設為首頁  加入最愛網
會員中心 贊助提供 徵求志工 線上電台 優惠精品 合作夥伴 關於我們 連絡我們
 
         
  首頁 > 影音網>打開天窗細說台灣Taiwan
打開天窗細說台灣Taiwan

[轉載自:民報]

[謝鎮寬]於2021-05-03 19:05:05上傳[]

 




打開天窗細說台灣
生為台灣人不知台灣史確實是台灣人最大悲哀

美國立法詮釋現況

美國國會跨黨派眾議員,於2021年4月19日提出台灣國際團結法案Taiwan International Solidarity Act,法案中提到,聯合國2578號決議僅處理中國代表權問題,不涉及台灣。4月21日美國參議院外交關係委員會(Senate Foreign Relations Committee)以21票贊成、1票反對、高票表決通過,對中國戰略方針的重大法案,「2021年戰略競爭法案」,動員多種外交、經濟和戰略工具抗衡中國,被認為是美國兩黨在對中政策上,一致走向加強對抗的里程碑式法案。

朝野擁抱中華民國

這兩個法案在當前,台灣絕大多數朝野政黨政客,不是自認台灣屬於中國,就是高舉中華民國是台灣、台灣是中華民國之際,讓世人霧煞煞分不清,台灣到底與中國、不論是中華民國或中華人民共和國,要如何區別界分之際提出、值得令人喝采深思。或有說台灣根本就是屬於中國,因中國國民黨接受一中原則,認為中華民國與中華人民共和國同屬一個中國,台灣既屬於中華民國等同屬於中國。而執政的民進黨也不妨多讓,堅持中華民國的國號,雖自稱為中華民國台灣,卻說中華民國是創立於1912年,早於1949年的中華人民共和國,也不承認中華民國早於1971年,經由聯合國決議判決,在國際社會被認為,已正式被中華人民共和國取代的史實。

民進黨捍中華民國

台灣、日本、美國和中國,究竟存在著什麼樣的關係?讓我們展閱歷史,來打開天窗說亮話;從過去所留下的紀錄,來檢視中國、日本、美國與台灣的糾葛,及中國各政黨,與歷來在台灣主政者對台灣法理地位的認知與主張。宏觀舉世,目前唯有民進黨在捍衛中華民國。因為中國共產黨認為,它早就被中華人民共和國取代;中國國民黨因接受一中原則,更不敢在共產黨面前提中華民國;美國、日本、歐盟、甚至全世界,都稱台灣為台灣;唯獨民進黨在中國面前獨扛中華民國。真不明白,民進黨的中華民國是要代表誰?台灣、中國、或則兩者都要?行嗎、有此能耐嗎?

馬關條約永久割讓

1895年4月17日,因中日甲午戰爭中國戰敗,必須割地賠款求和,中日簽訂馬關條約。滿清政府把台灣、澎湖的完整主權永久割讓給日本。條約第五款「本約批准互換之後,限二年之內,日本准中國、讓與地方人民願遷居,讓與地方之外者,任使變賣所有產業,退去界外。但限滿之後,尚未遷徙者,酌宜視為日本臣民」。其大意為,在台灣領土被割讓的居民,能自由變賣所有不動產及遷移,條約批准2年後,仍留下在該地居民將被視為日本國民;即台澎人民有兩年選擇期,看要回歸中國當滿清人,或留下來當日本人。台灣從那時起,就與中國恩斷義絕毫無瓜葛。

民國建立台仍屬日

甲午戰爭大約16年後,1911年10月10日滿清新軍等力量,在中國武漢武昌發生的兵變,演變成武昌起義,開啟辛亥革命,推翻清朝結束了,中國長達兩千年的封建帝制獨裁體制,建立了中國史上第一個共和國,即中華民國,它於1912年1月1日正式宣告成立,但當時台灣仍屬於日本統治的領土。

孫文主張台灣獨立

1925年中華民國創建者、孫中山於生前主張:台灣與朝鮮兩民族至少限度,也應該實施自治,各自設立自己的國會及自治政府。1926年1月13日國民黨全國代表大會表示,台灣民族革命,主張台灣、越南、朝鮮、菲律賓等都該獨立。1938年4月1日蔣介石在國民黨全國代表大會,也贊成孫中山希望台灣獨立的主張。認為台灣獨立,有助於中國的安定與東亞和平。

台共支援獨立戰鬥

1928年謝雪紅、林木順等台籍左翼人士,於4月15日在上海法國租界成立台灣共產黨。黨綱第二、三條表明「台灣人民獨立萬歲」、「建立台灣共和國」。1936 年7月16日,毛澤東對美國學者斯諾(Edgar Snow)說「如果朝鮮人民希望掙脫日本帝國主義者的枷 鎖,我們將熱烈支援他們爭取獨立的戰鬥。這一點同樣適用於台灣。」

中共支持獨立運動

1941年6月,周恩來在「民族至上與國家至上」一文中,明白表示中國除了要追求自己的獨立自主,也要支持其他民族國家的獨立解放運動。這些運動包括:朝鮮、台灣的反日運動,巴爾幹與非洲民族國家的反德、義侵略,以及印度、南洋等地的民族獨立運動。

廢除條約不含割地

1941年12月7日本對美國珍珠港偷襲,爆發太平洋戰爭。1941年12月9日中華民國,對日本正式宣戰。1942年國民政府自行宣布,廢除所有不平等條約,但割地賠款除外。美國於同年10月10日宣布,將通過談判廢除,美國同中國簽訂的不平等條約、所有其它治外法權、特權和租界。所謂的廢除不平等條約,是不包括割地與賠款,任何領土異動,都必須要有簽署和平條約確認、才算是。

開羅會議未達共識

1943年12月1日,開羅電台播報,羅斯福、邱吉爾、蔣介石三巨頭,於開羅會議的新聞稿、俗稱開羅宣言。蔣介石要求日本應將竊取自中國之所有領土,如滿洲、台灣及澎湖群島等歸還中華民國,因會議未達共識,所以無人簽署確認背書。

天皇詔書宣告作廢

日本眾議院於1945年3月17日通過、4月1日公布的法律34號(昭和20年法律第34號),正式名稱為「衆議院議員選舉法中改正法律」。以台灣和朝鮮之習俗同化已與內地無異,且以遂行聖戰為由,決定賦予台灣與朝鮮兩「外地」之住民參與國政(日本政治)的權利。該法案規定眾議院撥出28席名額給這兩外地。其中朝鮮佔23席、台灣佔5席,並強調其權利與日本內地眾議員完全一致。該法律、勅令和《詔書》公布於東京大空襲的數日後,第二次世界大戰露出敗象的日本政府,來不及依照新法案舉行相關選舉,就宣告無條件投降。終戰翌年、昭和21年法律第,8號眾議院通過「關於昭和20年法律第34號(衆議院議員選舉法之部分廢止改正法律)」。

