2019年7月28日 星期日

盧主義 Jay Tsu-Yi Loo(筆名:李天福)The China Impasse—A Formosan View

208. The China Impasse—A Formosan View《中國死巷—台灣人的觀點》by 盧主義(筆名 李天福) / 第一篇台獨文章刊登在Foreign Affairs / 1958/04

----
美國台灣獨立運動的開端:The Formosan's Free Formosa,3F. 陳以德、盧主義楊東傑等人是少數在1950年代即赴美求學的台灣留學生,三人先後來到費城,同樣受到更早期就到費城的林榮勳的幫助,四人常聚在一起,討論台灣問題,更進而組織 ...
Jay Tsu-Yi Loo(筆名:李天福). 北美洲台獨運動先驅與理論家,台南市人,1948長榮中學出中部畢業,1951台南一中高中部畢業,考入台大醫學院‧出國就讀Macalester College, Minnesota,1956–56 Temple University Medical School,1956–57 專攻 ...
2015/03/14 - 盧主義與「3F」的故事─. 楊遠薰. 已是逾半世紀前的往事,但盧主義 (Jay Loo)提起初抵費城的第一個中秋節,總覺往事彷若歷歷在眼前。 「那日,在阿賓頓(Abington)醫院服務的楊東傑醫師來看我。」他回憶說:「他帶我到城西,與 ...
---

赴美國費城拜訪盧主義

2005-01-26 06:00
■陳儀深
盧主義於一九三二年出生於台南,一九五一年放棄剛考上的台大醫科,直接到美國明尼蘇達大學留學,一九五五年轉入費城的Temple大學醫學院,一九五六年一月即與林榮勳、陳以德、林錫湖、楊東傑等所謂「費城五傑」成立「台灣人的自由台灣」(Formosans' Free Formosa),簡稱3F,打開北美洲台灣獨立運動的序幕。
一九五六年廖文毅在東京成立「台灣共和國臨時政府」,同年盧主義應廖文毅的要求,向聯合國提出「託管台灣」然後公投的請願書,3F因而受到FBI的調查。熱心探索台灣前途的盧主義,一九五六年改往明尼蘇達州立大學攻讀政治,第二年十二月畢業時,獲得該校該年度畢業論文獎第一名,一九五八年盧主義在著名的《外交事務季刊Foreign Affairs》發表台獨論文,就是由畢業論文改寫而來。
3F在一九五八年一月一日改名為「台灣獨立聯盟」,盧主義被推選為主席,直到一九六○年十月離開組織生活為止,他認真撰寫《通訊》文章,積極聯絡各地有志推動運動,可惜此後因為人事糾紛以及家庭因素,轉入一段消沈避世的生活,也因而成為「通過十級考試」具有完整資格的精算師。費城五傑之一的陳以德則在一九六六年首度公開的「全美台灣獨立聯盟」擔任第一屆主席,可以看作十年前3F成立以來的傳承不斷。一九九○年代盧主義恢復組織生活,分別在「台灣人公共事務會」(FAPA)以及台獨聯盟擔任重要職務。
這次個人為採集口述歷史,專程飛往費城北邊的小鎮Lansdale拜訪盧先生夫婦,適逢(據說是)十年來最冷的天氣,在冰天雪地當中談論戰後半世紀的台灣情事以及他個人的心路歷程。台大外文系畢業的盧太太不但一路相伴,自己在電腦公司有一份安定的工作,而且目前也擔任FAPA賓州分會的會長,夫婦堪稱台美人奮鬥成功的典範。盧先生多年來致力於台、美、中關係的研究,在Taipei Times以筆名李天福(Li Thian-hok)發表的專欄文章無數,由於他充分瞭解美國人的想法,所以對台灣社會之不重視國防與心防、唯利是圖赴中國投資、缺乏對台美關係惡化的警覺,而感到憂心;同時對泛藍陣營面臨國家危機卻做「事不干己的誇大」感到痛心。他建議台灣領導人對美國政府應該「措詞要禮貌」,但是方向要堅定。
最後,盧主義認為制憲、正名雖然是終極的目標,但是條件尚待充實,目前迫切的是生存問題。因為他對美國政界學界孰為藍隊、孰為紅隊動向熟諳,他已經為著台灣安全問題,僕僕風塵於費城與華府之間,默默替台灣政府從事遊說工作。盧先生寶刀未老,真是台灣人寶貴的資產。(作者陳儀深╱中研院近史所副研究員、台灣北社副社長)

----
The China Impasse
A Formosan View
By Lí Thian-Hok April 1958



Chiang Kai-shek in full uniform, 1940.Wikimedia Commons


THE present tacit moratorium on the Formosan problem does not give hope that the question will simply resolve itself by the passage of time; it does provide an opportunity to ponder a solution of one of the major foreign policy dilemmas facing the United States. Before pressure to admit Communist China to the United Nations becomes irresistible, the United States should relieve itself of the anomaly of supporting a government which is held to be sovereign where it exerts no authority and which lacks sovereignty where it does.

For it must be remembered that the United States holds the legal status of Formosa to be in abeyance. It maintains that neither the Cairo Declaration nor the Peace Treaty with Japan has operated to make Formosa and the Pescadores formally part of China. To endorse the Chinese claim of sovereignty over Formosa was thought unwise, presumably because to do so would automatically link the question with that of representation of the two rival Chinese régimes, and thereby give legitimate title to whichever régime was victorious in the civil strife.

Both Chinese Governments, of course, claim Formosa and the Pescadores as Chinese soil on the basis of ancient historical connection, the predominantly "Chinese" ethnic origin of the population, and the Cairo Declaration, which stipulated that "Formosa and the Pescadores shall be restored to the Republic of China." As a result, the Nationalists are mistrustful of the United States and the Communists are enraged. The United States has also been placed on the defensive in the war of propaganda. For if Formosa is Chinese territory, then disputes between the People's Republic of China and Chiang Kai-shek groups in Taiwan represent a civil war and any foreign attempt to obstruct the liberation constitutes intervention in China's domestic affair.

But what if Formosa is not Chinese territory? It has wisely been said that nationality is what a people think it is, and Formosans think of themselves as quite distinct from the Chinese. Far from

This article is a part of our premium archives.



沒有留言:

網誌存檔