Of course it is. It seems highly likely, but there’s no way of knowing.
It is assumed that a military government will be established in Formosa by the United States (PWC–19059). It is recommended that, even if the Japanese Government should capitulate before a forcible occupation of Formosa becomes necessary, the United States forces should, nevertheless, occupy the island, and establish a military government (PWC–19760). The military authorities will retain sole responsibility and authority for civil affairs administration (PWC–195,61 questions 1, 9 and 12).
However, the present military weakness of China, especially the absence of a navy, makes it almost impossible for China to take the initiative in any campaign to drive the Japanese out of Formosa. On [Page 1270] the other hand, it may be assumed that Pacific operations will include the capture and occupation of Formosa (including the Pescadores) by sea-borne forces of the United States or of the United States and its allies. As these operations would be under the direction of an American theater commander, it is likely that the United States will establish a military administration for civil affairs in Formosa and that the commander of the United States forces in that area will be responsible for the establishment and operation of such an administration and will continue to assume that responsibility until such time as arrangements have been made to reestablish Chinese sovereignty over Formosa.
The US military government was set up, but eventually took a backseat due to CKS’ protests, and instead directed US navy to ferry KMT troops over to Taiwan.
Now, how would the CCP takeover Taiwan in your alternative history without a navy when Taiwan is a trust territory of the US?
By the way, I’m astonished how well the KMT ran their brainwashing campaign, that even those who didn’t have to live through their education system could still buy into the propaganda.
If you bother to read your own source, that whole section is written in the future tense. Nobody knows what would have happened.
Would have, should have… I think the US was not too keen on protecting Taiwan in 1950, before the Korean war, but anyway.
My point was just that living under the KMT was probably not too bad, if you compare it to life under the Communists during the same time period, that’s all.
SFPT Article 2(b) Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores.
SFPT Article 4(b) Japan recognizes the validity of dispositions of property of Japan and Japanese nationals made by or pursuant to directives of the United States Military Government in any of the areas referred to in Articles 2 and 3.
The US is the principal occupying Power over Taiwan, it only delegated trusteeship to the ROC, which the ROC immediately violated by declaring Taiwan as a province of ROC.
So you’re saying it’s the occupation of Taiwan by the KMT that prevented Taiwan from becoming the 51st state? Would the U.S. have been willing to go to war with the PRC over Taiwan if the PLA had occupied the island instead of the KMT? Nobody knows.
Trusteeship’s goal is to allow self-determination. If Taiwan wasn’t illegally occupied by the KMT, then who knows how Taiwanese people would have decided in that alternate history. All I know is, in that version of history, Taiwanese people could make their self-determination without the threat of an invasion.
From “General Roberts’s Memorandum: Subject: SFE 104-National
Composition of Forces to Occupy Formosa”
386.2 Occupation of Formosa 1945.7.26-1945.9.25
SWNCC 68 SFE 104National Composition of Forces to Occupy Formosa including
Pescadores in the Post Defeated Period: Relations of the Military
Government of Formosa with China and Chinese.
USMG in Taiwan was already in operation before the ROC was ordered in General Order No. 1 to accept Japanese surrender in Northern Vietnam and Taiwan by General MacArthur.
So why didn’t the U.S. assert its power to keep that “illegal occupation” from happening? It wasn’t worth the blood and treasure. Which would tend to support the idea that the U.S. also wouldn’t have intervened if the PRC (a different flavor of authoritarian government) had asserted its authority over Taiwan first.
Because CKS wasn’t a communist.
But the U.S. had just fought a long bloody war against fascism, and CKS was a fascist through and through. If the U.S. really cared, it would have set up an occupation government like it did in Japan. Taiwan just wasn’t that important. Again, this supports the scenario that we wouldn’t have intervened if the PLA had arrived first either.
I think history shows that the US don’t care about fascism as long as the leader doesn’t support the US’ enemies.
1 Like
Looking at 1950 is more interesting I think.
The Korean war has had the indirect effect of restoring Formosa, island refuge of the Chinese Nationalist government of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, to a prominent place in the complex of Far East problems. Eight months ago, after the Nationalists had been driven from the mainland, the Truman administration virtually wrote off Formosa as foredoomed to fall to the Chinese Communists.1 The President announced, Jan. 5, 1950, that the United States would not “provide military aid or advice to Chinese forces on Formosa” or “pursue a course which will lead to involvement in the civil conflict in China.”
Invasion of South Korea at the end of June brought a sharp reversal of American policy toward Formosa. Recognizing that the decision to resist the aggressor in Korea might lead to war on a broader scale, the United States determined to take the precautionary step of neutralizing Formosa.2 Accordingly, when President Truman announced on June 27 that he had ordered American forces to Korea, he announced also that he had ordered the Seventh Fleet to “prevent any attack on Formosa” and had called on the Chinese Nationalist government on Formosa to “cease all air and sea operations against the mainland.”
https://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1950082900
1 Like
OK, now we’re getting somewhere. In the context of the Cold War, which was just starting to ramp up at the time, U.S. thinking was that since CKS is already in power, he can be more of an asset than a liability, so we may as well prop him up. And so, CKS, with U.S. support, insured that Taiwan didn’t fall to the communists and remained a relatively (in light of the alternative) free country. Sounds like a good reason to keep his statue right where it is. 
The US already had done little more than issuing stern warning at CKS for over 5 years before the Korean war. During that time the US completely lost faith in CKS, and also, Truman’s an idiot.
Dictator statues FOREVER!!!
Guy
Like Hannes mentioned, the US was already fed up with CKS by 1947. They were planning to takeover Taiwan if CKS failed all together. Honestly, it’s all in the US library.
You’re calling the president responsible for establishing the Marshall Plan and NATO an idiot? Strange take…
Doesn’t matter what library it’s in. It’s pure speculation.
Don’t see no Truman statue in that massive public space in our capital.
Guy
Yeah, he gets Europe, but he is clueless when it comes to Asian Pacific politics. He’s an idiot for not listening to MacArthur.
That’s actually not a bad idea. But the national debt is already a little out of control at the moment, so maybe now isn’t the best time.