Wasn't Japan the last legal owner of Taiwan?

Seems to me that Japan owned Taiwan for 50 years. How did China get it back?

Didn’t the ROC people run away to Taiwan as a "Government in Exile," institute martial law for 40 years, steal the land, enslave the people, impose forced conscription into the military against the Geneva Convention, deny human rights, etc. so that they could teach Mandarin to the common Mandarin and convert everyone into "Chinese"?
You’d think the PRC would be grateful for that. Why are they still angry at the ROC for having done the same dirty work in Taiwan that Mao was doing in China?
Is there any chance the die-hard Chinese will ever go back home, and just let the Taiwanese and those immigrants who have grown to love the island be Taiwanese?

I think they failed to finish the job.
typo – should be … teach Mandarin to the common people…
The ROC leading in and then PRC now attempting to back them up is a bit like Mussolini trying to take Africa and having to call on Hitler to help finish the job. Anyone ever look at that from the perspective of the Africans?
Maybe the Africans liked the French better.
@Dan – Can you show me a copy of those terms of surrender?
@HowJ – The matter WAS taken to court, back in 1959, subsequent to the San Fransisco Peace Treaty. {Significantly, in a 1959 court case (Sheng v. Rogers) in the United States, the US State Dept. was specifically quoted as maintaining that: " . . . that the sovereignty of Formosa has not been transferred to China . . . " and that "Formosa is not a part of China as a country, at least not as yet, and not until and unless appropriate treaties are hereafter entered into. Formosa may be said to be a territory or an area occupied and administered by the Government of the Republic of China, but is not officially recognized as being a part of the Republic of China.} http://www.taiwanbasic.com/nstatus/shengvs.htm
I agree that the ROC played a crucial role in defending Taiwan against the PRC, during and after the loss of Mainland China. The Taiwanese remain eternally grateful for this, despite the cruel methods employed by the ROC in usurping sovereignty of the people here. However, they had retreated to a "sanctuary", a neutral island, still under US Military Government jurisdiction. for some 20 years now, the ROC has moved toward accepting its true responsibilty to the people of Taiwan who received them as "guests" here. I am firmly against having to go through this painful process again, should the PRC succeed in having its bogus claim to the island accepted by the world community. The Taiwanese have a right to self-determination and sovereignty over their land which has long been denied to them.
It is far past the time to stop foisting the Chinese Civil War onto innocent people who had nothing to do with it. If the Yankees had chased the Rebels into Mexico, would it mean that upon their defeat, Mexico would then belong to the USA?
@sailor8 – Those might be in reference to the disputes over the Spratly Islands.

4 Responses to “Wasn't Japan the last legal owner of Taiwan?”

  1. HowJ Says:

    That is correct.
    In 1895 Qing Dynasty signed Treaty of Shimonoseki which agreed Taiwan and surrounding islands were to be ceded to Japan in perpetuity. ***Taiwan has ceased to be part of China from that point on*** The claim "Taiwan has always been part of China" is false.
    When Japanese surrendered at end of WW2 they left Taiwan.
    ROC led by KMT, represented the Allies of WW2 to accept the Japanese surrender. The Japanese did not specifically name that Taiwan be handed over to ROC. Some fancy the idea that USA can claim ownership to Taiwan because USA’s military intervention resulted in Japanese loss.

    That is correct again, "government in exile". ROC’s occupation in Taiwan and claims of ownership of island can be debated. Illegal? Let’s take it to court. In any case, Taiwan was never ruled by PRC. When Taiwanese want independence, they mean independence from ROC China, but certainly not PRC China.

  2. Pagan Dan Says:

    These questions should get asked and answered a lot.

    Japan was a "legal owner", insofar as a victor’s surrender demands are "legal". That’s like saying Nazi Germany, after the surrender, became the "legal owner" of France.

    The Republic of China regained control of Taiwan in 1945 when (under the terms of the surrender), all nations were to return any land seized by military means.

    You can say what you like, but were it not for Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalist government of Taiwan, the place would be ruled from Beijing this minute.

  3. Dark Green Saturn Says:

    Call it a crap, rubbish, garbage, lies, baloney & etc…

  4. sailor8 Says:

    First, I know of no Treaty that has been signed by the US as vague as what Dan says. Any treaty this vague would lead to problems before the ink dried. I think if Dan thinks about what he said he would agree. As for Taiwan, if any other countries agreed with China there would not be this talk of if it belonged to China or what ever China says today. Every year China claims something else from some other country. I read in today’s new there are 5 countries in southeast Asia who are going to file international violations against China. They were told by China these problems could be worked out between each country and China on a one to one basis but there seems to be more to the problems than China is agreeing to discuss. The nations listed were Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia Borneo and the Philippines. How can the Philippines have problems with China over islands? Has any body looked at a globe? This would be like the US claiming the Canary islands today.