Ghostly Tentacles: "Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory"

Ghostly Tentacles: "Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory"
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
May 5, 2009

Masaki Saito, Japan's representative to Taipei, openly proclaimed that "Taiwan's status is undetermined." This cannot be explained away as "merely his personal opinion." Our Ministry of Foreign Affairs' "expressions of regret and solemn protest" are tough on the exterior but soft in the interior. Demands that he be expelled and replaced are fully justified.

Taiwan's status never has been undetermined. Japan, via the Makuan Treaty of 1895, forcibly annexed Taiwan. But following the War of Resistance against Japan, the Nationalist Government nullified all treaties with Japan. The Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Declaration, and Japan's signing of the instrument of surrender, repeatedly affirmed Taiwan's retrocession to China. Therefore no legal or historical doubt whatsoever remains about Taiwan's retrocession.

However, when we condemn Japan for alleging that "Taiwan's status is undetermined," we must realize that post-war Japan was essentially a vassal of the United States. The real mastermind was the United States. The so-called "Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory" was concocted by the United States. It later realized the theory was untenable and let it drop. Japan is merely playing the part of the United States' parrot.

The United States has coveted Taiwan ever since the nineteenth century. It has never forgotten it. Despite numerous failed attempts to annex it, it has never given up. It has always adjusted to the situation as it develops. Taiwan was retroceded to China following the war. But soon afterwards the Nationalist government was defeated on the Mainland. The Korean War broke out. The United States was presented with another opportunity. When Truman dispatched the Seventh Fleet, he declared that Taiwan's status was still undetermined. The U.S. military command in Japan also asserted that Taiwan's status was undetermined. It attempted to use the Peace Treaty with Japan to place Taiwan under the trusteeship of the United States or the United Nations. Therefore the United States concocted its "Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory." It used the Soviet Union's refusal to recognize the Nationalist Government as a pretext to exclude both Taipei and Beijing from the proceedings. It stage-managed its "San Francisco Peace Treaty." Because the KMT government needed the support of the United States back then, it bit its tongue. Ever since then the San Francisco Peace Treaty has been the basis for claims that "Taiwan's status is undetermined."

Therefore, when we condemn Japanese officials for alleging that "Taiwan's status is undetermined." We must not target only Japan. Instead, we should thoroughly understand the context.

One. In terms of historical context: "Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory" is an example of U.S. meddling in China's internal affairs. It was an attempt to use extralegal force, using the San Francisco Peace Treaty as a pretext to override the Cairo Declaration and other legal documents. It was an attempt to use "Taiwan's Undecided Status Theory" to create for itself some political maneuvering room. It was a throwback to an era of imperialist hegemony. For example, a subsequent United States/apan "two-plus-two meeting" dealt with Taiwan as a "peripheral matter."

Two. In terms of its significance at the time: The United States deliberately muddied the meaning of the Cairo Declaration and other international treaties. It concocted the "San Francisco Peace Treaty." It turned Taiwan into its protectorate. It ensured that Taiwan and the rest of China would preserve the status quo and remain separate. Meanwhile on Taiwan two movements developed: "Taiwan independence" and "an independent Taiwan." Following the Saito incident, some Pan Blue legislators even said, "In fact he's helping Taiwan." This reveals that even within the KMT many people have internalized the premise.

Three. In terms of ideology: After World War II, United States regarded Taiwan as "spoils of war," as something it can order about as it wishes. The United States believes it has an extralegal prerogative to dispose of Taiwan as it pleases, to give its "spoils of war" to whomever it desires. For example, the United States combined the Ryukyu Islands with Diaoytai and "gave" them to Japan. For example, on the one hand, its "Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory" helps it contain Beijing. On the other hand, it manipulates Taipei by casting doubt on the legitimacy of the ROC govenment's rule. During the 1950s the U.S. attempted to stage a military coup on Taiwan. It wanted to promote the notion that the ROC government was a "foreign power." This was an extension of its "Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory."

Just as cross-Strait relations are warming up, enabling the resolution of past disputes, Saito brings up "Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory." This is hardly something that can be explained away as "merely his personal opinion." Do Japan and the US really want to turn back the clock? Do they really want to provoke conflict between the two sides?

Under the circumstances, the Ma administration must not merely express regret and allow the matter to drop. It must review the entire "Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory" and thoroughly expose it for what it is. It must take a stand and offer a vision for the nation's future. Saito's proclamation was merely an interlude. The ghostly tentacles that remain poised over Taiwan, ever ready to meddle in our internal affairs and provoke hatred and confrontation, is what we must be truly vigilant against.

章魚般的幽靈：「台灣地位未定論」
【聯合報╱社論】
2009.05.05 06:35 am

日本駐台代表齋藤正樹公開發表「台灣地位未定論」，這當然不是他事後所謂的「個人見解」能夠緩解的；外交部的「表示遺憾及嚴正抗議」也是色厲內荏，若命其離境換人亦在情理之中。

台灣從來就不曾有地位問題。日本於一八九五年以馬關條約強行割據台灣，但後來對日抗戰，國民政府宣布廢止對日一切條約；而後開羅宣言、波茨坦公告，以及日本簽署降書，都一再確定台灣的歸還。因此，所謂「台灣光復」無論就法律或歷史而言，皆毫無任何疑義。

不過，當我們為了「台灣地位未定論」而譴責日本時，不能不知道戰後的日本，在本質上只是美國的從屬，真正的主宰則是美國；所謂「台灣地位未定論」原是美國一度想炮製的東西，後已知難而退，日本所扮演的只不過是美國的反舌鳥而已。

美國對台，溯自十九世紀起即念茲在茲，從未或忘，儘管它的許多圖謀並未成真，但初衷不變，總是隨著情勢的發展而做著調整。戰後台灣光復，但緊接著國民政府在大陸失敗、韓戰爆發，美國的企圖遂又有了機會；杜魯門在派遣第七艦隊的文告中，即曾楬櫫台灣地位未定的說法。美軍駐日司令部更曾表示過要透過台灣地位未定這種說法，藉著對日和約，而將台灣置於美國或聯合國託管下；因而，美國為了炮製「台灣地位未定論」，以蘇俄不承認國府為藉口，將兩岸排除在外，導演了一場「舊金山和約」。由於當時的國民黨政府需要美國的支援，遂低調處理，但此後舊金山和約即屢屢成為「未定論」的張本。

因此，當人們在譴責日本官員的「台灣地位未定論」時，不能只是選擇性的拿日本當箭靶，而更應深入探討它的時代脈絡。歸納起來，我們可說：

一、就歷史脈絡而言：「台灣地位未定論」乃是美國介入中國內政，企圖以「超法律」實力為後盾的「舊金山和約」，凌駕「開羅宣言」等一系列法律文件的炮製手法；企圖透過「台灣地位未定論」，形成政治操作空間，故是一種帝國霸權主義的餘緒。例如，後來美日「二加二會議」將台灣納入「周邊有事」之範圍，即由此而延伸出來。

二、就時代意義而言：美國模糊化開羅宣言等一系列國際條約文件，炮製出「舊金山和約」，將台灣納為保護，固然使得台灣得以維持住與中國分離的「現狀」，但台灣內部也因而出現「台獨」與「獨台」這兩種發展。齋藤風波後，藍營還有立委表示「他其實是在幫台灣利益講話」，所反映的即是國民黨內不少人早已內化了的心態。

三、就意識形態而言：二戰之後，美國始終將台灣視為是它的「戰利品」，可以任意支配，美國自認擁有超法律的支配權，要把「戰利品」給誰皆可；美國將琉球群島連釣魚台列嶼一併「給」予日本即是例證。「台灣地位未定論」其實也是一方面牽制中國，另方面又對國民政府統治合法性故示模糊的某種操控；五○年代美國曾企圖在台導演軍事政變，以及宣揚「外來政權論」，都是「台灣地位未定論」的延長。

因此，齋藤代表在兩岸開始良性互動、已漸有可能解決爭端的此刻，再提「台灣地位未定論」，恐怕不是「個人意見」所能解釋；難道想要倒撥時鐘，挑激兩岸之間的矛盾對立？

正基於此，政府當局不能只做一番表態即讓事情過去，而是應該對整個「台灣地位未定論」重做回顧及嚴正駁斥，並對國家立場提出願景。齋藤的發言只是插曲，那個縈繞台灣上空，始終企圖干涉內政及炮製仇恨對立，有如章魚般無所不在的幽靈，才是我們要警惕並防範的。