There have been many articles here debating US Secretary of State Colin Powell's Oct. 25 statement that "Taiwan does not enjoy sovereignty as a nation." When the Department of State later reiterated former president Ronald Reagan's "Six Assur-ances," many press organizations in Taiwan interpreted this action as saying that Powell's remarks were a slip of the tongue, or merely a "face saving" gesture, in order to gain favor with Chinese officials.
However, it appears that this point is worthy of further discussion. After a close examination of the historic record, I believe it can be said that the US has never regarded Taiwan as a "sovereign nation." In the State Department's list of sovereign nations, "Taiwan" is only included as a footnote (www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/4250.htm).
I believe there is an easy way to clear up the entire dispute. The Presidential Office or the Executive Yuan should clarify the exact date that Taiwan became a sovereign nation. Then historians, legal researchers and others could quickly verify the true facts of the matter.
The sovereignty of Taiwan was at one time held by Japan. In the post World War II era, the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek (
Moreover, it is commonly recognized that in the postwar peace treaty (the San Francisco Peace Treaty), although Japan ceded the sovereignty of "Formosa and the Pescadores," that sovereignty was not awarded to the ROC. In fact, for any territorial cession, there must be a specific date when the "new owners" assume sovereign control. There are many examples in history, such as the , the Louisiana cession in 1803, Alaskan cession in 1867 and the Puerto Rico cession in 1899.
Hence, in order to clear up all the confusion, it would be most helpful if the government could announce the exact date when the sovereignty of "Formosa and the Pescadores" was transferred to the government of Taiwan.
Richard Hartzell
Taipei
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS