Japan's so-called 'undetermined status of Taiwan' argument represents ignorance of history, misjudgment of reality

Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has repeatedly made erroneous statements on the Taiwan question, exposing her deep-rooted tendency toward historical revisionism and a fundamental misjudgment of the current international political reality.

At a recent debate with opposition party leaders, Takaichi said that "having renounced all rights and claims under the Treaty of San Francisco, we are not in a position to recognize Taiwan's legal status." This notion that "Taiwan's status is undetermined" is a distortion of historical fact, echoing her earlier erroneous remark that a "Taiwan contingency" could constitute a "survival-threatening situation" for Japan. Such statements once again lay bare her real intention to undermine the post-war international order and pave the way for Japan's military involvement in Taiwan-related affairs.

Taiwan is part of China. This statement has a sound basis in history and jurisprudence.

In April 1895, Japan seized Taiwan and the Penghu Islands through an unequal treaty. The Cairo Declaration, issued by China, the United States, and the United Kingdom on Dec. 1, 1943, stated that it was the purpose of the three allies that all the territories Japan had stolen from China, such as Northeast China, Taiwan and the Penghu Islands, should be restored to China.

The Potsdam Proclamation was signed by China, the United States, and the United Kingdom on July 26, 1945, and subsequently recognized by the Soviet Union. It reiterated: "The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out." In September of the same year, Japan signed the Instrument of Surrender, in which it promised that it would faithfully fulfill the obligations laid down in the Potsdam Proclamation.

These documents, all possessing binding force under international law, constitute a complete legal framework confirming China's recovery of Taiwan. Taiwan's restoration to China is a manifestation of justice and a key outcome of the victory in World War II. Any erroneous claim of "undetermined status of Taiwan" is a deliberate distortion of this legal and historical reality and a blatant challenge to the post-war international order.

It must be emphasized that the so-called "Treaty of San Francisco" was issued in the early 1950s by certain Western countries seeking Cold War geopolitical calculations. It excluded important parties to World War II, such as the People's Republic of China and the Soviet Union, in order to seek a separate peace deal with Japan.

The document goes against the provision of not making a separate armistice or peace with the enemies in the Declaration by United Nations signed by 26 countries in 1942, including China, the United States, the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union, and violates the UN Charter and the basic principles of international law. Anything set out in the treaty on the sovereignty over Taiwan or the handling of the territory and sovereign rights of China as a non-signatory, constitutes a deviation from legally binding documents such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, and is thus entirely illegal and null and void.

By selectively disregarding the legal documents that underpin the post-war international order and instead invoking an exclusionary and legally flawed treaty, Takaichi not only distorts historical truth but also undermines universally recognized norms governing international relations.

Takaichi's assertion that "Japan is back" raises a fundamental question: What kind of Japan is back?

If the statement refers to a Japan that has drawn lessons from its wartime history, acknowledges the consequences of its militarist past, and reaffirms its commitment to the Pacifist Constitution as it returns to the international community as a normal country, such a trajectory is unobjectionable.

However, if it suggests the resurgence or emboldened reemergence of Japanese militarism, then the international community must remain highly vigilant.

Taiwan offers a stark example of the legacy left by Japanese militarism, marked by oppressive colonial rule and heinous crimes against humanity.

During Japan's half-century of forced occupation and colonial rule, hundreds of thousands of people in Taiwan were killed. The local population was deprived of political rights, freedom of religion, and cultural expression, while the island's mineral resources and essential supplies were exploited for imperial gain.

Notable atrocities underscore this dark chapter: the Yunlin Massacre claimed the lives of approximately 30,000 local civilians; the Taoyuan Sanjiaoyong Massacre saw 25,000 people slaughtered; in the Xiaolong Massacre, 27,000 were brutally killed.

These events are not distant history. Today, as Japanese right-wing politicians clamor that a so-called "Taiwan contingency" is a "Japan contingency," such rhetoric constitutes a provocative revival of colonial ambition and serves only to deepen historical wounds that have yet to fully heal.

Taiwan is China's Taiwan. The Taiwan question lies at the very heart of China's core interests. Eighty years ago, China was capable of defeating Japanese militarism; today, the Chinese government and people are even more resolute, confident, and capable of countering any attempt to interfere in China's internal affairs or hinder China's reunification.

We sternly warn certain Japanese politicians: those who play with fire on the Taiwan question will only burn themselves. Given Japan's grave historical responsibility, it must speak and act with extreme prudence, engage in serious historical reflection, and immediately cease all provocations concerning Taiwan to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past.

Zhong Sheng is a pen name often used by People's Daily to express its views on foreign policy and international affairs.

The views don't necessarily reflect those of Qiushi Journal.