波茨坦會蔣未出席

美英蘇元首於1945年7月26日,在波茨坦討論太平洋戰爭結束後,要如何處理日本領土事宜,會中達成決議並簽署波茨坦宣言。該宣言第八條:「開羅宣言之條款應當執行,日本主權應局限於本州、北海道、九州、四國及吾人所確定之其他小島嶼。」蔣介石因沒有出席波茨坦會議,所以在議程中根本就沒有提到台灣和澎湖。文件是透過電報傳送進行簽署,史達林雖然出席峰會,但 因蘇聯遲至1945年8月8日才對日宣戰,所以簽署也是會後才補上。波茨坦宣言旨在規劃,戰後日本領土範圍,沒有任何授權轉移台澎領土主權。

一號命令軍事佔領

1945年8月15日,大日本帝國宣布無條件投降,且於同年9月2日舉行投降儀式並正式簽署降書。盟軍最高統帥麥克阿瑟,發布第一號軍令,指名奉日本天皇指示,下令在中國(滿洲除外)、台灣及北緯十六度以北之法屬印度支那,境內的日軍高階司令官及所有陸、海、空軍及輔助部隊,應向蔣介石大元帥投降。台灣於是開啟了被軍事統治的漫長歲月,至今仍未宣告終止。

軍佔不是主權授與

無奈蔣介石政府,把軍事佔領詮釋為主權授與。於1946年1月12日,中華民國在和平條約尚未締結的情況下,就將台灣人的日本國籍改為中華民國國籍。接著時任台灣省行政長官的陳儀,突然在2月間發布命令,預定於9月開始在臺灣徵兵,將臺灣青年徵調到中國大陸加入中國國軍、去打中國內戰。這些都是屬於國際戰犯行為,於法不容。

毛澤東贊台灣獨立

1947年台灣爆發二二八大屠殺,中共的「解放日報」,還在3月8日發表「支持台灣獨立」的言論。毛澤東在延安的廣播講話就說:「我們中國共產黨所領導的武裝部隊,完全支援台灣人民,反對蔣介石和國民黨的鬥爭。我們贊成台灣獨立,我們贊成台灣自己成立,一個自己所要求 的國家。」

蔣斥陳誠台灣託管

二戰後,中國從未曾擁有過台灣領土主權,是舉世皆知的事實。1949年1月12日蔣介石就曾,針對陳誠在記者會中說『台灣為剿共堡壘』的不當發言,發電文斥責:「台灣陳主席(誠)。昨電諒達。刻閱報并承重要同志來談,對弟在記者席上談話皆多責難,實令中無言以對,且聞弟對何浩若許多主張屬其轉達在京同志,此種作風仍是過去一套,毫未有自反改過之意,殊為弟危也。若經過已往重大教訓而竟對如此之大失敗猶不反省,對於本身之處境亦不顧及,此不僅不能成為政治家,而且令人徒增悲歎與絕望也。須知此時何時,台灣何地,尚能任吾人如往日放肆無忌,大言不慚乎。台灣法律地位與主權,在對日和會未成以前,不過為我國一托管地之性質,何能明言做為剿共最後之堡壘與民族復興之根據也,豈不令中外稍有常識者之輕笑其為狂囈乎。今後切勿自作主張,多出風頭,最要當以中央之主張為主張,如對記者所言則與中元文告完全背反,使中外人士對弟有莫名其妙之感,務望埋頭苦幹,思過自責,再不受人嫉忌,力避為人指摘,則公私幸甚。中O手起 子侵府机」

中共建國蔣淪流亡

1949年10月1日毛澤東打贏中國內戰,宣布建立中華人民共和國。蔣介石早於1月21日下野,中華民國政府於12月7日宣布遷都台北。當時台灣仍屬日本領土,所以中華民國在國際社會,已淪為實質上的流亡政府,因為沒有合法的人民、土地、主權與被國際社會公認的政府。

韓戰爆發台位未定

1950年6月25日,韓戰爆發,美國總統杜魯門於6月27日發表宣言「攻打朝鮮毫無疑問地表明共產主義已超越了使用顛覆來征服獨立國家,現在他們使用武裝入侵和戰爭。這違背了為維護國際和平與安全而發布的聯合國安理會的命令。在這種情況下,台灣若遭共產勢力占領,將會對太平洋區域及美國於此區之維和勢力造成直接威脅。因此,我已經命令第七艦隊防止對台灣的任何攻擊。作為這一行動的必然結果,我呼籲台灣的中國政府停止對大陸的所有空中和海上行動。第七艦隊將看到這已經完成。台灣未來的地位,必須等待太平洋地區的安全恢復,以及對日本的和平條約成立,或經過聯合國討論後再作決定。」這就是台灣地位未定的源點。

聯安理會台不屬中

1950年6月26日,中華人民共和國總理兼外交部長周恩來,致電當時聯合國秘書長賴依,指控美國「違反聯合國憲章,侵入中國領土(指台灣)」並指派傅外交部長伍修權,為全權代表到聯合國運作「美國武裝入侵台灣」的指控,該案於1950年11月30日經第530次安全理事會會議表決,以9比1駁回,給予中國及國際社會一個非常明確的答覆。當天時任中華民國駐聯合國大使蔣廷黻,亦對伍修權指控案投下反對票。這是聯合國的正式判決,「台灣不屬於中國」,是經過國際社會公開討論,結案的公開記錄。

金山和約法理定位

1951年9月5日杜勒斯在舊金山,向所有參與舊金山和平會議的各國代表發表演講,對於太平洋戰爭和平會議之所以拖延六年才召開提出說明:「不幸地,盟國政府對中國内战的態度,無法凝聚普遍國際共識,誰有權利和能力,代表單一中國聲音來切結和平條件。有些認為這個政府適合,有些認為另者合適,有些懷疑兩個無一符合。當前沒有任何有關中國的作為可獲多數,因此盟國面臨了困難選擇。他們可以延緩與日本的任何和平,一直等到他們能同意,在中國有一個,具備合法與威信的政府。然而,就因中國內戰和國際對中國意見分歧來處罰日本,它是錯誤,殘忍和愚蠢。另一種方法是,每一個盟國可以拒绝與日本簽定和平條約,除非它所選擇的中國政府也共同簽署。那我們確定,在眾多與日本開戰的盟國,日本僅只獲得小規模的和平。的確,沒有理由相信,作為重要一方的日本,會願意合作將計畫徹底執行。對這事施壓,將在日本造成怨恨,而在全世界遭受嚴重威脅,在最需要大團結當前,它將刺激並加重盟國的分裂。剩下的選擇就是,在沒有任何中國的共同簽署下,盟國廣泛地締結和平,讓日本與中國去締造他們的和平,當然,在條件上將會完全保障中國的權利和利益。」

