Dear Friend,

Tenā koe.

Recently, the United States has once again peddled the fallacy of an "undetermined" final political status of the Taiwan region. This position flagrantly contravenes both historical fact and international law, and directly challenges the authority of UN General Assembly Resolution 2758. Such actions—part of a concerted effort orchestrated by certain U.S. institutions in collusion with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) authorities in Taiwan—represent not only a self-deceiving political farce, but a deliberate attempt to mislead the international community and serve narrow geopolitical interests.

In the interest of truth and clarity, and to ensure a correct understanding of the Taiwan question, I would like to present several key historical and legal facts.

A Historical Overview: Taiwan Has Been Part of China Since Ancient Times

There is only one truth for all the noise: there is but one China in the world, and Taiwan has been an integral part of China since ancient times. This is a fact widely documented in historical records, including the Seaboard Geographic Gazetteer compiled in 230 AD during the Three Kingdoms period. In 1885, Taiwan was formally established as China's 20th province.

Following China's defeat in the war of aggression launched by Japan, the Qing Dynasty government was forced to sign the Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895, ceding Taiwan and the Penghu Islands to Japan. But the Chinese people never accepted this unjust outcome. In the following decades, as the Chinese people resolutely resisted Japanese aggression, the Chinese government, in 1941, issued a formal declaration of war against Japan. It proclaimed the abrogation of all treaties, conventions, agreements, and contracts previously concluded between China and Japan, and affirmed China's determination to recover Taiwan and the Penghu Islands.

This demand for justice was codified in a series of landmark wartime agreements. In 1943, the Cairo Declaration, issued jointly by China, the United States, and the United Kingdom, stated that "all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa(Taiwan), and Pescadores" shall be restored to China. The 1945 Potsdam Proclamation reaffirmed this position and was subsequently accepted by Japan as part of its unconditional surrender. In October 1945, the Chinese government resumed the exercise of sovereignty over Taiwan, marked by a formal ceremony held in Taipei.

International Law and Post-War Order

The status of Taiwan as an inalienable part of China was thus legally and factually settled through a combination of international declarations and agreements, including the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation, and Japan's Instrument of Surrender. These documents form part of the foundational framework of the post-World War II international order.

In 1949, the government of the People's Republic of China was founded, replacing the government of the Republic of China as the sole legal government representing the whole of China. Despite the change of government, China, as a subject of international law, did not change. Although the two sides of the Taiwan Strait have since fallen into protracted political confrontation, China's sovereignty and territory have never and can never be divided, and Taiwan's status as part of China's territory has never and can never change. 

In 1971, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 2758 by an overwhelming majority which clearly stated that the General Assembly "decides to restore all its rights to the People's Republic of China and to recognize the representatives of its Government as the only legitimate representatives of China to the United Nations, and to expel forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the United Nations and in all the organizations related to it." 

The reason why the terms "Republic of China" and "Taiwan" did not appear in UNGA Resolution 2758 is that the "government of the Republic of China" was an overthrown regime and hence no longer the legitimate government of China. It could not represent China, a sovereign state, in the international community. The U.N. is an international organization of sovereign states, and accepts only representatives from such states. Since Taiwan is part of China, not a sovereign state, the U.N. Charter does not allow representatives in the name of Taiwan to be sent to the U.N. Thus, the phrase "expelling the representatives of the Taiwan authorities" must not be used either. Given that the Taiwan region then was under the control of the defeated Chiang Kai-shek clique, the resolution used the expression "the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek" instead. This is a precise and accurate legal wording.

On the day of the vote on Resolution 2758, Chiang Kai-shek's representative also acknowledged in statement that other countries "have stressed the fact that Taiwan is Chinese territory," and "on this I cannot agree with them more." Therefore, Resolution 2758 resolved once and for all the question of the representation of the whole of China, including Taiwan, in the United Nations, as a political, legal and procedural issue. The Resolution made it clear that China has a single seat in the U.N., and precluded the possibility of "two Chinas" or "one China, one Taiwan."

Since then, the United Nations has consistently recognized Taiwan as a province of China, with no separate status. Official legal opinions from the UN Office of Legal Affairs have stated unequivocally that the authorities in Taipei do not enjoy any form of governmental status under international law. 

The renewed assertion of the so-called "undetermined status of Taiwan" lacks any legal basis and violates fundamental principles and rules of international law, such as pacta sunt servanda (treaties must be observed) and estoppel. United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758, as an authoritative decision on matters concerning the functioning of the United Nations, carries legal force within the UN system. This resolution, along with the one-China principle it embodies, has established binding force over all subjects of the international community through the United Nations Charter, bilateral diplomatic communiqués, and the basic principles of international law.

U.S. Shifts and Contradictions

Based on this principle, 183 countries, including the United States, have established diplomatic relations with China.

Ironically, it was the United States that once explicitly acknowledged this position. In 1950, then US President Truman clearly stated that"For the past four years, the United States and other Allied Powers have accepted the exercise of Chinese authority over the island"，which was followed by a further clarification from then US Secretary of State Acheson that"The Chinese have administered Formosa for four years. Neither the United States nor any other ally ever questioned that authority and that occupation. When Formosa was made a province of China nobody raised any lawyer's doubts about it."

However, following the outbreak of the Korean War, the U.S. reversed course, reviving the "undetermined status" narrative in a bid to contain China. In 1972, President Nixon assured Premier Zhou Enlai during his historic visit to China that the U.S. would no longer advocate such a view. Yet in recent years, we have witnessed a disturbing backtrack, as Washington once again attempts to distort the intent and legal effect of UNGA Resolution 2758.

Some have pointed to the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty—signed without China's participation—as evidence of ambiguity over Taiwan's status. This treaty, and the subsequent 1952 Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty signed between Japan and the Taiwan authorities (who lacked any sovereign legitimacy to do so), are both legally null and void. They serve only to advance U.S. strategic aims to obstruct China's reunification, illustrating a clear double standard on core principles like sovereignty and non-interference.

These efforts not only violate international law but also undermine the post-war international order that the U.S. once helped to shape. The result is a growing erosion of U.S. credibility and a clearer view within the international community of who is truly undermining global peace and stability.

It is worth noting that even within Taiwan, broad-based voices have opposed and pushed back against this distorted narrative. The largest opposition party in the region has reaffirmed that World War II-era agreements clearly established Taiwan's return to China, consistent with international law and diplomatic practice.

A Just Cause for National Reunification

To conclude: Taiwan has never been, and will never be, an independent country—past, present, or future. Its status as part of China's territory was fundamentally resolved in 1945 following Japan's surrender and the end of WWII. While the two sides of the Taiwan Strait have not yet achieved full reunification, China's sovereignty and territorial integrity have never been divided, and will never be.

Any attempt to reverse history, violate international law, or separate Taiwan from China is destined to fail and will never be accepted by the 1.4 billion Chinese people.

We sincerely hope that New Zealand, as a peace-loving country, will continue to stand on the right side of history by adhering to the one-China principle, upholding the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, and supporting the just cause of the Chinese people in safeguarding sovereignty and territorial integrity, and seeking national reunification.

Ngā mihi.

Sincerely yours,

Wang Xiaolong

Chinese Ambassador to New Zealand (Cook Islands, Niue)

Incl:

Chinas Position Paper on the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758.pdf