|Area||Treaty||Came into force||End of USMG||USMG supplanted by|
|California||Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, Art. 5||July 4, 1848||Dec. 20, 1849||civil government for California (USA)|
|Puerto Rico||Treaty of Paris, Art. 2||April 11, 1899||May 1, 1900||civil government for Puerto Rico (USA)|
|Philippines||Treaty of Paris, Art. 3||April 11, 1899||July 4, 1901||civil government for Philippines (USA)|
|Guam||Treaty of Paris, Art. 2||April 11, 1899||July 1, 1950||civil government for Guam (USA)|
|Cuba||Treaty of Paris, Art. 1||April 11, 1899||May 20, 1902||civil government for Cuba (Republic of Cuba)|
|Ryukyus||SFPT, Art. 3||April 28, 1952||May 15, 1972||civil government for Ryukyus (Japan)|
|Taiwan||SFPT, Art. 2b||April 28, 1952|
Notes: (1) With the end of USMG jurisdiction in California, Puerto Rico, Philippines, Guam, Cuba, and the Ryukyus, each has become either (a) a sovereign nation, or (b) "part" of another sovereign nation. Significantly, each area has a fully functioning "civil government." Taiwan is clearly the exception.
(2) From the late 1920's to Dec. 31, 1978, the United States recognized the Republic of China as the sole legal government of China. Importantly however, under the SFPT, the Republic of China is not recognized as the legal government of Taiwan. The US political branches have never recognized the ROC as exercising sovereignty over Taiwan, only "effective territorial control."
(3) Beginning with the Truman Statement of June 27, 1950, (or arguably earlier) the US position on the Taiwan status question has been "undetermined." As clarified by the Truman Statement and the SFPT, the United States has never recognized the forcible incorporation of Taiwan into China.
(4) To explain this in more detail, none of the Allies recognized any transfer of the sovereignty of Taiwan to the Republic of China (ROC) on the date of Oct. 25, 1945, (or any date thereafter). Hence, there was no "Taiwan Retrocession Day," as announced by the Chinese Nationalists (KMT-ROC).
(5) In the post-war SFPT of 1952, Taiwan was not awarded to China (either the ROC or the PRC).
(6) The Mutual Defense Treaty of 1955 did not change the US position on the Taiwan sovereignty question either. In conjunction with the ratification of the MDT, a report issued Feb. 8, 1955 by the US Senate's Committee on Foreign Relations specified: "It is the view of the committee that the coming into force of the present treaty will not modify or affect the existing legal status of Formosa and the Pescadores."
(7) In the 1972 Shanghai Communique, the United States only "acknowledged" the PRC position on the Taiwan status question. However, in President Reagan's Six Assurances of July 1982, it was clearly stated that the United States would not formally recognize PRC claims over Taiwan or otherwise change its position regarding sovereignty over Taiwan.
(8) The Congressional Research Service (CRS) Report for Congress entitled China/Taiwan: Evolution of the "One China" Policy was released on July 9, 2007. In the Summary at the beginning of that report the following points were made --
(1) The United States did not explicitly state the sovereign status of Taiwan in the three US-PRC Joint Communiques of 1972, 1979, and 1982.
(9) Moreover, on Aug. 30, 2007 Dennis Wilder, National Security Council (NSC) Senior Director for Asian Affairs said: "Taiwan, or the Republic of China, is not at this point a state in the international community. The position of the United States government is that the ROC -- Republic of China -- is an issue undecided, and it has been left undecided, as you know, for many, many years."