Taiwan: Is democracy and military the only reasons Taiwan is not a part of China?

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Fireminer

The War for Independent of Vietnam has never end. When we don't fight with arms, we fight with our knowledge. The unique Water Rice culture. The only Ancesstor Worshiping culture. The can't-be-seen mix between Chinese wisdom, French elegant, and the Core which origin from far old Polynesian tribles that once roamed this land. 3000 years, my friend, compare to less than a century.

You are not answering my question. Will you give Vietnam to China if China demands it? In your own words:

It's a bloodline that flows through each of us. Every ethnic in my country has a common folklore, you know? All of us are from the same mother, whether was she a fairy or a dragon.

By your own argument, you should be welcoming Chinese rule of Vietnam with open arms. True or false?

[Fireminer]

False. The Lengends doesn't covered Chinese.

And beside, why should I welcome them? Invade us, I could understand and still fightback. But provoked the Khmer Rouge to fight us? It is the betrayal to their comrade, betrayal to the common cause of Communism.

[Ithekro]

My guess is that several South Vietnamese nationals would disagree with you in part. There are several that would like to go home...but not while Hanoi's government is still in power.

[Fireminer]

Of course they are. Leeches, not only to us, but for America too.

It quite surprise that people remember one bad deed of a Communist government, but forget ten of thousand of these for a Capitalist one.

[Ithekro]

Those would be people from Champa though. Not the long standing Viet. Peoples taken by force by the Viet over time, if I recall.

And what about the Nguyễn. There is still imperial blood around. Prince Nguyễn Phúc Bảo Thắng I think, right?

[Fireminer]

Correct! He is curently living in France. But no one care anymore. You would be quite surprise by the number of people with direct royal bloodline in Vietnam, especially in the city of Hue.

[Ithekro]

The South Vietnamese I know are hard workers in whatever field they are in. Be they from he cities like Saigon, or the fishermen, or the rice farmers, or the mountian peoples. Also lots and lots of Nguyen families. Had a seperate drawer from the "N" files at a Real Estate firm I worked for because there were just so many people with that name owning property in the Bay Area. It was Na-Ng, Nguyen, Nh-Nz

[Fireminer]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

The South Vietnamese I know are hard workers in whatever field they are in. Be they from he cities like Saigon, or the fishermen, or the rice farmers, or the mountian peoples. Also lots and lots of Nguyen families. Had a seperate drawer from the "N" files at a Real Estate firm I worked for because there were just so many people with that name owning property in the Bay Area. It was Na-Ng, Nguyen, Nh-Nz

So, you are a civil worker?

And Nguyen, together with Le, Tran and Vu are the most common family name in Vietnam.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

That long-gone dynasty didn't die until 1913, and Taiwan was still part of the Qing dynasty in 1895. The PRC's claims over Taiwan date from 1949 - that's just over 50 years since Japan took over the island. To put that in perspective, Japan wants the Kuril islands back from Russia. The Kurils were lost in 1945, and neither Imperial Japan nor the Soviet Union even exist any more.

I don’t know about you, but over a century is quite “long-gone” to me. Also, what makes PRC’s claim over the island any more valid than if the Dutch or Spanish were to lay claim today? Hell, they got there before the Chinese ever did!

Moreover, reclaiming the territories lost by the Qing is the second-most important foreign policy goal of the PRC. If Taiwan wasn't already a de facto independent country, China's claim would be extremely solid.

So when is China going to invade Mongolia?

Originally Posted by Fireminer

Of course they are. Leeches, not only to us, but for America too.

Just gonna throw this out there, when you start generalizing entire population group like that is when people tune you out and assign you the bigot label.

Originally Posted by Fireminer

But for me and other young Vietnamese, it's the right of a country to be unified.

Great, Taiwan has never been part of the PRC, end of story then.

But frankly, that’s just you using whatever double-standard to suit your own world view. Should Italy then lay claim over the Mediterranean? Maybe the Vatican should launch another Crusade? Hell, maybe the Germans should invade Poland again, the English should retake the territories of their former empire, and the Mongols should just table flip everyone and claim half of the civilized world as its own.

Because, you know, it’s the right of a country to be unified, regardless of whether said country is even around.

It's more than just economical or military gain. It's a bloodline that flows through each of us. Every ethnic in my country has a common folklore, you know? All of us are from the same mother, whether was she a fairy or a dragon. It's like Jew all over the world, how ever different their genes are, all look toward Israel.

Well then, time for the African nations to declare themselves rulers of the world then, after all that’s where the human race originated from.

But maybe that these thing didn't matter much with Western culture. Guess that the word Communist alone would you guys tag us as devils, whether we are Vietnamese, Chinese, Cuban,...

Remember what I just said about generalizing entire population groups?

[aohige]

@Fireminer
I have never met anyone in the US, even the stern racists who vocally speak badly of the Latino immigrants, call South Vietnamese immigrants "leeches" or consider them unwelcome. They are hard workers, very civil, and does not in any way fit the description of a "leech".

