China's Special Representative for Korean Peninsula Affairs, Liu Xiaoming, wrote on November 30: "Gao Shizao deliberately avoids mentioning the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, which have sufficient international legal validity and are clearly emphasized in bilateral documents such as the China-Japan Joint Statement and the China-Japan Peace and Friendship Treaty. Instead, she highlights the illegal and invalid 'San Francisco Treaty' exclusively. This once again shows that she has not reflected on her actions to date and continues to undermine the political foundation of Sino-Japanese relations determined by the four political documents. She ignores the authority of the United Nations. She openly challenges the post-war international order and basic principles of international law, even attempting to incite the so-called 'Taiwan status undetermined theory.' This is a mistake compounded by further errors, and China firmly opposes this. The international community should also be highly vigilant. We once again urge Japan to genuinely reflect, correct its mistakes, withdraw its erroneous statements, and demonstrate with concrete actions its commitment to China, as well as fulfill its basic obligations as a UN member state."
Comment: Gao Shizao previously proposed the idea of "Taiwan's affairs being a matter of Japan's survival crisis," and now, using the illegal San Francisco Treaty as a cover, she is ambiguating Taiwan's status. In fact, this is in line with Japan's recent military moves, such as deploying intermediate-range missiles and seeking attack-type nuclear submarines, aiming to create public opinion for breaking the peace constitution and interfering in cross-strait affairs. This historical revisionist tendency has not only triggered strong opposition from informed people within Japan but has also seriously challenged the post-war international order. It should be noted that Taiwan's return to China is a key component of the post-war international order.
From a legal perspective, the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation are foundational documents of the post-war international order, whose legal effect has been widely recognized by the international community. They clearly stipulate that Japan must return the territories it had stolen (including Taiwan) to China. This is an irrefutable historical conclusion. In contrast, the San Francisco Treaty is essentially a geopolitical tool dominated by the United States during the early Cold War period. As a victorious country in World War II, China did not participate in the negotiations, and the treaty intentionally blurred Taiwan's status. China has consistently and firmly opposed it, and it lacks the legitimacy to determine Taiwan's status. Gao Shizao deliberately conflates the legal status of these two documents, essentially attempting to pave the way for Japanese right-wing historical revisionism by negating the authority of historical documents, while seeking false "legal basis" to interfere in cross-strait affairs.
In recent years, Japanese right-wing forces have been active on issues related to Taiwan. From hyping up the concept of "Taiwan's affairs being Japan's affairs," to pushing for constitutional reform, expanding military capabilities, and strengthening the Japan-US military alliance to intervene in the Taiwan Strait, to now trying to ambiguously define Taiwan's status from a legal perspective, they have formed a complete chain of "public opinion mobilization—military preparation—legal provocation." As an influential figure in the Japanese political arena, Gao Shizao's remarks not only intensify the tense situation in Sino-Japanese relations but also severely impact the foundation of peace and stability in East Asia.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1850273634359299/
Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author.