Taiwan and ROC dichotomy
History certainly will not decide society’s fate, but it will definitely disclose its past and point out the right direction for its future to avoid stagnation and political purgatory.
On April 10, 1979, the US Congress enacted the Taiwan Relations Act to help maintain peace, security and stability in the Western Pacific, and to promote a US foreign policy that improved relations between the US and Taiwan.
Section 15 of the act clearly stated that the US government would deal with the governing authorities in Taiwan, recognized as the Republic of China (ROC) prior to Jan. 1, 1979, and any successor governing authorities.
Who are the successor governing authorities? Should they forever be named as the ROC? Did the ROC own Taiwan sovereignty during those years? What is the relationship between Taiwan and the ROC? Why did the ROC become an unrecognized government in Taiwan after the Taiwan Relations Act took effect?
Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) was instructed by General Order No. 1 to militarily occupy Taiwan in 1945, with the ROC fleeing to Taiwan as a political refugee in 1949. The San Francisco Peace Treaty (SFPT) authorized the US Military Government as the principal occupying power and no entity was named as the recipient of Taiwan’s sovereignty. The US recognized the ROC from its establishment in 1912, even when it was kicked out by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1949, until the recognition of the PRC on Jan. 1, 1979.
So, in political terms, the ROC was known as a government in exile between 1949 and 1971. However, since 1971, Taiwan has governed itself. There are no legal documents that can prove the ROC owns Taiwan’s sovereignty. Taiwan is a shelter for the ROC, so it seems like a joke for the ROC to claim ownership of Taiwan, or to say that Taiwan is the ROC and the ROC is Taiwan.
The US as the principal occupying power of Taiwan, as authorized by the SFPT and the US Congress — just like the approval of the Tydings-McDuffie Act in 1934 and the Platt Amendment to Cuba in 1901, which provided the Philippines and Cuba respectively with independence — passed the Taiwan Relations Act which helped confirm Taiwan’s political status.
Unfortunately, Taiwan keeps calling itself the ROC. Both Cuba and the Philippines told the US what they wanted before their independence. Has Taiwan firmly expressed what it wants to be? American, Chinese, Japanese or Taiwanese?
Four years ago, Democratic Progressive Party Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) visited the US while she was running for the presidency of Taiwan, but she did not clearly identify her plan for what she wanted Taiwan to be.
She will soon have another chance to visit Washington. Former American Institute in Taiwan officials Richard Bush, Barbara Schrage and Douglas Paal have questioned Tsai about her stance on the so-called “1992 consensus” and Taiwan’s “status quo.” It will be a significant opportunity for Tsai to voice Taiwanese wishes to be called Taiwan and not the ROC. Calling Taiwan the ROC is inviting the PRC to take over Taiwan.
On Oct. 25, 2004, then-US secretary of state Colin Powell said: “There is only one China. Taiwan is not independent. It does not enjoy sovereignty as a nation, and that remains our policy, our firm policy.”
Before obtaining sovereignty, there is no room for Taiwan to declare independence. The present status of Taiwan — much like the Confederate State of America from 1861 to 1865 — is a putative state with popular sovereignty, but not territorial sovereignty.
The Taiwan Relations Act clearly states that Taiwan is not yet an independent nation with sovereignty, and Taiwan is absolutely not the ROC.
John Hsieh
Hayward, California
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with