As far as I can tell, America is perfectly fine with housing the Vietnamese refugee/immigrants and consider their descendants Asian-American.

So this bigotry is not a commonly shared notion here, man.

[Fireminer]

Ok, I admit it, it's kind of reckless for me to say that. Forgot that the immigration society is compose of many parts. So I sorry for that, and let me narrowed the word "leeches" down to "runaway former member of the South Vietnam government".

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by kyp275

I don’t know about you, but over a century is quite “long-gone” to me. Also, what makes PRC’s claim over the island any more valid than if the Dutch or Spanish were to lay claim today? Hell, they got there before the Chinese ever did!

It's interesting that you brought up Spain - they still claim Gibraltar, and that was ceded to the British in 1704. Wouldn't you agree that that's a bit older than Taiwan?

Originally Posted by kyp275

So when is China going to invade Mongolia?

OUter Mongolia isn't considered one of the lost Qing territories, and China has never laid a claim to it so the answer is "probably never".

Originally Posted by kyp275

Great, Taiwan has never been part of the PRC, end of story then.

The record behind that is a lot murkier than that. Taiwan had been controlled by the Qing since 1683 before it was ceded to Japan. After World War II, every country in the world agreed that Japan didn't deserve to hang on to it. The logical thing to do was then to transfer it back to Qing China. Of course the Qing were no more, so it rightfully passed to the Qing successor state. The problem is that there were two governments that both claim to be proper successor state which is partially why this mess exists.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

It's interesting that you brought up Spain - they still claim Gibraltar, and that was ceded to the British in 1704. Wouldn't you agree that that's a bit older than Taiwan?

Not sure what point you’re trying to make here – The Spanish presence in Taiwan was in around the same time, though certainly didn’t last all that long before the Dutch kicked their ass out.

As far as Gibraltar goes, it certainly isn’t part of Spain now. The Spanish can lay whatever claim they want, the people of Gibraltar have repeated said no, and I certainly don’t see the Spanish threatening an invasion of Gibraltar.

OUter Mongolia isn't considered one of the lost Qing territories, and China has never laid a claim to it so the answer is "probably never".

Outer Mongolia is no less of a territory of Qing – in fact it was under Qing rule for over 200 years until it declared independence in 1911, more than a decade after Taiwan was ceded to Japan.

In other words, the whole thing is purely arbitrary based on whatever the hell the PRC wants. You can’t say on one hand the goal is to recover all lost Qing territories, and then follow it up with “well, except for the ones we don’t find politically expedient or worthwhile”. If the ROC had retreated to Mongolia instead, you can bet your ass the PRC will be crying about reunification with Mongolia instead.

The record behind that is a lot murkier than that. Taiwan had been controlled by the Qing since 1683 before it was ceded to Japan. After World War II, every country in the world agreed that Japan didn't deserve to hang on to it. The logical thing to do was then to transfer it back to Qing China. Of course the Qing were no more, so it rightfully passed to the Qing successor state. The problem is that there were two governments that both claim to be proper successor state which is partially why this mess exists.

Not quite. Japan renounced its sovereignty over Taiwan, which until their surrender in WW2 was a part of Japan de jure – it was no less of a legal territory of Japan than Puerto Rico is to the US today. It has little to do with what Japan did or didn’t deserve, it was simply a natural result of them losing the war, much like Germany losing its territories after WW1/2.

While it certainly is murky – the result of the ongoing civil war during that time, the fact remains that the PRC has never administered nor held jurisdiction over Taiwan.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by kyp275

While it certainly is murky – the result of the ongoing civil war during that time, the fact remains that the PRC has never administered nor held jurisdiction over Taiwan.

I think by China's logic, since Singapore was once a British territory conquered by Japan in WWII, and subsequently became under colonial rule again after the Japanese left, they were thinking that after WWII, Taiwan is to be returned to China as the Treaty of Shimonoseki was rendered void after the Treaty of Taipei.

But the actual wording : did Japan give up Taiwan, or give back Taiwan?

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by kyp275

Not sure what point you’re trying to make here – The Spanish presence in Taiwan was in around the same time, though certainly didn’t last all that long before the Dutch kicked their ass out.

I'm just amused that you questioned the claim on Taiwan on age principles even though Spain currently laid a claim much older than it.

The strength of a territorial claim lies on three points:

1. The historical record of legitimate ownership.

2. International recognition.

3. The will of the population in question.

The first two favor China quite a bit given that Taiwan enjoys very little formal recognition. However, the third point is far too important to disregard.

Originally Posted by kyp275

Outer Mongolia is no less of a territory of Qing – in fact it was under Qing rule for over 200 years until it declared independence in 1911, more than a decade after Taiwan was ceded to Japan.

Whether Outer Mongolia was ever a part of the Qing dynasty is unimportant. What's important is whether the PRC claims that Mongolia was a lost part of Qing territory.

In any case, China has already formally recognized Mongolia, and has expressed no interest its territory. Taking a formal position like this makes it very hard to establish any future claims in the future.

