Taiwan at the crossroads
Oct. 25 marked the 70th anniversary of so-called “Retrocession Day.” President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) emphasized the Chinese Nationalist Party’s “victory” in the eight-year War of Resistance against Japan, which he said contributed to the retrocession of Taiwan to the Republic of China (ROC), as indicated in the Cairo Declaration, Potsdam Declaration and Japanese Instrument of Surrender
Ma’s statement is just rhetoric without any legal basis, as the Cairo Declaration was merely a media communique unsigned by the “Big Three” — then-US president Franklin Roosevelt, then-British prime minister Winston Churchill and Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) at the Cairo meeting; the Potsdam Declaration only mentioned the limits of Japan’s future territory, while Chiang did not attend the meeting; and the Japanese Instrument of Surrender did not mention anything related to Taiwan’s retrocession.
Seventy years ago the KMT/ROC was authorized under General Order No. 1 by US General Douglas MacArthur to accept the surrender of Japanese commanders and all forces in Taiwan, China and Vietnam. The San Francisco Peace Treaty — the final settlement of World War II — did not give the ROC sovereignty over Taiwan.
So, there is no Retrocession Day; Oct. 25, 1945, only marked the date of the KMT’s new military occupation of Taiwan, which has not officially ended. In fact, the declaration of Taiwan’s Retrocession to China is a war crime, as it violated rules saying that a military occupation does not constitute the transaction of sovereignty, which must be done through the signing of peace treaties.
KMT presidential candidate Eric Chu (朱立倫) has said that he is concerned over the attitude of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) toward the nature of the ROC’s presence in Taiwan. Taiwan’s history since the Japanese colonial period must be respected by all; hopefully, there will not be controversial views stirred up by political parties. Taiwanese have for decades suffered as a result of the KMT/ROC’s war crime of occupying Taiwan, and now its modern-day incarnation is asking people to respect the criminal act. What a joke.
DPP presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has said that there are two camps that hold differing views on the Oct. 25 holiday.
What Tsai said highlights what is important: People must recognize the existence of differences; then, mutual understanding and tolerance can help stop these camps from greater divergence.
The war ended 70 years ago, and the Martial Law-era has been over for 28 years; the task of this generation is to make new memories — to make the lives of different ethnic groups become integrated with society, rather than the root cause of disputes.
Quoting George Leslie Mackay, a missionary to Taiwan, Tsai said: “No matter where we come from, regardless of the troubles and noise, Taiwan is our home. We want to serve, to love, to pamper her.”
However, is Taiwan an independent nation? If not, how can it be established? The No. 1 issue we face is national identity: Taiwan or the ROC?
The international community calls the nation “Taiwan,” but should “ROC” be emphasized? The name ROC directly challenges China and invites it to annex Taiwan. The issue is not resolved by a unilateral declaration of retrocession.
Unfortunately, after 70 years of brainwashing by the KMT, Taiwanese have begun taking for granted the existence of the ROC. Most people believe that Taiwan is the ROC, and the ROC is Taiwan. However, consider reality: Is the ROC an independent nation with sovereignty? The answer is no. The KMT cites the ROC Constitution, which claims China and Mongolia as its the territory; the notion is baloney. Chinese do not recognize it and even Chiang did not stick to the idea, putting into place a temporary provision during the Communist rebellion.
More Taiwanese are questioning the appropriateness of the Constitution. The Center on Democracy Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University sponsored a conference on Monday and Tuesday to discuss Taiwanese democracy.
Indeed, democracy is at the crossroads. Do Taiwanese want to be a political orphan living in the illusory nation of the ROC forever? Where is Taiwan headed: toward being a slave to the KMT, a Chinese vassal, or its own master? People need to unite to steer it to the right path.
John Hsieh
Hayward, California
Choke on it, Taipei
What a perverse joy it is to look at the pollution map today and see that the hardest-hit city in the whole country is Taipei.
After weeks of watching Taichung fester under a carcinogenic shroud of gray bleakness, now the capital can see, feel, taste and fail to escape from our daily reality. Suddenly articles pop up in the news. Oh, suddenly this issue is real. May you join my family in the fear for the children who play in this, the elderly who must avoid it and the commuters who bike or ride scooters through pollution so palpable you can see its residue on your mask after only an hour. Let us enjoy this moment of fellowship as we wonder what the hell we are going to do, because clearly we have not done enough.
While the current assault on quality of life may largely originate from a foreign cesspit, central Taiwan’s problem is largely local, with Changhua claiming that 60 percent of its customary blight is of Taiwanese origin.
Forgive my cartoonish, supervillain-esque laughter and desire to see this scourge carry on in the north until we all care enough about the issue to accept it, confront it and defeat it.
Aaron Andrews
Taichung
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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
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