Did anyone see this? A client shared it with me, and I thought it was a perfect comedic representation of the situation.
He, he! Fun sketch. Thanks for sharing.
Btw, it probably belongs more in the Youtube vids forum, but I’m sure you guys will find a way to make a political discussion out of it
Well, it’s certainly a Youtube vid, but it’s nothing if not political…
Let me share a couple of my own experiences of how clueless some (many?) people outside of this region are about China/PRC/ROC/Chinese Taipei/Taiwan.
On one trip home from Taiwan, the US immigration officer asked me how I liked Bangkok…um…
A British friend just contacted me about coming to visit me this summer. She is studying Chinese and asked me if there were many people here who spoke Mandarin…um… THEN, she asked me for my address to put on her Chinese visa application…um…
I’m cracking up so much here over the China thing. Thanks so much for the YT share! >D
I had to do a deep search to find The Mansion’s official YT page. Going through the many comments in their uploaded video of this, there are a bunch people debating against one pro-CCP supporter (living in the U.S.?), who keeps insisting that Taiwan belongs to China.
Looking forward to the day when Taiwan can openly declare itself as Taiwan in front of China. =.= (And the R.O.C./KMT is disbanded for good.)
The video is interesting, but it is historically and legally inaccurate.
The two gentlemen talking in the video fail to note the all important facts that when the “Republic of China” moved its central government to Taiwan in Dec. 1949, Taiwan was still, technically, sovereign Japanese territory. Hence, by moving its central government to an area outside of the Chinese national territory, the ROC became a government in exile.
International law does not recognize any procedures, methods, or legal maneuvers whereby a government in exile can become recognized as the legal government of its current locality of residence. In other words, for the ROC to regain legitimacy in the international community, it would have to return to Nanjing, China, and resume governance there.
In further support of the above, it is notable that none of the Allies recognized any transfer of the territorial sovereignty of Taiwan to “China” upon the Japanese surrender ceremonies of Oct. 25, 1945. That should not be too difficult to understand. [color=#8080BF] If the military forces in a Province of Iraq surrender to the US, does that Province then immediately become US territory? If the rebel soldiers in a village in Afganistan surrender to the US, does that village then become US territory? When the Spanish troops in Cuba surrendered on July 17, 1898, did Cuba then become incorporated into US national territory? The answer is NO in each instance. The surrender ceremonies only mark the beginning of the military occupation. International law specifies that "military occupation does not transfer sovereignty." [/color] Any statements in denial of this are merely Chinese propaganda. Note: In regard to any alleged ownership of Taiwan, the doctrine of “prescription” cannot be cited by the Chinese because “military occupation does not transfer sovereignty.”
Historical and legal commentators always forget that it was the US military forces which conducted all military attacks against Formosa and the Pescadores in the Dec. 1941 to Fall 1945 period. No military troops of England, Australia, N.Z., France, or the USSR participated. The military forces of the ROC did not participate either. Hence, at the most basic level, Taiwan is territory which has been acquired by the USA under the principle of conquest. In such a situation, the United States of America will be “the principal occupying power.” However, the administrative authority for the military occupation was delegated to the Chinese Nationalists.
Hence, at the most basic level, the Chinese Nationalists in Taiwan are “a subordinate occupying power” beginning Oct. 25, 1945. To this is then added the fact that this Nationalist regime became a government in exile as of mid-December 1949. Those are the dual statuses of the ROC in Taiwan, and there has been no change to date.
Taiwan is not Chinese territory. Indeed under the specifications of Article 4 of the ROC Constitution, Taiwan has never been incorporated into Chinese national territory. None of the Allies have recognized the incorporation of Taiwan into Chinese territory.
Today there is only One China, and that is the PRC. The PRC fully qualifies as a country. The ROC does not qualify as a country, because it does not hold the territorial title to the areas of Formosa and the Pescadores.
Oh good grief. Get a sense of humor… and perspective.
I like my China Tang-y, not so Chu-ey. maybe add some Han-ey. Goes well with Jin. But Yuan is enough.
