Searching for a symbol
At first reading it seems hard to dispute a hearty call to wave the national flag as a way to promote a sense of patriotism among the readers of this newspaper. However, after some careful research and reflection, I feel I must object to the comments made in Chang Shin-ping’s recent letter (Letter, Nov. 23, page 8).
Looking at the historical and legal record, it is an indisputable fact that when the Republic of China’s (ROC) government moved to Taiwan in December 1949,Taiwan was still a part of the empire of Japan. US General Douglas MacArthur later clarified this in a congressional hearing in May 1951.
The interpretation that the surrender of Japanese troops in Taiwan on Oct. 25, 1945, amounted to the transfer of Taiwan’s territorial sovereignty to China is impossible under international law. Indeed, none of the Allies recognized any such transfer. Oct. 25, 1945, only marked the beginning of the military occupation of Taiwan, and international law clearly states that “Military occupation does not transfer sovereignty.”
By moving outside of China’s national territory, the ROC became a government in exile as of December 1949. There has been no change in this status to date.
Some would argue that the ROC on Taiwan certainly appears to meet all of the Montevideo Convention’s criteria for statehood. However, in fact, all of its “qualifying criteria” are bogus: It exercises effective territorial control over Formosa and the Pescadores, but there has been no official transfer of title; the native Taiwanese population was mass-naturalized as ROC citizens in 1946, based on the false premise of “Taiwan Retrocession Day,” and in direct violation of the Hague Convention’s stipulations regarding the treatment of the populace of occupied territory: It has a government, but it is a government in exile, etc.
Based on the above, I must conclude that in the world today: “Taiwan” is a geographical term and there is no country in the world called the “Republic of Taiwan” (or anything similar), with its own government, population, etc. The ROC flag is not the flag of Taiwan and as a government in exile, the ROC does not exercise sovereignty over Taiwan, but only a high degree of territorial control.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs will no doubt take exception to the above and point out that the issuance of ROC passports is the act of a sovereign state. However, I must mention that in a March 18, 2008, District Court Decision in Washington, in Roger Lin versus USA, the judge held that native Taiwanese are essentially stateless. The ministry has yet to offer any “official rebuttal” to the judge’s conclusion in that important lawsuit.
One might wonder what symbol can be used to connect Taiwanese around the world. I do not have the answer to that question, but I am sure that it is not the flag of the ROC government in exile.
Chen Meng-chao
New Taipei City
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has created a dilemma that could soon cause him to be hoisted with his own petard, bringing his leadership of China to an end. His threatening rhetoric over the unification of Taiwan with China, in which he has said, “we are willing to draw blood if necessary,” has placed Xi in a corner. Xi is portrayed as a strong world leader, yet he has created a scenario for himself that most likely would have an unfavorable outcome. With the 20th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) scheduled to convene this month, Xi cannot
The 77th session of the UN General Assembly opened on Sept. 13. More than 10 overseas Taiwanese organizations had submitted a petition to the UN secretary-general, protesting that 23.5 million Taiwanese are excluded from representation. As president of the Taiwan United Nations Alliance, I also submitted a letter to the UN, saying that Taiwanese should have the right to be represented under the name of Taiwan. The government has been asking its allies to support Taiwan’s entry into the UN, but under its official name, the Republic of China (ROC). Doing so would have involved the right to represent China, with
I was privileged to meet with many of Taiwan’s leaders and leading thinkers during a study tour visit in August. One theme I heard several times during that trip was that bad relations between the United States and China benefit Taiwan. At first thought, I empathize with the argument. After all, there is a troubling record of America’s leaders negotiating with Beijing over the heads of Taiwan’s leaders. For example, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt returned Taiwan to China after World War II. President Richard Nixon surprised Taiwan leaders with his 1972 trip to China. President Jimmy Carter unilaterally chose to normalize
Washington’s “one China” policy has not changed and the US does not take a position on Taiwan’s sovereignty issue, a US Department of State spokesperson has said. He said that this has been the principle of US policy toward Taiwan since 1979, and the policy has remained in effect. He also said that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has privately made this clear to Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅). The US’ “one China” policy and China’s “one China” principle recognize China as the “representative of China.” The two diverge on the issue of Taiwan: Beijing asserts sovereignty
RSS