Talk:Mongolia–Taiwan relations

Comments

this page seems POV, especially the second to last paragraph —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.234.79 (talk) 07:22, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

which POV, exactly? Yaan (talk) 11:49, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Irredentist map

I had a hard time removing this "map" from "China" article 2 years ago. Now I see it has penetrated dozens of articles in Wikipedia. Disgusting, disgusting and again disgusting. Gantuya eng (talk) 15:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

What irredentism? One would have to be quite paranoid to imagine that any There is clearly no person in Taiwan seriously lies awake at night with dreams of invading Mongolia and taking it over. The problem is that the Republic of China government cannot recognise territorial changes which have occurred in the real world, because of the way their constitution is written. The map illustrates that fact. cab (talk) 16:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Stop personal attack, cab !!!

Gantuya eng (talk) 16:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Now I don't know what is meant by personal attack, but I think the ROC claims (or dreams) are quite well-sourced and relevant for this article. I actually am a bit confused about what their current state is when it comes to Mongolia, though, given those 2002 comments from the foreign ministry and the big Taiwan office in UB. Yaan (talk) 16:56, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Gantuya eng, I struck out the part of my comment I think you are referring to and replaced it with the words in italics. I do not want to insult you. But there is no need to call the usage of this map "disgusting, disgusting, and again disgusting" (and imply insulting things about the editors who insert it in articles); like Yaan said, the image neutrally illustrates a set of territorial claims by the Republic of China (RoC) government. There's no article using the map to imply something non-neutral like "Mongolia is not really an independent country". If you see such a case, we can all work together to fix it. cab (talk) 17:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

It's probably the map that is disgusting. I personally find it rather ridiculous, though that probably depends of who uses it with which intent. Yaan (talk) 17:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Mongolia isn't the only independent country that is subject to an irredentist claims. The map also shows China as part of the Republic of China, and China is also no longer controlled by the ROC. But again, the map shows the claimed area, not the actual limits of the country. Readin (talk) 18:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

There is a big difference here: the ROC recognizes that China is an independent country, it just does not recognize the current government. The ROC and the PRC are just two rival Chinese governments, or at least both sides still say so. This is not irredentism IMHO. In the case of Mongolia, the ROC allegedly does not recognize that there is a country of that name. Yaan (talk) 11:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

The article says the ROC recognized Mongolia in 1945. What gives?--80.26.120.40 (talk) 22:58, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

In light of this article carrying everyone's favorite map; and addressing the historic subject, Which two polar entities dissolved each other's stake in the Republic of China: I suggest a link to Two_Chinas in the "See Also" section. 173.14.238.113 (talk) 15:48, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

ROC's claim is "formal", not practical

I undid the removal of the word "formally" from the statement about Taiwan considering Mongolia part of its territory. Taiwan's ROC Constitution does indeed claim Mongolia, and that has not been changed. Keeping the word "formal" is correct. Perhaps better would be to say that Taiwan's claim to Mongolia is written in its constitution and then also not the statement by the foreign minister. Readin (talk) 18:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Here is a guy who claims that the ROC's constitution does not "indeed claim Mongolia", though ("Given that the Constitution's definition of "existing national boundaries" is vague, it is overly subjective to say with certainty that the boundaries of the ROC encompass "Outer Mongolia." It will take an amendment to the Constitution by the Legislative Yuan or interpretation of it by the Judicial Yuan to obtain an unequivocal answer."). Of course we can write "some people claim the ROC claims", or that "some consider the foreign ministry's statement unconstitutional", but unless there is a court ruling or some other higher authority who sais it is, it seems a bit like OR to claim that the ROC constitution "does indeed claim Mongolia". We can see the constitution does mention Mongolian banners and leagues (?) in three articles, but in the same articles it also mentions Chinese citizens residing abroad - obviously "abroad" is not part of the ROC, either? Yaan (talk) 11:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

That said, also the term "Mongolian leagues and banners" in the english translation is not as self-explaining as it looks at first. Even today the People's Republic of China has three leagues plus a number of banners, most of which could reasonably be called "Mongol". This makes this whole claim about a "constitutional" claim over Outer Mongolia even more questionable. Yaan (talk) 14:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Test

The Republic of china, mongolia and the united nations

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,855394,00.html

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,935733,00.html

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,866624,00.html

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,807995,00.html

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,897880,00.html

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,938307,00.html

Rajmaan (talk) 04:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Belize–Republic of China relations which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:45, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Territory

Does the ROC recognize Mongolia's sovereignty over all the territory it administers or only the former area of Outer Mongolia? In other words, does the ROC still claim as part of Mainland China any portion of the territory now controlled by Mongolia? --Lasunncty (talk) 05:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mongolia–Taiwan relations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080214091303/http://www.gio.gov.tw:80/info/94roc/context/Ch01/010202.htm to http://www.gio.gov.tw/info/94roc/context/Ch01/010202.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:37, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mongolia–Taiwan relations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110430041810/http://taiwanreview.nat.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=798&CtNode=128 to http://taiwanreview.nat.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=798&CtNode=128
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gio.gov.tw/info/94roc/context/Ch01/010202.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:17, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Updated the first link. --Lasunncty (talk) 09:21, 6 February 2018 (UTC)