The People’s Republic of China’s Taiwan Affairs Office on Wednesday published a white paper titled The Taiwan Question and China’s Reunification in the New Era.
Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Mainland Affairs Council responded strongly to a number of important fallacies in this paper, as it seriously distorts history.
As “evidence” that Taiwan “belonged to China since ancient times,” it describes how the Sui Dynasty sent three expeditions east. Whether “east” was “Taiwan” is not clear, as they discuss “Liu Qiu,” which might refer to Okinawa.
In any case, this took place from 605 to 607. The first was a friendly encounter, but the subsequent ones ended in fierce battles with the indigenous people, in which a number of Chinese soldiers lost their heads, literally. Not much evidence of administrative control.
Also, when the Dutch arrived in Anping in 1624, they found no evidence of any officialdom from China, let alone any administrative control. In 1622 and 1623, the Ming Dynasy emperor Tianqi (天啓帝) had even told the Dutch to go “beyond our territory.” So the Dutch went to Taiwan, where they built Fort Zeelandia and established administrative control in the area surrounding Tainan, which lasted until 1662. It certainly was not “part of China” during those days.
And in 1683, the new Manchu emperor was not interested in the island at all. His main goal was to defeat the last remnants of the Ming Dynasty. Emperor Kangxi (康熙帝) even said: “Taiwan is outside our empire and of no great consequence.” He offered to let the Dutch buy it back. Somehow, the white paper overlooks this important statement by a Chinese emperor.
Another important moment in Taiwan’s history, which is not even mentioned in the paper, is when after the Qing and Manchu ceded sovereignty over Taiwan to Japan in perpetuity at the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki, local officials and Taiwanese leaders declared the Republic of Formosa, one of Asia’s first independent republics. Unfortunately, the new republic was crushed under Japan’s military power, but it is another example of how Taiwan existed outside the reach of China’s control.
The most hilarious statement in the paper is the reference to an article by US journalist Nym Wales, who is supposed to have quoted Mao Zedong (毛澤東) as saying that “China’s goal was to achieve a final victory in the war …. and secure the liberation of Taiwan.”
In fact, “Nym Wales” is the pen name for Helen F. Snow, the wife of journalist Edgar Snow, who quoted Mao as saying: “we will extend them [the Koreans] our enthusiastic help in their struggle for independence. The same thing applies for Taiwan.”
This position was reiterated in subsequent years by Chinese Communist Party (CCP) luminaries such as former Chinese premier Zhou Enlai (周恩來). For some reason the white paper fails to mention this.
The paper also commits a number of serious distortions in its discussion of events in the 1940s, such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Declaration, which are referred to as “international legal documents,” which they were not. Legally speaking, they were simply news releases at the end of high-level meetings.
The paper inexplicably refers to the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty as “illegal and invalid,” even though it is the only formal treaty dealing with the status of Taiwan in the 20th century, as under its provisions, Japan ceded sovereignty over the island, but it was not decided to whom.
Finally, the paper says: “The important principles of respecting state sovereignty and territorial integrity as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations are the cornerstones of modern international law and basic norms of international relations.”
Beijing should respect these principles, as under international law — the 1933 Montevideo Convention — Taiwan is a nation-state that has the right to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
In this context, it is important to remind Beijing that Article 1.2 of the UN Charter says that it is the purpose of the UN “to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples.”
Peace and stability can only be achieved if China accepts and respects Taiwan as a friendly neighbor.
Gerrit van der Wees is a former Dutch diplomat and teaches the history of Taiwan at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, and American relations with East Asia at George Washington University’s Elliott School for International Affairs.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several