退台初期蒋介石与美国“共同防御条约”再探讨

Re-discussion on the Joint Defense Treaty between Chiang Kai-shek and the United States in the Early Days of Kuomintang Withdrawing to Taiwan

在加入或建立区域同盟的尝试受挫情况下,1954年春,台湾'外交部'将工作重心集中于与美国缔结安全条约方面。正式启动此项工作之前,台湾方面对可能产生的制约'反攻大陆'的负作用已有预期,并欲尽力规避。可惜强弱已定,台湾当局只能在有限范围内争取权益。为约束台湾,美国在换文中规定了对台湾使用武力与军事部署的'共同协议'权,军事部署一点带有明显的片面性质。台湾方面力争平等,甚至以共享冲绳美军调动权的要求挑战美国底线。美国不愿删除片面规定,台湾当局退而求其次,要求明文写入'外岛'补给保证,换文尽量保密。蒋介石与美国'共同防御条约'签订后,多位民主党高层提出质疑,认为该约在法理上认定台澎归属权属于中国。为予弥补,美参议院外委会提出'三项了解'作为保留条件。台澎归属权属于中国早已为历史事实与法理决定,不容任意解释。

Confronted with frustrations in its attempt to join or establish regional alliances,the Taiwan diplomatic service focused its efforts on the conclusion of the security treaty with the United States in Spring 1954.Before the official launch of this work,the Taiwan authorities had expected the possible negative effect on'counterattacking the mainland',and tried to avoid it.Unfortunately,with the limitation of strength,the Taiwan authorities could only fight for rights and interests within a limited scope.In order to constrain Taiwan,the United States claimed the right of'common agreement'on the use of force and military deployment by the Taiwan authorities.The regulation of military deployment had obvious one-sided nature.The Taiwan side strove for equality and even challenged the US bottom line by asking for sharing the rights of the Okinawa US military.The United States was reluctant to remove the one-sided rule.The Taiwan authorities conceded and made a minor request,that was,the plaintext was required to be written about the'offshore islands'supply guarantee and the exchange of documents was kept as confidential as possible.After the signing of the Joint Defense Treaty between Chiang Kai-shek and the United States,several senior Democratic Party members questioned that the treaty legally recognized the ownership of Taiwan and Penghu belonged to China.To make up for it,the US Senate Foreign Affairs Committee proposed three understandings as a retention condition.The ownership of Taiwan and Penghu belongs to China.It is decided by historical facts and jurisprudence,and cannot be arbitrarily explained.