Victor YF.Wang的Blog

前一陣子，機器出問題，有些刊登過的文章不見了。現在補回。

這一篇是1951年英國倫敦泰晤士報(The Times)的一篇文章。裡面提到台灣最終的處置，交由當時島上六百萬居民來公民投票是可能的選擇。有趣的是提出這樣觀點的是來自英國聯合國協會的人員(United Nations Association)，一位是Somerest De Chair,另一個是Gilbert Murray。只可惜台灣人當時在蔣介石的控制之下，沒有自己的政府，根本無法與外界對話。

為何英國會在此時發言關注遠東局勢？我覺得前一年也就是1950年的韓戰局勢丕變有關。另外一個Context要注意的是裡面提到英國首相Eden針對台灣地位發言，其時間就在這篇文章之前不久。事實上英國很早就把承認新中國和台灣地位處置採脫勾處理。英國在承認中國的共產新政府時，並不願意承認台灣是中國的。甚至在紅毛城還有一個領事館，運作了很久才收起來。這是相當有趣的事情，英國這樣做一定有她的道理。只是我們太不用功不去研究箇中原委。我手上還有幾篇文獻，再找時間和大家分享。

這段文章的末了提到Mr. de Chair said he would not be surprised to see a movement emerge demanding “Formosa for the Formosans” and a demand for a plebiscite under the United Nations’ auspices.所謂Formosa for the Formosans正是所謂『台灣是台灣人的』。只是將近60年後，台灣人似乎對這句話的真義還在猶豫不決。至於plebiscite，有一半的人拒領票。老牌的民主國家只能開藥方給你，至於服不服用當然無法強迫。不過，當患者拒絕跟醫生配合時，延誤病情，通常死的是患者，不會是醫生吧！
(台灣內部一堆人對於台灣是誰的不在乎，但對於釣魚台是誰的又是軍艦又是海巡署，還真煞有其事。坐個船把島繞一圈就說那島是你的喔？！到底智商有沒有問題？)

全文如下↓

FUTURE OF FORMOSA
MR. SOMERSET DE CHAIR ON POSSIBLE PLEBISCITE

MR. SOMERSET DE CHAIR, M.P. a member of the national executive of the United Nations Association, opening a new branch of U.N.A. at Windsor yesterday, said that the future of Formosa must be decided eventually by the United Nations. Because the Cairo conference, at a time when China was fighting beside the democracies to resist totalitarian aggression, recognized China’s right to Formosa, it did not follow that the People’s Government of China was similarly entitled to sovereignty over the island. The six million inhabitants of Formosa included a large number of Malay stock, and their views should certainly be consulted before they were arbitrarily handed over to the Chinese Communists.

Dr. Gilbert Murray, O.M., president of the United Nations Association, had pointed out in a letter to The Times, which Mr. Eden quoted in the foreign affairs debate in the House of Commons, that the Cairo declaration did not mean that the mainland government of China had the indefeasible right to Formosa. The point was important because there was no point upon which America was more adamant than on the subject of Formosa. Mr. de Chair said he would not be surprised to see a movement emerge demanding “Formosa for the Formosans” and a demand for a plebiscite under the United Nations’ auspices.