台灣屬中國？馬理由變來變去

.

【Comment】

Collin Powell, former Secretary of State, claimed on Oct. 24, 2004: “Taiwan is not independent.  It does not enjoy sovereignty as a nation, and that remains our policy, our firm policy.”  Three years later (08/30/2007), Dennis Wilder, National Security Council Senior Director for Asian Affairs, confirmed: “Taiwan, or the Republic of China, is not at this point a state in the international community.”[1]  Neither of them suggested that Taiwan is part of China.

However, ever since Ma Ying-jeou took the office in 2008, he seeks every possible chance to interpret that Taiwan is part of China and tends to change the status of Taiwan unilaterally.  His pretexts are ever-changing and inconsistent.  They are:

‧According to the Cairo press communiqué, Taiwan should be returned to China;

‧According to the Treaty of Taipei (1952), Japan has restored the sovereignty of Taiwan to ROC;

‧According to the Treaty of Shimonoseki (1895), Qing Empire has ceded only the jurisdiction, not full sovereignty, over Formosa and the Pescadores to Japan, so China has legitimate right to recollect;

‧According to the San Francisco Peace Treaty (1951), Formosa and the Pescadores has been restored to China by the renunciation of Japan;

MYJ’s latest pretext returns to the Cairo press communiqué, which has no signature of the participants on the original text. Actually, in a reply letter to Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Michael J. Kurtz, Assistant Archivist for Records Services of the National Archives and Records Administration, stated that “the declaration was a "communiqué," and it does not have treaty series (TS) or executive agreements series (EAS) number.” [2]  In short, it was not a treaty or an US code.  http://fapa.org/Archives/Let%20from%20Archives.pdf

Being a President and a scholar of international laws, MYJ has been unbelievably irregular and changeable. Little does it occur to him that his ever-changing pretexts have paradoxically confirmed the fact that Taiwan status is yet to be determined since the end of the war.  And the fact was already confirmed sixty years ago today (1951/9/5) by John Foster Dulles, the former US Secretary of State who hosted the San Francisco Peace Conference.  His message was more than lucid: [3]

…the treaty embodies article 8 of the Surrender Terms which provided that Japanese sovereignty should be limited to Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and some minor islands.  The renunciations contained in article 2 of chapter II strictly and scrupulously conform to that surrender term.

Some Allied Powers suggested that article 2 should not merely delimit Japanese sovereignty according to Potsdam, but specify precisely the ultimate disposition of each of the ex-Japanese territories. This, admittedly, would have been neater. But it would have raised questions as to which there are now no agreed answers. We had either to give Japan peace on the Potsdam Surrender Terms or deny peace to Japan while the Allies quarrel about what shall be done with what Japan is prepared, and required, to give up.  Clearly, the wise course was to proceed now, so far as Japan is concerned, leaving the future to resolve doubts by invoking international solvents other than this treaty.

and;

Conflicts between Japan and China began in 1931 and open warfare broke out in 1937.

revised at 1250

 

 

馬上台後，對於台灣地位的解釋有幾次轉折，跳來跳去。馬萬變不離其宗的是，台灣已經還給中國。他說：

開羅新聞公報說→台北條約歸還說→馬關條約無效說→舊金山和約無效說→開羅新聞公報說。

他還說，「美國並將開羅宣言與波茨坦公告列入美國條約與國際協定彙編，將日本降書載入美國法規大全，均具有法律拘束力。」這不是事實。

白紙黑字的是：台灣人公共事務委員會為此正式詢問美國國家檔案局。回答是「宣言是個公報（communique），且並未賦予條約（TS）系列或行政協定（EAS）的編碼。」

http://fapa.org/Archives/Let%20from%20Archives.pdf
事實上，杜勒斯確認了「台灣地位未定論」：

「這次和約收納了〈波茨坦投降條件〉的第八條，即日本主權應侷限在本州、北海道、九州、四國與一些小島。第二章第二條的放棄，嚴格且謹慎地遵守了該投降條件。」

「盟國還在爭執該如何處理日本準備放棄或必須放棄的東西。很明顯的，…把這些疑問保留到將來，訴諸國際方式解決，而不是由本條約來處置。」

「日本與中國之間的敵性從1931年開始，且在1937年正式開戰。…」

明確的是，國際法學者當總統卻在引用國際法時變來變去——其行為的本身，就代表台灣地位的未定。

 

有關台、澎主權已於二次大戰後歸還中華民國的法律文獻，現正在國立故宮博物院展出中，歷史事實不容否認 　中華台北外交部（2011-9-4）

關於1951年舊金山和約第2條聲明日本放棄台灣、澎湖，但未述及其歸屬乙節，外交部茲再度強調重申如下：一、 根據1943年12月中華民國、美國與英國三國領袖共同發布的「開羅宣言」規定：日本竊自中國的領土，包括東三省、台灣及澎湖群島，必須歸還中華民國（…All the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa, and Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China）。隨後1945年7月中、美、英三國再度發布「波茨坦公告」，重申「開羅宣言」的條件必須貫徹實施（The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out…）。同年8月日本天皇宣布無條件投降時，以及9月日本向盟軍呈遞的降伏文書，均明確接受波茨坦公告。前述文件均為台灣與澎湖在戰後已歸還成為中華民國領土的歷史鐵證，美國並將「開羅宣言」與「波茨坦公告」列入「美國條約與國際協定彙編」，將日本降書載入「美國法規大全」，均具有法律拘束力。

http://www.mofa.gov.tw/webapp/content.asp?cuItem=54193&mp=1

 

【相關閱讀】
〈舊金山和平條約〉SFPT（一）第一章和平第二章領土
〈舊金山和平條約〉SFPT（二）第三章安全第四章政治及經濟條款
〈舊金山和平條約〉SFPT（三）第五章要求及財產第六章爭議解決第七章最後條款
美國國務卿杜勒斯在1951.09.05「舊金山和會」的開場演講（1/2）　■雲程譯/SW校飾
美國國務卿杜勒斯在1951.09.05「舊金山和會」的開場演講（2/2）　■雲程譯/SW校飾
美國國務卿杜勒斯在1951.09.05「舊金山和會」的開場演講（English）1/2
美國國務卿杜勒斯在1951.09.05「舊金山和會」的開場演講（English）2/2