approval of the membership of the People's Republic of China in the U.N., and to pursue all available opportunities for developing friendly relations.

Third, we recognize that there remain complex issues regarding Taiwan's future but hope that these will not preclude development of new relations with the People's Republic of China. We believe that an adequate solution requires that the people of Taiwan have freedom to develop their own relations with the mainland and with the international community.

JUNE 21, 1971.

Hon. J. WILLIAM FULBRIGHT,
U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR FULBRIGHT: Thank you for your letter of June 11 inviting me to submit a statement in connection with the hearings on various issues involved in United States-China relations, including the question of United Nations representation, starting on June 24. I enclose such a statement and request that it be considered by the Committee and placed into the record of the hearings.

I regret that time available for the hearings prevents my making such statement orally in the hearings and answering any questions on it which members of the Committee might want to ask. Since I cannot possibly anticipate what such questions might be, I have limited my statement to giving reasons of a tactical nature as to why it would be politically advantageous for the United States to modify drastically its position in last year's Assembly by itself sponsoring and seeking support of an Assembly Resolution along the lines of the one set forth at the end of my statement.

I understand that Dr. Lung-chu Chen, Secretary for External Affairs of World United Formosans for Independence, has or will also submit a statement, and trust it will also be considered by the Committee and placed into the record of the hearings. In case it is not, I enclose two statements by Dr. Chen which go into other aspects of the matter and request that they be treated as Exhibits to my statement that show the position of World United Formosans for Independ

ence.

Again thanking you for your courtesies to me in this matter, I am,
Respectfully yours,

FREDERIC C. SMEDLEY.

STATEMENT TO THE U.S. SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE IN CONNECTION WITH ITS HEARINGS COMMENCING JUNE 24, 1971, WITH REFERENCE TO U.S. POLICY AS TO CHINA, FORMOSA, AND THE UNITED NATIONS

In insisting that the defeated faction in the Chinese Civil War which occupies Formosa, the Pescadores, Quemoy and Matsu, but has been completely evicted from mainland China, does and should represent China in the United Nations, the United States has painted itself into a diplomatic corner and cannot occupy such position in this year's Assembly session without suffering disastrous defeats therein.

It also cannot surrender such position completely to the increasing number of UN members who have been favoring not only transferring the seat in the Security Council and other UN bodies held by "China" but also the territory and people of Formosa and the Pescadores, to the Peoples Republic of China, without doing a monstrous injustice to the people of Formosa and the Pescadores, in flagrant disregard of the principle of self-determination which is embodied in the UN Charter.

Placing 12 million Formosans, plus 3 million mainland Chinese who fled to Formosa after being defeated in the Chinese Civil War, arbitrarily under the dominance of the Peoples Republic of China without these 15 million people having any opportunity to exercise any choice as to their future government would be to impose a colonial status on such people and territory.

It would seem that in the light of the present composition of the Assembly, a large number of whose members are nations that were colonies of other nations until very recent times, the United States may avoid the embarrassing defeats that would result in this year's Assembly if it continued to maneuver to preserve the status quo as to Formosa and the Pescadores, not to mention Quemoy and Matsu.

This it could do by sponsoring a Resolution which would recognize the People's Republic of China as the Chinese member of United Nations, representing

mainland China plus the islands of Quemoy and Matsu, but would leave the question of sovereignty over Formosa and the Pescadores for determination by a plebiscite among the adult population thereof.

There are four alternatives which should be presented in such plebiscite, namely:

(1) remaining under their present government;

(2) joining the Peoples Republic of China;

(3) rejoining Japan; and

(4) becoming an independent nation under indigenous leadership and eligible to apply for United Nations membership under Article 4 of the Charter.

Our government should advise the "Republic of China" that unless it accedesto such an arrangement for self-determination if recommended by the Assembly and agrees to and does permit the conduct of such plebiscite and the implementation of transition to any other status than (1) that may receive the highest number of votes therein, then we will cease to recognize the "Republic of China" and halt any military or economic support for it forthwith. It is believed that such a declaration on our part would bring about the necessary cooperation in the process of self-determination that the Resolution would seek. It is also believed that in the likely event that alternative (4) received a majority of the vote and alternative (2) hardly any of it, the process of peaceful change thus put in motion, under which any threat of invasion of the mainland from Formosa, the Pescadores, Quemoy and Matsu is removed and the last two named islands are peacefully restored to the mainland, would not be interfered with by the Peoples Republic of China, which would thus be in a better position to defend itself from its most likely invader, the U.S.S.R.

