by Richard W. Hartzell and Roger C. S. Lin    

Q: Mr. Sim Kiantek, Executive Secretary of Provisional Government of Formosa pointed out the articles 76 and 77 of Charter of the United Nations as well as the Article 2(b) of the Treaty of Peace with Japan (April 28, 1952) as his definitive refutation against the Hartzell-Lin theory that Taiwan is "occupied territory of the United States."

A: In Chinese, we refer to Mr. Sim Kiantek as Mr. Shen Jian-de. Mr. Shen's theories were quite popular in Taiwan several years ago, however upon analysis they do not stand up.


Q: As I could not understand why such articles could refute the Hartzell-Lin theory, when we dined together with other guests in a restaurant Nang King West Road on June 2, 2007, I previously told you what he said, and you kindly gave me the following web-site address for reference: http://www.taiwanbasic.com/kcity/taitrust.htm

Unfortunately, my PC could not reveal its contents.

A: Yes, this is the correct webpage. This page is written in Chinese and you must have Chinese system to view it. Unfortunately, we have no English language version of this information.


Q: Therefore, I would like to know your refutation aganst his mentioning, for it seems to me the Hartzell-Lin theory is more definitive and persuasive as an explanation of current legal status of Taiwan.

A: As a starting point of reference, we have put relevant portions of the UN Charter on this page -- http://www.taiwanbasic.com/un/charter.htm

Please note that Article 79 speaks of the "terms of trusteeship for each territory," Article 80 speaks of "individual trusteeship agreements," and Article 81 speaks of the "individual trusteeship agreements" and the "administering authority."

In regard to Taiwan, there is no record of an individual trusteeship agreement which has been concluded under the auspices of the United Nations, nor is there any record of the appointment or selection of an "administering authority." As everyone familiar with the history of Taiwan in the post 1945 period knows, Taiwan was never under any UN trusteeship agreement.


Q: Were there any specifications for UN trusteeships in the SFPT?

A: In the SFPT, the UN trusteeship agreements are stipulated in Article 3. However, the disposition of "Formosa and the Pescadores" (aka Taiwan) is made in Article 2(b).

Also, please note that Article 107 clearly invalidates Mr. Mr. Shen Jian-de's explanations of the applicability of Article 77 to Taiwan's situation, since this Article fully confirms all the arrangements of the SFPT as being valid.

Mr. Shen consistently fails to take note of Article 107 and its legal implications.


Q: So, you are saying that there is no claim that Taiwan qualifies as a UN trusteeship under the UN Charter?

A: Correct. No such claim whatsoever can be made. Moreover, as we know, there is no tribunal in the United Nations by which any sort of "official interpretation" of Mr. Shen's theories could be obtained.

However, the following listing of Trust or Non-Self-Governing Territories 1945 to 1999 gives some authoritative insight into this matter. Taiwan is not included. http://www.taiwanbasic.com/un/nonself.htm

We can only conclude that under the UN Charter, Mr. Shen's arguments are totally invalid. The specifications of Articles 76 and 77 of the UN Charter have nothing to do with Taiwan.