止於辛丑未涉馬關

1951年9月8日正式簽訂舊金山和平條約,這是國際社會共同決議,它規範了台灣在二次大戰後應有的政治法理地位與走向。和約第2 條a款:日本宣布放棄對台灣與澎湖群島的治權、產權與債權。第23條授權,美國為台灣的主要佔領權國。第4條a款:依據本條 b 款之規定,處理日本與在第 2 條所列舉區域內日本國民之財產,及他們向目前在該地區管理當局與其住民 (包含法人) 包括債務的索賠;和在日本處理該當局與住民的財產,及該當局與其住民向日本和日本國民要求包括債務的索賠,應依據日本與該當局之特別協議為之第4條b款:日本承認美國軍政府或依循其指令,在第2和第3條中所提的任何領域,對日本與日本國民財產處分的有效性。 第 10 條 中國相關權益:日本放棄,一切有關中國之特別權利與利益,包括源自 1901 年 9 月 7 日簽署於北京之辛丑條約條款、其附件、書簡與文件所衍生之對中國的利益與特權;同時,同意放棄前述議定書條款、其附件、書簡與文件。

台北條約未涉主權

第26條,授權日本得以依據舊金山和約為主的實質相同條件,與中華民國簽訂子和約、雙邊和平條約,就是台北條約,即所謂中日和約的法源。切記,子和約當然無法自走砲,超越母和約的授權。舊金山和約是於1951年9月8日簽署,1952年4月28日生效,而台北條約是在1952年4月28日簽署,於1952年8月5日生效。有些專家學者教授說,日本於日華合約中把台灣主權明文轉讓給中國,真是鬼打架愛說笑。試想日本在舊金山和約生效時,即已喪失對台澎治產債三權,那裡還有權力再把台澎主權授予中華民國?真是天才、異想天開。台北條約清清楚楚標明:旨在結束日本於中國戰場的戰爭(第1條),沒有將台澎主權授予中華民國(第2條),日本放棄在中國的所有特權及所謂不平等條約,只回溯到1901年到辛丑條約,根本沒有碰觸1895年的馬關條約(第5條),況且該約已於1972年9月29日作廢。

金山和約授權保台

依據1952年舊金山和約授權,美國政府制定諸多法案:1954共同協防條約、1979台灣關係法、1982六大保證、2018台灣旅行法、亞洲再保證倡議法、台灣安全加強法、台灣國際參與法、台灣友邦國際保護及加強倡議法案,來保障台灣的社會安定、經濟繁榮、國防安全、生活自由與政治民主,美國捍衛台灣的立場與行動,前後一致、從沒改變。於4月19日所提台灣國際團結法案,指明聯合國2578號決議僅處理中國代表權問題,不涉及台灣。

協防條約保衛台澎

1954年12月2日,中華民國與美國在華府、簽署中美共同防禦條約Mutual Defense Treaty Between the United States and the Republic of China,全文共計十條,於1955年3月3日生效。條約第六條清楚標明:所謂「領土」及「領域」對中華民國來說,是指臺灣及澎湖諸島,北美合眾國是指在其管轄下的西太平洋屬領諸島。第二條及第五條的規定,也適用於互相同意所決定的其他領域。該條約由美國正式通知中華民國,已於台灣時間1980年1月1日終止、失效作廢。

聯國決議無涉台灣

1971年10月25日聯合國大會所通過的第2758號決議:「決定恢復中華人民共和國的一切權利,承認她的政府代表,為中國在聯合國組織的唯一合法代表,並立即把蔣介石的代表,從它在聯合國組織及其所屬一切機構中,所非法佔據的席位上驅逐出去。」所以自聯合國第2758號決議通過後,任何打著中華民國旗號的人事務,都自動歸屬中華人民共和國管轄。但,不管是日本與中華民國的台北條約,或日本與中華人民共和國建交的聯合公報,其涉及台灣領土部分,都是遵照舊金山和約第26條的授權,它並沒有把台灣的領土主權,授予中華民國或中華人民共和國。台灣不是中國領土的一部分,台灣根本就不是中國或日本不可分割的固有領土,日本高等法院法官說台澎非其固有,而是日本得自馬關條約的領土,但是在舊金山和約與台北條約中已經放棄。其實,自1662年起,台灣已經被荷、鄭、清、日多次轉手割讓了,現在該是台灣正視歷史的時刻。

美拒中華只認台灣

1979年4月10日,美國總統卡特簽署,由參眾兩院通過的台灣關係法Taiwan Relation Act,全文共十八條,於1979年1月1日生效。第十五條:「臺灣」一詞將視情況需要,包括臺灣及澎湖列島,這些島上的人民、公司及根據適用於這些島嶼的法律而設立或組成的其他團體及機構,1979年1月1日以前美國承認為中華民國的臺灣治理當局,以及任何接替的治理當局(包括政治分支機構、機構等)。該法案清清楚楚寫明,美國自1979年1月1日起,已不在承認中華民國,只認同在台灣的治理當局。

東京判決喪失日籍

1980 年6月12日東京高等法院吉田法官,在林金彬訴日案判決書說:在世界人權宣言有一個條款,即「任何人不任意被剝奪他的國籍,和拒絕其改變國籍的權利」〈第15條 (2)〉。「任何人不任意被剝奪他的籍」,恰當的解釋為「沒有正當理由和正當程序,任何人不應任意被剝奪他的國籍」。將「任意」解釋成片面的國家,這是過於嚴重和窄化。如上所述,台灣人喪失日本國籍,是因戰後割讓領土,伴隨著國籍改變。而國籍改變,導致領土割讓,通常是明顯或含蓄地由條約提供。所以應該把世界人權的旨意,不禁止全面性地變更國籍,解釋為任意地剝奪國籍。因此,台灣人在日本與中華民國和平條約,依正當程序和正當理由而喪失日本國籍,並不違反世界人權宣言。〈有關日本高等法院判決台灣居民喪失日本國籍案例詳情請參閱日本國際法年鑑1982年第25冊第177頁(6)〉。

中華民國未定議題

2004年10月25日美國前國務卿鮑爾說:「世上只有一個中國,台灣沒有獨立,她此刻不享有一個國家的主權,這依然是我們的政策我,們堅定的政策。」2007年8月30日美國前白宮國家安全會議亞洲事務資深主任韋德寧說:「當前台灣或者中華民國並非國際社會的一個國家,美國政府的態度是,ROC、中華民國是一個未定的議題,而且正如您所知很多、很多年來,這個議題都是未定」。

