Taiwan

What is the basis for considering the Republic of China on Taiwan to be an independent sovereign nation?

It's becoming increasingly difficult to maintain peace in the Taiwan Strait, as both the Republic of China (ROC) and People's Republic of China (PRC) are claiming sovereignty over Taiwan. Interestingly, the PRC says that the ROC had sovereignty over Taiwan until 1949, whereupon (with the founding of the PRC on Oct. 1, 1949) it became the successor government to the ROC. But where is any legal documentation to show that the ROC has had sovereignty over Taiwan? Any ideas? Over a period of weeks, a professional researcher friend searched in the library, academic databases, and on the internet. She could find absolutely no definitive proof that the ROC has sovereignty over the areas of Formosa & the Pescadores (aka Taiwan). She mentioned that a common point of confusion is to say that "the territorial sovereignty of these areas was transferred to the ROC when Japanese troops surrendered on Oct. 25, 1945." However, international law does not support such an interpretation.

Public Comments

1. Does your "researcher friend" realise that the PRC was not recognized as a sovereign nation itself until the 1970s? The fact is that Taiwan is a de facto independent nation that would have been nothing without the ROC. You say international law does not support [this] interpretation. Yet the whole point of international law, and any other law, is that it is OPEN to interpretation. In any case, the civil war between the Communists and Nationalists (KMT) is not over, in a similar way to the conflict in Korea. Therefore, the PRC have absolutely no right of sovereignty over Taiwan. The situation is complicated, because the KMT have insisted there is "one China", a view echoed by the PRC, but now the KMT no longer have control in Taiwan. Now the view is that, with a democratic Taiwan, Taiwan is no longer part of "one China". Finally, there is no such thing as "definitive proof" - you ought to know this if you are an academic, and your researcher friend should know better than to say such silly things.
2. The modern-day political movement for Taiwan independence dates back to the Japanese colonial period but became a viable political force within Taiwan only in the 1990s. The Taiwanese independence movement was advocated periodically during the Japanese colonial period, but was suppressed by the Japanese government. With the end of World War II in 1945, Japanese rule ended, but the subsequent rule under the Republic of China's autocratic KMT revived calls for local rule. During the martial law era lasting until 1987, discussion of Taiwan independence was forbidden in Taiwan, at a time when recovery of the mainland and national unification were the stated goals. During that time, many advocates of independence and other dissidents fled overseas, and carried out their advocacy work there, notably in Japan and the United States. Part of their work involved setting up think tanks, political organizations, and lobbying networks in order to influence the politics of their host countries, notably the United States, Republic of China's main ally, though they would not be very successful until much later. Within Taiwan, the independence movement was one of many dissident causes among the intensifying democracy movement of the 1970s, which culminated in the 1979 Kaohsiung Incident. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was eventually formed to represent dissident causes. After the lifting of martial law in 1987, and the acceptance of multiparty politics, the DPP became increasingly identified with Taiwan independence, which entered its party platform in 1991. At the same time, many overseas independence advocates and organizations returned to Taiwan and for the first time openly promoted their cause in Taiwan and gradually built up political support. By the late 1990s, DPP and Taiwan independence have gained a solid electoral constituency in Taiwan, supported by an increasingly vocal and hardcore base. As the electoral success of the DPP, and later, the DPP-led pan-green coalition grew in recent years, the Taiwan independence movement shifted focus to identity politics by proposing many plans involving symbolism and social engineering. The interpretation of historical events such as the 228 incident, the use of broadcast language and mother tongue education in schools, the official name and flag of the ROC, slogans in the army, orientation of maps all have been issues of concern to the present-day Taiwan independence movement. With the cross-straits political process stalled, this is likely to be the focus of the movement for the foreseeable future. Many supporters of independence for Taiwan view the history of Taiwan since the 1600s as a continuous struggle for independence and use it as an inspiration for the current political movement [2] In this view, the people indigenous to Taiwan