The American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) on Sept. 12 publicly stated that World War II-related documents do not determine Taiwan’s ultimate political status. This statement is correct.
Japan’s surrender of Taiwan and Penghu to the Republic of China (ROC) on Oct. 25, 1945 — Taiwan’s so-called “Retrocession Day” — was merely a political show under ROC military occupation.
From the standpoint of international law, it was unlawful and without effect. When the Treaty of San Francisco came into force on April 28, 1952, Japan formally renounced sovereignty over Taiwan and the Penghu Islands, yet the treaty did not designate a recipient. As a result, their legal status remained unresolved.
Although the ROC was in Taiwan at the time, Japan never formally transferred sovereignty to it after the war.
However, to legitimize the claim that the ROC took over Taiwan, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) issued a stern response to the AIT, asserting that there is no doubt that Taiwan’s sovereignty belongs to the ROC. It cited the 1952 Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty, also known as the Treaty of Taipei, saying that articles 3 and 10 “reaffirm the status of Taiwan and Penghu as belonging to the ROC.”
However, this is a complete misinterpretation of the Treaty of Taipei by the KMT. Articles 3 and 10 are evidence that Japan did not recognize Taiwan and Penghu as belonging to the ROC.
Article 3 states: “The disposition of property of Japan and of its nationals in Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores), and their claims, including debts, against the authorities of the Republic of China in Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores) and the residents thereof, and the disposition in Japan of property of such authorities and residents and their claims, including debts, against Japan and its nationals.”
Japanese are referred to as “nationals,” while those in Taiwan and Penghu are referred to as “residents,” not nationals of the ROC.
Article 10 states: “For the purposes of the present treaty, nationals of the Republic of China, shall be deemed to include all the inhabitants and former inhabitants of Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores) and their descendants who are of the Chinese nationality”
Instead of saying that “ROC nationals include the residents of Taiwan and Penghu,” it uses the phrase “shall be deemed to include.” How should the language of the articles be interpreted?
The original Japanese text uses a phrase that can be translated as “deemed to include,” while the official English version says “shall be deemed to include.” This shows that people living in Taiwan and Penghu were not originally nationals of the ROC — they are merely presumed to be for the purpose of the treaty.
While Japan signed the Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty to end the war between Japan and the ROC, that does not mean Japan recognized Taiwan and Penghu as belonging to the ROC. As a party to the treaty, the KMT could not possibly have been unaware of that.
It is not only the US, but also, at a minimum, states such as Japan, the UK, Australia, France and Canada, as parties to the Treaty of San Francisco, that originally held that Taiwan’s status remained undetermined.
However, out of concern over the reaction of the People’s Republic of China or the ROC, most countries refrained from making public statements on the matter, although some later accepted the so-called “one China” principle.
Hideki Nagayama is chairman of the Taiwan Research Forum.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
In 1976, the Gang of Four was ousted. The Gang of Four was a leftist political group comprising Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members: Jiang Qing (江青), its leading figure and Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) last wife; Zhang Chunqiao (張春橋); Yao Wenyuan (姚文元); and Wang Hongwen (王洪文). The four wielded supreme power during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), but when Mao died, they were overthrown and charged with crimes against China in what was in essence a political coup of the right against the left. The same type of thing might be happening again as the CCP has expelled nine top generals. Rather than a
Former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmaker Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) on Saturday won the party’s chairperson election with 65,122 votes, or 50.15 percent of the votes, becoming the second woman in the seat and the first to have switched allegiance from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to the KMT. Cheng, running for the top KMT position for the first time, had been termed a “dark horse,” while the biggest contender was former Taipei mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), considered by many to represent the party’s establishment elite. Hau also has substantial experience in government and in the KMT. Cheng joined the Wild Lily Student
When Taiwan High Speed Rail Corp (THSRC) announced the implementation of a new “quiet carriage” policy across all train cars on Sept. 22, I — a classroom teacher who frequently takes the high-speed rail — was filled with anticipation. The days of passengers videoconferencing as if there were no one else on the train, playing videos at full volume or speaking loudly without regard for others finally seemed numbered. However, this battle for silence was lost after less than one month. Faced with emotional guilt from infants and anxious parents, THSRC caved and retreated. However, official high-speed rail data have long
Taipei stands as one of the safest capital cities the world. Taiwan has exceptionally low crime rates — lower than many European nations — and is one of Asia’s leading democracies, respected for its rule of law and commitment to human rights. It is among the few Asian countries to have given legal effect to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant of Social Economic and Cultural Rights. Yet Taiwan continues to uphold the death penalty. This year, the government has taken a number of regressive steps: Executions have resumed, proposals for harsher prison sentences
RSS