美國立場聲明1955.02.16關於中華民國治理台澎行為的性質,國務卿 John Foster Dulles 表示:
在 1945 年,中華民國被委託治理(福爾摩莎與澎湖群島)
“[i]n 1945, [t]he Republic of China was entrusted with authority over (Formosa and the Pescadores), ”
Our Foreign Policies in Asia, DEP'T ST. BULL., Feb. 1955 at 329
涵義:中華民國是受委託治理台澎。
2014.09.22 ZIVOTOFSKY V. KERRY 一案實體答辯,國務院代理法律顧問 MARY E. MCLEOD 表示:
美國承認中華人民共和國(政府)是中國唯一的合法政府,但對於中國的「只有一個中國,且台灣是中國的一部份」的立場只有認知。因為美國對後面這個議題並無採取立場,因此本部門認為列名為「台灣」或「中國」所傳達的訊息與總統的承認政策一致--各該選項涉及的是地理描述,並非主張台灣是身為主權國家的中國的一部份。
“The United States recognizes the People’s Republic of China as the sole legal government of China, but it merely acknowledges the Chinese position that there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. J.A. 154. Because the United States does not take a position on the latter issue, the Department concluded that listing either “Taiwan” or “China” would convey a message consistent with the President’s recognition policy—either option involves a geographic description, not an assertion that Taiwan is or is not part of sovereign China. ”
http://www.justice.gov/....../zivotofsky-v-kerry-brief......
涵義:美國僅「認知」但未承認中華人民共和國「台灣是中國的一部分」的立場。
日本的立場 1972.09.29日本對台澎主權的立場及對中國主張台灣為其領土一部分的立場,日本政府 表示: 日本政府完全瞭解並尊重中華人民共和國所持「台灣為其領土一部分」的立場,且「日本政府」維持本身在波茲坦宣言下的立場。
“it fully understands and respects the P.R.C. government's stand that [Taiwan is a part of its territory] and that [the Japan government] maintains its stand under the Potsdam Proclamation.”
Joint Communiqu6 of the Government of Japan and the Government of the
涵義:日本不承認中國「台灣為其領土一部分」的主張
1951.08.23印度對舊金山和約中未明定將台灣主權歸還中國表示抗議,印度政府 表示:
印度政府認為在條約中規定福爾摩莎島應歸還中國是最重要的。其歸還的時間與方式可以另行協商。但在企圖對日本和所有交戰政府間的關係進行規範的文件中無視過去的國際協議,讓該島嶼的未來處於未定狀態,在印度政府眼中,既不恰當也非權宜之計。
“[T]he Government of India attach[es] the greatest importance to the Treaty providing that the Island of Formosa should be returned to China. The time and manner of such return might be the subject of separate negotiations but to leave the future of the Island undetermined, in spite of past international agreements, in a document which attempts to regulate the relations ofJapan with all Governments that were engaged in the last war against her does not appear to the Government of India to be either just or expedient.”
India Refuses To Be Party to Treaty, Memorandum of India
涵義:印度政府認為舊金山和約未將台澎主權移轉給中國。
1955.02.10關於中美共同防禦條約是否影響台澎主權之歸屬,參議院外交關係委員會主席 Walter F. George 表示:
參議院批准本條約並不會強化或弱化蔣政府對於國際地位尚未決定之福爾摩莎的主權主張。
“Senate approval of the Treaty would neither strengthen nor weaken the Chiang Governmen's [sic] claim to sovereignty over Formosa, the international status of which is yet to be decided.”
Senate Approves Formosa Treaty, N.Y. TIMEs, Feb. 10, 1955
涵義:中美共同防禦條約不影響「台澎主權未定」的法理狀態。
1955.02.07關於中華民國治理台澎行為的性質,國務卿 John Foster Dulles 表示:
蔣【介石】將軍僅被要求為同盟國及相關國家管理它們(福爾摩莎及澎湖群島),等待關於其所有權的最終決定。
“General Chiang [Kai-shek] was merely asked to administer them (Formosa and the Pescadores) for the Allied and associated powers pending a final decision as to their ownership.'”
New Formosa Bid, N.Y. Times, Feb. 7, 1955, at Al
涵義:蔣介石(中華民國)是依同盟國的要求管理台澎。