@article {6144,
	title = {The Taiwan Problem: Two China or One China},
	journal = {Krytyka Prawa. Niezale{\.z}ne studia nad prawem},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2015},
	month = {3/2015},
	pages = {497{\textendash}523},
	abstract = {The difficult history of Taiwan has preoccupied politicians and scholars for the better part of the last century and is unlikely to be unraveled in the near future. The main issue is the following: are there two separate Chinas or one and if so who has the right to represent China? Both the Taiwanese and Peking governments have consistently adhered the One China theory and both claim the right to represent the country. Many legal concepts were devised in support of either party, including that Taiwan had become res nullius after Japan{\textquoteright}s unconditional surrender, or a condominium of the Allied Powers. Several major theories are analysed in depth, based on the interpretation of public international law such as the Peace Treaty of San Francisco, the Treaty of Taipei and the Shimonoseki Peace Treaty. Parallels are drawn between the attempts to decide the legal status of Taiwan and akin attempts performed by some European territories such as bringing Alsace-Loraine in the fold of France. The paper aims mainly at exploring various concepts of Taiwan{\textquoteright}s status according to international law. This investigation takes into account the international and the domestic situation.},
	issn = {2080-1084},
	doi = {10.7206/kp.2080-1084.95}
}
