Wednesday marked 72 years since Japan’s surrender was accepted in Taiwan. At the time, the Republic of China (ROC) was playing tricks and when Chen Yi (陳儀) handed Order No. 1 to General Rikichi Ando, Japan’s last governor-general of Taiwan, it had the text “Receiving the territory of Taiwan and the Penghu archipelago,” with the result that Ando did not sign the surrender document.
To this day, Ando’s surrender cannot be found in the ROC, although the acceptance of the surrender took place in Taiwan. This led to the lie that Taiwan and Penghu were handed over to the ROC through the Treaty of Taipei on April 28, 1952.
First, on Sept. 17, 1951, then-US ambassador to Taiwan Karl Ranking warned then-minister of foreign affairs George Yeh (葉公超) that the Treaty of Taipei could not imply that Taiwan became a de jure part of Chinese territory.
On May 13, 1952, the ROC’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) stated in Volume 54 addressing the peace treaty with Japan that “the San Francisco Peace Treaty only stipulates that Japan renounce sovereignty over Taiwan and Penghu, but does not specify to whom, and this cannot be remedied through the peace treaty with Japan.”
On July 16, 1952, a Central Daily News article said: “In accordance with the Cairo Declaration, we have received Taiwan and Penghu, where we are exercising executive power, and there is no doubt that Taiwan and Penghu are part of our territory. The Treaty of Peace between the Republic of China and Japan has been executed exactly in accordance with the San Francisco Peace Treaty, and on this matter, we have done all we can to add further stipulations, but in the end, we did not achieve our goals.”
On July 23, 1952, Dispatch No. 31 from the US embassy in Taiwan reported to the US Department of State that Yeh had said that due to the delicate international situation, Taiwan and Penghu “do not belong to us. In the current situation, Japan has no right to hand over Formosa and Penghu to us, nor can we accept such a transfer from Japan even if it so wishes.”
However, MOFA says that no such files exist.
On July 13, 1971, then-US Department of State legal adviser Robert Starr in a note to Office of Republic of China Affairs director Charles Sylvester confirmed the text in the previous point, “nor can we accept such a transfer from Japan even if it so wishes.”
Sim Kiantek is a former associate professor in the Department of Business Administration at National Chung Hsing University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US