Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Honduras is also greatly thinking about switching recognition to the PRC. Very soon, no nation left will recognize the ROC as the sole legitimate government of China, not even the Vatican. The remaining nations that do recognize the ROC are all small, poor nations more interested in financial aid anyways. It's all sham diplomacy. It is ironic that the current ROC president does not even view her own government or herself moreover as the sole legitimate government of all China but rather that of a separate entity. That is not going to stop the paradigm however. The most the Taipei government can do in the future is to (re)admit that Taiwan Island is an inalienable part of China regardless of what government is ruling it and seek to return to the "One China, Different Interpretations" policy first thought up when Deng was still in power.
It's called Formosa, and why would it be an inalienable part of China? How near or far does one have to be from the coast of the mainland, to be within or outside of bounds for China to claim ownership? What next--Okinawa and the Ryukyu Islands?
It's called Formosa, and why would it be an inalienable part of China? How near or far does one have to be from the coast of the mainland, to be within or outside of bounds for China to claim ownership? What next--Okinawa and the Ryukyu Islands?
Formosa was only the name given to the island by the Portuguese. You still see it referenced on old maps and history books but the use of the name has fallen into disuse in many places. Distance from the Mainland has little to do with how Taiwan is a inalienable part of China, the recent history of the island has a lot more to do with it.
To your second point, you may argue that the PRC ought not claim the island because it never governed it but what about the ROC? The flag of the Republic of China, "the White Sun on a Blue Sky with Red Earth" still flies in Taiwan but was brought over from the Mainland. Lu Hao Dong, a pre-1911 Chinese revolutionary and childhood friend of Sun Yat Sen, founder of the ROC, designed the "White Sun on a Blue Sky" canton portion of the flag. Dr. Sun himself later added the Red Earth portion. To state that this flag is not Chinese would be an insult to all the martyred Chinese revolutionaries who fought under it and protected China from its adversaries. You can still find the flag in history museums and other designated historic places in Mainland China to this day.
Formosa was only the name given to the island by the Portuguese. You still see it referenced on old maps and history books but the use of the name has fallen into disuse in many places. Distance from the Mainland has little to do with how Taiwan is a inalienable part of China, the recent history of the island has a lot more to do with it.
To your second point, you may argue that the PRC ought not claim the island because it never governed it but what about the ROC? The flag of the Republic of China, "the White Sun on a Blue Sky with Red Earth" still flies in Taiwan but was brought over from the Mainland. Lu Hao Dong, a pre-1911 Chinese revolutionary and childhood friend of Sun Yat Sen, founder of the ROC, designed the "White Sun on a Blue Sky" canton portion of the flag. Dr. Sun himself later added the Red Earth portion. To state that this flag is not Chinese would be an insult to all the martyred Chinese revolutionaries who fought under it and protected China from its adversaries. You can still find the flag in history museums and other designated historic places in Mainland China to this day.
Is Tibet also an "inalienable part" of China? If so, why? Because of all of the "martyred Chinese revolutionaries" who fought to take it over?
How about Bhutan and Nepal? Are they next in line for a "reclaim" by China?
Last month U.S. President Joe Biden ripped into Ortega, calling Nicaragua’s presidential election a “pantomime†as the former Marxist guerrilla and Cold War adversary of the United States won election for a fourth consecutive term......
One Taiwan-based diplomatic source, familiar with the region, said the move was not a surprise given Washington’s lack of leverage with Ortega due to the sanctions, and that looking to China for aid and support was a natural course of action.
“It appears that Ortega had had enough,†the source told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The KMT indeed was the dominating force, the Japanese surrendered to them. But the KMT was severely weakened by WWII. While the KMT/Republic of China troops were fighting the Japanese for almost ten years, the PLA and Mao were biding there time in the hills watching the Japanese ravish the countryside and killing indiscriminately (with limited exceptions). Mao in fact was still fighting ROC forces in hit and run attacks while ROC was trying to hold back the Japanese, a real D-bag move. ROC took horrendous losses in men and material fighting the Japanese while the CCP got stronger, helped by Stalin of course who liberally gave Mao's forces captured Japanese weapons.
It's telling that CCP owes it's existence to Tojo and Stalin.
I agree the KMT was weakened significantly by fighting the Japanese for almost ten years.
The reason I pointed it out to Maomao, was because he made the false argument that KMT was not the dominating force, hence CCP did not rebel because they did not overthrow an established government or leader.
Rebellion: an act of armed resistance to an established government or leader.
Is Tibet also an "inalienable part" of China? If so, why? Because of all of the "martyred Chinese revolutionaries" who fought to take it over?
How about Bhutan and Nepal? Are they next in line for a "reclaim" by China?
Many losing countries feel that their prior conquests are inalienable:
Russia feels that the Russian Empire as it existed in 1916 is engraved in stone and someday it will reclaim half of Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Ukraine and the "Stans";
China feels that the territories are irretrievably its territories;
The Islamic World figures that the State of Israel is of questionable legitimacy and that even Spain is not beyond the pale; and
France and Prussia/Germany kept of fighting over much of Europe until the U.S. spoiled the fun.
Revanchism is alive and well. There are other examples, but "reconquista" of the U.S. Southwest bubbles up occasionally.
It's called Formosa, and why would it be an inalienable part of China? How near or far does one have to be from the coast of the mainland, to be within or outside of bounds for China to claim ownership? What next--Okinawa and the Ryukyu Islands?
I agree the KMT was weakened significantly by fighting the Japanese for almost ten years.
The reason I pointed it out to Maomao, was because he made the false argument that KMT was not the dominating force, hence CCP did not rebel because they did not overthrow an established government or leader.
Rebellion: an act of armed resistance to an established government or leader.
no that was not my argument, it doesn't matter who is dominate, there are close to 10 established governments or leaders within china during the japanese surrender.
what I'm saying is that no one is a rebel as no one has complete or even majority control of china.
you cannot label anyone as a rebel during a time like that. there are many warlords/governors/leaders that are neither KMT or CCP as well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.