By Peng Tao

Recently, the US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs and China Coordinator said that "UNGA Resolution 2758 does not endorse, equate to, or reflect an international consensus on the one-China principle." Such statements by the US official seriously deviate from historical facts and relevant international treaties and are entirely untenable.

UNGA Resolution 2758 is a resolution on restoration of the lawful rights of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in the United Nations (UN). On October 25, 1971, at the 1976th plenary meeting of the 26th session of the UNGA, the representatives of participating countries adopted the proposal to restore all the lawful rights of the PRC in the UN. UNGA Resolution 2758 recognizes that the representatives of the Government of the PRC are the only lawful representatives of China to the UN and that the PRC is one of the five permanent members of the Security Council. Resolution 2758 fully demonstrates that Taiwan is part of China, there is only one China in the world, and the Government of the PRC is the sole legitimate government representing China.

Historically, Taiwan has always been part of China's territory. The earliest written history of Taiwan dates back to 230 AD when Wei Wen led a fleet to Taiwan, marking the Chinese mainland's earliest discovery and governance of Taiwan. In 1661, Zheng Chenggong recaptured Taiwan from the Dutch, ending Dutch rule over Taiwan. In 1684, the Qing government established one prefecture and three counties in Taiwan, officially incorporating Taiwan under the Qing government's jurisdiction. In 1885, Taiwan was designated as an individual province, becoming China's 20th province. The Qing government effectively governed Taiwan for over 200 years until Japan's occupation of Taiwan in 1895. After the First Sino-Japanese War, the Qing government was forced to sign the Treaty of Shimonoseki with Japan, which included provisions for ceding Taiwan and the Penghu Islands to Japan, leading to Taiwan's 50-year period of Japanese colonial rule. In 1945, Taiwan was returned to the motherland after 14 years of the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.

Legally, there is only one China in the world. From November 22 to 26, 1943, as the victory of the World Anti-Fascist War approached, the US, the UK, and China held a summit in Cairo, Egypt. They issued the Cairo Declaration, solemnly declaring to the world that "all the territories Japan had stolen from China, such as Manchuria, Taiwan and the Penghu Islands (Pescadores), should be restored to Chinese sovereignty." On July 26, 1945, the US, the UK, and China jointly issued the Potsdam Declaration, which again confirmed China's sovereignty over Taiwan from an international legal perspective. On September 2, 1945, Japan formally signed the Instrument of Surrender, accepting the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, including the return of Taiwan to China. This marked Taiwan's return to China after half a century of occupation.

In summary, UNGA Resolution 2758 is clear in facts, accurate in characterization, and procedurally valid, fully demonstrating that the Government of the PRC is the only legitimate representative of China in the UN. This is the core content of the One-China Principle, a fundamental norm of international relations, and has become a consensus within the international community. Nowadays, some US officials, driven by selfish interests, have hyped up the so-called undetermined status of Taiwan, which is a complete distortion of facts, a falsification of history, a trampling on basic norms of international law and relations, and a betrayal of the US's commitments. In any case, the One-China Principle established by UNGA Resolution 2758 is inviolable and indisputable.

(The author is deputy director of the Center for Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macao and East Asian Studies at Central China Normal University.)

Editor's note: Originally published on china.com.cn, this article is translated from Chinese into English and edited by the China Military Online. The information and opinions in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of eng.chinamil.com.cn.