In front of a large crowd at a news conference during last week’s Chinese National People’s Congress and Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference — an annual gathering of the Chinese government known as the “two sessions” — Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) spoke about UN Resolution 2758.
Wang claimed that the resolution granted Beijing “the right to represent China,” and even proudly boasted that “the only official name for Taiwan recognized by the UN is Taiwan Province, China.”
The former statement is true, but the latter is the result of China buying influence over the UN. The first UN yearbook is proof of this. In 1947, Taiwan was technically still under Japan’s control, as the formal legal transfer of Taiwan’s sovereignty after World War II was still pending. Despite this, the 1946-1947 UN yearbook recorded “Formosa” as part of China’s territory. There is no other explanation for this other than that China had bought out the UN.
It was not until June 20, 1949, that the truth was revealed. Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) fled to Taiwan after the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) defeat by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Overcome with anxiety, Chiang sent a telegram to US general Douglas MacArthur — the supreme commander of the Allied Powers in the Far East at the time — pleading for assistance. In his message, Chiang requested he and the Republic of China (ROC) government be allowed to remain in Taiwan temporarily, as he and MacArthur opposed the spread of communism.
Chiang promised that the ROC would not permanently relocate its capital to Taiwan or seek exile there. This telegram was partially hidden from the Academia Historica Office and the KMT archives by former director of the National Palace Museum Chin Hsiao-yi (秦孝儀) to deceive the public.
Chiang’s promise not to permanently move the capital to Taiwan or go into exile demonstrates that he knew deep down that Taiwan did not belong to the ROC, and that the Cairo Declaration did not explicitly and legally grant the ROC sovereignty over Taiwan.
Wang also brought up the so-called legal basis for Taiwan’s “return” to China, claiming it was clearly stipulated in the Cairo Declaration. However, this is simply another one of Wang’s lies. Aside from the telegram from Chiang to MacArthur, which acknowledged that Taiwan did not belong to the ROC, then-US president Franklin D. Roosevelt and then-British prime minister Winston Churchill had reservations about China’s annexation of Taiwan. Therefore, the Cairo Declaration merely listed the return of Taiwan to China as a common “purpose” of the three countries — it was not a legal stipulation.
On Dec. 24, 1943, Roosevelt stated in one of his “fireside chats” — a series of 31 evening radio addresses — that one of the principles discussed with Chiang in Cairo was “the recognition of the rights of millions of people in the Far East to build up their own forms of self-government without molestation.”
Churchill, on the other hand, argued that Japan should give up control over Taiwan. Churchill also reiterated at a session of the UK Parliament on Feb. 1, 1955, that the Cairo Declaration was “merely a statement of common purpose” and that the San Francisco Peace Treaty signed in 1952 — also known as the Treaty of Peace with Japan — left the future of Taiwan’s sovereignty “undetermined.” This evidence can be accessed anywhere.
Wang’s tactics only succeed in deceiving ignorant reporters.
Sim Kiantek is a former associate professor of business administration at National Chung Hsing University.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to