and those who have taken up residence there have been repeatedly occupied by groups like the Dutch, the Ming and Qing dynasties, Koxinga and the Ming loyalists, the Japanese. From a pro-independent supporter's point of view, Taiwan is currently still under the occupation of Chinese nationalists despite the government being democratically elected. Under this view:Taiwan independence movement began under Manchu rule in the 1680s which led to a well known saying those days, "Every three years an uprising, every five years a rebellion". The people of Taiwan have been occupied in partial or in whole by various groups from the 1600s, the Dutch, the Manchu, Koxinga and the Ming dynasty loyalists, the French, the Qing dynasty, the Japanese, and then by Chinese nationalists. The Taiwan independence movement under Japan was ironically supported by Mao Zedong in the 1930s as a means of freeing Taiwan from Japanese rule[3]. With the end of World War II in 1945, by issuing "Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers General Order № 1" the Allies agreed that the Republic of China Army under the Kuomintang would "temporarily occupy Taiwan, on behalf of the Allied forces."[4] After the Kuomintang began to rule the island, the focus of the movement was as a vehicle for discontent from the native Taiwanese against the rule of "mainlanders" (i.e. mainland China-born people who fled to Taiwan with KMT in the late 1940s). The 228 incident in 1947 and the ensuing martial law policies which lasted until 1987 contributed to a so-called sense of White Terror on the island. In 1979, the Kaohsiung Incident, occurred as the movement for democracy and independence intensified. Between 1949 and 1991, the official position[5] of the ROC government on Taiwan was that it was the legitimate government of all of China and used this position as justification for authoritarian measures such as the refusal to vacate the seats held by delegates elected on the mainland in 1947 for the Legislative Yuan. The Taiwan independence movement intensified in response to this and presented an alternative vision of a sovereign and independent Republic of Taiwan. This vision was represented through a number of symbols such as the use of Taiwanese in opposition to the school taught Mandarin Chinese. Taiwan independence has been some of the motivation behind the Taiwanese localization movement.
3. Basis for sovereignty of a nation over another nation's territory is a treacherous issue politically and internationally. Only people's referendum can solve the issue. These days no nation can overpower or control another nation politically or militarily yet economic domination is possible.
4. The reason that the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan is not able to get admitted to the vast majority of international organizations as an independent sovereign nation can be summed up nicely by saying "no territory." In other words, the ROC on Taiwan does not hold "legal title" to the areas of Formosa and the Pescadores. The claim that the ROC had sovereignty over the areas of Formosa and the Pescadores up to 1949 is clearly false. There had been no transfer of territorial sovereignty of these areas to the ROC at any time prior to this date. In fact, in 1949 the post-war peace treaty had not yet come into effect!! The acceptance of the surrender of Japanese forces was done according to the directions of US General MacArthur. In General Order No. 1 of Sept. 2, 1945, MacArthur directed a Chinese ally -- Chiang Kai-shek, of the Republic of China -- to go to Taiwan and accept the surrender of the Japanese troops stationed there. In legal terms, MacArthur's order created an agency arrangement for the military occupation of Taiwan: The United States being the principal occupying power, with Chiang Kai-shek's ROC troops fulfilling the role of a subordinate occupying power. Then in late 1949 a large number of high-ranking officials of the ROC fled to occupied Taiwan from the mainland, thus becoming a government in exile. In the post war San Francisco Peace Treaty of April 28, 1952, Japan renounced the sovereignty of Taiwan without specifying a receiving country. The Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty of August 5, 1952, confirmed these arrangements. In other words, from 1945 to the present, there are no international treaties or other legal documents which can show that the territorial sovereignty of Taiwan has ever been transferred to the ROC. Without any such proof of transfer, the ROC on Taiwan merely remains as (1) a subordinate occupying power, and (2) a government in exile. There has been no change in this status to date. Hence, the ROC on Taiwan has "no territory." With "no territory" the ROC on Taiwan cannot be considered an independent sovereign nation. (The issue of what country is actually holding the territorial title to Taiwan is a separate matter. However, it is certainly not the PRC.)