Taiwan, inseparable from China under international law
To question Taiwan's status today is to undermine the very foundation of justice and sovereignty secured through decades of struggle against imperialism and aggression.
"The only reference to the Taiwan region in the UN is 'Taiwan, Province of China.'" This is a resounding message from Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi at a press conference of this year's annual "two sessions."
This statement, grounded in historical and legal clarity, underscores China's unwavering position and reflects the consensus of the international community. Yet, some external actors have recently combined force with separatist rhetoric from Taiwan in an attempt to distort this reality and rewrite history.
The status of Taiwan is not open to debate. Post-World War II agreements, United Nations resolutions, and binding bilateral treaties all leave no ambiguity: Taiwan has always been an inseparable part of China.
UN Resolution 2758: the defining moment
On October 25, 1971, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 2758 by a vote of 76-35, expelling the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek from the United Nations and restoring all rights to the People's Republic of China.
The resolution was unequivocal: the People's Republic of China succeeded the Chiang regime as the sole representative of all China. The seat of China in the United Nations has always represented the entirety of China, including Taiwan.
During the debate, even Chiang Kai-shek's delegate conceded, "Taiwan is indeed Chinese territory" and "Taiwanese are ethnically, culturally and historically Chinese." China's sovereignty over Taiwan was never in question.
Some claim the resolution addressed only "representation," not territory. This ridiculous argument collapses under scrutiny. If Taiwan were a separate entity, the United Nations would have required a distinct process to address its status. But that has never happened.
Following the resolution, the UN Secretariat formalized Taiwan's designation as "Taiwan, Province of China" in all official documents. Proposals advocating "two Chinas" or "Taiwan independence" have been consistently rejected by the United Nations and its agencies.
Post-WWII foundations
Taiwan's rightful return to China after WWII was stipulated in Allied wartime agreements. Japan seized Taiwan in 1895, but was compelled to return it after its WWII defeat.
The 1943 Cairo Declaration stated that Japan was to return all territories "stolen from the Chinese," specifically naming Formosa (Taiwan). Two years later, the Potsdam Declaration reaffirmed that the terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out. Japan formally accepted these terms in its 1945 Instrument of Surrender. These documents transformed wartime pledges into binding legal obligations.
Bilaterally between China and Japan, the two countries normalized relations in 1972 through a landmark agreement. Tokyo recognizes the People's Republic of China as China's sole legitimate government and "fully understands and respects" that Taiwan is an inalienable part of China. Crucially, Japan again pledged to uphold the Potsdam terms, which are directly linked to Taiwan's 1945 legal restoration.
Some Japanese politicians now dismiss the 1972 Communique as "lacking legal force." This is dangerous revisionism. The commitments in the agreement were codified into law via the 1978 Treaty of Peace and Friendship Between China and Japan, ratified by Diet, the national legislature of Japan. Article 1 of the treaty binds both sides to develop lasting relations of peace and friendship between the two countries on the basis of mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Why this legal history matters today
The international community overwhelmingly recognizes Taiwan as part of China, with 183 countries, including the United States, endorsing the one-China principle. Across administrations, many U.S. leaders have consistently and openly opposed any move toward Taiwan's "independence."
Throughout its long history, China has faced periods of division and internal strife. But each time, the Chinese people have united to restore the nation's territorial integrity. This resilience transcends political tensions and external interference. While political complexities persist, the historical record stands clear: Taiwan's rightful place is within China.
Taiwan's status as part of China is upheld through the sacrifices during World War II, enshrined in international law, and reaffirmed by the United Nations. As the world marks the 80th anniversary of the victory of the World's Anti-Fascist War, it is imperative to remember the hard-won lessons of that warring era. The Cairo Declaration and Potsdam Declaration are not mere diplomatic formalities, but pillars of the postwar international order.
To question Taiwan's status today is to undermine the very foundation of justice and sovereignty secured through decades of struggle against imperialism and aggression.
