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
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,