Status quo defined by US - TW/CN

[dArKeR]

Arthur Waldron
Lauder Professor of
International Relations,University of Pennsylvania


The phrase "one China," now ubiquitous, is widely misunderstood and leads to endless problems, as your essay about A-mei (???) and her travails makes clear (online title: "What does `one China' truly mean?"; print title: "Taiwan not a province of China," July 12, page 8).

The US has never recognized Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan. This was true even when the US recognized the Republic of China as the legitimate government of all China. Even then, the US acknowledged only administrative control of Taiwan. The whole point of the complex wording of the Shanghai Communique and other documents was to avoid conceding sovereignty, while giving China enough face for the reconciliation process to continue. Our position over sovereignty has been regularly, but quietly, reiterated ever since and is unlikely to change.

So if "one China" does not mean that Taiwan is part of China, what does it mean? I gather that phrase was introduced accidentally during the Clinton administration in the text of a poorly drafted letter to Beijing which has never been made public. This suggests that we did not know what we meant when we introduced the wording; we were above all concerned with mollifying China.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/07/14/2003178949

Formosa was never a part of China. Get the facts straight!