[quote=“walile”]
Well, what you’re proposing sounds like what people in prehistoric period did. I thought legal documents exist for a good purpose, no?[/quote]
I am not proposing anything, I am simply describing how international law works. The ROC assumed sovereignty over Taiwan in 1945, the San Francisco peace treaty was not signed until 1951. So in 1951, the ROC had already ruled Taiwan for 6 years, the US fully recognized ROC sovereignty over Taiwan (it was only disputed by the PRC), and these goons are still trying to claim that Taiwan is “legally” US territory.
[quote=“Mawvellous”][quote=“walile”]
Well, what you’re proposing sounds like what people in prehistoric period did. I thought legal documents exist for a good purpose, no?[/quote]
I am not proposing anything, I am simply describing how international law works. The ROC assumed sovereignty over Taiwan in 1945, the San Francisco peace treaty was not signed until 1951. So in 1951, the ROC had already ruled Taiwan for 6 years, the US fully recognized ROC sovereignty over Taiwan (it was only disputed by the PRC), and these goons are still trying to claim that Taiwan is “legally” US territory.[/quote]
I’m not expert in international law. But the whole idea of “assuming sovereignty” sounds prehistoric to me. Actually it’s kinda barbaric.
I’m not expert in international law. But the whole idea of “assuming sovereignty” sounds prehistoric to me. Actually it’s kinda barbaric.[/quote]
Taiwan was surrendered to Japan in 1895 by the Qing. When Japan lost the war the territory was returned to the recognized successor state, the ROC. This was not disputed by any other state! The San Francisco Peace Treaty 6 years later did not mention the ROC directly for the very good reason that there were now “two Chinas” both claiming sovereignty over both mainland China and Taiwan. I have no idea how all this makes Taiwan “legally” US territory.
[quote=“Mawvellous”]Taiwan was surrendered to Japan in 1895 by the Qing. When Japan lost the war the territory was returned to the recognized successor state, the ROC. This was not disputed by any other state! The San Francisco Peace Treaty 6 years later did not mention the ROC directly for the very good reason that there were now “two Chinas” both claiming sovereignty over both mainland China and Taiwan. I have no idea how all this makes Taiwan “legally” US territory.[/quote] Depends when you start the history clock I suppose. From whom did the Qing assume sovereignty of Taiwan to surrender it to Japan? For that matter from whom did they assume soveriegnty of China from? One could argue that more recently, the US assumed sovereignty of Iraq in the same way the ROC assumed sovereignty of Taiwan.
I guess the Qing “assumed sovereignty” over Taiwan by conquest, and over China as the “successor regime” to the Ming. But sovereignty is a modern concept, and certainly wouldn’t have been recognized in China until at least the last half of the 19th century.
Your question is rather like asking who the British assumed control over North America from so they could later surrender it to the United States.
[quote=“Mawvellous”][quote=“TaipeiDawg”] Depends when you start the history clock I suppose. From whom did the Qing assume sovereignty of Taiwan to surrender it to Japan? For that matter from whom did they assume soveriegnty of China from? One could argue that more recently, the US assumed sovereignty of Iraq in the same way the ROC assumed sovereignty of Taiwan.[/quote]I guess the Qing “assumed sovereignty” over Taiwan by conquest, and over China as the “successor regime” to the Ming. But sovereignty is a modern concept, and certainly wouldn’t have been recognized in China until at least the last half of the 19th century.
Your question is rather like asking who the British assumed control over North America from so they could later surrender it to the United States.[/quote] And that’s exactly my point - that there is an element of conquest in this whole equation. If the Qing assumed control (or soveriegnty or whatever) over Taiwan by conquest then one could also argue that Japan did the same thing from the Qing, and the US in turn from the Japanese. Another point of debate is whether the ROC is really the successor regime to the Qing. I’m not trying to muck this whole thing up for the fun of it, I’m just saying that there is a certain line of reasoning that would give some validity to this lawsuit.
You mean the Allies from the Japanese. ROC was an allie that got a permenant seat in the UN security counsil for its contribution in WWII.
When Josh Hartnett and Ben Affleck crashed land in China after bombing Japan, those were Chinese KMT soldiers that sent them back to America to reunite them with the American nurse Kate Beckinsale.
But in reality the lawsuit was tossed out. So what valid line of reasoning are we questioning here?
The lawsuit was tossed out because the court ceded that declarations of sovereignty were a matter for the executive branch, and out of its jurisdiction, not because of any reasoning in the suit. I’m quite surprised you didn’t know that. You should do some research before you post.
[quote=“ac_dropout”]Maybe if you spent more time in the US you’d understand the court system and politics better.[/quote]If he spent as much time in the US as you he wouldn’t classify as an average Taiwanese any longer.
Sovereignity is a modern concept my ass. Unless you ignore the role of the Vatican in efectively recognizing kingdoms (and that dates back to the 10th century, at least)…
Just as information from you, Portugal was “recognized” as a Kingdom in 1143 by the Castillan King Afonso VII, and by the Pope Alexander III in 1179 (at the cost of giving control of the biggest city of the country to the church). Our independence date however is 25th July 1139.
Just go read the wiki on sovereignity to get information, will’ya…
[quote=“ac_dropout”]ROC was an allie that got a permenant seat in the UN security counsil for its contribution in WWII.[/quote] Silly me, and here I was thinking that the ROC was not a member of the UN.
[quote=“Mawvellous”]
I guess the Qing “assumed sovereignty” over Taiwan by conquest…[/quote]
We digress here but I want to clarify something. You assumed too much by saying “Ching assumed the sovereignty of Taiwan by conquest.” Do you know what happened? Ching never conquered Formosa. Rather, the last King of Dongning surrendered the sovereignty of his land to the Ching emperor in 1683. There was official document written by the King to the Emperor, begging to become his subject and pleading clemency. Dongning subjects were ordered to returned to China and they did.
And how did Dongning acquired the sovereignty of Formosa in the first place? Actually there was no such thing as sovereignty of Formosa. There was that dutch castle called Zeelandia. Koxinga and he Dutch governor of that castle signed a Treaty and I believe the dutch still has it today. It was just a Castle.
IMO sovereignty was not assumed, not even by Koxinga and the Ching Emperor. They were wise guys and wise guys don’t trust casual promises.
And if you became an expert the concept would be civilized?[/quote]
“Assuming sovereignty” makes me thing of barbarian warriors pillaging villages.[/quote]
You mean like making people sign treaties at gun point?
[quote=“mr_boogie”]Sovereignity is a modern concept my ass. Unless you ignore the role of the Vatican in efectively recognizing kingdoms (and that dates back to the 10th century, at least)…
Just as information from you, Portugal was “recognized” as a Kingdom in 1143 by the Castillan King Afonso VII, and by the Pope Alexander III in 1179 (at the cost of giving control of the biggest city of the country to the church). Our independence date however is 25th July 1139.
Just go read the wiki on sovereignity to get information, will’ya…[/quote]
The idea of modern sovereignty only dates to the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, although you are correct that older concepts of sovereignties exist. The modern nation state only really developed after the French revolution.
I like this quote from Benedict Anderson.
The concept of sovereignty arrived very late to Qing China, which was part of Anderson’s dynastic “older imagining” rather than a modern nation state.
[quote=“walile”][quote=“Mawvellous”]
I guess the Qing “assumed sovereignty” over Taiwan by conquest…[/quote]
We digress here but I want to clarify something. You assumed too much by saying “Ching assumed the sovereignty of Taiwan by conquest.” Do you know what happened? Ching never conquered Formosa. Rather, the last King of Dongning surrendered the sovereignty of his land to the Ching emperor in 1683. There was official document written by the King to the Emperor, begging to become his subject and pleading clemency. Dongning subjects were ordered to returned to China and they did.
And how did Dongning acquired the sovereignty of Formosa in the first place? Actually there was no such thing as sovereignty of Formosa. There was that dutch castle called Zeelandia. Koxinga and he Dutch governor of that castle signed a Treaty and I believe the dutch still has it today. It was just a Castle.
IMO sovereignty was not assumed, not even by Koxinga and the Ching Emperor. They were wise guys and wise guys don’t trust casual promises.[/quote]
So your point being the American, Dr. Roger Lin, failed lawsuit about sovereignty is more valid than the Ching Emperor and the Dutch. I thought the DPP was against Americans that are no longer Taiwanese meddling in Taiwan’s affairs.
So many double standards in the green argument, it’s hard to keep up.
You know as an average Taiwanese, I don’t find Dr. Roger Lin’s argument very compelling, not because he’s an American and not another average Taiwanese, but because his argument starts off with the premise that the historical evidence of ROC sovereignty in Taiwan as invalid.
Greens fail to realise just because there doesn’t exist a law or legal proceding for every form of sovereignty transfer that has ever existed, doesn’t mean the Green interpretation is correct. In fact quite contrary, it only means people fall back on historical evidence, which in this case mean that ROC is soveriegn over Taiwan.