‘포모사(Formosa)’와 ‘대만(臺灣)’ 사이

Abstract

Ever since the ownership of Mainland China was shifted to the Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China in October, 1949, the question, ‘who is the representative of China?’ and the jurisdiction of Taiwan that was liberated from the control of Japan emerged as an important issue in the international political arena. According to the Cairo Declaration released in 1943, Taiwan should have been returned to China, but something unexpected came up in the postwar period, that is, the coexistence of two Chinas. One China in Mainland China (People’s Republic of China) argued that Taiwan should belong to the China, while the other China in Taiwan (Republic of China) argued that the China promised by the Cairo Declaration was itself. The argument was basically based on the premise that Taiwan is owned by China, and they are still at odds over this. In the meantime, many Taiwanese people have raised a question about the view that their identity is tied to China. Formosa, the English term that had been used to refer to Taiwan until the mid-20th century, started to be replaced at some point. The origin of Taiwan was discussed based on its name in the body of this study, which is very closely related to its relationship with China that Taiwanese people themselves raise a question about today. Taiwan has experienced changes in government and culture caused by various external forces over the past four hundred years, and in the midst of them various ethnic groups have formed communities. In the process, Taiwanese people who had to go through a long-lasting process of convergence both politically and culturally started to view the question, ‘who am I and where am I?’ as an international issue beyond their sole issue. For this reason, how they were called and named is the most important and real problem to Taiwanese people to define their identity, and at the same time would always be the crux that is difficult to solve to them. This study reviewed and discussed things that were overlooked in earlier studies on the understanding of the ‘name’ of Taiwan based on the findings of earlier studies. This is a part of the issue of searching for the history of Taiwan. In particular, ‘the issue of naming’ reviewed in this study would contribute to the understanding of the identity of Taiwan and their conflicts with China. Implications of this study also exist here.