Beijing’s “one China” principle is a legalized political propaganda attempt aimed to facilitate the annexation of Taiwan, by suggesting that the issue of Taiwan is a “domestic matter,” thereby preventing the US and Japan from interventing in the event of a cross-strait conflict. This begs the question: Is it true that Taiwan belongs to China as claimed by the “one China” principle?
Since the principle of sovereignty, which is the supreme authority within a territory, is pivotal in modern international law, one first needs to establish which international law the “one China” principle is based on.
Last year’s white paper “The Taiwan Question and China’s Unification in the New Era” published by the Chinese government states that in September 1945, Japan signed the Japanese Instrument of Surrender and vowed “to carry out the provisions of the Potsdam Declaration in good faith,” which is to return Taiwan and the Penghu islands to China as outlined in the Cairo Declaration.
On Oct. 25, 1945, the Republic of China (ROC) government announced that it had “resumed its jurisdiction over Taiwan.” According to this logic, China had recovered Taiwan de jure and de facto through a host of international legal documents. As a result, the interpretation that “Japan returned Taiwan and the Penghu islands to China in 1945” is the legal foundation for Beijing’s “one China” principle.
However, as the ROC government had not signed any documents of formal cession, it is void for it to unilaterally proclaim jurisdiction over Taiwan. Japan did not cede Taiwan and the Penghu islands to the ROC or the People’s Republic of China, it renounced all right, title and claim to Taiwan and the Penghu islands, which was dictated in the Treaty of San Francisco signed on April 28, 1952.
Due to this, the “one China” principle does not have any legal basis and therefore the contention that “Taiwan is part of China” is entirely false.
However, to obstruct Japan’s intervention in cross-strait issues, Beijing has consistently attempted to brainwash Japan with its “one China” principle. Consequently, the “Taiwan issue is a domestic problem” is deeply rooted in the Japanese mind, as part of China’s cognitive warfare against Japan.
Japan’s Asahi Shimbun, with its pro-China stance, published a report on Thursday last week analyzing relations between Taiwan and China. In the report, there was a sentence: “After Japan surrendered, China recovered Taiwan.”
I wrote to the Asahi Shimbun asking for a correction, but have yet to receive a reply.
I suspect that there are pro-China elements within the Asahi Shimbun. Unfortunately, many Japanese are under the long-term influence of Chinese propaganda, which makes them prone to accepting these false reports.
I hope the Taiwanese government and its people can understand how influential and dominant Chinese propaganda is within the international community. Taiwanese should also stiffen their sinews and condemn China for continuing its one-sided claim to Taiwan through the “one China” principle, so that other nations know that China and Taiwan are not the same country in accordance with international law.
Above all, Taiwanese should not vote for a presidential candidate who is in favor of the “one China” principle in next month’s election.
Hideki Nagayama is chairman of the Taiwan Research Forum.
Translated by Rita Wang
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
RSS