---

※ 引述《Ahhhhaaaa (你是個好人)》之銘言：
: 標題在講啥，AIT是這樣說的欸:
: 「中國持續扭曲二戰時期文件，包括《開羅宣言》、《波茨坦公告》和《舊金山和約》，
: 試圖支持其脅迫台灣的行動。他強調，北京的敘事完全是錯誤的，這些文件從未決定台灣
: 的最終政治地位。」
: 這些文件從未決定台灣的最終政治地位。
: 這些文件從未決定台灣的最終政治地位。
: 這些文件從未決定台灣的最終政治地位。
: 廢話，你先看看這三份文件分別是什麼時候簽下的?
: 1943/11/23 開羅宣言
: 1945/07/26 波茨坦公告
: 1951/09/08 舊金山和約
: 中華民國根本沒出席簽署1951舊金山和約啊。既然1951台灣地位未定，那1952之後呢?
: 1952/04/28 臺北和約(中日和約)，直接宣布馬關條約無效。
: 馬關條約無效，理論上是要把台灣、澎湖歸還給清帝國，但實務上就是歸還給清帝國的法
: 理繼承者-中華民國，這在國際上是有先例可循的。
: AIT說1951舊金山和約簽署時台灣地位未定，原po要不要講講1952之後的事?
這時候要翻出古文了
https://disp.cc/b/Gossiping/94Bo
作者 TheRock (就是這樣)

        【說明】






        機密
        C. (55) 38 u

        11th February, 1955
        1955年2月11日

                                      CABINET
                                     　內 閣
                                      FORMOSA
                                    福 爾 摩 沙

                NOTE BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS
                                  外交部部長註記

        I circulate for the information of my colleagues a note on the
        juridical aspects of the Formosa situation in accordance with a
        suggestion made at the meeting of the Cabinet on 31st January
        (C.C. (55) 8th Conclusion, Minute 2).
        謹依 1 月 31 日內閣會議之建議，就福爾摩沙狀態之法律面向提供相關
        資訊供內閣同仁傳閱參考。

        Foreign Office, S.W. 1.,
        外交部
        10th February, 1955.
        1955年2月10日


                 JURIDICAL ASPECTS OF THE FORMOSA SITUATION
                          福爾摩沙狀態的法律面向


        Formosa and the Pescadores
        福爾摩沙與澎湖

        1.Formosa and the Pescadores were ceded to Japan by China in
          the Peace Treaty of Shimonoseki of 1895.

          福爾摩沙及澎湖於 1895 年依馬關條約由中國割讓給日本。

          The validity of this cession can hardly be contested.

          此割讓的有效性難以挑戰。

          The Cairo Declaration of December, 1943, with its reference
          to Formosa as one of the territories which Japan had "stolen
          from the Chinese" was a retrospective moral condemnation of
          an international transaction which, at the time and long
          afterwards, was never questioned as being in any way contrary
          to international law.



    歸納：馬關條約合法、有效地將台澎主權移轉給日本，國際法上難以挑戰。


        2:In the Cairo Declaration, the Allies stated that it was their
          purpose "that all the territories which Japan has stolen from
          China, such as .... Formosa and the Pescadores shall be
          restored to the Republic of China" This declaration was simply
          a statement of intention that Formosa should be retroceded to
          China after the war.



          This retrocession has in fact never taken place because of the
          difficulties arising from the existence of two entities
          claiming to represent China and the differences among the
          Powers as to the status of these two entities.

          但因為有兩個主張代表中國的實體存在，且同盟國成員對這兩個實體
          的地位有不同觀點，導致此項歸還事實上從未發生。

          The Potsdam Declaration of July, 1945, laid down as one of
          the conditions for the Japanese Peace Treaty that the terms
          of the Cairo Declaration should be carried out.

          1945 年 7 月的波茨坦宣言將「開羅宣言的條款應該履行」定為
          日本和平條約的條件之一。

          In September, 1945, the administration of Formosa was taken
          over from the Japanese by Chinese forces pursuant to the
          Japanese Instrument of Surrender and General Order No. 1
          issued by the Japanese Government at the direction of the
          Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, dated September 2,
          1945. But this was not a cession nor did it in itself involve
          any change of sovereignty.

          在 1945 年 9 月，依據日本政府在盟軍總司令指示下於 1945 年 9 月
          2 日發布的日本降伏文書及一般命令第一號，福爾摩沙的管理權由日
          本移交到中國部隊。但這並非領土割讓，其本身也不涉及任何主權變動。

          The arrangements made with Chiang Kai-shek put him there on
          a basis of military occupancy, responsible to the whole body
          of the Allies, pending a peace treaty with Japan or, if the
          status of Formosa was not finally settled by that treaty
         (which it was not), then pending an eventual settlement about
          Formosa—which has not yet taken place. The arrangements
          did not of themselves constitute the territory Chinese.



          In the Japanese Peace Treaty of April, 1952, Japan formally
          renounced all right, title and claim to Formosa and the
          Pescadores, but again this did not operate as a transfer
          to Chinese sovereignty, whether to the Chinese People's
          Republic or to the Chinese Nationalist authorities.




          It has been suggested that the Japanese Peace Treaty meant
          that the parties to the Peace Treaty, other than Japan, had
          become co-sovereigns of Formosa. This seems doubtful. The
          Peace Treaty merely removed Japan's title without making
          any alterations in the existing arrangements for its
          administration.



