In response to Roger Lin's letter to the editor (Letters, Nov. 10, page 8), I must say that as an attorney, I find it fascinating to read "legal" analyses by lay people. Lin's letter attempts to provide a "legal" analysis of why Taiwan is not an independent nation. However, his legal reasoning is just plain comical. Lin, without regard to the clear and unambiguous terms of the Montevideo Convention, argues that it does not apply. Like an amateur lawyer, Lin chooses to ignore clear and plain language not favorable to his argument, so that he can arrive at his predetermined conclusion.
Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention states that, "[t]he state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states."
In the case of Taiwan, each of these four elements are met. First, Taiwan has a permanent population. Second, Taiwan is situated in a defined territory. Indeed, Taiwan is an island, so the boundaries of its territory could not be clearer. Third, it clearly has a government. Fourth, Taiwan has the capacity to and does enter into relations with other states.
Lin apparently concedes that Taiwan meets three of the four elements and only argues that Taiwan does not meet the element for defined territory. What Lin fails to understand is that the term "defined territory" only relates to geographical boundaries.
All the arguments Lin and like-minded people make about who gave what to whom and on what day are meaningless. This is because their arguments presuppose that Taiwan had to have a certain level of sovereignty prior to becoming an independent nation. This is false based upon their own use of the Montevideo Convention. Indeed, the first sentence of Article 3 of the Montevideo Contentions explicitly states that "[t]he political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states." Accordingly, all Taiwan needs to have and does have is a geographically defined territory. Therefore, using their own legal premises and applying the true facts to the elements contained therein, Taiwan is an independent nation.
It appears that Lin has skewed his argument the way he has because he wants to be considered a de facto US citizen. Indeed, the title of his letter is "Taiwan is US territory." While this form of immigration is quite unique, the only sure way to determine if he is indeed correct is to have Lin put his money where his mouth is. If Lin is so sure that he is correct, he should file a complaint in any US District Court asserting his rights to protection under the US Constitution. Failing to do that, Lin and all like-minded people should keep their ludicrous theories to themselves as they clearly have no place in the reality Taiwan currently exists in.
Walter Chung
Taipei
When I visited Taiwan last summer, I called on the nation to use its status as a technology superpower to build superweapons. It is obvious to me as I return a year later that Taiwan is now answering that call. By 2030, Taiwan envisions a domestic drone hub, capable of producing large quantities of drones per year. The nation continues to tighten cooperation across the private sector, scientific researchers and the elected government, on creating new and innovative production avenues for defense, while efforts to become central to the “democratic supply chain” are only increasing. Anduril is seeing all of these positive
Singaporean former Prime Minister and current senior minister Lee Hsien- Loong(李顯龍) last month stood on Chinese soil and told Beijing that Singapore cooperates because of “shared interests”, not because of common “ethnic descent,” a significant statement that has upended China’s cognitive warfare tactics of “ethnic nationalism.” Along with using its military buildup and economic growth to expand its international dominance, China has long deployed ethnic politics to promote the idea that all ethnic Chinese around the world, regardless of citizenship, share a tight bond with the Chinese motherland, by which it means the regime of the People’s Republic of China (PRC)
A recent report concerning a student who is suing his teacher posed the question in its headline: Does failing a student in two subjects constitute bullying? The college student in Chiayi County apparently sought NT$2 million (US$63,603) in state compensation, but a court dismissed the case. The first reaction of many might have been to ask: What has happened to students nowadays? Some say that teachers have lost their authority, while others say students are overindulged. Some even start reminiscing over the days when “whatever the teacher says goes.” However, the real issue might be overlooked if emotional reactions like that are the
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) in San Francisco on Tuesday last week said if she had not met with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), she would have been “just a plain” and “even negligible” KMT chairperson, bluntly signaling the role she is playing in her visit to the US — Beijing’s messenger from Taiwan. Cheng and her delegation arrived in the US on Monday last week for a two-week visit across five major cities. Her party said the group is scheduled to meet with US lawmakers, officials, policy experts and businesspeople. Before departing, Cheng said her trip
RSS