‘Misleading’ Taiwan independence remarks

In his letter titled “Global Goals and Peace: Chip in with Taiwan” published in several Philippine newspapers, so-called “Representative of Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in the Philippines” Wallace Minn-Gan Chow questions the United Nations General Assembly Resolution (UNGA) 2758 and challenges the one-China principle. He claimed that “[Neither] Taiwan nor the PRC is subordinate to the other.”

These blatant “Taiwan independence” remarks not only mislead the general public, but also undermine regional peace and stability, and violate the Anti-Secession Law of China. They need to be strongly refuted and condemned.

Taiwan has been Chinese territory since ancient times. From 1895 to 1945, Taiwan was occupied and colonized by Japan. In 1945, the Chinese people won the great victory of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, ending Taiwan’s half-century of humiliation under Japanese slavery.

The Cairo Declaration issued by China, the United States and the United Kingdom in December 1943 states that it was the purpose of the three allies that all territories Japan had stolen from China, such as Northeast China, Taiwan and the Penghu Islands, be restored to China.

On Oct. 25, 1945, the Chinese government announced that it was resuming the exercise of sovereignty over Taiwan, with the ceremony to accept Japan’s surrender held in Taipei. The return of Taiwan to China constitutes an important component of the post-World War II international order.

The Taiwan question is essentially a remnant of China’s civil war. Shortly after WWII, a civil war broke out in China, and Kuomintang (KMT) forces led by Jiang Jieshi (Chiang Kai-shek) retreated to Taiwan after their defeat. With the support of external forces, the KMT set up a regime in Taiwan, with the two sides of the Taiwan Straits falling into a state of protracted political confrontation.

On Oct. 1, 1949, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) was founded, and became the sole legal government representing the whole of China and its sole legitimate representative in the international community. As such, it should exercise China’s full sovereignty, including that over Taiwan. The Taiwan question has nothing to do with democracy, health or global supply chain stability as claimed by Mr. Chow, but bears on China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The one-China principle is clear cut. There is but one China in the world. Taiwan is part of China. The Government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole of China. UNGA Resolution 2758 fully reflects and reaffirms the one-China principle. On Oct. 25, 1971, the 26th session of the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 2758 with an overwhelming majority.

It states in black and white that the General Assembly “decides to restore all its rights to the People’s Republic of China and to recognize the representatives of its Government as the only legitimate representatives of China to the United Nations, and to expel forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the United Nations and in all the organizations related to it.”

The one-China principle is a universally recognized basic norm governing international relations and a prevailing international consensus. It is the political foundation on which China establishes and develops bilateral relations with 183 countries, including the Philippines. On June 9, 1975, then Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai and Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Sr. signed in Beijing the Joint Communiqué on the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the Philippines.

In this Communiqué, the Philippine Government recognizes “the Government of the People’s Republic of China as the sole legal government of China, fully understands and respects the position of the Chinese Government that there is but one China and that Taiwan is an integral part of Chinese territory, and decides to remove all its official representations from Taiwan within one month from the date of signature of this Communiqué.” Such commitment is also enshrined in Philippine Executive Order No. 313 and Memorandum Circular No. 148.

“Representative” Chow also lets loose much nonsense about the South China Sea issue in an attempt to implicate the Taiwan question in the maritime disputes between China and the Philippines. The Taiwan question is purely an internal affair of China.

The maritime differences between China and the Philippines can be compared to a spat between neighbors, while the Taiwan question is completely domestic. Distinction between the two must not be blurred. The attempt to confuse the domestic issue with a neighborhood dispute shows exactly that Chow not only forgets his Chinese roots, but also tries to sow discord between China and the Philippines.

—————

Counselor Ji Lingpeng is spokesperson of the Chinese Embassy in the Philippines.