反分裂法無憑無據

2005年3月14日中華人民共和國第十屆全國人民代表大會第三次會議,通過一部針對台灣海峽兩岸關係的中華人民共和國基本法律,稱為所謂的反分裂國家法,全文共十條,於2005年3月14日通過,公佈生效。該法第二條:世界上只有一個中國,大陸和台灣同屬一個中國,中國的主權和領土完整不容分割。維護國家主權和領土完整是包括台灣同胞在內的全中國人民的共同義務。台灣是中國的一部分。國家絕不允許台獨分裂勢力以任何名義、任何方式把台灣從中國分裂出去。問題是台灣早在年就被割讓出去,而中國是在1912年成立,1949年中華民國被中華人民共和國給繼承。在中國有生之年,台灣從來就不是中國的一部分。

聯潘誤言收回成命

2007年7月27日聯合國前秘書長在面對媒體詢問「台灣申請加入聯合國案」時說:「聯合國會員資格要由聯合國會員國決定,聯合國的立場依據,聯合國大會2758號決議文確認,中國政府是唯一且合法代表全中國的政府,聯合國認定台灣是中國的一部分」。潘言隨即遭受美國、日本、加拿大、歐盟等國際社會的抗議。2007年8月16日美國代表處發出電文證實,潘基文經與美國駐聯合國大使哈里札德討論,有關台灣地位的聯合國措辭等議題後,潘基文說,他最近的公開談話言過其實,並允諾聯合國將不再使用「台灣是中國的一部分」措辭。

法院判決台無國籍

2008年3月18日美國聯邦地方法院法官蘿絲美麗柯祐Rosemary M Collyer,在林訴美案的判決書上說:原告 (台灣人) 基本上在過去近六十年來是沒有國家的人民。1945年麥克阿瑟將軍所頒布第一號軍令,竟是最後一次對台完整清晰的權威聲明,人們可以理解並同情原告,渴望他們在世界上的地位能夠正常化。然而原告仍處於國際邊緣,不是因為他們被美國或世界其他國家所忽視。

政治煉獄不具國格

2009年4月7日美國聯邦上訴法院,哥倫比亞區巡迴法庭巡迴法官布朗,在林訴美上訴案判決書說:美國與中國在過去六十年的喧囂動盪,徒陷台灣住民於政治煉獄,此期間台灣人民一直生活在,毫無一致認知的政府。務實言之,這意味著他們在國際社會中,沒有確定的地位,而這已影響到人民的日常生活。

台灣自古不屬中國

美國聯邦法院巡迴法官,白紙黑字明文告知世人,台灣人民沒有被世界公開承認的國籍。時下台灣人,拿中華民國護照,中華人民共和國說,中華民國已於1971年10月25日被中華人民共和國繼承,但中國、不論是中華民國或中華人民共和國,卻都不曾擁有過台灣的領土主權,這就是今日台灣的盲點與無奈。2020年11月12日前國務卿龐培歐說,台灣從來不是中國的一部份 (Taiwan has never been a part of China)。2021年3月15日美國國防部官員說,台灣自古不屬中國 (Taiwan was never part of China)。中國不是台灣的宗主國。

領土主權界定範圍

2021年4月25日蔡英文總統,在出席台灣國家聯盟舉辦的「海內外台灣國是會議」致詞時表示,政府一貫立場是「國土主權、寸步不讓;民主自由、堅守不退」。副總統賴清德則重申,台灣是主權獨立國家,台灣前途只有台灣人民有權決定「是我們不變的主張」。這是一個非常諷刺的畫面,在獨派先進的大會上,公開聲明:中華民國台灣是一個主權獨立的國家,國土主權、寸步不讓。唯不知台灣幾時獨立何時建國、中華民國什麼時候取得台灣的領土主權、它憲法上的領土主權範圍到哪裡、既是主權國家為何進不了聯合國、也無法加入世界衛生組織、為什麼、為什麼、為什麼?

法理建國循序漸進

今日台灣領土主權,不隸屬任何一個中國、確是「不爭的事實」,台灣2300萬人有權力住民自決,依循國際法理程序:終止二次大戰後的軍事佔領、成立台灣平民政府、選舉政府代表、向主要佔領權國聲張領土主權、爭取國際社會認同、成為一個實質地領土主權國家、然後才能申請加入聯合國、成為國際社會具有領土主權國家的一員。

台灣不是中華民國

目前在台灣主政的中華民國、不是一個主權國家、它只不過是ㄧ個流亡政府。不盡要問的是,當全球世人美、日、中、非、歐、亞、澳都肯定台灣是台灣時,請在台灣執政者能明白告知,為何民進黨當局要堅持中(華民)國?是無知、不敢、還是另有別人所不知的企圖、來日還想要統治中國大陸?

謝鎮寬
加州、海沃

細說台灣不屬中國
台灣早被割讓中國從未曾擁有過台灣

https://www.peoplenews.tw/news/ec1366c2-93bf-42bd-86bd-ab9ecbe8fc37
【專文】打開天窗細說台灣(上)
——生為台灣人不知台灣史確實是台灣人最大悲哀
文/謝鎮寬(加州、海沃) 2021-04-30 11:00

https://www.peoplenews.tw/news/80b16761-e303-4710-a9fe-1c2fd62734be
【專文】打開天窗細說台灣(中)
——生為台灣人不知台灣史確實是台灣人最大悲哀
文/謝鎮寬(加州、海沃) 2021-05-01 11:00

https://www.peoplenews.tw/news/83af7f57-1a1a-4c13-935d-64c48665dfcf
【專文】打開天窗細說台灣(下)
——生為台灣人不知台灣史確實是台灣人最大悲哀
文/謝鎮寬(加州、海沃) 2021-05-02 10:00

Open the skylight let’s talk Taiwan in detail
It is indeed saddest a Taiwanese not known Taiwan’s history
Taiwan was ceded long ago, China has never owned Taiwan

The US Congress interpreted Taiwan status

The US biparty congress proposed the Taiwan International Solidarity Act on April 19, 2021. The bill mentioned that the UN Resolution 2578 only deals with the issue of Chinese representation and does not involve Taiwan. On April 21, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (Senate Foreign Relations Committee) passed 21 to 1 high votes in favor. The major bill on China’s strategic policy, the "2021 Strategic Competition Act", mobilizes various diplomatic and economic activities. Confronting China with strategic tools is considered a milestone bill for the two parties in the US to unanimously move toward strengthening confrontation in their China policy.

The ruling and the opposition embrace the ROC

With these two bills proposed, the vast majority of Taiwan’s ruling and opposition parties and politicians either think that Taiwan belongs to China or hold that the ROC is Taiwan and Taiwan is the ROC, leaving the world frustrated and confused. Not knowing how to distinguish Taiwan from China either ROC or PRC. It helps a great deal to clarify the confusion. It may be said that Taiwan belongs to China at all, because the KMT accepts the one-China principle and believes that both ROC and PRC belong to one China, and that Taiwan belongs to ROC and China. And the ruling DPP may wish to give more and insist on the national title of the ROC. Although it calls itself ROC Taiwan, it says that the ROC was founded in 1912 and senior than the PRC in 1949, and it does not accept that the ROC was replaced in 1971 under the UN resolution, it is considered in the international community that it has been officially succeeded by the PRC.

DPP defends ROC who does it represent?

What kind of relationship does Taiwan, Japan, the US and China have? Let us review history to open the skylights to speak up; from the records left in the past, we will examine the entanglements between China, Japan, the US, and Taiwan, as well as the various political parties in China, and those who have historically ruled Taiwan, their cognition and assertion to the legal status of Taiwan. Macroscopically, at present, only the DPP is defending the ROC. This is because KMT believes that it has long been replaced by PRC; KMT dares not mention ROC in front of PRC because it accepts the one-China principle; the US, Japan, the European Union, and even the world all call Taiwan is Taiwan; only DPP alone carries ROC to challenge PRC. I really don’t understand, who does DPP/ROC represent? Taiwan, China, or both? Able, capable, can they do it?

Ceded in perpetuity by Shimonoseki Treaty

On April 17, 1895, due to China's defeat in the Sino-Japanese in 1894, China had to cede territory for compensation and seek peace. China and Japan signed the Shimonoseki Treaty. The Qing government in perpetuity ceded the full sovereignty of Formosa and the Pescadores to Japan. Article 5 of the treaty "After the agreement is approved and exchanged, within two years, the Japanese quasi-Chinese and the local people are willing to relocate, and those who are outside the locality will be allowed to sell all their industries and retreat. But after the limit expires, it has not yet Migrants should be regarded as Japanese subjects at their discretion." The general idea is that residents who are ceded in Taiwan’s territory can freely sell all their real estate and move. Two years after the ratification of the treaty, residents who remain in the place will be regarded as Japanese nationals; that is, the people of Taiwan and Penghu have a two-year selection period. It depends on returning to China to be a Manchu or staying as a Japanese. Since then, Taiwan has absolutely nothing to do with China's righteousness.

Taiwan remained belonged to Japan while ROC established

About 16 years after the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895, on October 10, 1911, the Manchurian Army and other forces in Wuchang, Wuhan, China, the mutiny that took place in Wuchang, Wuhan, evolved into the Wuchang Uprising, the beginning of the Revolution of 1911, it overthrew the Qing Dynasty, and China’s 2,000-year-old feudal monarchy was over and established the first republic in Chinese history, the ROC. It was formally declared established on January 1, 1912, but at that time Taiwan was still under Japanese rule.

Sun Yat-sen advocated Taiwan independence

In 1925, the founder of ROC, Sun Yat-sen, advocated during his lifetime: Taiwan and Korea should at least implement autonomy, and each should establish its own parliament and self-governing government. On January 13, 1926, the National Congress of the KMT stated that Taiwan’s national revolution advocated that Taiwan, Vietnam, Korea, and the Philippines should all be independent. At the National Congress of the KMT on April 1, 1938, Chiang Kai-shek also agreed with Sun Yat-sen's wish for Taiwan's independence. It is believed that Taiwan’s independence contributes to China’s stability and peace in East Asia.

Taiwanese Communist Party Supported Independent action

In 1928, Taiwanese left-wingers such as Hsieh Chei-hong and Lin Mushun established the Communist Party of Taiwan in the French Concession of Shanghai on April 15. Articles 2 and 3 of the party’s bylaw stated that "long live the independence of the people of Taiwan" and "establish the Republic of Taiwan." On July 16, 1936, Mao Zedong told the American scholar Edgar Snow, "If the Korean people want to break free from the yoke of the Japanese imperialists, we will enthusiastically support them in their fight for independence. This also applies to Taiwan."

The CCP supported Taiwan independence

In June 1941, Zhou Enlai clearly stated in the article "National Supreme and State Supreme" that China should not only pursue its own independence, but also support the independence and liberation movements of other nation-states. These movements include the anti-Japanese movement in Korea and Taiwan, the anti-German and Italy aggression in the Balkans and African nation-states, and the national independence movement in India and Southeast Asia.

Repeal of the unequal treaty does not include cession of land

On December 7, 1941, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in the US, and the Pacific War broke out. On December 9, 1941, the ROC officially declared war on Japan. In 1942, the National Government announced on its own that all unequal treaties were abolished, with the exception of the cession of land compensation. The US announced on October 10 of the same year that it would negotiate to abolish the unequal treaties signed between the US and China, and all other extraterritorial rights, privileges, and concessions. The so-called abolition of unequal treaties does not include land cessation and indemnities. Any territorial transfer must be confirmed by signing a peace treaty.

Cairo meeting did not reach consensus

On December 1, 1943, Cairo Radio broadcasted the press release of Roosevelt, Churchill, and Chiang Kai-shek at the Cairo Conference, commonly known as the Cairo Declaration. Chiang Kai-shek asked Japan to return all the territories stolen from China, such as Manchuria, Taiwan, and the Penghu Islands, to the ROC. Since the meeting did not reach a consensus, no one signed a confirmation endorsement.

The Emperor's Edict is annulled

Law No. 34 (Law No. 34 of Showa 20), passed by the House of Representatives on March 17, 1945 and promulgated on April 1, is officially called "The Law on the Election of Members of the House of Representatives." Based on the assimilation of customs in Taiwan and Korea, it is no different from the mainland, and on the grounds of carrying out jihad, it is decided to give the residents of Taiwan and Korea the right to participate in national politics (Japanese politics). The bill stipulates that the House of Representatives allocate 28 seats to these two places. Among them, Korea occupies 23 seats and Taiwan occupies 5 seats, and emphasized that its rights are fully consistent with those of the representatives of the Japanese mainland. A few days after the law, the edict, and the "Edict" were announced in the Tokyo air raid, the Japanese government, which showed its defeat in WWII, declared its unconditional surrender before it had time to hold the relevant elections in accordance with the new law. In the year following the end of the war, the Showa 21 Law No. 8, the House of Representatives passed the "Showa 20 Law No. 34 (Partial Repeal of the Law on the Election of Members of the House of Representatives)."

CKS did not attend the Potsdam Conference

On July 26, 1945, the heads of state of the US, Britain and the Soviet Union discussed how to deal with Japan's territorial issues after the Pacific War ended in Potsdam. The meeting reached a resolution and signed the Potsdam Declaration. Article 8 of the Declaration: "The provisions of the Cairo Declaration shall be implemented, and Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku, and other small islands as determined by us." Chiang Kai-shek did not attend the Potsdam Conference, so the agenda didn’t mention of Taiwan and Penghu. The document was signed by telegram. Although Stalin attended the summit, the Soviet Union did not declare war on Japan until August 8, 1945, so the signing was added after the meeting. The purpose of the Potsdam Declaration is to plan the territorial scope of Japan after the war without any authorization to transfer the territorial sovereignty of Taiwan and Penghu.

General Order #1 Military Occupation

On August 15, 1945, the Empire of Japan announced its unconditional surrender, and on September 2 of the same year held a surrender ceremony and formally signed the letter of surrender. MacArthur, the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, issued the General Order #1, appointing the emperor of Japan to order the Japanese high-ranking commanders in China (except Manchuria), Taiwan and French Indochina north of the 16th latitude, as well as all land, navy, air force and auxiliary forces should surrender to General Chiang Kai-shek. Taiwan thus began a long period of military rule, and it has not yet announced its termination.

Misleading the military occupation into sovereignty transfer

Reluctantly, the Chiang Kai-shek government interpreted military occupation as a grant of sovereignty. On January 12, 1946, the ROC changed the Japanese nationality of Taiwanese to the nationality of the ROC before the conclusion of the peace treaty. Then Chen Yi, the then chief executive of Taiwan Province, suddenly issued an order in February that he was scheduled to start conscription in Taiwan in September 1946 and recruit Taiwanese youths to China to join the Chinese army and fight the Chinese civil war. These are all acts of international war crime and cannot be tolerated by law.

Mao Zedong praised Taiwan's independence

In 1947, the February 28th Massacre broke out in Taiwan. The CCP’s "Liberation Daily" also published a statement "supporting Taiwan's independence" on March 8. Mao Zedong’s radio speech in Yuan Ann said: “Our armed forces led by the CCP fully support the people of Taiwan and oppose the struggle against CKS and the KMT. We are for Taiwan’s independence, and we are for Taiwan’s own establishment a country they want. "

CKS scolded Chen Cheng Taiwan is a trust territory

After WWII, China has never possessed Taiwan's territorial sovereignty. It is a fact that known to the world. On January 12, 1949, CKS in response to Chen Cheng's improper speech saying "Taiwan is a fortress for the suppression of communism" in a press conference, issued a statement reprimanding: "Taiwan governor Chen (Cheng). Yesterday's telegram you had received and read. And I learned from newspaper of your important comrades caused condemned that let me speechless. Moreover, I heard that my brother’s many claims to He Haoruo belonged to him to convey to his comrades in Beijing. This style is still the same in the past, and there is no reflexiveness. The meaning of reforming is especially dangerous. If you fail to reflect on such a big failure after the major lessons in the past, you will not take into account your own situation. Not only can you not become a politician, but it will also make you sad and desperate. Also. You must know when, where and what is Taiwan today, we can still let us be brazen and presumptuously speak out like in the past. Taiwan’s legal status and sovereignty, before the peace conference with Japan, are the nature of our country as a trusteeship, how can we make it clear as the last fortress of the suppression of the Communist Party and the basis for national rejuvenation, wouldn't it make people with a little common sense at home and abroad laugh at it as madness. From now on, don’t make your own claims and show more of the limelight, and most should take the central’s propositions as your propositions. If what you say in the press conference is completely contrary to the central government’s proclamation, people at home and abroad feel inexplicable towards their younger brother. I hope you bury head and work hard, think about self-blame, and avoid being jealous and avoid being accused by others, then it is a blessing to the nation. Hand screwdriver

CCP/PRC established SKS/ROC exiled

On October 1, 1949, Mao Zedong won the Chinese Civil War and declared the establishment of PRC. CKS stepped down as early as January 21, and the government of ROC announced the move to Taipei on December 7. At that time, Taiwan was still Japanese territory, so the ROC in the international community has become a substantial government in exile, because there is no legitimate people, territory, sovereignty, and a government recognized by the international community.

The Korean War breaks out and the position is uncertain

On June 25, 1950, the Korean War broke out. US President Truman issued a declaration on June 27, "The attack upon Korea makes it plain beyond all doubt that communism has passed beyond the use of subversion to conquer independent nations and will now use armed invasion and war. It has defied the orders of the Security Council of the United Nations issued to preserve international peace and security. In these circumstances the occupation of Formosa by Communist forces would be a direct threat to the security of the Pacific area and to United States forces performing their lawful and necessary functions in that area. Accordingly, I have ordered the 7th Fleet to prevent any attack on Formosa. As a corollary of this action, I am calling upon the Chinese Government on Formosa to cease all air and sea operations against the mainland. The 7th Fleet will see that this is done. The determination of the future status of Formosa must await the restoration of security in the Pacific, a peace settlement with Japan, or consideration by the United Nations.” This is the source of Taiwan’s undetermined status.

UN Security Council Taiwan is not part of China

On June 26, 1950, the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of the PRC Zhou Enlai called Trygve Lie, then Secretary-General of the UN, accusing the US of "violating the UN Charter and invading Chinese territory (referring to Taiwan)" and appointing Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Wu Xiuquan as a plenipotentiary representative. The accusation that the UN operates the "American armed invasion of Taiwan" was rejected by a vote of 9 to 1 at the 530th Security Council meeting on November 30, 1950, giving China and the international community a very clear answer. On that day, Tsiang Tingfu, the ambassador of the ROC to the UN, also voted against the accusation against Wu Xiuquan. This is the official judgment of the UN "Taiwan does not belong to China" is a public record of the conclusion of the case after public discussions in the international community.

SFPT specified Taiwan status after WWII

On September 5, 1951, Dulles delivered a speech to all the representatives of the countries participating in the San Francisco Peace Conference. He explained the reason why the Pacific War Peace Conference was delayed for six years before convening: “Unhappily, civil war within China and the attitudes of the Allied Governments have created a situation such that there is not general international agreement upon a single Chinese voice with both the right and the power to bind the Chinese nation to terms of peace. Some think that one government meets these tests. Some think another meets them. Some doubt that either, meets them. No majority can be found for any present action regarding China. Thus, the Allies were faced with hard choices. They could defer any peace with Japan until they could agree that there was in China a government possessed of both legitimacy and authority. It would, however, be wrong, cruel, and stupid to penalize Japan because there is civil war in China and international disagreement regarding China. As another approach, each Allied Power could refuse to sign a treaty of peace with Japan unless a Chinese government of its choice was cosigner with it. That, we ascertained, would leave Japan at war with so many Allied Powers that Japan would get only a small measure of the peace she has earned. Indeed, there is no reason to believe that Japan, an essential party, would willingly cooperate in a program leading to that end. To exert compulsion in this matter would create resentment in Japan, and it would activate and aggravate Allied division in the face of a grave world-wide menace which requires maximum unity. The remaining choice was for the Allied Powers generally to proceed to conclude peace without any present Chinese co-signature, leaving China and Japan to make their own peace, on terms, however, which would guarantee full protection of the rights and interests of China.”

The final Protocol not reached Shimonoseki Treaty

The San Francisco Peace Treaty was formally signed on September 8, 1951. This is a joint resolution of the international community. It regulated Taiwan's political and legal status and direction after the Second World War. Article 2a of the Peace Treaty: Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores. Article 23 authorizes the US as the principal occupying power. Article 4(a):Subject to the provisions of paragraph (b) of this Article, the disposition of property of Japan and of its nationals in the areas referred to in Article 2, and their claims, including debts, against the authorities presently administering such areas and the residents (including juridical persons) thereof, and the disposition in Japan of property of such authorities and residents, and of claims, including debts, of such authorities and residents against Japan and its nationals, shall be the subject of special arrangements between Japan and such authorities. (b) Japan recognizes the validity of dispositions of property of Japan and Japanese nationals made by or pursuant to directives of the United States Military Government in any of the areas referred to in Articles 2 and 3. Article 10 Japan renounces all special rights and interests in China, including all benefits and privileges resulting from the provisions of the final Protocol signed at Peking on 7 September 1901, and all annexes, notes and documents supplementary thereto, and agrees to the abrogation in respect to Japan of the said protocol, annexes, notes and documents.

Taipei Treaty does not involve sovereignty

SFPT Article 26 authorizes Japan to sign a sub-peace and a bilateral peace treaty with the ROC on the basis of the substantively identical conditions of the San Francisco Peace Treaty. This is the Taipei Treaty, which is the source of the so-called Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty. Remember, the sub-treaty certainly cannot be self-propelled, beyond the authorization of the head-treaty. The San Francisco Treaty was signed on September 8, 1951 and entered into force on April 28, 1952, while the Taipei Treaty was signed on April 28, 1952 and entered into force on August 5, 1952. Some experts, scholars, and professors said that Japan transferred Taiwan’s sovereignty to China thru the Taipei Treaty is a real joke. Imagine that when the San Francisco Peace Treaty came into effect, Japan had already lost all the right, title and claim to Taiwan and Penghu already. Is there still a right to grant Taiwan and Penghu sovereignty to ROC? Really genius and whimsical. The Taipei Treaty clearly stated that it aimed to terminate the war between Japan and ROC. (Article 1). And did not grant sovereignty over Taiwan and Penghu to the ROC (Article 2). Japan waived all its privileges in China and the so-called unequal treaties retroacted to the final Protocol signed at Peking on 7 September 1901. It did not touch the Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895 (Article 5), and the treaty was annulled on September 29, 1972.

SFPT authorized USMG to secure Taiwan

According to the authorization of the San Francisco Peace Treaty in 1952, the US government enacted many bills: 1954 Joint Defense Treaty, 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, 1982 Six Guarantees, 2018 Taiwan Travel Act, Asia Reassurance Initiative Act, Taiwan Security Enhancement Act, Taiwan International Participation Act , Taiwan AIA International Protection and Strengthening Initiative Act to protect Taiwan’s social stability, economic prosperity, national defense security, freedom of life, and political democracy. The United States’ stand and actions in defending Taiwan are consistent and never changed. The Taiwan International Solidarity Act proposed on April 19 stated that UN Resolution 2578 only deals with the issue of Chinese representation and does not involve Taiwan.

Defense Treaty to Defend Taiwan and Penghu

On December 2, 1954, the Republic of China and the United States signed the Mutual Defense Treaty Between the US and the ROC in Washington, with a total of ten articles, which came into effect on March 3, 1955. Article 6 of the treaty clearly states: For the Republic of China, the so-called "territory" and "territory" refer to Taiwan and the Penghu Islands, and the United States of America refers to the territories of the Western Pacific under its jurisdiction. The provisions of Articles 2 and 5 also apply to other areas determined by mutual consent. The terms "territorial" and "territories" shall mean in respect of the ROC, Taiwan and the Pescadores; and in respect of the USA, the island territories in the West Pacific under its jurisdiction. The provisions of Articles II and V will be applicable to such other territories as may be determined by mutual agreement. The treaty was formally notified to the ROC by the United States, and it was terminated and invalidated on January 1, 1980, Taiwan time.

The UN Resolution #2758 does not relate to Taiwan

Resolution 2758 adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on October 25, 1971: "Decides to restore all rights of the PRC, recognize her government representative as the only legal representative of China in the UN, and immediately remove Chiang Kai-shek’s representative from It is expelled from the seats illegally occupied in the UN organization and all its affiliated institutions.” Therefore, since the passage of UN Resolution 2758, the affairs of anyone represented ROC will be automatically succeeded by PRC. However, whether it is the Taipei Treaty between Japan and the ROC or the Joint Communiqué on the establishment of diplomatic relations between Japan and PRC, the territorial part of Taiwan involved is in compliance with the authorization of Article 26 of the San Francisco Peace Treaty. It does not treat Taiwan’s territorial sovereignty. Awarded to ROC or PRC. Taiwan is not part of the Chinese territory. Taiwan is not an indivisible and inherent territory of China or Japan at all. The judge of the Japanese High Court said that Taiwan and Penghu are not inherent, but the territory of Japan obtained from the Shimonoseki Treaty, but in the San Francisco Treaty and the Taipei Treaty China has given up. In fact, since 1662, Taiwan has been ceded by the Netherlands, Zheng, Qing, and Japan many times. Now is the time for Taiwan to face up to history.

The U.S. derecognized ROC and only recognizes Taiwan

On April 10, 1979, US President Carter signed the Taiwan Relation Act passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate. The full text contains 18 articles, which came into effect on January 1, 1979. Article 15: The term "Taiwan" will include Taiwan and the Penghu Islands as appropriate, as well as the people, companies, and other groups and institutions established or formed under the laws applicable to these islands, January 1, 1979 Before Japan, the United States recognized as the Taiwan governance authority of the Republic of China, as well as any succeeding governance authorities (including political branches, institutions, etc.). The bill clearly states that since January 1, 1979, the US no longer recognizes the ROC, but only recognizes the governing authority on Taiwan.

Tokyo High Court judged the Japanese nationality lost

On June 12, 1980, Judge Yoshida of the Tokyo High Court stated in Lim King-Bing v. Japan’s judgment that: There is a clause in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that “no one shall be deprived of his nationality arbitrarily and his right to change his nationality shall be denied.” Article 15 (2)>. "No one should be deprived of his nationality arbitrarily", which is properly interpreted as "No one should be deprived of his nationality without justification and due process." Interpreting "arbitrary" as a one-sided country is too serious and narrow
. As mentioned above, Taiwanese lost their Japanese nationality because of the cession of territories after the war, which was accompanied by a change of nationality. The change of nationality, which leads to the cession of territory, is usually provided explicitly or implicitly by a treaty. Therefore, it should be interpreted as an arbitrary deprivation of nationality for the purpose of human rights in the world, which does not prohibit a comprehensive change of nationality. Therefore, the loss of Japanese nationality by the Taiwanese in the peace treaty between Japan and the Republic of China in accordance with due process and justified reasons does not violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. "For details of the case of Taiwan residents' loss of Japanese nationality judged by the Japanese High Court, please refer to the Japan International Law Yearbook, 1982, Volume 25, page 177 (6)."

ROC an undecided issue

On October 25, 2004, former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said: "There is only one China. Taiwan is not independent. It does not enjoy sovereignty as a nation, and it remains our policy, our firm policy." August 2007 On the 30th, Dennis Wilder, former National Security Council (NSC) Senior Director for Asian Affairs said: "Taiwan, or the Republic of China, is not at this point a state in the international community. The position of the United States government is that the ROC -- Republic of China -- is an issue undecided, and it has been left undecided, as you know, for many, many years."

The anti-secession law has no legal basis

On March 14, 2005, at the Third Session of the Tenth National People’s Congress of the PRC, a basic law of the PRC on cross-strait relations, the so-called Anti-Secession Law, was passed. Adopted on the same day and announced to take effect. Article 2 of the law: There is only one China in the world, the mainland and Taiwan belong to one China, and China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity are indivisible. Safeguarding national sovereignty and territorial integrity is the common obligation of all Chinese people, including Taiwan compatriots. Taiwan is part of China. The country will never allow Taiwan independence separatist forces to separate Taiwan from China in any name or in any way. The problem is that Taiwan was ceded out as early as 1895, but China was founded in 1912, and ROC was inherited by PRC in 1949. In China's lifetime, Taiwan has never been a part of China.

UN Secretary Ban took back his words

On July 27, 2007, the former Secretary-General of the UN, Ban Ki-moon said when asked by the media about the "Taiwan’s application to join the UN": "The membership of the UN shall be determined by the member states of the UN. The position of the UN is based on the UN General Assembly Resolution 2758. PRC is the only government that legally represents the whole of China, and the UN recognizes that Taiwan is part of China." Ban’s statement immediately suffered protests from the US, Japan, Canada, the European Union and other international communities. On August 16, 2007, the U.S. Representative Office issued a telegram confirming that after Ban Ki-moon discussed with the U.S. Ambassador to the UN Zalmay Khalizad on issues such as the UN wording on Taiwan’s status, Ban Ki-moon said that his recent public speeches were overstatement and promised no more use the phrase "Taiwan is part of China".

The US federal court ruled that Taiwan is stateless

On March 18, 2008, the US District Court Judge Rosemary M Collyer stated in the judgment of Lin v. USA: Plaintiffs have essentially been persons without a state for almost 60 years. The last completely clear statement of authority over Taiwan came from General MacArthur
in 1945. One can understand and sympathize with Plaintiffs’ desire to regularize their position in the world. That Plaintiffs remain in an international limbo is not, however, because they have been ignored by the United States or the rest of the world.

The political purgatory is not a nation yet

On April 7, 2009, the U.S. Federal Court of Appeals, the Circuit Judge of the District of Columbia Circuit, Brown, stated in the Lin v. U.S. appeal case: America and China’s tumultuous relationship over the past sixty years has trapped the inhabitants of Taiwan in political purgatory. During this time the people on Taiwan have lived without any uniformly recognized government. In practical terms, this means they have uncertain status in the world community which infects the population’s day-to-day lives.

Taiwan was never part of China

The circuit judge of the US Federal Court informed the world in black and white that the people of Taiwan do not have a nationality that is publicly recognized by the world. Nowadays, Taiwanese take the passport of the ROC. The PRC says that ROC was inherited by PRC on October 25, 1971, but China, neither ROC nor PRC, has never owned Taiwan’s territorial sovereignty. It is the blind spot and helplessness of Taiwan today. November 12, 2020, then Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that Taiwan has never been a part of China. On March 15, 2021, US Department of Defense officials said that Taiwan was never part of China since ancient times. China is not the sovereign state of Taiwan.

Defines Taiwan’s Territorial sovereignty

On April 25, 2021, President Tsai Ing-wen delivered a speech at the "Global Taiwan Affairs Symposium" organized by the Taiwan Nation Alliance that the government's consistent position is "national territory and sovereignty will never give up an inch; we persist in democracy and freedom." Vice President Lai Ching-te reiterated that Taiwan is a sovereign and independent country. Only the people of Taiwan have the right to decide the future of Taiwan, "it is our unchangeable proposition." This is a very ironic picture. At the advanced conference of the independence faction, a public statement was made that Taiwan, ROC, is a sovereign and independent country, and its sovereignty will not yield even one step. I don’t know when Taiwan became independent and when it was founded. When did ROC obtain Taiwan’s sovereignty? What’s the scope of its constitutional territory sovereignty? Why, why, why, why is it that a sovereign country cannot enter the UN or the World Health Organization?

Establish a nation step by step

Today Taiwan’s territorial sovereignty is not affiliated with any one China. It is indeed an "indisputable fact." Taiwan’s 23 million people have the right to self-determination and follow international legal procedures: ending the military occupation after WWII, establishing Taiwan’s civil government, and electing government representatives. , Declare territorial sovereignty to the principal occupying powers, strive for the recognition of the international community, and become a substantive territorial sovereign country before applying to join the UN and becoming a member of the international community with territorial sovereignty.

Taiwan is not the ROC

The ROC, currently ruling Taiwan, is not a sovereign country; it is just a government in exile. It is not always necessary to ask, when the US, Japan, China, Africa, Europe, Asia, and Australia all affirm that Taiwan is Taiwan, please can those in power in Taiwan be able to tell us why the DPP authorities insist on a China country? Is it ignorant, dare not, or is it another attempt that no one else knows, dreams to rule over China someday in the future?

John Hsieh
Hayward, California

Advertisements