Originally Posted by kyp275

In other words, the whole thing is purely arbitrary based on whatever the hell the PRC wants. You can’t say on one hand the goal is to recover all lost Qing territories, and then follow it up with “well, except for the ones we don’t find politically expedient or worthwhile”.

Countries can renounce claims to whatever territories they want. Is it a matter of political and legal chicanery? Of course it is - that's precisely how diplomacy functions.

Originally Posted by kyp275

While it certainly is murky – the result of the ongoing civil war during that time, the fact remains that the PRC has never administered nor held jurisdiction over Taiwan.

The Republic of China never controlled Taiwan until 1945 either. It enjoys possession because it is a successor state to the Qing Empire.

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

I think by China's logic, since Singapore was once a British territory conquered by Japan in WWII, and subsequently became under colonial rule again after the Japanese left, they were thinking that after WWII, Taiwan is to be returned to China as the Treaty of Shimonoseki was rendered void after the Treaty of Taipei.

But the actual wording : did Japan give up Taiwan, or give back Taiwan?

It should be give back. Japan was forced to restore all post-1895 possessions to their previous owners.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

I think by China's logic, since Singapore was once a British territory conquered by Japan in WWII, and subsequently became under colonial rule again after the Japanese left, they were thinking that after WWII, Taiwan is to be returned to China as the Treaty of Shimonoseki was rendered void after the Treaty of Taipei.

But the actual wording : did Japan give up Taiwan, or give back Taiwan?

Japan intentionally never specified that they’re ceding sovereignty of Taiwan to China, or anyone for that matter, but only that they’re renouncing their claim to it. Regardless, the PRC refused to recognize the Treaty of Taipei anyway.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by kyp275

Japan intentionally never specified that they’re ceding sovereignty of Taiwan to China, or anyone for that matter, but only that they’re renouncing their claim to it. Regardless, the PRC refused to recognize the Treaty of Taipei anyway.

Technically, Japan doesn't recognize the Treaty of Taipei any more. The treaty that is still extant on Japan's position on Taiwan is the Treaty of San Francisco (which also wasn't signed by either the PRC or the ROC).

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

I'm just amused that you questioned the claim on Taiwan on age principles even though Spain currently laid a claim much older than it.

Uh, perhaps you should go back and read it again, the age of the claim is hardly the only thing that make the claim ridiculous. Moreover, I still don’t see why you keep trying to bring the Spanish claim into this, it’s not as if I’m saying the Spanish claim is legitimate.

Countries can renounce claims to whatever territories they want. Is it a matter of political and legal chicanery? Of course it is - that's precisely how diplomacy functions.

Then perhaps you shouldn’t post it as if that’s some legitimate noble endeavor by China.

The Republic of China never controlled Taiwan until 1945 either.

Um, duh? It was a part of Japan until that point.

It enjoys possession because it is a successor state to the Qing Empire.

No, it was because one, the ROC has not yet lost the civil war, and second, Japan surrendered to US forces in the Pacific, not the Soviets. The superpowers are jockeying for their post-war positions, I seriously doubt anyone gave two shits about the Qing.

It should be give back. Japan was forced to restore all post-1895 possessions to their previous owners.

*coughsenkakucough*

And I think the right to self-determination for over 23 million people is more important than what you think should or shouldn’t happen.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Technically, Japan doesn't recognize the Treaty of Taipei any more. The treaty that is still extant on Japan's position on Taiwan is the Treaty of San Francisco (which also wasn't signed by either the PRC or the ROC).

Yes, and it doesn't change anything - the treaty of taipei was basically a copy of the treaty of san fransisco the US wanted Japan to sigh with RoC specifically.

Th sovereignty of Taiwan was intentionally ambiguous in both.

[Ithekro]

The major difference in the Treaty of Taipei was the clause to make those who lived on Formosa and one of the other sets of islands Taiwanese nationals. Senkaku Islands are not listed at all, and were taken by the Americans with Okinawa were it has stayed, even after the Americans handed Okinawa to Japan again.

The other islands in the South China Sea are listed, but only in context that Japan gives up the right to sovereignty on them. Nothing about who they go to.

The older Cairo Declaration does say who things go to, but that isn't a treaty. Even the Instrament of Japan's Surrender is overshadowed by the Treaty of San Francisco because that is the official peace treaty.

China lost out becaues of their Civil War. The problem is they haven't just dealt with it and moved on. They keep bringing it up and laying claims (both the PRC and ROC) on places someone else holds, but they claim as their right by a Declaration that was not passed on to the final treaty.

Thus is the result of the Cold War's beginnings.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

China lost out becaues of their Civil War. The problem is they haven't just dealt with it and moved on. They keep bringing it up and laying claims (both the PRC and ROC) on places someone else holds, but they claim as their right by a Declaration that was not passed on to the final treaty.

why should China "move on" as you suggest? Its was China that bore the brunt of Japan invasion and after war ended they weren't given a seat at the treaty negotiation. Not even as a courtesy of the "sit and shut" type of seat. China was deem inconsequential by the West and now that decision is coming back to bite everybody.