三、決定戰(zhàn)后日本領(lǐng)土范圍的是《開(kāi)羅宣言》與《波茨坦公告》
III. Cairo Declaration and Potsdam Proclamation define the territory of Japan after World War II

日本外務(wù)省主張，戰(zhàn)后日本領(lǐng)土范圍由1952年生效的《舊金山和約》決定，而《開(kāi)羅宣言》和《波茨坦公告》則“不能對(duì)日本的領(lǐng)土處理形成最終的法律效果”。
Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs holds that its territorial scope is determined by the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1952, and that the Cairo Declaration and Potsdam Proclamation cannot place legal restrictions on Japan’s territory.

這是日本政府對(duì)戰(zhàn)后國(guó)際法及國(guó)際秩序的公然否定，推翻了1945年日本政府在投降書(shū)中所作承諾，性質(zhì)惡劣。1951年《舊金山和約》排除中華人民共和國(guó)政府參與，從未得到新中國(guó)政府的承認(rèn)。中國(guó)的領(lǐng)土主權(quán)當(dāng)然不能由美日兩國(guó)的任何條約和協(xié)定來(lái)決定。同年9月18日，時(shí)任中國(guó)外長(zhǎng)周恩來(lái)發(fā)表聲明表示：“美國(guó)政府在舊金山會(huì)議中強(qiáng)制簽訂的沒(méi)有中華人民共和國(guó)參加的對(duì)日單獨(dú)和約，……中央人民政府認(rèn)為是非法的，無(wú)效的，因而是絕對(duì)不能承認(rèn)的。”
This is a public denial of international law, which negates the promises Japan made in its formal document of surrender in 1945. In the meantime, the People’s Republic of China was not a part of and never recognized the San Francisco Peace Treaty signed in 1951. China’s sovereignty cannot be determined by a treaty between Japan and the U.S. On Sept. 18, 1951, then Chinese Foreign Minister Zhou Enlai stated that China considers the treaty illegal and void, as it failed to involve China. For that reason, China will never acknowledge it.

針對(duì)1971年美日達(dá)成“歸還沖繩協(xié)定”擅自將釣魚(yú)島劃入歸還日本的區(qū)域，中國(guó)外交部于同年12月30日發(fā)表聲明譴責(zé)：這是對(duì)中國(guó)領(lǐng)土主權(quán)的明目張膽的侵犯。中國(guó)人民絕對(duì)不能容忍。中國(guó)政府表示，將釣魚(yú)島納入“歸還區(qū)域”完全是非法的。更何況，即便是《舊金山和約》第三條，其中也根本沒(méi)有提及釣魚(yú)島或所謂“尖閣諸島”。
In 1971, Japan and the U.S. signed the Okinawa Reversion Agreement, which provided that any and all powers of administration over the Ryukyu Islands and Diaoyu Island would be “returned” to Japan. On December 30, 1971, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement pointing out that the agreement was a flagrant violation of China’s sovereignty and would never be tolerated by the Chinese people.“It is completely illegal for the government of the U.S. and Japan to include China’s Diaoyu Island as part of the territories to be returned to Japan in the Okinawa Reversion Agreement,” read a statement from the Chinese government.In addition, Diaoyu Island was never even mentioned in Article 3 of the San Francisco Peace Treaty.

日本作為第二次世界大戰(zhàn)的加害國(guó)、戰(zhàn)敗國(guó)，在戰(zhàn)后領(lǐng)土劃分問(wèn)題上承諾遵守的政治文件和國(guó)際法規(guī)約如下：1972年9月《中日聯(lián)合聲明》第三條規(guī)定：“中華人民共和國(guó)重申：臺(tái)灣是中華人民共和國(guó)領(lǐng)土不可分割的一部分。日本國(guó)政府充分理解和尊重中國(guó)政府的這一立場(chǎng)，并堅(jiān)持遵循波茨坦公告第八條的立場(chǎng)?！?978年8月締結(jié)的《中日和平友好條約》規(guī)定，“聯(lián)合聲明所表明的各項(xiàng)原則應(yīng)予嚴(yán)格遵守”。1945年7月《波茨坦公告》第八條規(guī)定：“開(kāi)羅宣言之條件必將實(shí)施，而日本之主權(quán)必將限于本州、北海道、九州、四國(guó)及吾人所決定其他小島之內(nèi)?！?943年12月《開(kāi)羅宣言》規(guī)定：“日本所竊取于中國(guó)之領(lǐng)土，例如東北四省、臺(tái)灣、澎湖群島等，歸還中華民國(guó)?！毙枰赋龅氖?，《開(kāi)羅宣言》的日文版表述為，日本必須把“從清國(guó)人竊占的一切地域歸還中華民國(guó)”。即，無(wú)論是《馬關(guān)條約》之前還是《馬關(guān)條約》之后日本竊占的中國(guó)領(lǐng)土，都必須遵守《波茨坦公告》和《開(kāi)羅宣言》歸還中國(guó)。
After its defeat in World War II, Japan promised to obey the following political documents and regulations regarding territory: According to Article 3 of the China-Japan Joint Communiqué signed in September 1972, the government of the People’s Republic of China reiterates that Taiwan is an inalienable part of the territory of the People’s Republic of China. The government of Japan fully understands and respects this stand of the government of the People’s Republic of China, and it firmly maintains its stand under Article 8 of the Potsdam Proclamation.Also, based on the Treaty of Peace and Friendship between China and Japan in August 1978, the principles set out in the Joint Communiqué had to be strictly observed.Article 8 of the Potsdam Proclamation stipulated that the terms of the Cairo Declaration be carried out and Japanese sovereignty limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and other such minor islands as later determined.The Cairo Declaration, signed in 1943, required that all the territories Japan stole from China, such as Manchuria, Formosa and the Pescadores Islands, be restored to the Republic of China.It should be noted that in the Japanese version of the Cairo Declaration, it is stipulated that Japan has to return all the territories stolen from the Qing court to the Republic of China, which means all the territories Japan stole from China before and after the signing of the Treaty of Shimonoseki.

這是因?yàn)椋?945年8月15日，日本天皇發(fā)表《終戰(zhàn)詔書(shū)》表示：“朕已命帝國(guó)政府通告美、英、中、蘇四國(guó)，接受其聯(lián)合公告?！蓖?月2日，日本政府簽署的《日本投降書(shū)》承諾：“余等為天皇、日本國(guó)政府及其后繼者承允忠實(shí)履行波茨坦宣言之條款……”
The Imperial Rescript on the Termination of the War, which was announced by the emperor of Japan on Aug. 15, 1945, ordered the Japanese government to inform the U.S., Great Britain, China and the Soviet Union that it accepted their joint declaration.On Sept. 2 of the same year, the Japanese surrender document was signed, in which Japan promised that “we, acting by command of and on behalf of the Emperor of Japan, the Japanese government and its successors will faithfully implement the terms of the Potsdam Proclamation.”

然而，如今的日本政府“后繼者”不僅沒(méi)有忠實(shí)履行《波茨坦公告》和遵守《中日聯(lián)合聲明》《中日和平友好條約》，反而企圖以美日為主締結(jié)的《舊金山和約》取而代之，并強(qiáng)加于中國(guó)等戰(zhàn)勝國(guó)和并未參與該和約的國(guó)家，這不是公然違反戰(zhàn)后國(guó)際法和國(guó)際秩序、自食其言又是什么？
However, the successors of the Japanese government did not faithfully implement the terms of Potsdam Proclamation, nor did they abide by the China-Japan Joint Communiqué and Treaty of Peace and Friendship between China and Japan. Instead, the successors tried to replace those agreements with the San Francisco Peace Treaty, signed only by the U.S. and Japan.If that’s not a violation of international law and order, what is?

（作者為清華大學(xué)國(guó)際關(guān)系研究院教授）
(The author is a professor from the Institute of International Relations at Tsinghua University.)?