1943 Cairo Declaration

The Cairo Declaration was the outcome of the Cairo Conference in Cairo, Egypt, on 27 November 1943. President Franklin Roosevelt of the United States, Prime Minister Winston Churchill of the United Kingdom, and Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek of the Republic of China were present. The declaration developed ideas from the 1941 Atlantic Charter, which was issued by the Allies of World War II to set goals for the post-war order. The Cairo Communiqué was broadcast through radio on 1 December 1943.

Text

Controversy as to Taiwan

The Cairo Declaration is cited in Clause Eight of the Potsdam Declaration, which is referred to by the Japanese Instrument of Surrender.
Both the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China have cited the Cairo Declaration as one of the bases for the One China principle that Taiwan and Penghu are part of Republic of China. However, some of the pro-independence advocates in Taiwan have not taken the same position on this matter, arguing instead that the Cairo Declaration was not binding, or gives the false impression that Taiwan and China should be unified like Germany or Vietnam.
Due to the Chinese Civil War that immediately broke out after WWII, it became unclear which Chinese government Taiwan should be returned to. The government of the United States considers the declaration a statement of intention and never formally implemented. In November 1950, the United States Department of State said that no formal act restoring sovereignty over Formosa and the Pescadores to China had yet occurred. Similarly, in February 1955, Winston Churchill stated that the Cairo Declaration "contained merely a statement of common purpose" and the question of Taiwan's future sovereignty was left undetermined by the Japanese peace treaty. British officials reiterated this viewpoint in May 1955.
In March 1961, then-Japanese Minister for Foreign Affairs responded that:
On the other hand, then-ROC president Ma Ying-jeou cited a series of instruments beginning with the Cairo Declaration and stated in 2014:

Controversy as to Korea

Many prominent Koreans in the Korean independence movement, including Kim Ku and Syngman Rhee, were initially delighted by the declaration, but later noticed and became infuriated by the phrase "in due course". They took it to be an affirmation of Allied intent to place Korea into a trusteeship, rather than granting it immediate independence. There was significant concern that the trusteeship could be indefinite or last decades, making Korea functionally again a colony under a great power.
The phrase "in due course" was not present in the first draft; it originally read "at the earliest possible moment after the downfall of Japan". The US suggested "at the proper moment", and finally the British "in due time". Exact motivations for these changes are unclear.