Supporters of Taiwan in Taipei assert that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has no authority to represent Taiwan. Some say the Cairo Declaration is not a treaty and lacks legal standing — in other words, it should be ignored. Others say that Japan gave up control over Taiwan and Penghu in the San Francisco Peace Treaty, but never stipulated to whom Taiwan’s sovereignty would be transferred, meaning Taiwan’s status is undetermined.
However, both arguments are outdated and should be revised based on new information.
First, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has previously ruled that all international agreements are legally binding — this means that the Cairo Declaration has legal effect. However, the Cairo Declaration does not involve Taiwan. This was clearly explained by the declaration’s drafter, then-UK prime minister Winston Churchill, on Feb. 1, 1955. The Academia Historica’s archives about the Cairo communique also state as much.
Second, the San Francisco Peace Treaty did stipulate that Japan would give up its power over Taiwan and Penghu islands — referred to in the treaty as “Formosa and the Pescadores” — but it did not indicate to whom sovereignty over Taiwan would be transferred. This was pointed out by its drafter, former US secretary of state John Foster Dulles, when he explained the treaty article by article on Sept. 5, 1951.
However, Dulles proposed a solution: the UN Charter of 1945. According to Article 77 of the charter, “territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War” would be placed under the UN trusteeship. As stated in Article 76, the objective of the trusteeship system is “to promote the political, economic, social, and educational advancement of the inhabitants of the trust territories, and their progressive development towards self-government or independence” — therefore, Taiwan’s status is not “undetermined.”
The preamble of the San Francisco Peace Treaty states that Japan must “in all circumstances conform to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.”
When discussing the treaty in his speech at the San Francisco Peace Conference, Dulles said: “The preamble is an important part of the treaty.”
So, Taiwan’s status — according to the UN Charter — is independence, not undetermined.
Sim Kiantek is a former associate professor of business administration at National Chung Hsing University.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS