Taiwan and Japan on Wednesday concluded their second round of meetings under the Taiwan-Japan Maritime Affairs Cooperation Dialogue Mechanism. Efforts seem to have been made after the inking of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on maritime emergency rescue operations, but is the annual dialogue really being used to tackle core issues, or is it simply a formality?
The dialogue mechanism was created on May 23 last year to resolve the two sides’ divided and unbending stances on the thorny Okinotori Atoll issue.
It was established only three days after President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration — which is considered more Japan-leaning than the previous Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government — was inaugurated, which shows how much of an impediment Okinotori has been to Taipei-Tokyo ties.
Near the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) second presidential term, relations between Taiwan and Japan reached a new level of hostility after the Japan Coast Guard’s seizure in April last year of a Taiwanese fishing boat operating about 150 nautical miles (277.8km) east-southeast of Okinotori.
Japan refused to release the boat until the Ministry of Foreign Affairs paid a ¥6 million (US$52,860 at the current exchange rate) so-called deposit to secure its return. The demand for what the public deemed a “ransom” galvanized an outcry in Taiwan and a strong response from Ma’s administration.
Japan insists it is entitled to a 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone around Okinotori, which it says is an island, despite its total area being less than 10m2.
The Ma administration publicly declared Okinotori to be a rock and instructed government agencies at all levels to refer it as such in official documents.
There is no international consensus on the issue.
After taking office, the Tsai administration toned down the government’s official stance and pledged not to take a legal position on the atoll’s classification until the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf delivers a ruling, but it urged Japan to respect the rights of Taiwan and other nations to fish and freely navigate the area.
However, despite the government’s gesture, little compromise has been seen from Japan.
At a post-meeting press conference in Taipei on Wednesday, Taiwan-Japan Relations Association
Secretary-General Chang Shu-ling (張淑玲), who headed the Taiwanese delegation, acknowledged that differences remain between the two sides on the issue.
Although Chang said both sides have demonstrated sincerity and goodwill in addressing the matter and have seen the gap between their opinions narrowed, the fact that the ¥6 million deposit — which the government said it is determined to see returned — was not even mentioned during the two-day meeting, raises the question of whether Taiwan is the only side making compromises.
Few details about the MOU signed at the meeting’s closing ceremony were provided, showing its insignificance. One cannot help but wonder if the agreement was inked merely for the sake of showing the public that something was achieved.
With Japan now also leading talks about the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership — which Taiwan expressed great interest in joining even before the US’ exile in January — Taiwan is quickly losing any leverage it has over its closest Asian ally on talks about fishery disputes or about an import ban on foods from the five Japanese prefectures near the site of the 2011 Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant disaster.
The only question is how much Taiwan is willing to give up for a closer alliance with Japan and, in turn, a greater role on the international stage.
The 75th anniversary summit of NATO was held in Washington from Tuesday to Thursday last week. Its main focus was the reinvigoration and revitalization of NATO, along with its expansion. The shadow of domestic electoral politics could not be avoided. The focus was on whether US President Biden would deliver his speech at the NATO summit cogently. Biden’s fitness to run in the next US presidential election in November was under assessment. NATO is acquiring more coherence and teeth. These were perhaps more evident than Biden’s future. The link to the Biden candidacy is critical for NATO. If Biden loses
Shortly after Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) stepped down as general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 2012, his successor, Xi Jinping (習近平), articulated the “Chinese Dream,” which aims to rejuvenate the nation and restore its historical glory. While defense analysts and media often focus on China’s potential conflict with Taiwan, achieving “rejuvenation” would require Beijing to engage in at least six different conflicts with at least eight countries. These include territories ranging from the South China Sea and East China Sea to Inner Asia, the Himalayas and lands lost to Russia. Conflicts would involve Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia,
The Sino-Indian border dispute remains one of the most complex and enduring border issues in the world. Unlike China’s borders with Russia and Vietnam, which have seen conflicts, but eventually led to settled agreements, the border with India, particularly the region of Arunachal Pradesh, remains a point of contention. This op-ed explores the historical and geopolitical nuances that contribute to this unresolved border dispute. The crux of the Sino-Indian border dispute lies in the differing interpretations of historical boundaries. The McMahon Line, established by the 1914 Simla Convention, was accepted by British India and Tibet, but never recognized by China, which
In a recent interview with the Malaysian Chinese-language newspaper Sin Chew Daily, former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) called President William Lai (賴清德) “naive.” As always with Ma, one must first deconstruct what he is saying to fully understand the parallel universe he insists on defending. Who is being “naive,” Lai or Ma? The quickest way is to confront Ma with a series of pointed questions that force him to take clear stands on the complex issues involved and prevent him from his usual ramblings. Regarding China and Taiwan, the media should first begin with questions like these: “Did the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)