Based upon the principles of first discovery and effective occupation of terra nullius, or land belonging to no one, the Diaoyutai (釣魚台) islands unquestionably belong to Japan. If the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) cites history and locale as proof of Taiwan’s sovereignty over the Diaoyutais, then the Taiwanese government could lose its firm footing in arguing for sovereignty over the island of Taiwan itself and of the Spratly Islands (南沙群島) in the South China Sea.
It is confounding to see that while the government of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) seems to be indifferent to safeguarding sovereignty over the island of Taiwan, it does not hesitate to threaten violence against an ally over an uninhabited island that does not belong to Taiwan in the first place.
The intense criticism of the Ma government’s Diaoyutai policy should be considered on two levels. The criticism from KMT members is earnest: They had previously, for inexplicable reasons, obeyed the KMT’s urging and participated in youth movements to “save the Diaoyutais,” believing that the islands are Chinese territory. This, combined with anti-Japanese conditioning, naturally makes their blood boil at the current controversy.
Criticism from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), however, comes from the preconditioning that China is the perceived enemy. The DPP holds friendly relations between Japan and Taiwan in higher regard and is more practical in regard to the Diaoyutai issue. Their criticism of the Ma government’s cowardly behavior was not meant to provoke a tough response from the government, but to force it to admit that its previously impractical policy on the Diaoyutai issue was a mistake.
Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) obviously does not make this distinction. Under criticism from both the pan-blue and pan-green camps, Liu rashly recalled Koh Se-kai (�?�), the Taiwanese representative to Japan. Some have also used the incident to shame Koh and force him to resign. Under fire from legislators, Liu has even declared that war would not be ruled out as a last resort.
One must realize that recognizing a past mistake and being criticized for a mistake are incentives for self-correction — not an encouragement to stubbornly stick to a policy that hurts the nation. The Ma administration should courageously admit that its previous incitement of foolish bravado to protect the Diaoyutais was a mistake — instead of turning around and challenging a major ally to war.
Taiwan and Japan have developed very good relations in the last eight years and their close cooperation on security issues has obviously been a deterrent to China. However, this strategy seems to have changed since the KMT assumed power. Pan-blue politicians have increasingly traveled to China and Taiwan’s main perceived enemy no longer seems to be China.
If so, shouldn’t the national strategy, drawn in accordance with the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between Japan and the US, be adjusted? The KMT should be proactive in explaining the situation so the public can make a decision. If the KMT still values the treaty, taking a tough stance on such a minor issue as the Diaoyutais is unwise. If it does not need the treaty, then it should explain to the public its new national defense strategy.
The current confusion over Diaoyutais can only mean two things: Either the Ma government wants to change Taiwan’s national defense strategy on the sly, or Liu was caught unaware and has no stance on Asia-Pacific military strategy. Judging by the government’s recent decisions on hiking gas and electricity prices, the latter possibility seems more likely.
Li To-tzu is a doctoral student at Tsing Hua University’s Institute of Sociology.
TRANSLATED BY ANGELA HONG
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS