The transferring of the title of Taiwan

Politics Taiwan Politics
61

[quote=“fanglangzhe”]
You may want to reconsider, I think the guy is confused and/or crazy. Going off the deep end, as they say :loco:[/quote]

Maybe I am a bit crazy. The American generals that fighted the Pacific War had sent tens of thousands of young men to the Pacific and did not bring them home. Then they just gave away the hard-won Formosa to the Chinese for free. Who is actually crazier, me or Douglas McArthur? Here is another crazy idea of mine: any American (or British, Australian, New Zealander) that thinks that Taiwan is part of China should be tried for treason. Such person betrayed their men dead in the Pacific War.

Harry Truman scorned the Chiang-dynasty :“Chiang Kai-shek and the Madame and their families, the Soong family and the Kungs were all thieves… They stole seven hundred and fifty million dollars out of the thirty-five billion we sent … and invested in real estate … And I don’t want anything to do with people like that.” However Truman had no idea how Chiang had also stolen Formosa from the USA.

62

A few more signs of phasing-out ROC are here for your weekend amusement:

  1. In 2011, ROC government celebrated ‘Spectacular Century; Republic of China’. Ma admistration did not allow (or was not allowed by the USA government) to use any slogan that recognizes ROC’s sovereignty. The emblem of ROC has been muffled during the whole celebration and again a funny pattern was used as the logo of the celebration.

  1. No national flag or emblem can be found in the websiet of the City of Taipei, Taichung, Kaoshiung, and others.

  2. ROC government will stop drafting Taiwanese to serve in its millitary in 2014. The draft is against the law of war and the US government will not allow it anymore.

63

[quote=“printlessfoot”]A few more signs of phasing-out ROC are here for your weekend amusement:

  1. In 2011, ROC government celebrated ‘Spectacular Century; Republic of China’. Ma admistration did not allow (or was not allowed by the USA government) to use any slogan that recognizes ROC’s sovereignty. The emblem of ROC has been muffled during the whole celebration and again a funny pattern was used as the logo of the celebration. [/quote]

Another interpretation of this fact is available: the Communist Chinese regime did not allow Mr. Ma to use ROC-related slogans or symbols, or Ma was simply pleasing the PRC.
In fact, this is the interpretation that the Pan-Green camp has come up with. I think you’d better be more cautious before concluding that the US is phasing out the ROC.

64

[quote=“printlessfoot”]A few more signs of phasing-out ROC are here for your weekend amusement:
[/quote]

Let’s say that the ROC is indeed being phased out, but could it be that it has nothing to do with the US, but actually a prelude to unification with China?

It makes so much more sense. KMT is pro-unification. Relations between China and Taiwan are very close. ROC flags disappearing? Well, Taiwan SAR will have to fly a new flag. Military getting rid of the emblem and the draft? Sure, it’s not like Taiwan even needs a military after unification. Trust me, these are far more plausible than the US coming over and taking over Taiwan. Afterall the US “gave up” Taiwan when they recognized the PRC in the 70’s, not to mention they agreed in the Potdams Declaration that Taiwan should be returned to China.

65

[quote=“bohica”][quote=“printlessfoot”]A few more signs of phasing-out ROC are here for your weekend amusement:
[/quote]

Let’s say that the ROC is indeed being phased out, but could it be that it has nothing to do with the US, but actually a prelude to unification with China?

It makes so much more sense. KMT is pro-unification. Relations between China and Taiwan are very close. ROC flags disappearing? Well, Taiwan SAR will have to fly a new flag. Military getting rid of the emblem and the draft? Sure, it’s not like Taiwan even needs a military after unification. Trust me, these are far more plausible than the US coming over and taking over Taiwan. Afterall the US “gave up” Taiwan when they recognized the PRC in the 70’s, not to mention they agreed in the Potdams Declaration that Taiwan should be returned to China.[/quote]

Although the above talk is heresy to the TI faithful, it’s probably a lot more realistic than any plan to have the USA take over Taiwan, which I think has a snowball’s chance in Hell of happening. With all respect to Mr Hartzell, I don’t know how he can believe that the USA would ever do this or that the Taiwanese would even want it.

Not that I particularly want to see reunification, nor do most Taiwanese. Most realistic scenario for now is continuing the status quo, and most Taiwanese (practical folks that they are) seem to think so too. But that could change - Ma’s incompetence (ie US beef idiocy) might bring the DPP to power in the next election, and then official declaration to rename the “ROC” to the “ROT,” new national anthem, new flag, trade embargo with China, Chinese response with a few missiles or sinking some Taiwanese ships, ROT president declaring independence and demanding USA send troops, USA tells the ROT to “piss off,” economy collapses, DPP collapses, ROT collapses, and then we’ll all be learning simplified characters and spending Renminbi.

66

We had eight years of a DPP president, and at a time when the military balance was still in Taiwan’s favor. Nothing of what you described above happened. Instead economic and cultural ties increased, the three-links were established, and the military budget continued to shrink.

People in both parties do take their roll as national leaders seriously. The status quo will continue under the DPP if they win the next election. The changes will be in domestic policy to once again reassert Taiwan’s distinction (which is perfectly normal and rational).

67

YOu are all wrong. tommy525 will come over with his cat and take control of taiwan from the kmt. As soon as I can afford another plane ticket .

I know for a fact Uncle Sam will not complain (he is a cat lover).

MUAH HAHAHAHA (doctor evil will accompany, using his vast billions as head of Starbucks coffee)

Maybe I can get him to lend me the plane fare?

should i do China Airlines or EVA? probably EVA.

68

The DPP had the presidency, but not the legislative majority that would have been needed to push through any significant change in national status. Aside from a few tweaks like Tongyong Pinyin and Taiwanese language classes in public schools (which I think was all done administratively), Ah-Bian was boxed in.

You might well be correct, but it’s almost too funny that if the DPP did gain the presidency and legislative majority, all they would do is maintain the status quo. After years of staging protests and screaming that “there is no more ROC” it’s going to be quite a let down for their supporters if they get into power and keep protesting against the government when they are the government. Might be fun to watch though.

69

Ah-Bian could have declared himself the “President of Taiwan” and then dissolved the Legislative Yuan based on the undeniable fact that Taiwan has never been incorporated into ROC national territory via the specifications of Article 4 of the ROC Constitution . . . . . .
and hence
his actions would not be bound by the provisions of the ROC Constitution . . . . . . .
a Constitution
which in no way, shape, or form can be considered the organic law of Taiwan.

70

We should buy the trademark “The Renegade Province”.
And use it on any and all occasion.

71

Ah-Bian could have declared himself the “President of Taiwan” and then dissolved the Legislative Yuan based on the undeniable fact that Taiwan has never been incorporated into ROC national territory via the specifications of Article 4 of the ROC Constitution . . . . . .
and hence
his actions would not be bound by the provisions of the ROC Constitution . . . . . . .
a Constitution
which in no way, shape, or form can be considered the organic law of Taiwan.[/quote]

Article 4 of the ROC constitution does not mention Taiwan, but it also leaves unmentioned a number of Chinese territories such as Hainan Province.
But no one would say Hainan is not Chinese territory. You fail to notice that the concept of ‘inherent territory’ is never defined. Even the judicial branch does not define it. But the history of the making of the ROC constitution did involve Taiwanese representatives in the National Assembly. Taiwan has since been treated as a province of China.

72

[quote=“raymondaliasapollyon”]

Article 4 of the ROC constitution does not mention Taiwan, but it also leaves unmentioned a number of Chinese territories such as Hainan Province.
But no one would say Hainan is not Chinese territory. You fail to notice that the concept of ‘inherent territory’ is never defined. Even the judicial branch does not define it. But the history of the making of the ROC constitution did involve Taiwanese representatives in the National Assembly. Taiwan has since been treated as a province of China.[/quote]

At the time of the transfer/exile of the KMT/ROC government from the mainland to Taipei, there were about 6 million Taiwanese and 2 million ROC “refugees/occupying forces/the people with guns”. Are you suggesting the Taiwanese were fairly represented during some sort of National Assembly procedings used to generate a new ROC Constitution applicable to the island of Taiwan? Perhaps suggesting that the Taiwanse went along willingly in subjecting themselves to Dictator Chiang, the White Terror, and 40 years of Martial Law?

73

Why is that even remotely funny? What we have is a situation where the actions of the KMT and the PRC have severely limited Taiwanese voters rights to enact reforms (should they want them). This is a tragedy not a farce.

The farce is that voters are stuck with a constitution that states that Mongolia, a country recognized by the UN, is part of ROC territory, a political entity NOT recognized by the UN or any major power.

It doesn’t strike me as funny at all that voters have in effect lost the freedom to change such a patently absurd constitution. I guess this is where we differ.

74

Ah-Bian could have declared himself the “President of Taiwan” and then dissolved the Legislative Yuan based on the undeniable fact that Taiwan has never been incorporated into ROC national territory via the specifications of Article 4 of the ROC Constitution . . . . . .
and hence
his actions would not be bound by the provisions of the ROC Constitution . . . . . . .
a Constitution
which in no way, shape, or form can be considered the organic law of Taiwan.[/quote]

So how did CSB get elected if not for the ROC constitution?

Funny how CSB was elected ROC president according to the ROC constitution, and there are people like you who want him to renounce the very constitution that he sworn to uphold. If you want him to renounce everything about the ROC, wouldn’t it make more sense to do that when he was NOT ROC president?

75

[quote=“TaiwanTeacher”][quote=“raymondaliasapollyon”]

Article 4 of the ROC constitution does not mention Taiwan, but it also leaves unmentioned a number of Chinese territories such as Hainan Province.
But no one would say Hainan is not Chinese territory. You fail to notice that the concept of ‘inherent territory’ is never defined. Even the judicial branch does not define it. But the history of the making of the ROC constitution did involve Taiwanese representatives in the National Assembly. Taiwan has since been treated as a province of China.[/quote]

At the time of the transfer/exile of the KMT/ROC government from the mainland to Taipei, there were about 6 million Taiwanese and 2 million ROC “refugees/occupying forces/the people with guns”. Are you suggesting the Taiwanese were fairly represented during some sort of National Assembly procedings used to generate a new ROC Constitution applicable to the island of Taiwan? Perhaps suggesting that the Taiwanse went along willingly in subjecting themselves to Dictator Chiang, the White Terror, and 40 years of Martial Law?[/quote]

the representatives were elected by the people. The nationalist government held local elections in Taiwan, then the elected ‘town council members’ elected the representatives at other levels, who ultimately elected representatives to the National Assembly. Besides, it was the Taiwanese people who welcomed the nationalist government in the beginning and cooperated in these elections. True, White Terror and 40 years of martial law were nothing they liked, but thats’s well after these elections took place and the constitution came into being.

76

Why is that even remotely funny? What we have is a situation where the actions of the KMT and the PRC have severely limited Taiwanese voters rights to enact reforms (should they want them). This is a tragedy not a farce.

The farce is that voters are stuck with a constitution that states that Mongolia, a country recognized by the UN, is part of ROC territory, a political entity NOT recognized by the UN or any major power.

It doesn’t strike me as funny at all that voters have in effect lost the freedom to change such a patently absurd constitution. I guess this is where we differ.[/quote]

Actually, it is a widespread myth that Outer Mongolia is included in the constitution. The ROC government recognized its independence back in January 1946 and established official diplomatic ties with it. The making of the constitution began in December 1946, during which the diplomatic relation remained valid. How could Outer Mongolia have ever been in the Constitution? Also, in the National Assembly meeting, the person who directed the making of the Constitution, Ke Sun, mentioned Outer Mongolia as an example of territorial abandonment. IT was in the1950’s that the ROC revoked its recognition of Outer Mongolia because the Soviets failed to honor their treaty obligations. But all was too late. Mongolia had been independent. Recognition of statehood cannot be reversed. The ROC did not amend the constitution to re-include Outer Mongolia, but only included it on the maps. (You can still find the term ‘Mongolia’ in the constitution, but it could well refer to the vast area inhabited by ethnic mongols, including some places in several northern provinces, not an area geographically distinct from them.)

I have seen too many DPP supporters mention Outer Mongolia as a way to refute the authority of, and make fun of, the Constitution, but that’s actually quite ironic: the DPP legislators are well aware of the history I’ve just discussed, and in fact, it was them who first brought forward the history to the judicial authority concerned with explanation of the Constitution. How could they use Outer Mongolia to attack the Constitution when in fact they know it is NOT in the Constitution? (the relevant record is 司法院釋字第328號解釋 (judicial ordinance as regards the Constitution, No. 328)

Also, since the Additional Clauses of the Constitution came into being, the legislators have been endowed with the authority to amend the constitution, the requirement being that enough legislators propose such an amendment. You might blame the KMT legislative majority for eliminating this possibility, but these legistoalrs were elected by the Taiwanese people! IT’s democracy! If you want to blame the KMT majority at the legislature, you’re blaming the Taiwanese voters! What a mockery of democracy!

77

I stand corrected. Possibly. Cheers. However, the present government does make the claim that the ROC has sovereignty over Mongolia, an absurd position for which they should be laughed off the planet.

78

I stand corrected. Possibly. Cheers. However, the present government does make the claim that the ROC has sovereignty over Mongolia, an absurd position for which they should be laughed off the planet.[/quote]

Your information is outdated. The current government has no longer recognized Outer Mongolia as its territory.

79

When did they stop? Ma has made the claim since becoming president.

Also I am going to challenge your assertion that the ROC could not de-recognize Mongolia. The entire question of the status of Taiwan is conditioned upon China and the Allied Power de-recognizing Japan’s sovereignty over Taiwan as granted in the Treaty of Shimonoseki.

It is clear that de-recognition occurs and is accepted as legitimate under some circumstances.

80

When did they stop? Ma has made the claim since becoming president.[/quote]

Ma only claims that the ROC’s sovereignty extends to Mainland China, which, according to the current 兩岸人民關係條例，excludes Outer Mongolia.

The exclusion of Outer Mongolia from the ROC territory was an executive order when the DPP were in power. In the absence of anything that reverses the order, The Ma administration simply maintains it.

You can find the news below. Xing Yuan Lai, the official in charge of Mainland Affairs, stated that the ROC territory excludes Outer Mongolia.

tw.news.yahoo.com/%E5%9B%BA%E6%9 … tml?_esi=1