　　歸納：1.開羅宣言是未實現的意向聲明 (statement of intent)。


          6.日本和平條約只是使日本失去主權，並未改變治理權的安排。


        3.Formosa and the Pescadores are, therefore, in the view of
          Her Majesty's Government, territory the de jure sovereignty
          over which is uncertain or undetermined.

          因此，就吾國政府之觀點，福爾摩沙及澎湖是法理 (de jure) 主權
          未確定或未定的領土。

          In the meantime, Her Majesty's Government do in practice
          recognise the Chinese Nationalists as the authority
          administering Formosa; but they do not recognise them as
          the de facto government of Formosa, whether as part of China
          or on any other basis, since they do not regard Formosa, as
          such, as constituting a separate State.



    歸納：1.臺澎法理主權未定。
        　2.英國政府在實務上承認中國國民黨政權是福爾摩沙治理當局，但不
        　　承認其為事實上政府。


        4.The logical corollary of our view as to the basis on which
          the Chinese Nationalists occupy Formosa is that although
          they are entitled to be in Formosa, they exercise a limited
          authority there.



          As we do not recognise the Nationalists as the Government
          of China, they are not, in our view, entitled to use Formosa
          for trying to get back into the mainland of China.

          由於我們並不承認國民黨政權是中國政府，因此，就我們的觀點，該
          政權無權利用福爾摩沙來重返中國大陸。

          Their powers in respect of Formosa are, or should be,
          strictly confined to administering Formosa itself and not
          using it as a base for outside activities.

          該政權對福爾摩沙的權力是，或應該是，嚴格限縮在治理福爾摩沙本
          身，且不得將其作為該政權對外活動的基地。

    歸納：1.中國國民黨政權只能在台灣行使有限的權力。
          2.中國國民黨政權無權利用台灣來重返中國大陸。
          3.中國國民黨對台灣的權力應嚴格限縮在治理台灣。


        5.On the future of Formosa, Mr. Morrison when Foreign Secretary
          in the late Labour Government, took the line in the House of
          Commons on May 11, 1951, that it had now become "an
          international problem in which a number of nations apart from
          those signatory to the Cairo and Potsdam Declarations are
          closely concerned" and which could usefully be considered by
          the United Nations at the appropriate time.



          The Prime Minister said in the House of Commons on February 1
          of this year that " the problem of Formosa [had] become an
          international problem in which a number of other nations are
          closely concerned."

          首相在今年 (1955) 2 月 1 日於下議院表示「福爾摩沙的問題已成
          為其他許多國家密切關注的國際問題。」

    歸納：臺澎未來已成為國際問題，可於適當時機交由聯合國考慮。


        The Coastal Islands
        沿海島嶼（主要指金馬等鄰近中國沿海省份的島嶼）

        6. The Nationalist-held islands in close proximity to the
           China coast are in a different category from Formosa and
          the Pescadores, since they are undoubtedly Chinese territory
          and therefore, in our view, part of the territory over which
          the People's Republic of China is entitled to exercise
          authority.



          Any attempt by the Government of the People's Republic of China,
          however, actually to assert its authority over these islands
          by force would, in the circumstances peculiar to the case,
          give rise to a situation endangering peace and security,
          which is properly a matter of international concern.



    歸納：1.中國沿海島嶼是中國領土，中華人民共和國有權行使權力。
        　2.中華人民共和國政府若藉武力對這些島嶼行使權力會有害和平與安
        　　全並引發國際關注。

        7th February, 1955.
        1955年2月7日

--------------------------
因為不想把台澎主權交給中國

不管哪個中國都不想給

所以透過舊金山和約

打造台灣地位未定的法律框架
(而中日和約的基礎也是在這框架內)

畢竟才剛打完仗

交給哪個中國都會帶來麻煩

總之台灣議題先擱置到亞洲安定再說

基本上就是三戰後再說

而當時的中華民國外交部也是明白人～

作為台灣統治當局的中華民國流亡政府

無法決定台澎地區的法理主權

有意見找美國

--
我帶來渾沌，亦帶來秩序；我是暗影，亦是光明。

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 1.169.78.214 (臺灣)
※ 作者: orzmaster 2025-09-14 09:14:57
※ 文章代碼(AID): #1enXSKdO (HatePolitics)
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/HatePolitics/M.1757812500.A.9D8.html

作者 orzmaster 的最新發文:

• Re: [討論] AIT說，台灣地位未定 - HatePolitics 板

  作者: orzmaster 1.169.78.214 (台灣) 2025-09-14 09:14:57

  28F 3推 4噓
• +3 - Gossiping 板

  作者: orzmaster 1.169.102.112 (台灣) 2025-06-19 11:48:39

  8F 3推
• +4 - Gossiping 板

  作者: orzmaster 1.169.74.248 (台灣) 2025-06-11 11:52:32

  10F 4推
• +2 - Gossiping 板

  作者: orzmaster 223.136.175.201 (台灣) 2025-06-09 16:30:10

  19F 2推
• +6 Re: [問卦] 日本市容屌打台灣嗎？ - Gossiping 板

  作者: orzmaster 1.169.77.82 (台灣) 2025-06-07 09:47:51

  20F 6推

點此顯示更多發文記錄