Success in this démarche should have a salutary effect in improving our policies and tactics in other parts of the world by change from mere sterile anticommunism to positive promotion by peaceful means of democracy and selfdetermination, which should in turn improve our relations with the many friends throughout the world whose friendship, understanding and respect we are in the process of losing because of the type of dictators we have been supporting and promoting.

For all the above reasons, among many others that doubtless have occurred to or will occur to many of its members, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee should advice the Administration to sponsor the following Resolution in this year's session of the United Nations Assembly:

The General Assembly, taking cognizance of the fact that the largest population of the world that is under one sovereignty is not represented in the United Nations,

Desiring to make such representation possible while at the same time settling the still outstanding problems left from the Chinese Civil War,

Noting that said problems include the occupation of Formosa and the Pescadores as well as the Chinese coastal islands of Quemoy and Matsu by the forces defeated in said Civil War,

Considering that neither Japan nor the other signatories to the treaty by which Japan renounced its soverignty over Formosa and the Pescadores has ever ceded said territories to any political entity,

Recalling the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to colonial countries and peoples contained in its Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960. Believing that it would contribute to peaceful settlement of disputes as to sovereignty generally and the strengthening of the United Nations as an instrument of peace, to determine the question of sovereignty of Formosa and the Pescadores in accordance with the freely-expressed desires of their people, and finally to end the Chinese Civil War by removing all military installations and personnel from Quemoy and Matsu, permitting their peaceful occupation by the Peoples Republic of China, after giving civilian residents of such islands an opportunity to emigrate therefrom:

Recommendations

1. An immediate complete cessation of all armed hostilities along and near the coast of China and on, over and under Formosa Strait.

2. Immediate evacuation from all coastal islands not presently controlled by the Peoples Republic of China over which China was sovereign on and prior to 7 July 1937, of all military forces and portable military equipment and supplies belonging to either the Republic of China or the United States of America and

the simultaneous evacuation of all civilians from such islands who (or whose parents or other custodians, in the cases of minors and incompetents) express an unwillingness to remain on such territory after the withdrawal of military forces therefrom, with such of their possessions as it is feasible to transport, to Formosa or the Pescadores, for which operation members of the United Nations in a position to do so should furnish necessary transport and protection on and over said territories and the waters between them.

3. A plebiscite under United Nations auspices among residents of Formosa and the Pescadores wherein those who are adults are given an opportunity to register their choice, by secret ballot or voting machine among:

(a) remaining under the sovereignty of their present government;

(b) coming under the sovereignty of the Peoples Republic of China;

(c) becoming a province of Japan; or

(d) becoming independent under United Nations protection, with the guidance of a United Nations Commission in establishing an independent and indigenous government, to be fully functioning on or before 1 July 1972, such guidance to be exercised in a manner similar to that used to guide Libya to independent selfgovernment, in pursuance of Part A of Resolution 289 (IV) 21 November 1949. 4. Transfer of the permanent membership on the Security Council and in other United Nations bodies now held by the Republic of China in the name of China to the Peoples Republic of China.

5. That the Security Council recommend the admission of Formosa to United Nations pursuant to the provisions of Article 4 of the Charter if and when it becomes independent pursuant to paragraph 3 (d) hereof.

Respectfully submitted,

FREDERIC C. SMEDLEY.

[From The Washington Post, Sunday, May 23, 1971]

"TWO CHINAS" DILEMMA

SOLUTION FOR TAIWAN: HOLD A PLEBISCITE

(By Lung-chu Chen)

(The following is from a speech delivered on April 29 at the Panel on Chinese Participation in the United Nations chaired by former Secretary of State Dean Rusk at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law in Washington. Dr. Lung-chu Chen, Research Associate at Yale Law School, is Secretary for External Affairs of World United Formosans for Independence.)

The so-called dilemma of "two Chinas" or "dual representation" in the United Nations is due to the fact that Taiwan, or Formosa, if you like, has too often been misidentified as "China." In a basic sense, China is not at issue, because it is quite clear who governs the 800 million people on the Chinese mainland. The real issue is Taiwan, whose international legal status is yet to be settled.

