There have been reports that Chinese Ambassador to the US Cui Tiankai (崔天凱) criticized Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), saying that her visit to the US is inappropriate because she should first pass the test of 1.3 billion Chinese and ask the opinion of “compatriots” on the other side of the Taiwan Strait.
The criticisms are groundless: Why would a Taiwanese presidential candidate need the approval of 1.3 billion Chinese before visiting the US?
Is it because of the Cairo Declaration, issued on Dec. 1, 1943? That is a purely administrative document. On June 27, 1950, only two days after the beginning of the Korean War, then-US president Harry Truman declared Taiwan neutral and from that point on, the US was no longer bound to hand Taiwan over to China, thus negating the Cairo Declaration and rendering it administratively ineffective. In all, the Cairo Declaration was in effect for four years, 10 months and 12 days.
Perhaps it is because of the Potsdam Declaration, issued on July 26, 1945. However, on Jan. 29, 1946, the General Headquarters of the Allied forces on behalf of US General Douglas MacArthur, commander of the Allied forces, issued Instruction No. 677: “Governmental and Administrative Separation of Certain Outlying Areas from Japan.”
Item 6 of the instructions says: “Nothing in this directive shall be construed as an indication of Allied policy relating to the ultimate determination of the minor islands referred to in Article 8 of the Potsdam Declaration,” thus rejecting the administrative effectiveness of the Potsdam Declaration. The Potsdam Declaration was in effect for five months and 14 days.
Perhaps it is because of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, which was signed on Sept. 8, 1951, and came into effect on April 28, 1952. This treaty does not have a single word making a connection between Taiwanese sovereignty and China. Internationally, ever since the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, all territorial transfers have been explicitly stated in peace agreements, which raises the question: Which article of the San Francisco Peace Treaty might China be relying on?
According to Article 25 of the San Francisco agreement, China is not one of the Allied powers for the purposes of the agreement, so the benefits for China were limited to those specified in articles 10, 14 and 21. Apart from this, none of the benefits or privileges stipulated in other articles applied to China.
Taiwan’s sovereignty was addressed in Article 2, according to which “Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores,” which means China has no right to the sovereignty over Taiwan that Japan renounced.
Beijing should stop using the word “compatriots” to refer to Taiwanese. The word makes people feel nauseous. “Compatriots” refers to people of the same country, which Taiwanese and Chinese are not, so they are not “compatriots.”
Since 1950, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has used the phrase “Chinese compatriots,” but beginning some time during the 1990s, it stopped doing so because it had no effect. The phrase is now an old and tired cliche, and the fact that China continues to use it implies that it is even more antiquated than the KMT, if that is possible.
Finally, the DPP should refute all this Chinese nonsense, and it should do so practically and forcefully.
The party must remember that there must be substance to its statements and actions, and it should forgo empty slogans and squabbling; showing Taiwanese that it is a party on which people can pin their hopes and expectations.
Lai Fu-shun is a professor in the Department of History at Chinese Culture University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry