China has been making endless claims that Taiwan has been a part of Chinese territory since ancient times and Taiwanese have been using ancient and vaguely worded Chinese documents to try and prove that the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) belong to Taiwan.
While these documents may be interesting, they are devoid of meaning in terms of international law.
The sovereignty issues surrounding the Diaoyutais have nothing to do with researching ancient documents; they involve international treaties.
Before the Treaty of Shimonoseki was signed in 1895, Japan had already incorporated the Diaoyutais into its territory. In terms of the territories handed over to Japan in this treaty, the latitude and longitude of the Pescadores Group were clearly stated, while, as far as Taiwan goes, it only specified “the island of Formosa, together with all islands appertaining or belonging to the said island of Formosa.”
Article 2, (b) of the Treaty of San Francisco states: “Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores.” It did not, however, list any other appertaining islands or any latitude and longitude and therefore this cannot be used to say that Japan gave up the Diaoyutai Islands.
Instead, for the Diaoyutais, the treaty stated that, “Japan will concur in any proposal of the United States to the United Nations to place under its trusteeship system, with the United States as the sole administering authority, Nansei Shoto south of 29 degrees north latitude (including the Ryukyu Islands and the Daito Islands), Nanpo Shoto south of Sofu Gan (including the Bonin Islands, Rosario Island and the Volcano Islands) and Parece Vela and Marcus Island.”
In 1953, the US civil administration of the Ryukyu Islands announced that the territory of the Ryukyus would include all islands, atolls and rocks between 28 degrees north latitude, 124 degrees 40 minutes east longitude and 240 degrees north latitude, 122 degrees east longitude.
In negotiations with the US in 1970, the then-Republic of China ambassador to the US, Chow Shu-kai (周書楷) admitted that this clearly defined latitude and longitude placed the Diaoyutais within the area under US trusteeship.
According to the Treaty of San Francisco, Japan did not renounce the Nansei Shoto and therefore the US admitted that Japan still has residual sovereignty over these areas.
In 1972 at the end of their entrustment, they were returned to Japan and the US merely stated that it did not hold any position on sovereignty disputes over the region before the Treaty of San Francisco was in existence.
However, before the Treaty of San Francisco, there were no disputes over the sovereignty of the Diaoyutai Islands.
To now rely on archaic Chinese documents to proclaim sovereignty over the Diaoyutais is as ludicrous as claiming that because Taiwan has temples devoted to the God of War, Guangong (關公), Guangong once ruled Taiwan.
James Wang is a media commentator.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS