Comments: The announcement of "Taiwan Retrocession Day" on Oct. 25, 1945, was not considered valid by the Allies. Under international law, Taiwan remained a part of Japan's national territory until the coming into force of the San Francisco Peace Treaty on April 28, 1952. Hence, by moving to Taiwan in Dec. 1949, the ROC Central Government was moving outside of China’s national territory, and immediately became a government in exile.

Comments: In this treaty, Japan renounced all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores (aka "Taiwan"). However, no "receiving country" was designated. To cede territory in this manner may be called a "limbo cession." In other words, the territorial sovereignty of Taiwan was not awarded to the ROC, see Articles 2(b) and 21. In recognition of the United States' role as the conqueror of Taiwan, the Ryukyus, etc., the United States of America is confirmed as "the principal occupying power" in Article 23(a). Additionally, Article 4(b) confirms that these areas are under the jurisdiction of the military arm of the US government. This is a US federal agency called the "United States Military Government (USMG)."

More details...

Comments: Article 10 confuses many researchers. It states:

For the purposes of the present Treaty, nationals of the Republic of China, shall be deemed to include all the inhabitants and former inhabitants of Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores) and their descendents who are of the Chinese nationality in accordance with the laws and regulations which have been or may hereafter be enforced by the Republic of China in Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores); and juridical persons of the Republic of China shall be deemed to include all those registered under the laws and regulations which have been or may hereafter be enforced by the Republic of China in Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores).

Ng Yuzin Chiautong, Chairman, World United Formosans for Independence (WUFI), researched the records of the Japanese National Diet for the period when the "Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty" was being reviewed. Writing in the 2nd edition (1972) of his book Historical and Legal Aspects of the International Status of Taiwan (Formosa) maintained that Article 10 is not an affirmative definition of the Chinese nationality of the Taiwanese people, but merely an agreement reached for the sake of convenience on the treatment of the Taiwanese as ROC nationals, because otherwise they would be considered stateless and be ineligible for documentation to enable them to travel to Japan. He further points out that the Treaty of Taipei does not call the Taiwanese "Chinese nationals" but instead employs the term "residents". Moreover, Japan formally surrendered its claim to sovereignty over Taiwan on April 28, 1952, thus calling into serious doubt the authority of Japan to formally make such an assignment regarding the status of Taiwan over three months later on August 5, 1952.

More details...

Comments: In conjunction with the review of the 1955 Mutual Defense Treaty, the US Senate's Committee on Foreign Relations issued a report on Feb. 8, 1955 which discussed the international legal status of Formosa and the Pescadores. That report included the following statement:

It is the understanding of the Senate that nothing in the treaty shall be construed as affecting or modifying the legal status or sovereignty of the territories to which it applies.

Further Comments in Czyzak Memorandum...

Comments: The judges examined the legal status of Taiwan in detail, and held:

. . . that the Government of the Republic of China exercises authority over the island; that the sovereignty of Formosa has not been transferred to China; and that Formosa is not a part of China as a country, at least not as yet, and not until and unless appropriate treaties are hereafter entered into. Formosa may be said to be a territory or an area occupied and administered by the Government of the Republic of China, but is not officially recognized as being a part of the Republic of China.

More details...

The most tenable theory regarding the status of Formosa and the Pescadores is that sovereignty over the islands has not yet been finally determined.

More excerpts...

The position of the United States was set forth by the State Department in connection with the 1970 Hearings before the Subcommittee on United States Security Agreements and Commitments Abroad of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations (91st Cong., 2d Sess.):

Legal Status of Taiwan as Defined in Japanese Peace Treaty and Sino - Japanese Peace Treaty "Article 2 of the Japanese Peace treaty, signed on September 8, 1951 at San Francisco, provides that 'Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores.' The same language was used in Article 2 of the Treaty of Peace between China and Japan signed on April 28, 1952. In neither treaty did Japan cede this area to any particular entity. As Taiwan and the Pescadores are not covered by any existing international disposition, sovereignty over the area is an unsettled question subject to future international resolution . . . . "

More excerpts...