Talk:Foreign relations of the Republic of China

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
More information about this article...
This article is part of WikiProject Taiwan, a project to improve all Taiwan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Taiwan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as top-importance for this Project's importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Name of article

I am moving this article from foreign relations of Taiwan to foreign relations of the Republic of China. This will mean that the title is inconsistent with political status of Taiwan, but that is okay because the two articles address different concepts: the article foreign relations of the Republic of China addresses the international affairs of a state or state-like entity that both others and itself calls the Republic of China, while the article political status of Taiwan (which is named correctly) addresses the disputed political status of an island. In fact, foreign relations of Taiwan is a POV title, because it implies that Taiwan is a sort of state entity (and thus sanctioning the proposed Republic of Taiwan), which neither the PRC nor the ROC (at least officially) claim. Reading this article, the article is not about the foreign relations of a "Republic of Taiwan", but rather the foreign relations of a "Republic of China" (indeed, "ROC" is the preferred term to "Taiwan" throughout the article). States who are dealing with the entity described in this article name the entity they are dealing with the "Republic of China"; even the PRC calls the entity the "Republic of China", even if the PRC does not recognize it as a legitimate government. (Yeah, I realize the above paragraph has some stilted speech, but I am trying to write a paragraph that is NPOV and doesn't take any of the various positions on this issue.) —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 21:07, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)

The first sentence of this article makes it clear that "Republic of China" refers to the government that is currently based in Taiwan, not the government based in mainland China. —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 21:11, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning Vanuatu's Recognition

According to this BBC link, Vanuatu has reversed its decision to recognize the ROC as a country after the government there changed. -anon

[edit] Grenada's switch

This BBC story says that Grenada switched its diplomatic recognition. I'm not the person who reverted the changes but here is the link to back his/her decision. -anon

[edit] ROC: an illegitimate government of China

From 1949 through 1971 PRC was an illegitimate government of China. ROC was recognized by most states in the world as the sole legitimate government of China during that period, although the number was decreasing by years. UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 recognized PRC as the sole legitimate government of China. Since only one government can represent a UN member state(in this case, China) at the same time, ROC was replaced by PRC.

There is a clear evidence for this: check out UN website:

http://www.un.org/Overview/growth.htm

According to this table, there was no member state expelled from UN since its foundation. ROC was replaced by PRC as a government representing China as a UN member state in 1971.

According to international law regarding succession of governments, ROC has been succeeded by PRC in all it's rights, possessions and obligations, including Taiwan since 1971.

Siyac 18:54, 8 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pre-1970s foreign relations of the ROC

The ROC came into existence since 1912. Why the pre-1970s history is not mentioned at all in this article? That part of history is currently not covered by any article. — Instantnood 19:49, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Simply because this article was once about Taiwan, and not on the ROC. Aggresive attempts to change the titles and so on seem to be unaccompanied by work to update the page content itself. Meanwhile, mind explaining this edit, which switches the spelling of Macau [1] to Macao [2]?--Huaiwei 15:34, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
Prior to my edit there was only one occurance of the word "Macau", that I did not notice. When I typed I usually typed -o. Please help standardise within the same article when it's necessary and appropriate. As for the scope of this article, I found no record that this article was ever moved from foreign relations of Taiwan to the present title. — Instantnood 16:37, 2 November 2005 (UTC) I've found the move record. Although some may not agree that foreign relations of the ROC on mainland to be included in this article, I believe the foreign relations of the ROC in the 1950s to the 1970s should be included. — Instantnood 18:39, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
At this point in time, I dont think I want to bother pondering whether I should give you the benefit of the doubt over your claims of ignorance, given the impressive track record you have. I would think you need better explaination then that, before I start massively un-doing your unabating exercise in using wikipedia to advance your agendas and viewpoints. And I am certainly glad that you found out how to read the edit history page. For someone who has been fighting to use ROC over Taiwan and wanting to mass rename pages, I would expect you to then make the effort to add ROC-related information here instead of complaining that information is missing.--Huaiwei 04:41, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
I was using special:logs to look for the move, and surprisingly there was no record there. As for pre-1970s foreign relations, I asked here before going ahead, since some people might strongly oppose to include pre-1949 stuffs. As a matter of fact I have already started the history section two days ago. — Instantnood 06:29, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
I dont see why you need to be so adventurous when something as simple as the edit history can be equally useful for this purpose. Thank you for finally introducing content two days ago, considering your first complain was made three months ago. Meanwhile, I am slightly concerned over your introduction of content over relations with the PRC. I do hope you exercise great care in writing on an issue as sensitive as this.--Huaiwei 07:17, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
Agree it's sensitive, nevertheless it's still the external relations of the ROC. Same for the relations between the ROC and Mongolia, that whether it's truly "foreign" or not is debatable. — Instantnood 07:31, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "generally excluded"

I put the word generally before excluded about the applicability of the mainland area law to HK. There are (article 60 is the most explicit) places in the law that deal with mixed HK/MO/Taiwan/mainland dealings (citizenship, various passport holders, taxes on income earned through the regions, investment, mixed partnerships, two hop travel, etc) when the other laws Taiwan has about the mainland need to be looked at. HK is excluded from the definition of "mainland area" but the non-applicability of the mainland law is not that cut and dried. SchmuckyTheCat 21:59, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Article 60 talks about what if any part of the law is suspended. There's no situation prescribed in the statute that Hong Kong and Macau are considered part of the "Mainland Area". The applicability of the "Statute Governing the Relations Between Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area" is limited to situations when residents, organisations or other institutions of the "Mainland Area" is involved. That does not mean Hong Kong and Macao are included in the "Mainland Area" in those situations. If you read what I've written in the article carefully, you'll know I actually wrote "Hong Kong and Macao are excluded from the "Mainland Area".". — Instantnood 16:56, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ROC to PRC transition

It is interesting witch states of these that recognised PRC have had relations with ROC before 1949 and for how long (for example USA from 1912). Currently very few have such notes. Alinor 07:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Bhutan? This contradicts Foreign relations of Bhutan. Do you have a source? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 14:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, seems strange to me too, but Bhutan is not here: Dates of establishment of diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China and also the article that you mention: Foreign relations of Bhutan - reads the following: "Bhutan has no diplomatic relations with its northern neighbour, the People's Republic of China". It says also that Bhutan has consulates in Hong Kong and Macau, but nevertheless - no relations with PRC itself. Strage, realy... I will put Bhutan back in the list of no ROC/PRC relations, agreed? Alinor 11:09, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh well Fine with me. It's nice to get a source so articles don't contradict one another or themselves... -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 14:05, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Micronations

Are there any majior micronations that recognise the ROC? -Dr.-B 08:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mongolia

The claim that all 24 nations with relations with the ROC recognize its claim to Mongolia seems most bizarre; I do not believe that the United States did, even before 1973. At a minimum, it requires a source; and an official ROC source should be menitoned in the text. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:33, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../f/o/r/Talk%7EForeign_relations_of_the_Republic_of_China_1990.html"