A long-standing dispute with Japan over a fishing zone has reached a new climax, with reports of Taiwanese fishing boats being forcibly expelled from the disputed area. This is not the first such incident. Similar disagreements with other countries, such as the Philippines, have also occurred in the past. Unfortunately, the government's handling of such disputes has been weakened by the country's unique international status.
The disputed fishing zone in the Yellow Sea and East China Sea is in an area which Taiwan, Japan and China each claim to be within their 370km exclusive economic zones. Under normal circumstances, the three countries would have to engage in trilateral negotiations to resolve their overlapping claims. But Japan and China have negotiated a bilateral fishing pact, leaving Taiwan out in the cold.
The Sino-Japanese fishery pact took effect last June. In the pact, the two countries agreed that the disputed water will be deemed "intermediate water," in which the vessels of other countries are prohibited and for which the vessels of both countries will have to seek permission from the other before entry.
The agreement is not binding on Taiwan, which is an independent sovereign country. China has no right to negotiate on Taipei's behalf. Since bilateral negotiations between Japan and Taiwan are continuing -- even though the last round was in August 2001 -- the status quo between the two nations should be maintained. This means that Taiwanese fishermen should be allowed to fish in the disputed area. After all, putting aside the issue of overlapping economic zones, the area is a traditional fishing ground for Taiwanese fishermen.
It was totally inappropriate for Japan's coast guard to intercept Taiwanese fishing boats and to expel these vessels by firing water cannons and shooting paint bombs.
It is high time that the government took a firmer stand in such disputes. But the government's dilemma in handling the dispute is complicated by several factors. One is that many Taiwanese have traditionally felt a special tie to Japan. The second is that, pragmatically, Taipei cannot substitute diplomatic sanctions and pressure with economic ones -- the way it can with countries such as Thailand or Indonesia. After all, this country is still economically dependent upon Japan.
The same helplessness has long been reflected in the government's handling of its sovereignty dispute over the Tiaoyutai Islands.
The government must break this pattern of meekness and lose its inferiority complex over the country's international status. Begin to make loud noise, and take on a firm attitude in demanding amicable and fair resolution of such disputes. Insist on re-initiating bilateral negotiations with Japan to clearly map out Taiwan's fishing zones. Taiwanese fishermen have threatened to stand up to the Japanese coast guard themselves if they don't see any concrete action by the government. If that were to happen, the dispute would quickly escalate out of control.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS