Most importantly, historical researchers with a civilian mindset have consistently failed to analyze the role of military occupation in discussing the Taiwan question. They have considered peacetime legal concepts, but failed to consider the law of war.

By contrast, one aspect of history that has received little to no attention in the Taiwanese or international press is the historical similarity of Cuba after the Spanish American War and Taiwan after World War II. Spain renounced all rights to Cuba, but the island was not given to any other country. That is a very close similarity to Taiwan. There are many provisions of the peace treaty with Spain of April 11, 1899, that are very similar to the peace treaty with Japan of April 28, 1952.

In Taiwan, local independence advocates stress that Taiwan belongs to the Taiwanese people. The People's Republic of China authorities stress that Taiwan belongs to the PRC. Some activist groups claim that based on the U.N. Charter, Taiwan qualifies to be a U.N. trusteeship. These are all points of view that have received a large amount of coverage in the mainstream Taiwanese media.

Importantly, under that Senate-ratified treaty the "Republic of China" is not recognized as the legal government of Taiwan. Neither the Republic of China nor the Peoples Republic of China are signatories to this important treaty.

The need for the Taiwanese people to set up their own civil government and to coordinate their organizational activities with the Dept. of State and the members of Congress arises from Taiwan's true legal status as an overseas territory of the United States under military government. This legal status was specified in the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1952.

The Taiwan Civil Government's office in the nation's capital is located at a prestigious address, within easy travel distance of the White House, Dept. of State, Senate and House Office Buildings, Dept. of the Treasury, Library of Congress, and the Pentagon.

After 59 years, the Taiwanese people have finally come together to establish their own Civil Government, and to formally set up a Washington D.C. Office, in order to coordinate more effectively with US government officials.

Formosa and the Pescadores had been ceded to Japan in the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki. Under international law, there is no doubt that Japan had possession of the sovereignty of these areas after 1895.

"Yesterday, December 7, 1941 -- a date which will live in infamy -- the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan." President Roosevelt's speech of December 8, 1941, was immediately followed by a Congressional Declaration of War. On the following day, December 9th, the Chiang Kai-shek's Republic of China also declared war against Japan.

To fully understand the specifications of the SFPT, we must return to the history of WWII. In particular, we must recall the details of the war in the Pacific.

Taiwan is a territorial cession under Article 2(b) of the Senate-ratified San Francisco Peace Treaty (SFPT) of April 28, 1952. The treaty did not specify a "receiving country" for this territorial cession, however Article 23(a) confirms the United States of America as "the principal occupying power." The scope of application of this legal responsibility is clarified by Article 4(b), which gives disposition rights over Taiwan territory to a federal agency called the United States Military Government (USMG).

This treaty has a higher legal weight than Executive Order 13014, the Taiwan Relations Act, the One China Policy, and the Three Joint Communiques . . .



for Native Taiwanese





TCG calls for the end of the

use of ROC passports by native Taiwanese

How Can we Make a Nationality Determination under U.S. Law for Native Taiwanese People?



1. With no clear legal basis to include Taiwan in its definition of "national territory," and no international treaty references which can be found, the ROC is definitely not the competent authority to issue ID documentation (including ID cards, drivers' licenses, passports, etc.) of any kind to native Taiwanese persons. Such an interpretation must be recognized by all US government agencies under the terms of the SFPT.



2. Hence under the US Supreme Court's Insular Cases, the US Constitution, the laws of war, the San Francisco Peace Treaty, and the SFPT-authorized Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty (Treaty of Taipei), the native inhabitants of Taiwan remain either as (1) Japanese nationals, thus owing their allegiance to Japan, or (2) wards (or "Protected Persons") of the principal occupying power, and thus owing their allegiance to the principal occupying power.



3. In conjunction with Japan's relinquishment of sovereignty over Taiwan in the SFPT, Japanese courts have not recognized the native persons of Taiwan as Japanese nationals since the Spring of 1952. In other words, under Japanese law, and indeed under international law, native persons of Taiwan currently owe no allegiance to the government of Japan.



4. This leaves us with only one other possibility. The native inhabitants of Taiwan must have their identification documents and travel documents issued under the authority of the United States. In the San Francisco Peace Treaty, the United States is specified as the principal occupying power.



5. Taiwan is self-governing dominion under Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), but there is no passport issuing authority. Hence, it can be maintained that under US law the Taiwan governing authorities are counterfeiting "Republic of China passports."



6. In other words, the Republic of China is not recognized under either the San Francisco Peace Treaty or the TRA with any power to issue passports for native Taiwanese persons, in the areas of "Formosa and the Pescadores." As defined in INA 101(a)(30), the Republic of China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs cannot be construed as the competent authority for issuing passports to these persons. The false claims of "citizenship of the Republic of China" for native Taiwanese persons holding ROC passports make those passports illegal under US law.





REFERENCE: INA [8 USC 1101 (a)(30)]

The term "passport" means any travel document issued by competent authority showing the bearer's origin, identity, and nationality if any, which is valid for the admission of the bearer into a foreign country.



>> Additional Summary





Note: The consideration of whether the ROC Ministry of Foreign Affairs is the competent authority for issuing passports to native persons in the Jinmen (Kinmen) and Mazu (Matsu) island groups is an entirely separate matter however. These two island groups are not included in the definition of "Taiwan" given in the Taiwan Relations Act . See 22 USC 3314 (2).







