In the days of court diplomacy, it was said that the job of the diplomat was to tell fibs to foreigners in the interest of his country.
Under President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has turned this principle on its head, lying to its own people in the interest of a hostile nation.
Members of Ma’s party — the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — and of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), are the only people in the world who think it appropriate to disregard the Treaty of San Francisco, to ignore the emergence of democracy in Taiwan and to cling to a press communique released following the 1943 Cairo Conference in Egypt saying that Taiwan and the Penghu Islands were to be restored to the Republic of China.
When National Taiwan University law professor Chiang Huang-chih (姜皇池) wrote recently that the Cairo Declaration was just a statement of intention and not a binding international agreement, the ministry acted as if it had been personally affronted, and scrabbled wildly around for a riposte.
It assured us that the Cairo Declaration was a legally binding “treaty and agreement.”
The ministry’s so-called clarification of the issue is simply not based on the facts. In asserting this, the ministry is brazenly complying with Beijing, which wants to annex Taiwan, and lying to Taiwanese.
The Cairo communique was neither a treaty nor an agreement. If it were a treaty, it would have had to have been approved by the US Senate, and if it were an executive agreement it would have had to have been publicly announced. However, this distinction seems to have been lost on the ministry, too, which apparently believes the communique was both.
When former US president Harry Truman and his secretary of state Dean Acheson subsequently spoke of China’s “occupation” and control of Taiwan, they did not mention sovereignty.
And yet the ministry had the temerity to say that the Allied Forces recognized that “China had sovereignty over Taiwan.”
Some legal consultants in the US Department of State do say that, according to the Cairo communique and other subsequent declarations, Taiwan has already been “restored to the Republic of China.”
However, the legal argument for this is weak, and it is certainly not the US Department of State’s official position.
The US Department of State’s position is as follows: According to the protocol and the text of the San Francisco Treaty, the legal status of Taiwan and the Penghu Islands is yet to be decided.
When the US Senate approved the Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty, it specifically noted that the treaty did not touch upon the legal status of Taiwan or the undecided question of sovereignty.
Former US president Franklin Roosevelt offered Manchuria, Taiwan and the Penghu Islands to former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) to make sure he continued to resist the Japanese.
This covert deal violated the right to self-determination of the peoples colonized by the Japanese. Thankfully, these promises were never made legal, so that Taiwanese still had some choice in the matter.
The fact that the government is clueless when it comes to protecting the rights of Taiwanese is in China’s favor. However, lying to your own people is just setting yourself up against them.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) on Tuesday returned from her visit to the US, where she had met with several US senators and representatives, think tanks, and overseas Taiwanese and Chinese communities, espousing her vision of promoting cross-strait dialogue as a way to evade war. On Monday last week, she sat down with US academic Orville Schell and Asia Society Policy Institute distinguished fellow Daniel Russel. Russel is a seasoned diplomat who has served in positions related to East Asian and Indo-Pacific affairs. At the conclusion of the discussion, Russel employed his considerable diplomatic experience and knowledge
I arrived in Taiwan when I was 18, fresh out of high school and trying to navigate university life. Everything felt unfamiliar. My broken Mandarin quickly revealed what I already knew: I was not from here. When I told people I was from Indonesia, many told me that I did not look Indonesian. This caught me off guard, not because it was cruel, but because of how casually it was said. Sometimes it came with curiosity, sometimes surprise, occasionally admiration for my “fair skin.” More often than not, the people asking meant no harm. It is understandable. I look ethnically
Nearly three decades after the 1997 handover, Hong Kong has become a paradox: a place where financial dynamism coexists with political repression — a reality Taiwan cannot afford to ignore. Despite a sharp contraction of civic freedoms since 2020, Hong Kong remains a major global financial center. It has recently overtaken Switzerland as the world’s largest offshore wealth hub, supported by steady inflows of capital from China and across Asia. The territory continues to serve as a key intermediary linking Chinese firms, multinational investors and global markets. Institutional continuity has played a role. The Hong Kong dollar’s peg to the
In the aftermath of China’s expulsion of the New York Times correspondent Vivian Wang (王月眉), Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Lin Jian (林劍) has publicly and explicitly articulated Beijing’s core thinking on the Taiwan issue. Chinese authorities accused the newspaper of promoting what they called “Taiwan independence fallacies,” and said that its description of Taiwan as a country amounts to a challenge to the “one China” principle. The significance of the incident goes beyond the reporting dispute and has given the international community a window into the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) attitude toward Taiwan. Lin, in a statement, said
RSS