Nothing wrong with his perspective in principle.
But being right doesn’t mean much at the best of times and certainly even less in those cases where the parameters of a discourse are power and money.
And, yes, the news lab is funny - but we don’t need anybody to say that, do we?
That’s the one point where i disagree with you: factually the ROC holds the territory you describe, and “title” is a human concept that can be manipulated or disregarded at will - and the fact on the ground is all that counts for the time being…
That’s the one point where I disagree with you: factually the ROC holds the territory you describe, and “title” is a human concept that can be manipulated or disregarded at will – and the fact on the ground is all that counts for the time being . . .[/quote]
No one disagrees that “factually the ROC holds the territory [of Formosa and the Pescadores]” . . . . . and that is exactly the legal situation. It is military occupation. It is effective territorial control. The effective territorial control of the ROC over the areas of Formosa and the Pescadores was recognized in the ROC - USA Mutual Defense Treaty of March 3, 1955.
But that is not sovereignty.
And the fact on the ground is that the ROC has a high degree of effective territorial control over the areas of Formosa and the Pescadores. However, it does not hold the sovereignty to these areas.
I agree. However, in the situation of the ROC the international community is not willing to disregard the legal reality of the matter. That is very clear when we see that the ROC cannot gain entry into any international organizations as a “sovereign state.” The reason for this is very simple. The ROC on Taiwan is not a sovereign state.
If you still want to claim that the ROC has ownership of Formosa and the Pescadores, please provide the relevant legal references. Thank you.
Even “ownership” is a human concept that is manipulable (is there such a word?) or manipulated at will. As i said, i agree with pretty well all of your assessment of the situation (i’ve read up on that messy issue in the last two years), but i also think that hardly anybody - especially not the powers that be on both sides of the Pacific - give a fig’s leaf about any of your sound reasoning. I happen to live in Taiwan right now, and what i experience every day is real enough for me to call it “real” - and i am sure that is the same for the other 23 or so million people who live on this island. I have actually nothing to argue with you about. (Of course, i don’t refer to “Taiwan” as “ROC”, but that is just my own idiosyncrasy. )
By the way, did you ever figure out that little technical problem you asked about there: HTML design question . . . . hiding .css file(s) ?
Three. There are three.
My kitchen cupboards are FULL of the damn stuff.
there’s way more than three, Doc.
There are three Guineas (four if you count NEW Guinea) two Congos, but only one China - alongside one Taiwan…
Which sounds about right: the PRC, the country of mainly Chinese culture we know as Taiwan, and that mythical beast that won’t die, the ROC…
There’s one China, obviously. But Taiwan’s not part of it.
I read something online a while back that said Taiwan is actually part of the US because after WWII when the US seized control of all of the Japanese Empire, they formed treaties to give all of the territories back to whomever it was before, EXCEPT TAIWAN. Taiwan was never legally given to the KMT by the US military. The KMT was only the ‘acting government’ or something like that. Therefore, Taiwan Island is part of the US.
Does someone know where the link is to this juicy conspiracy theory? I can’t seem to find it anymore…
It’s not a conspiracy theory, it’s a historic fact. But considering that half a century has passed since, and considering also that the US is by all accounts not the least bit intested in picking up the loose ends in this case, this is a non-issue for 99.99(add a few more nines)% of the world’s population. Other than that, detailed information about what is going on these days around the unresolved issue of Taiwan’s sovereignty can be had here, for example: taiwankey.net/dc/tforumtw.htm
Also search here for posts by Richard W Harzell.
I bet if you gave Taiwanese the ultimatum of choosing to be part of Mainland or the US, 90% would say the US. I asked some of my classmates about this (the US territory WWII thing), and they ALL said they would rather be 美國第51州. Kind of impressive considering that a lot of American people don’t even know that we have 50 states.
I’ve started googling “site:forumosa.com richard harzell”. I’m very intrigued, but from what I’ve come across, people can’t seem to actually finish reading anything he’s written.