The Taiwan Question

Most of us know the historical details in general about the ownership of that island territory. In brief:

1. Occupied by Portugese and Dutch privateers up to the 17th century
2. Qing Emperor occupies the island, taking control from the Europeans
3. Qing Emperor cedes the island to the Japanese after the Sino-Japanese war in the late 19th century
4. Allied forces take control of the island and award it to China after 1945
5. Republic of China forces retreat to the Island after the Communists take control of the mainland in 1949

The only blurry part to me is #4. The Cairo conference stated that all territories the Japanese took from other countries should be restored to those countries. So Manchuria and Pescadores were restored to China. Somehow Taiwan was tossed in. The Japanese claim (correctly) that Taiwan was not invaded. It was ceded to them in the 19th century. It's as Japanese as Okinawa or Kyushu. So it should not have been given to the Chinese.

On the other hand men have followed a basic principle concerning defeated nations since time immemorial: The Loser Pays. China takes Taiwan as part of compensation for all the damages it has suffered under the Japanese. And China was an Allied nation at the time. So everyone thought the move was just.

Therefore, disregarding #5, it seems Taiwan should fall under mainland rule. But then, that's basing it on historical events. There is a stronger basis for Taiwanese independence and that is the right to self-determination. Any geographical boundary or group of people have the right to ask for independence (the granting of which is of course not that easy --shut up California!) In my usual scan-fast style of reading I failed to see anything concrete about this in the original UN Charter (post-1946).

 

This seems like a difficult question until you put yourself in that position. What if Tasmania became communist and decided to separate from mainland Australia? What would the average mainland Australian think? No bloody way! Is what we would think...get the commies out of there! Is what we would think...and if the international family told us to cool it we would get even angrier...and if the US decided to protect it then we would be mega pissed with the US. Not an overly different situation with Israel. - Except they have nuclear capability allowed by the allies thus protecting them from invasion...imagine the US giving Tasmania nukes to protect itself from Mainland Australia? Would we think that just? Would not the US become enemy number one in our minds? I speak to Chinese Australians semi regularly, and they all think Taiwan is Chinese!
I also remember a Taiwanese woman working here who was get out of town drop dead beautiful...and a Taiwanese taxi driver who seemed like a really nice bloke and a lover of democracy...i'm in two minds.

I can only hope that China realises it can get more with honey than it can with vinegar.

 

This is purely for discussion so don't get angry. What if Tasmania wants to secede for reasons other than becoming communists? Let's say they have developed a culture so unique and so strong that they simply feel they're a people apart? What if they come into undreamed of wealth and prosperity that they feel they have the right to manage this wealth all on their own? Also, what if the mainland Australians uniformly think and talk about the whole notion the way you do (No bloody way!) I'm pretty sure some feeling-pretty superpower will righteously take a pro-stand.

 

You had me up until "What if they come into undreamed of wealth and prosperity" - Money - "the root of all evil" - That would make sure we wouldn't let go.
You only have to see it from your side...what if California (fourth largest economy in the world) says we are sick of paying for all the other states (except New York of course) - We don't agree with what the government is doing domestically or internationally, we are sick of being told what to do, time to become independent...What if Florida said as much? What about Alaska? Hawaii? - I'm sure there would be rioting in the streets over a break up of the US. Civil war.
And what if China backed the leaving state militarily? What wold you think of China butting in and taking advantage?

 

That is one of the most asinine statements I have ever read.

China "ceded" the Pescadores and Taiwan to Japan, because China lost the First Sino-Japanese War. As such, the Islands were not "ceded" out of goodwill or for financial recompense, but at the point of a Japanese gun.
Please read the Treaty of Shimonoseki that ended the First Sino-Japanese War.

Now, had the Chinese not lost the war, they would not have ceded the islands to Japan. Thus, the Japanese did indeed take them by conquest.

 

China always considers Taiwan part of them. Politics.

 

Taiwan did not come into undreamed of wealth and prosperity until many years after they had seceded from mainland China. The economic boom began in the mid-60s, until then it was more or less a podunk nation. As such, it had nothing to do with wanting to remain independent from 1949-1965.

 

You can get more with a kind word and a 2-by-4, than you can with just a kind word.

 

So they say…

But friends can give you things money can’t buy…

 

Like STDs...oh, wait, that is "friends with benefits."

Then again, with money, you can buy friends. Although, they are usually called servants.

 

Please explain to me how much duress the Qing emperor felt in ceding Taiwan. Was he in Taiwan or Korea at the time, and did a Japanese Luca Brasi point a gun to head while signing the treaty? Because if not, it would still be counted as a bilateral agreement.

 

By using this argument, the Japanese have no claim on the Taiwan, the Pescadores or any other lost territory...As they too signed a bilateral agreement giving up those territories.

You can't have it both ways.

China lost the First Sino-Japanese war and lost territories. China won the Second Sino-Japanese War and gained them back.

 

The same duress any defeated leader or nation feels in meeting the demands of the victor. The emperor was probably glad the Japanese didn't demand anything more valuable.

Would you suggest, for example, that the French ceding Alsace-Lorraine to Germany in 1871 was just a friendly bilateral agreement?

The best rule is the one the Chinese themselves cited throughout the period of decolonialization, self-determination by the people of a territory.

 

Also, despite what was written on paper between Japan and China...the locals were less than pleased to see that they had suddenly become Japanese citizens.
Japanese invasion of Taiwan (1895) - Wikipedia

So, yes, Japan did take Formosa/Taiwan by the point of a gun.

 

Is everything Japanese bad to you? You may have left out (no, I'm sure you did) the more important point in that post of mine: In a war, the loser pays. So don't play China as a victim. That's what happens when you lose a war. If every land acquisition through conquest was unjust, then Germany stands to increase its area by 10%, what with properties currently under French, Polish and Czech control. Constantinople should be given to the Greeks. The kingdom of Hawaii should be restored and its autonomy recognized (though Hawaii wasn't really conquered, more of a creeping take-over.)

You got the main point, but you're ignoring it to nitpick on some small matter. In two wars Japan won and lost Taiwan. Which is why China has a stronger historical claim to it at the moment.

 

Seriously?

You are the one who wrote

are you not?

All of which is complete BS. I have explained why Taiwan was not "simply tossed in", that the Japanese claim, incorrectly, that Taiwan was not invaded, the reason why China "ceded" Taiwan to Japan.

Although, I did leave alone That Taiwan is as Japanese as Okinawa or Kyushu - As that is a Robdab level of ludicrousness


You also miss the main point...That Taiwan is an independent nation, an neither Japan nor China have any claim on the island. No more than the British, Spanish or French can claim the United states as theirs..

 

Are you sure you're not confusing the two Sino-Japanese wars? The Cairo conference referred to territories invaded by the Japanese in world war 2, or thereabouts.

 

No more than the British, Spanish or French can claim the United states as theirs..

Oh the Brits will still say the US is theirs...don't worry. They just can't do anything about it... Ha!

 

Live updates: President Xi Jinping tells Chinese Communist Party 100th anniversary 'foreign power' won't be allowed to 'bully' China - ABC News

Some really great questions answered...

 

The confusion is on your part...

Here is the pertinent part of the Cairo Declaration.

Note the use of the word "all."

"All" the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa and The Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China.
Not just from WW1, not just from WW2, not just from 1932, not just from 1937...But, "All" with no date limiter.