Declaration lacks legal power
I was intrigued by the article about a conference on Sunday to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the Cairo Declaration (“Declaration ‘intended to return Taiwan to ROC,’” Dec. 2, page 1).
“It is a ‘very big mistake’ to think that the Cairo Declaration was only a press communique. Both the US and Japan have included the Cairo Declaration, the 1945 Potsdam Declaration and the 1945 Japanese Instrument of Surrender in their official collection of treaties,” President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said at the conference in Taipei, adding that all three documents are legally binding.
I do not know about Japan, but the US has definitely not included the Cairo Declaration in its official collection of treaties. How do I know that? Because an assistant archivist for records services at the US National Archives, where the declaration is held, wrote to me: “The National Archives and Records Administration has not filed this declaration under treaties... The declaration was a communique and it does not have [a] treaty series (TS) or executive agreement series (EAS) number.”
It is true that the declaration was more than a press communique, but it was not a treaty.
So what was it?
It was a “Declaration of Intent.” Nothing more, nothing less.
This “Cairo Declaration of Intent” was created in Cairo at a meeting on Dec. 1, 1943 between Winston Churchill, Franklin Roosevelt and Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), and has been used for the past 70 years by China and Taiwan as a wafer-thin legal foundation for their claims that Taiwan is part of China.
The reality is that although it was important at that time, the declaration does not have any legally binding power allowing Taiwan or China to derive to any territorial claims.
ADIZ reveals Ma’s intent
To protest and challenge China’s new air defense identification zone (ADIZ) over the East China Sea, the US and Japan sent their bomber and fighter planes through the zone the day after it was announced. In contrast, President Ma Ying-jeou issued a statement instructing his administration to submit Taiwan’s flight schedules to China as requested.
Many in Taiwan were dismayed and angry, and condemned Ma for his cowardly action.
Ma is Chinese, not Taiwanese. His goal is to unify Taiwan and China. His strategy is to use the so-called “warm water cooks fogs,” a catchphrase meaning do it slowly and gradually. His tactics are as follows, step-by-step:
First, kill Taiwanese leaders. Ma believes Chinese are the rulers and Taiwanese are the followers. The day Ma was elected, he jailed former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). Now, he wants to take out Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平). Soon, he will try to destroy the next leader of Taiwan — the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) nominee in the 2016 presidential election. He is following the old Chinese saying: “Don’t kill the soldiers, kill the general.” The “soldiers” will be fighting among themselves for survival.
Second, he aims to control the stomachs of people.
He eliminated all regulations and restrictions set by previous presidents on trade relations between Taiwan and China. He allowed unlimited capital to flow to China. In Taiwan, he allowed factories to close, unemployment to increase, wages to decrease and made the public’s life miserable.
He aims to make Taiwanese increasingly poorer so rulers can control the the public’s life and activity.
Third, Ma froze foreign relations. His administration stopped supporting the campaign for Taiwan’s independence, deferring to the UN. He blocked Taiwan’s opportunity to strengthen relations with other nations in order to promote his goal of “one China with two regions” and his stance that “the relationship between Taiwan and China are not an international relations issue.”
Fourth, he wants to weaken defense. He objected to an increase in the defense budget and weapons development as a signal to China that Taiwan is preparing to surrender.
Fifth, he allows Chinese capital to flow into Taiwan. He is allowing Chinese to do business and be employed in Taiwan. The result is that Chinese companies can employ Taiwanese. In the future, the Chinese boss will be able to tell Taiwanese what to do and when.
Sixth, Ma’s administration has been revising the time required for Chinese people to become Taiwanese citizens.
He is copying the so-called “human waves tactic” in Tibet.
There are other tactics, including the cross-strait service trade agreement and the peace treaty.
If Ma’s candidate wins the 2016 presidential election, Taiwan will become like either Hong Kong or Tibet.
When Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Xi Jinping (習近平) wakes up one morning and decides that his People’s Liberation Army (PLA) can win a war to conquer Taiwan, that is when his war will begin. To ensure that Xi never gains that confidence it is now necessary for the United States to shed any notions of “forbearance” in arms sales to Taiwan. Largely because they could guarantee military superiority on the Taiwan Strait, US administrations from Jimmy Carter to Barack Obama practiced “forbearance” — pre-emptive limitation of arms sales to Taiwan — in hopes of gaining diplomatic leverage with Beijing. President Ronald
Communist China’s Global Times warned US President Joe Biden in the first week of this month that he “should make a significant response to China’s sincerity within his first 100 days, as the sincerity and patience will not last forever.” In fact, they lasted only days. By the end of the week, Beijing had laid down the law, so to speak, to the Biden administration. First was a speech billed as a “Dialogue with National Committee on US-China Relations,” by Yang Jiechi (楊潔篪), director of China’s Office of the Central Commission for Foreign Affairs. Yang said he was pleased “to have
As the US marks one month under the leadership of President Joe Biden, the conversations around Taiwan have shifted. As I discussed in a Taipei Times article (“No more talk of ‘bargaining chips,’” Jan. 30, page 8), with the end of former US president Donald Trump’s administration — and all of the unpredictability associated with it — Taiwan would not have to worry about being used as a “bargaining chip” in some sort of deal with the People’s Republic of China. The talk of Taiwan being used as a bargaining chip never subsided over those four years, but under Biden, those
The Canadian parliament on Monday passed a motion saying that China’s human rights abuses against the country’s Uighur Muslim population in Xinjiang constitute “genocide.” Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has so far avoided using the word genocide in regard to Xinjiang, but if he did, it would begin to generate solidarity among G7 nations on the issue — which is something Trudeau has called for. Former US president Donald Trump used the word genocide regarding Xinjiang before leaving office last month, and members of US President Joe Biden’s administration have been pushing for him to make the same declaration, a Reuters report