Truman announced that the Seventh Fleet of the US Navy would enter the Taiwan Strait to stop the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) from attacking Taiwan, while also stopping the KMT government from launching sea and air attacks on China. Truman’s statement clearly said that a decision on the future status of Formosa would have to wait until peace was restored in the Pacific or a peace agreement had been signed with Japan, or be left for consideration with the UN.
An investigation of information at the National Archives in Washington shows that what is known as the Provisional Draft of the Japanese Peace Treaty was changed several times in 1950 and 1951. The initial wording handed Formosa and the Pescadores directly to China, stating that “Japan hereby cedes to China, in full sovereignty, the island of Formosa and the Pescadores.”
However, the version from May 3, 1951, lumped Korea and Formosa and the Pescadores together, saying that “Japan renounces all rights, titles and claims to Korea, Formosa and the Pescadores.”
By July 13, 1951, the treaty finally separated Korea from Formosa and the Pescadores, clearly stating that Japan recognizes the independence of Korea, while it only mentioned that Japan renounced Formosa and the Pescadores: “Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores.”
During this process, the KMT government strongly resisted Taiwan being entrusted to the UN, but said, through the ROC’s ambassador to the US at the time, Wellington Koo (顧維鈞), that it did not disagree with the suggestion that the four major powers decide the status of Formosa and the Pescadores. Luckily, Dulles was eventually able to resist pressure from the UK and insisted on “freezing” the issue of Taiwan’s status and this was how the version of the peace treaty in which Japan merely renounced any rights to Taiwan came into being.
The direct implication of Taiwan’s undetermined status is that it does not belong to Japan, the US, or China, making Taiwanese self-determination the natural choice.
However, long-term rule by the KMT, a foreign regime, has covered up the fact that Taiwan does not belong to China. Instead of all the extravagant talk about sovereignty and independence, Taiwanese would do better to first ask themselves whether they can end the rule of the KMT.
Chen Yi-shen is an associate research fellow in the Institute of Modern History at Academia Sinica.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Local media reported earlier this month that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) criticized President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for referring to China as a “neighboring country,” saying that this is no different from a “two-state” model and that it amounts to changing the cross-strait “status quo.” I find it quite impossible to understand why civilized Taiwan continues to tolerate the existence of such a deceitful group that believes its own lies. The relationship between Taiwan and China is the relationship between two countries, and neither has any jurisdiction over the other — this is the undeniable “status quo.” Those who believe in the
On Thursday, China applied to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) — a regional economic organization whose 11 member countries have a combined GDP of US$11 trillion. That is less than China’s 2019 GDP of US$14.34 trillion, so why is China so eager to join? China says there are two main reasons: To consolidate its foreign trade and foreign investment base, and to fast-track economic and trade relations between China and member countries of the CPTPP free-trade area. China’s bilateral trade with these countries grew from US$78 billion in 2003 to US$685.1 billion last year, mostly because of China’s 2005
With the Taliban’s return to power in Afghanistan, China has remarketed its East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) concerns. Beijing urged the Taliban to make a clean break with the movement and asked the US to blacklist it again. While some are still debating whether the movement exists, it is not the core of the matter because its existence neither justifies China’s Uighur policy nor sheds light on its concerns after the withdrawal of the US from Afghanistan. Is China really worried, and if so, is it because of the movement? This question needs to be answered. When Chinese officials first acknowledged
US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) talked on the telephone on Thursday last week, the first time the two leaders have done so since Biden assumed the presidency. While each side sought to put their own gloss on the content of the conversation, some common ground did emerge. Biden reportedly said that both sides have a joint responsibility to ensure that competition between the US and China does not spiral into conflict and that there is no reason that the two nations are destined to fall into this trap. The day after the phone call, the Financial Times reported