With far less knowledge of international law than Amy Chen (Letters, July 8, page 8), I still find something perplexing about the 1945-1949 period and suggest that there can be only one possible interpretation that sits with the widely known attitudes, beliefs and practices of the Allied administration in Asia.
Japanese administration was confined by the victorious Allied powers to the four main islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu and Shikoku as described in the surrender document, plus any other islands that the Allied command structure in Japan deemed appropriate.
From a Japanese point of view, the casualties of this policy did not just include the loss of the Taiwan colony, but also the northern Pacific islands which the US had invaded, a partitioned Korea, the Japanese part of Sakhalin Island which was forfeited and the Kurile islands.
But the basis for Japan's claim on the Kurile group is not the same as the Taiwan question: Tokyo is seeking a final peace treaty with Russia that could include discussion of the administration of the disputed islands.
Neither is it the same as the saber-rattling we see from China over Taiwan. Taiwan and the outlying islands under its control were expressly never on the list of islands authorized by the Allies to be returned to Japanese administration. Certainly there was no act of "commission" and it would require a very long bow to be drawn to say that an act of "omission" occurred. Japan never tried, for example, to sneak back into Taiwan hoping that the Allies would not act.
Therefore, from an Allied perspective, the islands must have been "empty" of sovereignty, with Japanese sovereignty extinguished, unless this sovereignty was asserted by locals or by the Allies themselves, as no one else would be able to assert that sovereignty.
The Republic of China's occupation of the island of Taiwan would therefore have to constitute an "invasion" unless the Allies had expressly given up their rights to the entire Japanese empire unilaterally, which they clearly did not do. If anything, the US military presence in the Chiang Kai-shek (
This actually leaves the US bearing some of the responsibility for the campaign of terror that occurred during that period -- a situation that has parallels in other US-dominated states.
I imagine that this interpretation would not apply to Kinmen or Matsu, being part of China's Fujian Province. But the settlement of the final status of these islands as well as that of Taiwan must be through an internationally mediated series of talks that can bring a close to outstanding issues from World War II. The term "final status" has been used in many other places, including Israel/Palestine and the Kuriles. It is a term that should give comfort to all parties.
Some people, including Chen, might regard a preoccupation with legalism as impractical and not attuned to regional needs and aspirations.
Yet these people would be the first to join a cheer squad for the Diaoyutais or any other issue that allows them to condemn Japan from the same legalistic approach.
Richard Chapman
Melbourne, Australia
With escalating US-China competition and mutual distrust, the trend of supply chain “friend shoring” in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the fragmentation of the world into rival geopolitical blocs, many analysts and policymakers worry the world is retreating into a new cold war — a world of trade bifurcation, protectionism and deglobalization. The world is in a new cold war, said Robin Niblett, former director of the London-based think tank Chatham House. Niblett said he sees the US and China slowly reaching a modus vivendi, but it might take time. The two great powers appear to be “reversing carefully
As China steps up a campaign to diplomatically isolate and squeeze Taiwan, it has become more imperative than ever that Taipei play a greater role internationally with the support of the democratic world. To help safeguard its autonomous status, Taiwan needs to go beyond bolstering its defenses with weapons like anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles. With the help of its international backers, it must also expand its diplomatic footprint globally. But are Taiwan’s foreign friends willing to translate their rhetoric into action by helping Taipei carve out more international space for itself? Beating back China’s effort to turn Taiwan into an international pariah
Typhoon Krathon made landfall in southwestern Taiwan last week, bringing strong winds, heavy rain and flooding, cutting power to more than 170,000 homes and water supply to more than 400,000 homes, and leading to more than 600 injuries and four deaths. Due to the typhoon, schools and offices across the nation were ordered to close for two to four days, stirring up familiar controversies over whether local governments’ decisions to call typhoon days were appropriate. The typhoon’s center made landfall in Kaohsiung’s Siaogang District (小港) at noon on Thursday, but it weakened into a tropical depression early on Friday, and its structure
Taiwan is facing multiple economic challenges due to internal and external pressures. Internal challenges include energy transition, upgrading industries, a declining birthrate and an aging population. External challenges are technology competition between the US and China, international supply chain restructuring and global economic uncertainty. All of these issues complicate Taiwan’s economic situation. Taiwan’s reliance on fossil fuel imports not only threatens the stability of energy supply, but also goes against the global trend of carbon reduction. The government should continue to promote renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, as well as energy storage technology, to diversify energy supply. It
RSS