politics

Coast Guard could shoot at foreign vessels aiming to land on Senkakus: gov't officials

76 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

76 Comments
Login to comment

The officials explained the confirmed interpretation at a meeting of the panel, saying it is possible for Japan's coast guard to fire on foreign official vessels under laws by regarding vessels aiming to land on the Senkaku Islands as committing violent crimes.

Well, there's a reason coast guards are armed. Now that Japan has said this, you can expect the Chinese to widely avoid setting foot on these rocks but would do everything else short of it as part of its gray zone tactics. If only US ships operate near these features on a regular basis, I think it would either encourage China to either step it up or step back.

17 ( +20 / -3 )

Now the Japan Coast Guard is allowed to use weapons against foreign official ships but not against foreign ships disguised as private fishing boats. And that’s what the Chinese are most likely to do if they are serious about taking the Senkakus.

18 ( +19 / -1 )

Japan must erect structures ANY structures be it a lighthouse a weather station or even outhose on the Senkakus IMMEDIATELY as should have done years ago and drape the rocks with enormous rising sun flags!

Put down a helipad to supply the duty crew from Ishigaki and rotate them in and out.

Without this China will keep pressuring until they will take it over

18 ( +22 / -4 )

So they can discharge weapons in self-defense or in escape scenarios is what I'm reading. These LDP lawmakers had better get their rules of engagement squared away and ensure that the chain of command does not hinder the combatant commander's on the ground assessment and decision. Chinese vessels have rammed JCG vessels before, does this warrant firing weapons? Fire where, the hull and below the water line or the bridge?

12 ( +12 / -0 )

By the time the JCG sights the vessels, calls home for permission to fire, a committee is assembled to gather information on the vessels, to report to several senior staff in change of making the decision to shoot . . . . . . . .

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

Forget the landing, just being inside in Japan waters should be enough, now that they haven't announced this portion it only invites and incites other foreign countries to just come on in, possibly conduct "other" research development like "mass fishing" out of bodies of water of Japan. China is not after the land, but rather the marine life out in the waters. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the waters on the other side are extremely polluted with a massive amount out and near their coast has less than .02% O2 required to sustain and maintain marine life. In other words the sea of Japan is rich in marine life and they want it.

13 ( +14 / -1 )

China implemented a new law earlier this month that allows its coast guard to use weapons against foreign ships that Beijing sees as illegally entering its waters.

This was necessary. China this past month implemented a law that allows its Coast Guard to use Weapons against foreign ships entering it's waters.

What you are seeing is Japan playing defensive. Reacting to China's aggressive moves.

13 ( +15 / -2 )

The thing with world wars is you can see them coming from a long way away.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

if there is a shootout between the 2, I blame China as they have been acting as a thug. Personally, i think the islands should be incorporated as part of the US bases in Okinawa. Yes, it is escalation, but China will do that regardless.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Wow, that escalated quickly.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Push back on the bully hard , good to see Japan is prepared to use force to protect its itself.

13 ( +15 / -2 )

WW3 starts here folks. Hopefully not but all the pieces are falling together.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

As I said before, this problem can be handled automated. An AI missile launcher, positioned on or besides the Senkakus. If the radar in Ishigaki detects intruders, some radio warnings will be sent on published frequencies and when the time for turning around and leaving is over, the launcher spits out its freight. No fight of ships, no personnel in danger. Only peace and silence....lol

6 ( +10 / -4 )

Now the Japan Coast Guard is allowed to use weapons against foreign official ships but not against foreign ships disguised as private fishing boats. And that’s what the Chinese are most likely to do if they are serious about taking the Senkakus.

I've seen videos of Japanese Maritime Safety Agency patrol ships shooting up North Korean fishing boats that would not leave Japanese waters when offered a chance to leave peacefully. No reason Chinese fishing boats would be treated with greater deference under the same circumstances.

12 ( +14 / -2 )

As I said before, this problem can be handled automated. An AI missile launcher, positioned on or besides the Senkakus.

Sigh. As I said before, the laws governing the conduct of nations in war prohibit what you propose. There has to be humans in the kill chain to positively identify the target is hostile and make the decision to use lethal force. These tasks are not legally automated.

14 ( +15 / -1 )

InspectorGadgetToday  08:37 am JST

By the time the JCG sights the vessels, calls home for permission to fire, a committee is assembled to gather information on the vessels, to report to several senior staff in change of making the decision to shoot . . . . . . . .

That didn't happen 20 years ago. Why should that happen now?

"An unidentified ship spotted within Japan’s exclusive economic zone in the East China Sea sank Saturday night after being shot at by Japan Coast Guard vessels that had been pursuing it, coast guard officials said."

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2001/12/23/national/coast-guard-sinks-suspect-ship-in-east-china-sea/

11 ( +13 / -2 )

In any event something not shown in the Japanese press but that was shown in the US press is the US has four big guided missile subs, converted ballistic missile subs that carry around 150 cruise missiles and, get this, US Marines. One such sub recently exercised with Japanese forces conducting amphibious operations against a shore target from the deck of the sub while surfaced using small boats stored on the sub. These subs are specially configured to deploy divers and Marines against shore targets as well as to pound shore targets with big salvos of cruise missiles. A little gem in the article mentioned that a mission they train and deploy for is to be able to put Marines ashore someplace like the Senkaku Islands on extremely short notice to prevent the Chinese from landing there. The idea being that the Chinese would abort a landing attempt if they became awaer there were American forces already ashore wherever it is they intend to land. One assumes the US has the necessary intelligence assets in place to make this possible.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

"There were rising concerns in Japan that the country is unable to deal with China's assertiveness around the Japan-controlled, China-claimed Senkaku Islands."

Clear jargon that those isles are disputed territory that actually belongs to Ilan county, Taiwan.

If Tokyo strongly believes that those islands are an inherent part of Nippon then the Japanese Coast Guard should built a token naval base and a tennis court where Naomi Osaka can train.

If not then it just proves the point to the world that those rocks are indeed a disputed piece of real estate.

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

I am curious about what Monty, Zoroto, Zichi and others have to say about it as they all have expanded views and knowledge of the history of China and Japan in general.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

hah ha ha japan wouldn't dare shoot at a Chinese ship. Come on....

-11 ( +4 / -15 )

> OssanAmericaToday  11:39 am JST

InspectorGadgetToday  08:37 am JST

By the time the JCG sights the vessels, calls home for permission to fire, a committee is assembled to gather information on the vessels, to report to several senior staff in change of making the decision to shoot . . . . . . . .

That didn't happen 20 years ago. Why should that happen now?

"An unidentified ship spotted within Japan’s exclusive economic zone in the East China Sea sank Saturday night after being shot at by Japan Coast Guard vessels that had been pursuing it, coast guard officials said."

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2001/12/23/national/coast-guard-sinks-suspect-ship-in-east-china-sea/

Because there is big difference between sinking a rusty North Korean spy ship, and antagonsing China

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

Shoot? when elephants fly. haha

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

Perfectly acceptable for any sovereign nation to defend her sovereign territory against uninvited foreign arrivals. This is not an anti-China thing as some are wrongly arguing. The Senkakus have also been illegally entered by Taiwanese nationalist flotillas before, and dealt with by water cannon. They got off lightly.

This announcement by the Japanese government gives notice to ANY nation - the JMSDF can and will shoot live rounds at boats illegally entering the Senkakus from here on. They have been warned.

Japan must erect structures ANY structures be it a lighthouse a weather station or even outhose on the Senkakus IMMEDIATELY

Japan has already contructed a lighthouse on the Senkakus.

As I said before, this problem can be handled automated. An AI missile launcher, positioned on or besides the Senkakus.

Agree 100 percent. But the Defense on the Senkakus should be manned 24/7 by a group of JMSDF.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Japan will do nothing, Japan is pacifist nation now, their feelings are hurt to easily.

China will use NUKES thats all they have, the Chinese military cannot go head to head with the US military once you uncouple it completely, the US will drop that military quickly, this will not be like the junk they've been doing in the middle east, where politicians were afraid to completely unleash the American Machine

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

I hope they remember that when shot at some nations respond by shooting back!

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Good, a few shots are all that are needed to scare China.

A bully is a bully till someone stands up!!!!

2 ( +6 / -4 )

As much as I love Japan and dislike the CCP, we all know Japan doesn't have what it takes to defend themselves.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Seems the Senkaku issue is ratcheting up to a serious phase as days go by. The next time when clashes occur between Japan and China Coast Guard ships, it may be the start of grave hostilities. Before that happens, all measures must be taken to prevent such clashes from occurring. 

Dialog is needed most between the two countries. If official dialog is difficult, then how about an NGO forum to discuss the matter?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

WW3 starts here folks. Hopefully not but all the pieces are falling together.

More likely in Syria, with the Great Satan stirring it up again.

Maybe the Japanese Coast Guard, in the meantime, could empty the occupiers from their bases and send them home.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

El RataToday  02:27 pm JST

As much as I love Japan and dislike the CCP, we all know Japan doesn't have what it takes to defend themselves.

They don't have what it takes to go fight some far away war. But they certainly have what it takes to defend themselves.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

There’ll be no war over those isles.

Tokyo deep down knows it’s not inherent Japanese territory in the first place.

Nippon certainly knows those isles belongs to their former colony Taiwan.

The problem now is how to give it back to Taipei in the absence of diplomatic relations.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

The problem is that China and Taiwan also claim the islands that should have been returned to China after the war, but which the US decided to hold on to for bombing practice. When China and Japan normalized relations in 1972, they agreed to shelve the question of ownership of the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands and everything went smoothly until the governor of Tokyo unilaterally decided that they were Japanese. So it could be equally argued that it would be perfectly acceptable for China to defend her sovereign territory against uninvited foreign arrivals.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

Use them for nuclear waste storage.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Since the antiquity, with typical characteristics of a big bully and a coward, China has applied a strategy called "Soft: seize, Tough: back off."

Once the vulnerable countries join forces and are ready to fight hard against China, this coward would surely back down.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Unless the J government finally establishes a permanent presence on the islands, one day they find themselves with a Chinese presence there, and they will be too reluctant to remove them by force. Wait for it.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Japan needs to expel both Chinese and US spies and agitators.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Suga also said, "I firmly believe that it is 'a free and open order based on the rule of law,' not 'force or coercion,' that will bring peace and prosperity to the region and the world."

That would be the first time that shooting would bring about peace and prosperity!

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

hah ha ha japan wouldn't dare shoot at a Chinese ship. Come on..

I clearly remember occasions during my active duty days when JASDF F-15s fired warning shots at Soviet strategic bombers that entered Japanese airspace. As with China today, the Soviets kept pushing closer and closer, the Japanese gave verbal warnings and diplomatic protests. But eventually the Soviets pushed too far, Japanese forces fired live rounds and the Soviets backed off. The Soviets understood the Japanese were serious and that was the end of the intrusions.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

This is exactly what China wants Japanese coast guard to do.

Once Japanese coast guard open fire, China can claim Japan attacked first and call in PLA Navy warships to sink the Japanese coast guard ship, and launch a full scale military landing by PLA troops.

The correct way to handle such situation is to push out Chinese ships by ramming.

But opening fire is a big no no, one can only do it in its sovereign territorial water and no one else in East Asia recognizes Japan's territorial claim on Diaoyu Islands, not China, not Taiwan, not Korea, not Russia.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

That would be the first time that shooting would bring about peace and prosperity!

Not true. Well placed warning shots have deterred further aggression many times in the past. Even the JASDF has fired live rounds in front of Soviet bombers to stop them from violating Japanese airspace. It is rolling over and doing nothing when another nation chips away at your territory or that of your ally that invites an all out invasion.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Hiro S Nobumasa Feb. 26 05:36 pm JST

Tokyo deep down knows it’s not inherent Japanese territory in the first place.

The Treaty of San Francisco (UN). Contradicts your assertion.

Hello Kitty 321 Feb. 26 05:55 pm JST

The problem is that China and Taiwan also claim the islands that should have been returned to China

No. At the 1943 Cairo conference. It was determined that all Japanese occupation, dated after January 1, 1895. It was considered illegal and illegitimate. Forcing the return of these territories to their true owners.

The Senkaku Islands were taken by Japan in 1879. And there is no international law that obliges Japan to return them. That on a legal basis. It was outside the requirement of return. Consequently, the seizure of those islands was legal and legitimate. And that is why today it is Japanese territory. In fact, the Treaty of San Francisco specifies that these islands are Japanese territory.

Samit Basu Feb. 26 11:30 pm JST

no one else in East Asia recognizes Japan's territorial claim on Diaoyu Islands, not China, not Taiwan, not Korea, not Russia.

But if the UN. And with it the International Court of Justice, among others. Even the People's Republic of China itself, in 1979. Since the China-Japan Treaty. Which is actually an appendix to the San Francisco Treaty of 1951. This included the parameters established at the 1943 Cairo conference.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Social puppets and social puppetry and Humans with absolutely no imagination or creativity in their decisions and behaviors: main criteria for becoming a Politician. This is the best they can do? The same such people ALWAYS do and follow in the dance, like chorus line members with no ability to change the steps or even the music. The Americans intrude on the Chinese. The Chinese intrude on America's agent in the Pacific. America's agent in the Pacific ignores America's intrusions but tries to convince its people that all 'aggression' comes from the Chinese in line with the very longstanding American policy of lies and obfuscation. What is more predictable than some Corporate sponsored politician shouting "Lock and Load!" at the least difficulty, potentially condemning countless young people to precocious and violent deaths. All of the talk of 'laws', 'conventions', 'treaties', all made by people whose interest was not in Peace but in Greed. That Nihon leadership would see these islands as worth the lives of the thousands of young people who would die 'defending' them for the sake of the rich who are the only ones who would benefit from any exploitation of this area shows the betrayal that all governments do upon their peoples. Has the idea of a joint ownership, joint exploitation, not entered the heads of ANY official? Or does American policy, American Greed, stand as a wall against peaceful solutions to these kinds of childish situations? Innate co-operation is what expanded our skulls over one million years, and mindless and murderous competition is what has shrunk them two hundred cubic centimeters in the last 70,000 years. The most disappointing thing about being Human is Humanity itself.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

dougthehead13Today  01:49 am JST

The Treaty of San Francisco (UN). Contradicts your assertion.