Xin Ping is a commentator on international affairs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euractiv
2 hours ago
- Euractiv
EU environment Commissioner ready to do plastic pollution deal ‘but not at any cost'
The European Union is ready to do a deal to land a groundbreaking treaty on plastic pollution, but not at any cost, the EU's environment commissioner insisted Tuesday. With just over two days left to strike a global accord in talks at the UN in Geneva, Jessika Roswall said it was "time" to clinch a deal between oil-producing countries and more ambitious nations, including EU countries. Five previous rounds of talks over the past two and a half years have failed to seal an agreement, including a supposedly final round in South Korea late last year. The current talks in Geneva opened a week ago but are due to close on Thursday. "The EU is ready to do a deal but not at any cost," Roswall told reporters. "We do like plastic... and we will continue to need it. However, we don't like plastic pollution and it's time to end plastic pollution as quickly as possible," the commissioner said. She said any treaty should give businesses the certainty of a clear global framework in which to operate. Stalled Geneva talks threaten landmark plastic pollution treaty The first week of talks in Geneva fell behind schedule, producing no clear text as countries remained split on step one: the treaty's purpose and scope A cluster of mostly oil-producing states calling themselves the Like-Minded Group – including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Russia and Iran – want the treaty to focus primarily on waste management. The EU and others want to go much further by reining in plastic production – which on current trends is set to triple by 2060 – and by phasing out certain especially toxic chemicals. Drama in the pipeline Danish Environment Minister Magnus Heunicke admitted that the "wide gap" between the rival camps was making negotiations a challenge but said the work of tackling plastic pollution "will only get harder the longer we wait. So now's the time". "There's going to be a whole lot more drama in the days to come," he said, "but our goal is this drama should end up in a deal", he said, speaking alongside Roswall at the United Nations. He said all parties, including the EU, had to re-examine their red lines and see where they could tweak them in the interests of landing a deal by Thursday. "If we all stick to our red lines then a deal is impossible," he said. "So we have to look at those red lines and we have to negotiate and compromise -- because we will be worse off if we don't succeed in making a deal. "That's not me saying 'a deal at any price': Not at all. But a deal that is legally binding and has strong text and lays the ground for our work in the years ahead in order to tackle plastic pollution." (cp) Plastic promises: EU enters tough talks with petrostates over global treaty No result will be achieved without shifts in position from all sides, an EU official said
Euractiv
2 hours ago
- Euractiv
Commission updates guidance on anti-deforestation law
The European Commission on Tuesday clarified definitions and exemptions related to its anti-deforestation regulation, while maintaining the timeline for enforcement. Under the new anti-deforestation regulation (EUDR), certain products such as soy, cocoa, coffee, livestock, palm oil, timber, and rubber will be banned from entering the European Union – unless they are 'deforestation-free.' After pressure from EU countries and trade partners, the European Commission previously delayed the regulations to December. The updated guidance document follows the current timeline, with micro- and small companies needing to apply the rules as of 30 June 2026. It also clarifies key definitions such as 'negligible risk' – which means that there is solid proof that a product is compliant with the EUDR rules – and reiterates that converting forest to land for non-agricultural use is not considered deforestation under the regulation. Just last week, food importers were seeking clarity on the EUDR, amid speculation about the possibility of re-opening the file. In a June vote, the European Parliament backed the relaxation of the rules, and EU farming chief Christophe Hansen told Euractiv he would support this – especially for products made in the EU. However, Environment Commissioner Jessika Roswall has the final say and Hansen confirmed in July that no decision had been made on easing or delaying the regulation. Potential changes could be included in a simplification package aimed at farmers and foresters due this autumn. Environmental groups hope that this won't happen. 'The update of the guidance is a positive sign that the Commission is still working on supporting the implementation of the EUDR. We hope it means that credibility and legal certainty will prevail over attempts to reopen the EUDR, and that it won't be included in a [simplification] omnibus of any sort,' the NGO Rainforest Alliance told Euractiv. Farming ministers resume push to delay EU deforestation rules Following pressure from EU capitals, the European Commission previously delayed the entry into force of the EU's anti-deforestation regulation (EUDR) to December 2025. But agriculture ministers are now calling for further simplifications. (vib)
Euractiv
2 hours ago
- Euractiv
Europe's game developers took a hit in 2023 – and the pain's not over
Europe's video game developers saw revenues fall in 2023 for the first time, even as the broader European gaming market continued to grow, according to a report published by their trade association on Tuesday. Worth more than €100 billion globally each year, the industry's European market, which includes overseas companies active in the region, grew to €25.7 billion in 2023. But revenue from Europe's own developers fell from €18.9 billion to €18.7 billion, with the report from the European Games Developer Federation (EGDF) citing layoffs and studio closures. The Europe-wide figures were delayed because they rely on slower national-level data, and development hotspots France and Poland are still missing. EGDF Managing Director Jari-Pekka Kaleva said gaps in some national associations' work are hampering collection, and called for more public investment to avoid flying blind on video game policy in Europe. Despite the downturn, developer employment increased from 90,000 in 2022 to 91,000 to 2023. But Kaleva said he is not optimistic about a rebound. Germany's games industry association recently reported a drop in the number of game companies in 2025, following what its managing director, Felix Falk, called 'another very difficult' year. He blamed the former government's U-turns in funding policy, despite the country's gaming market growing. The EGDF report also highlights the fragmented nature of state support for game developers, with countries such as France and Belgium offering extensive funding schemes, while others provide little or none. Kaleva also raised concerns over incoming EU consumer protection rules, though he welcomed the European Commission's approach to the planned Digital Fairness Act. Gamers have coordinated their responses to the Act's public consultation process to press for tougher regulation, including measures to prevent developers from shutting down games. A recent technical glitch revealed that the Commission is preparing a dedicated communication on the video game sector. (de)
