key

　　Since 1900's the Taiwan authorities headed by Lee Teng-hui, not only gradually departed from the one-China principle in action, but also cooked up some evil ideas and fallacies, and gave enormous publicity to them in the international community in order to win sympathy and support. Among there so-called theories are: on both sides of the Taiwan Straits are "two equal political entities", "two governments", since 1949, the territories on either side of the Straits have been divided and governed separately with neither side having jurisdiction over the other, etc. In July 1997, LeeTeng-hui openly summarized these fallacies as the "two states theory". In August 2000, new leaders of the Taiwan authorities openly proclaimed that "Taiwan is a state with independent sovereignty". Some even proposed to decide Taiwan's status and future by referendum, and to solve the problem of reunification according to the model of "two Germanys" or "Korean issue". There are erroneous ideas in these theories, which should be clarified.

1) The Chinese territory and sovereignty have not been divided. Territories on both sides of the Straits are not two states. One China is a real existence.

　　This is because: Firstly, state sovereignty cannot be divided. According to the generally recognized international law, sovereignty always belongs to the whole country, and can neither be divided nor shared. In 1949, the founding of the People's Republic of China proclaimed the end of the history of the Republic of China. The government of the People's Republic of China, as the only legal government of China, as a matter of course, took over the sovereignty of the whole of China including Taiwan, which was exercised by the old government on behalf of China, and became the main body in the international law. Although the Kuomintang (KMT) continued to use the names of "Republic of China", it already had no right to exercise the sovereignty of the state on behalf of China. It is in fact but one of the local authorities on China's territory. Secondly, in the real condition, the international community recognizes that there is only one China; the government of the People's Republic of China is the only legal government of China. The one-China principle has been widely accepted by the international community. Thirdly, the reason why the two sides of the Straits have not been reunified is mainly due to the intervention of foreign forces and the obstruction of the separatist forces in Taiwan. This abnormal situation will not and cannot change the legal status of Taiwan as a part of China.

2) The practice of deciding Taiwan's future by referendum is invalid in international law.

　　This is because: Firstly, Taiwan has been an inalienable part of the Chinese territory since ancient times, which is a historical fact and has been recognized by the international community. The sovereignty of Taiwan belongs to the whole Chinese people including Taiwan compatriots. Therefore, the legal status of Taiwan as a part of China's territory is clear and undeniable whether in respect of domestic laws or of international law. There is no premise to decide self-determination by referendum. Secondly. "Sovereignty belongs to the people" or "citizens' sovereignty,” means that sovereignty belongs to all the people of a state, and not certain people or the people of a certain area. Local referendum can only determine local affairs, but cannot determine the country's reunification or separation. Referendum concerning the sovereignty should be authorized by the sovereign state. The sovereignty over Taiwan belongs to all the Chinese people including Taiwan compatriots, and not to some of the people in Taiwan. Hence, the future of Taiwan can only be jointly decided by all 1.2 billion Chinese people including Taiwan compatriots. Even if the Taiwan authorities take the so-called referendum for the basis of separation, their separatist stand and action are invalid under international laws.

3) Taiwan question is totally different from German question or Korean question in nature.

　　Among the several assumptions and models talked about in Taiwan and abroad regarding the settlement of the Taiwan question, the "two Germanys model" is rather representative. In fact, the division of Germany after sides of the Straits are questions of a different nature.
Firstly, the reasons for, and the nature of, the division are different. After World War II, the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic were established respectively with support from the US and that from the Soviet Union in the zone occupied by the US, the UK and France and that by the Soviet Union. Germany was then divided into two countries. Obviously, the German question arose entirely from the special historical conditions and from relevant external factors after World War II, while the Taiwan question, left over by China's civil war, is a matter of China's internal affairs. Secondly, there is a difference in the status between the two under international law. Germany was divided in accordance with a series of international treaties during and after World War II, while the Taiwan question involves provisions of the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation and other international treaties, stating that Japan must return Taiwan, which it had seized from China, to China. Taiwan is different from East or West Germany in that the latter are sovereign states. The fact that Taiwan is a part of China has been generally accepted in the international community. Thirdly, They are different in their actual conditions of existence. The two German states after World War II were an example of complete division into two parts, not only in geographic sense but also in sovereignty, and joined the United Nations simultaneously as two independent international legal representatives. Meanwhile, though the two sides of the Straits are yet to be reunified, China's territory and sovereignty have not been divided. Since the two sides of the Straits were divided, the Chinese government always persists in the one-China principle, and Chiang Kai-shek and his son prior to Lee Teng-hui as well as Lee himself during his early days in office, all recognized only one China and opposed "two Chinas". The on-China principle has also been widely accepted by the international community. Up to now there are 163 countries in the world, which recognize that the government of the People's Republic of China is the only legal government of the whole of China including Taiwan, and none of them simultaneously maintain "diplomatic ties" with Taiwan. Obviously, the Taiwan question and the German issue cannot be placed in the same category, nor can the "two Germanys model" be copied to settle the Taiwan question.

　　For the same reasons, the Taiwan question cannot compare with or copy the Korean question model. The division of the Korean Peninsula into the north and the south were formed in accordance with the international treaties after World War II. The essential reason is the intervention of foreign forces when the us and the Soviet Union opposed each other and divided their orbits after World War II. The north and the south, divide into two opposite governments, though free from the colonial rule of Japan , did not solve the problem as which government represents all the people in the world, as neither was qualified to inherit the sovereignty of the whole of Korea represented by the former unified government of the Korean Peninsula; their simultaneous joining the United Nations demonstrated that the fact of their separate administration and co-existence of the north and the south has been accepted by the international community to a vast extent. Their difference in area, population, and comprehensive strength is slight, each with regulated central and local administrative systems, and with nearly the same number of countries maintaining diplomatic relations with each of them. These facts are totally different from the history and status of the division between the Chinese mainland and Taiwan.


		查看/发表评论

无标题文档

Advertising | Sitemap | Help | About Us