The 1951 Japanese Peace Treaty affirmed the colonial status of Taiwan and kept its legal status undetermined, pending an international settlement. Japan renounced all her "rights, title and claim" to Taiwan, but the Treaty did not specify any beneficiary. The sovereignty of Taiwan has not been transferred to China, Nationalist or Communist.

Contrary to the claims of Chiang and Mao and their supporters, Taiwan does not belong to China. Taiwan is Taiwan and China is China; they are two separate political entities.

For centuries the Formosan people have been living in an environment different from that of the Chinese people and undergoing experiences distinctly Formosan. They have forged a distinct sense of identity and perspective in their quest to be masters of their own destiny.

The Taiwanese people do not identify with the People's Republic of China, a foreign country with which they have never had contact. It is significant to note. that ever since its founding 22 years ago, the People's Republic of China has never extended its jurisdiction and effective control over Taiwan.

Nor do the Taiwanese people identify with the Chiang Kai-shek regime. Betraying the trust of the Allied Powers, the exiled Chiang regime has usurped the sovereign power of the people of Taiwan and illegally occupied the island. At present, the 12 million Taiwanese, 85 percent of the island's population, are

allowed only a 3 per cent token representation in the congressional bodies on Taiwan. Under the reign of terror and coercion of the Chiang regime, as perpetuated by the secret police and the continuous imposition of martial law for more than 20 years, Formosa has become a non-self-governing territory.

...

If there should be a settlement by negotiation, as suggested, the true representatives of the people of Taiwan, not the Chiang regime, must be included. The crux of the question of Chinese participation in the U.N. is whether or not Taiwan is or should be part of China. A peaceful and clear-cut solution that would serve the common interests of all parties concerned and promote world public order would be to hold a plebiscite on Taiwan under U.N. auspices. Let the future of Taiwan be decided by the 14 million people on Taiwan, not by the 800 million people on China. And let all parties concerned abide by the outcome of such a plebiscite.

Legally, such a solution would be imperative because the international legal status of Taiwan remains undetermined subsequent to the termination of half a -century of Japanese colonial rule. As in the case of some 60 former colonial territories that have achieved independence after World War II, the principle of selfdetermination should be applied to Taiwan.

Politically, such a plebiscite would be practical and sound because it would subject the assertions and assumptions of all claimants, including those of Communist Chinese, Nationalist Chinese and Taiwanese, to verification in an impartial and peaceful procedure. Imposing any solution about the future of Taiwan against the wishes of its inhabitants is not a solution at all, it would be a constant source of instability and disorder

Morally, such a solution would be just, because it gives true expression to human dignity and human rights. If human dignity and human rights mean anything at all, it means that the 14 million people on Taiwan must not again become a pawn of power politics. The age for trading people like sand and rock, like a piece of property, is long past. The future of Taiwan as well as American policy in this matter must not be dictated by what Chiang and Mao say, what they like or dislike.

It is suggested that somebody has to pay the price; but why the long oppressed people of Taiwan? Any solution that would accommodate the People's Republic of China at the expense of the 14 million people on Taiwan will not serve the common interests of the world community; nor will it serve the "national interest" of the United States.

There is not the slightest doubt in my mind what the outcome would be if a U.N. plebiscite were held on Taiwan today. Given a free and honest election, the overwhelming majority of the people of Taiwan would choose to establish an independent State of Taiwan, free of foreign domination, Chinese or otherwise. This independent State of Taiwan should be admitted as a member of the United Nations. Thus both China and Taiwan would be seated in the United Nations, not as two Chinas, but as China and Taiwan. There would be no China dilemma.

On the other hand, should such a plebiscite result in integration of Taiwan with China, there would be no China problem either.

Accordingly, it appears that a U.N. plebiscite for Taiwan in accord with the principle of self-determination is a prerequisite and the key to a just and viable solution to the question of Chinese participation in the United Nations.

[From the Congressional Record, Oct. 14, 1970]

THE QUESTION OF SELF-DETERMINATION FOR FORMOSA-TAIWAN

(By Hon. Donald M. Fraser of Minnesota)

Mr. FRASER, Mr. Speaker, Dr. Lung-chu Chen, Secretary for External Affairs of World United Formosans for Independence, has sent me copies of an explanatory memorandum on "The Question of Self-Determination for Formosa-Taiwan" and a proposed U.N. resolution on "Self-Determination for Formosa-Taiwan."

In a statement prepared earlier this year and reprinted in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, I considered the plight of the Formosan people and the need to breathe life into their right to determine their political future.

The national security of the United States does not require the United States

to determine who governs each nation of the world or what geographical area should not be sovereign. Many of us are working to decrease the need for untrammeled national sovereignty and for wider international cooperation.

But until international harmony becomes more widespread our country cannot ignore legitimate claims to nationhood, especially when such claims are a viable alternative to incorporation into a closed society such as mainland China or continuation of a rightwing dictatorial regime. Formosa-Taiwan-presently is not governed with the consent of its citizens. This is not a reason to surrender it to China. But neither should we be content with the status quo wherein the United States actively supports the dictatorial Nationalist Chinese regime on Formosa.

There is a third alternative and Dr. Chen's materials describe it-self-determination for Taiwan:

THE QUESTION OF SELF-DETERMINATION FOR FORMOSA (TAIWAN)

(Prepared by the World United Formosans for Independence)

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

1. For more than twenty years now, the United States has failed to resolve the question of China in the U.N. This is largely attributable to the fact that Formosa, also known as Taiwan, has too often been mis-identified as "China." Fundamentally speaking, "China" is not at issue, because it is quite clear who governs the 800 million people on the China mainland. The real issue is Formosa, whose legal status has remained undetermined since the 1951 Peace Treaty with Japan terminated Japan's "right, title and claim" over the island. 2. Formosa (" a beautiful island" in Portuguese) is a hundred miles off the southeast coast of mainland China. (Unless otherwise specified, Formosa is meant to include the Pescadores, and is used interchangeably with Taiwan). Of the 14 million inhabitants on Taiwan, 12 million are native Formosans (Taiwanese) whose ancestors began to settle in Formosa four centuries ago from southeastern China to be free from authoritarian Chinese rule, and 2 million are Chinese, who fled to Formosa with Chiang Kai-shek in 1949 when the Chinese Communists took over the Chinese mainland.

3. From its inception Asian and European Powers sought to make Formosa their colony. During the seventeenth century, foreign powers, notably the Portuguese, Spaniards and the Dutch, as well as dissident Chinese forces, vied for control of the island. In 1683 the Ch'ing Dynasty of China nominally annexed Formosa and kept it under very loose control for about two centuries. In fact, in 1871 the Ch'ing government of China stated to Japan that Formosa was "outside its jurisdiction" and thus it could not be held responsible for what Formosans had done to Japanese nationals in Formosa. Not until 1887 did the Ch'ing government proclaim Taiwan a province of China. But shortly afterward, defeated in the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895, China ceded Formosa to Japan and agreed to Korea's "independence" by the Treaty of Shimonoseki concluded in 1895. Hence, from 1895 to 1945, Formosa was ruled by Japan.

4. When Japan surrendered, the Supreme Commander of the Allied Command in the Pacific, General Douglas MacArthur, authorized the Nationalist Chinese authorities to accept the surrender of Formosa from the Japanese and to temporarily undertake military occupation of the island as a trustee on behalf of the Allied Powers, which took place on October 25, 1945. The subsequent atrocities, corruption, deprivations of human rights and maladministration of the Nationalist Chinese occupation authorities were such that Formosan rage exploded on February 28, 1947, after the Chinese police killed a Formosan woman for selling untaxed cigarettes. During the "2-28 Incident," as the event is remembered by Formosans, about 20,000 Formosan leaders from all walks of life were seized, tortured and then brutally massacred in March, 1947, by the occupation forces and reinforcements sent by Chiang Kai-shek from the Chinese mainland. The Formosan leaders who survived the genocide by the Chinese occupation forces either went abroad or underground to struggle for self-determination and independence for Formosa. Thus began the worldwide Formosan Independence Movement of today.

5. On January 21, 1949, at the height of the Chinese civil war between the Communists and the Nationalists, Chiang Kai-shek legally resigned as the President of the Republic of China, a post he assumed on May 20, 1946 in Nanking, and was succeeded by then Vice President Li Tsung-jen.