|
1% Corrupt ![]() Posts: 24 Location: singapore |
The article is not objective
|
Chance granted to others means to oneself!
|
|
3% Corrupt ![]() Posts: 64 |
The first Chinese settlements of Taiwan dated back in 600 AD and possibly earlier.
This resulted in assimilation and conquest of the aboriginal population who were possibly Polynesian in essence. As a result of the migration, current aboriginal population is less than 2 percent of Taiwan’s population. The aboriginals, the true natives of the island used to be referred to by their politically incorrect name Shandi. It means highlander or mountain people (most likely because they were driven there). The majority population of Taiwan were from Southern China. The people of Taiwan have distinguished themselves into 2 groups. The WaiSheng (roughly means outside the province) which refers to Chinese provincial dialects who came after the civil war in 1949. And BengSheng (originated in the province) which refers to the rest of the Chinese provincial dialects that migrated from the mainland before 1949. http://www.roc-taiwan.org.uk/taiwan/5-g ... people.htm http://www.taipei.org/teco/cicc/current ... aborig.htm http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/sectio ... istory.asp Taiwan aboriginals still exist although they are only 2 percent of the Island’s population. They have tried seceding from Taiwan itself but Chinese secessionists would not allow Aboriginal secessionists to secede. The Straits Times Interactive, June 16, 2004 Chen crushes "republic" of aborigines by Lawrence Chung TAIPEI - President Chen Shui-bian, widely believed to want independence for Taiwan, has, ironically, denied the same to a group who are the original Taiwanese - the aborigines. His government, on learning that hundreds of them have formed their own 'Kaosha republic', ordered a crackdown, sending in 500 armed police to disperse them from a site they have claimed as the seat of their republic. Kaosha is a term used to refer to the aboriginal people of Taiwan. The police raided the 6ha site in southern Kaohsiung county early yesterday, ordering the inhabitants to evacuate before four bulldozers tore down the more than 270 illegal structures. The aborigines turned emotional and blamed the President for their plight. 'Down with Chen Shui-bian the big liar,' some of them shouted. The residents claimed they had been tricked by Chen aides, who had told them that if they supported his re-election, their 'republic' would be legalised and they could each get a small piece of land. 'A-Bian told us he would establish 'country within country' relations with the aborigines if we voted for him,' said Mr Tang Chao-cheng, a self-proclaimed 'Speaker' of the 'Taiwan People Parliament'. 'Now that he got his second term, he no longer cares whether we are alive or dead,' said Mr. Tang. The angry residents tried to block the bulldozers and had to be forcibly removed from the scene. 'Give me back my home. We have no place to go,' cried an elderly woman. In April last year, the aborigines started congregating on the farmland leased from the state-run Taiwan Sugar Corp. They were led by Su Jung-tsung, a non-aborigine who nevertheless proclaimed himself president of the Kaosha republic, which had its own flag and anthem, and a temporary government and parliament. He was arrested earlier this month after Taiwan Sugar sued him for breach of contract as the land had been leased for the purpose of planting vegetables and fruit trees. Indigenous legislator Kao-Chin Su-mei said the aborigines had first been tricked by Su and then by certain aides of Mr Chen. 'A number of these people are underprivileged and do not have a steady job. Because they are poorly educated, they are easily cheated.'†Sorry, the website seems to have expired. But there is this story. http://www.etaiwannews.com/Taiwan/2004/ ... 351073.htm There were Dutch settlers hoping to do trade with the Ming in the 1620s claimed Taiwan. Chinese settlers that claimed dominance in the region fell under Dutch authority. Remnants of the Ming Dynasty retook the island from the Dutch in the1660s. The Ming General, like Chiang Kai Shek tried to stage a retaking of the mainland from the Island of Taiwan. But soon after, Ching China overthrew the Ming in Taiwan. http://www.eslisland.com/intro/history.html Ching China then fell into decline and Taiwan was ceded to Japan due to the Sino-Japanese War. The Treaty of Shimonoseki required that China hand over the island and its Chinese population to Japan in the late 1890s. Due to continuing Sino-Japanese war and continuing invasion of Chinese territory, the ROC argued that it had no reason to respect any agreement with Japan since Japan continued to act within a state of war with China. http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0845361.html After Japans defeat in the 2nd world war the Republic of China who succeeded the Ching government (by overthrowing it) reclaimed Taiwan. But after regaining jurisdiction in Taiwan for China, the ROC was overthrown on mainland China by the People’s Republic of China. The US does not claim or has ever claimed sovereignty over Taiwan. Its position was that the SFPT gave the US temporary administration. The US argues it can not transfer sovereignty to the mainland since it never had it to begin with. The situation now is that the US makes agreements that Taiwan is a domestic affair for the Chinese but at the same time backpedals on such agreements in fear of losing Taiwan as a strategic investment. “This interpretation of Taiwan's de jure status has gained some low level of acceptance in recent years. In a Rotary Club meeting in 2004, the former ROC President Lee Teng-hui, who is recognized as one of the pro-independence leader, publicly asserted that Taiwan is still a territory administrated by US military government and therefore is not likely to be accepted in U.N. without a determined status.[10] (http://www.ettoday.com/2004/10/08/10844-1696624.htm) Still, one should note that this is a position held by a small minority, and the United States government has not claimed sovereignty over Taiwan. Furthermore, if the United States had been merely given the "administration" of Taiwan temporarily following Japan's cession of it, then the United States would be unable to cede what it never possessed in a sovereign sense. One should also bear in mind: though the PRC stressed the sovereignty of Taiwan to be its domestic affair and the U.S. has "acknowledged" the PRC's position, the U.S. government made it clear that "the United States would not formally recognize Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan" in its Six Assurances offered to Taipei in 1982â€. http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedi ... -of-Taiwan |
|
87% Corrupt ![]() Posts: 1756 Location: Singapore |
The treaty of San Francisco is not the correct document to refer to when it comes to Taiwan and China relations. Japan and China signed a separate peace. Essentially both are the same thing.
The part u would be referring to is that Japan renounces all claim to Formosa? that would be article 2. ------------------------------------------------------ Article 2 (Treaty between Japan and China) It is recognised that under Article 2 of the Treaty of Peace which Japan signed at the city of San Francisco on 8 September 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the San Francisco Treaty), Japan has renounced all right, title, and claim to Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores) as well as the Spratley Islands and the Paracel Islands. Article 2 (San Francisco) (a) Japan recognizing the independence of Korea, renounces all right, title and claim to Korea, including the islands of Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet. (b) Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores. (appended) --------------------------------------------------- Now that leaves Formosa in limbo right? Since technically they never state that Taiwan now belongs to China. Notice however they do declare that Corea is an independant nation, but not formosa. However for more damning legalities we refer to 2 previous documents. 1. The Cairo conference held between 2 allied greatpowers and Chinain 1943 2. The Instrument of Surrender of Japan in 1945 signed by Japan and most of the allies, including China. In Cairo, ---------------------------------------- Cairo Conference 1943 November, 1943 Released December 1, 1943 The several military missions have agreed upon future military operations against Japan. The Three Great Allies expressed their resolve to bring unrelenting pressure against their brutal enemies by sea, land, and air. This pressure is already mounting. The Three Great Allies are fighting this war to restrain and punish the aggression of Japan. They covet no gain for themselves and have no thought of territorial expansion. It is their purpose that Japan shall be stripped of all the islands in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the first World War in 1914, and that all the territories Japan has stolen form the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa, and the Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China. Japan will also be expelled from all other territories which she has taken by violence and greed. The aforesaid three great powers, mindful of the enslavement of the people of Korea, are determined that in due course Korea shall become free and independent. With these objects in view the three Allies, in harmony with those of the United Nations at war with Japan, will continue to persevere in the serious and prolonged operations necessary to procure the unconditional surrender of Japan. http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/wwii/cairo.htm --------------------------------------------------- The instrument of surrender states that Japan unconditionally accepts all conditions listed down in Potsdam, which proceeds from the 3 conferences held before it, Yalta, Tehran and finally Cairo. Since we know Cairo Conference was never brought into disrepute, or changed we can reasonably assume, the allies on condition of victory returned FORMOSA to China. Legally formosa was Japan's territory in 1943 due to the 1895 signing of the Shimoseki Agreement (is that correct i forgot the name of that document). Since Japan unconditionally surrendered to the Allies, and the Allies had stated that on victory the territories that once belonged to China and were "stolen" by Japan including FORMOSA would be returned to China. So legally China has every right to claim Taiwan as their own territory. On the fact that ROC was stated in name, this ROC was the name of China back then. They changed the name to PRC in 1949. KMT fled to Taiwan and renamed Taiwan to ROC. Its the same as if i call my home ROC, but clearly i am not the ROC referred to in the document. NOW ethnically, Taiwan might not have been originally Han Chinese, but technically so isn't Yunnan or the southern provinces but all are recognized as Chinese provinces. So why the disparities? The reason i pointed out the ethno-linguistic argument in my first reply(although linguistic each of china's dialect is varied enough to be considered a language of its own) was the tone of the first post was concerning ethnicity. LordofTheNippleRings had posted a very good article on how the aborigines are being actually treated by the "NATIVE" TAIWANESE who are actually Han Chinese. SO legally, I point out China has every right to claim Taiwan due to the 2 documents, and ethnically i point out that it makes no sense whatsoever to let a minority aboriginal population be the judge of whether their nation is independant especially when they are maltreated by the "native taiwanese". |
![]() |
|
1% Corrupt ![]() Posts: 37 Location: Sydney, Australia |
as long as there is not another war
|
|
42% Corrupt ![]() Posts: 845 Location: Haifa |
But what will happen when Taiwan declares Indipendnance? Or China decides it want's Taiwan?
|
|
Lobby Fodder (say hi & be nice to me!) ![]() Posts: 1 |
taiwan will be part of china when china is democratized
|
|
Lobby Fodder (say hi & be nice to me!) ![]() Posts: 7 Location: Myanmar(Burma) |
I suport the one china policy.
there is no seat for taiwan in diplomatics way. |
| NEW TOPIC POST REPLY | You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum |