In a recent development, the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) has explicitly refuted Beijing’s claims of “deliberate distortion” of World War II documents and stated that these documents do not determine Taiwan’s final political status. This has garnered international attention, with scholars suggesting that the U.S.’s move strategically supports Taiwan and counters the Chinese Communist Party’s narrative, reflecting the consistent U.S. policy of upholding the status quo in the Taiwan Strait and opposing Beijing’s attempts to squeeze Taiwan’s international space through legal and historical means.
According to a report by the Central News Agency on September 15th, the AIT responded to inquiries by stating that Beijing’s “deliberate distortion” of World War II era documents such as the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation, and the Treaty of San Francisco was an attempt to support its coercive actions against Taiwan.
The AIT spokesperson bluntly stated that Beijing’s narrative is completely wrong, emphasizing that “these documents do not determine Taiwan’s final political status.” A spokesperson for the U.S. State Department also confirmed to the Central News Agency that the U.S. will continue to support Taiwan under Chinese military, economic, information, legal, and diplomatic pressures, collaborating with international partners to maintain peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, and opposing any unilateral attempts to change the status quo, especially through force or coercion.
Richard Bush, former chairman of the AIT and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington D.C., expressed that this was the first time he had seen such specific wording, but it aligns with long-standing U.S. policy, which advocates for resolving cross-strait differences peacefully with the consent of the people of Taiwan.
Reuters pointed out that the AIT emphasized in an email statement that China’s claims are completely unfounded, as none of these documents have determined Taiwan’s final political status. The false legal narrative propagated by Beijing is part of a larger effort to isolate Taiwan from the international community and restrict other countries’ sovereignty choices in engaging with Taiwan.
In response, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, during its routine press conference on the 15th, criticized the AIT’s response as “distorting facts and confusing right and wrong,” claiming that “Taiwan’s return to China is an important part of the victory in World War II and the post-war international order.” He cited documents such as the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation, and the Japanese Instrument of Surrender, asserting that these documents clearly affirm China’s sovereignty over Taiwan.
Xiao Guangwei, spokesperson for the Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, responded on the 16th, stating that the international community is well aware that the Republic of China Taiwan and the People’s Republic of China exist on an equal footing and are not subordinate to each other. He thanked the U.S. for openly refuting China’s false narratives and demonstrating steadfast support for Taiwan’s international participation.
He emphasized that the government of the Republic of China (Taiwan) is the only legitimate government representing Taiwan, with both its executive and legislative branches elected by the people of Taiwan.
Wu Sezhi, Director of the China Research Center at a Taiwanese think tank, expressed to Dajiyuan that the Chinese Communist Party has long used UN Resolution 2758 as a major basis for claiming that Taiwan belongs to China, aiming to address the legitimacy issue of the People’s Republic of China replacing the Republic of China and assert sovereignty based on the historical narrative of the Republic of China taking over Taiwan after 1945.
Wu stated that the U.S.’s recent declaration specifically emphasizes China’s deliberate distortion of multiple international documents, including UN Resolution 2758, The Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation during World War II, as well as the Treaty of San Francisco after the war, clearly expressing the position that Taiwan’s status remains undecided.
Wu analyzed that the U.S. has long viewed the situation in the Taiwan Strait from the perspective of “Taiwan’s undetermined status.” This statement holds dual strategic significance: supporting Taiwan while countering the Chinese Communist Party’s global narrative.
Furthermore, he noted that there is a contradiction between the Chinese Communist Party’s official stance and reality. “The Chinese Communist Party believes that the Republic of China no longer exists, but in fact, the Republic of China continues to operate effectively in Taiwan.”
“By continuously distorting historical documents, the Chinese Communist Party aims to have its narrative accepted by the international community without opposition, making intervention in the Taiwan issue seem natural,” Wu stated, likening this tactic to Russia’s packaging of the invasion of Ukraine as a “military operation.”
In 2025, which marks both the “80th Anniversary of the End of World War II” and the “80th Anniversary of the Establishment of the United Nations,” Wu emphasized that China is expected to strengthen the “Recovery of Taiwan” narrative on October 25. The U.S.’s public stance at this juncture evidently reflects comprehensive strategic considerations.
On May 5th of this year, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Taiwan International Solidarity Act, explicitly stating that the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971 only addresses the issue of representation in the United Nations by China (or the Communist Party), and does not involve Taiwan’s sovereignty or representation rights.
Gong Xiangsheng, a researcher at the Taiwan Institute for National Defense and Security Studies, stated that the AIT’s statement is in line with this act, representing U.S. support for Taiwan’s expanded international space. He pointed out that the dispute over historical interpretation has shifted from the past “undetermined status of Taiwan” to a new stage, where Taiwan hopes to challenge existing interpretations of Resolution 2758 and seek representation in the United Nations and other international organizations.
Ye Yaoyuan, Professor of International Studies at the University of St. Thomas, analyzed from a historical perspective, stating that the Cairo Declaration, signed at the end of World War II by Chiang Kai-shek, Roosevelt, and Churchill, clearly states that the land taken by Japan from the Chinese should be returned to the “Republic of China,” including Taiwan.
Ye emphasized that the Declaration was not a formal treaty but a political statement, therefore lacking legal force and existing only as an oral commitment. The Chinese Communist Party, however, positions itself as the “legitimate heir of China,” deliberately overlooking the clear mention of the “Republic of China” in the Declaration and distorting the significance of “returning to the Chinese” as “returning to the Chinese Communist Party.”
Ye noted that since establishing diplomatic ties with Beijing in 1979, the U.S. no longer formally recognizes the Republic of China, but has maintained a “One China Policy” rather than a “One China Principle,” merely acknowledging China’s claims without accepting its sovereignty over Taiwan.
He believed that the AIT’s statement is more symbolic clarification, with the core of U.S. policy remaining unchanged, calming domestic tensions amid increasing skepticism in Taiwan and reiterating that the U.S. will not recognize Beijing’s legal claims.
At this moment, right before China’s National Day and Taiwan’s Double Tenth Day, Wu Sezhi assessed that Beijing may engage in military exercises or bolster international propaganda to highlight the “Recovery of Taiwan” narrative.
Facing this situation, he recommended that Taiwan unify its sovereignty discourse internally, consolidate domestic consensus, and align with the U.S. position in foreign strategies, carefully observing international reactions to the AIT’s historical statements and formulating strategic directions that align with national interests and sovereignty concepts.
Wu further pointed out that the U.S.’s declaration may lead to a “bandwagon effect” among democratic countries, expanding support for Taiwan, which could have a positive impact on Taiwan’s efforts to expand its international space, but Taiwan should evaluate the situation cautiously to avoid it spiraling out of control.
Eighty years after the end of World War II, from the Cairo Declaration to United Nations Resolution 2758, the interpretation of historical documents has become a battleground for narratives between the U.S., China, and Taiwan.
Scholars generally agree that the rare public stance taken by the American Institute in Taiwan is not only a rebuttal to Beijing’s distorted historical narratives but also reaffirms its support for the current situation in the Taiwan Strait.