Please show us the precise paragraph where it's clearly stated that the Tiayutai/Senkaks belongs to Japan.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Taiwan was the first to put a claim on the Senkakus because of it's fishery importance. China, usurped that Claim because it saw the geopolitical advantage, in particular the strategic value of breaking the first island chain, right at the doorstep of the biggest US military presence in Asia.

Taiwan already reached an agreement with Japan regarding it's fisheries issue. Those claiming that the Senkakus should be given to Taiwan are disengenious wumaos, most of whom hide theior identity, who know full well that since China claims Taiwan as part of China, giving the Senkakus tp Taiwan is defacto handing them to China.

The Senkakus fall under Article 5 of the US-Jpn Mutual Deffense Treaty and any action on the part of China to take them by force will be answered by the United States. China can up the game all they want, but that's a red line they are not prepared to cross.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

OssanAmericaToday  02:10 pm JST

Those claiming that the Senkakus should be given to Taiwan are disengenious wumaos, most of whom hide theior identity, who know full well that since China claims Taiwan as part of China, giving the Senkakus tp Taiwan is defacto handing them to China.

Guten tag OA!

Thank you for finally not debunking the truth that the Tiauyutai solely belongs to Ilan county of Taiwan!

I'm so happy that you finally see the truth!

On the other hand it's really so sad that there are still disingenuous WUMAO states or countries that adamantly refuses to give diplomatic recognition to 'ally', 'like minded' and 'fellow democratic ' and peaceful Taiwan in favor of their master Xi Jin Ping and his $$$!

If only these WUMAO countries will finally have the moral spine to say no to Beijington and Washingjing's order not to give diplomatic love to Taiwan then I'm pretty sure that the Bushido Spirit of Nippon will make it the first country to re-establish official diplomatic friendship with Taiwan!

When that happens it's almost automatic that Tokyo will hand the Tiauyutai isles back to Taipei!.

No doubt about it!

Sadly, the WUMAO States who pretends to be human rights and democracy advocates are effectively blocking what Japan wants to do.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Hiro S. Nobumasa,

You say, "those isles ... actually belongs to Ilan county, Taiwan." You can't say these islands belong to Taiwan simply because they are incorporated into Yilan County, Taiwan. You can't claim a find is yours because it's yours. You have to prove, based on hard evidence, why it's yours.

Here's Okinawan view on Senkakus/Diaoyudaos/Tiayutais issue

Some say that the Senkakus/Diaoyudaos/Tiayutais were ceded to Japan by China’s Qing dynasty in the Treaty of Shimonoski as a result of the First Sino-Japanese War. They then argue that since Japan accepted the terms of unconditional surrender stipulated in the Cairo Declaration, it should observe these terms and fulfil its obligation.

As the result of an unconditional surrender, Japan was automatically stripped of Manchuria, Taiwan, Korea, the Pescadores and other islands in the South China Sea and the Pacific. The Ryukyu Islands, including the Senkakus/Diaoyudaos/Tiayutais, were separated from Japan and put under direct US administration.

Why weren't the Senkakus/Diaoyudaos/Tiayutais returned to China when Taiwan was restored? Apparently, they were not considered spoils of war Japan had taken by force.

The international community took the post-World War II regime for granted. Even the People’s Republic of China, that had assumed power in Beijing in 1949, kept acknowledging the “status quo” until 1971.

The Treaty of Taipei signed on April 28, 1952, stipulates that Japan renounced all rights to Taiwan, Penghu, the Spratly Islands (Nansha Islands, 南沙群島) and the Paracel Islands (Xisha Islands, 西沙群島), over which Japan no longer had any jurisdiction, but it left out the Senkakus/Diaoyudaos/Tiayutais.

These documents and historical evidence seem to argue against China and Taiwan's claim that the Senkakus/Diaoyudaos/Tiayutais have been China or Taiwan's sovereign territory since ancient times.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

voiceofokinawaToday  05:18 pm JST

> Why weren't the Senkakus/Diaoyudaos/Tiayutais returned to China when Taiwan was restored? Apparently, they were not considered spoils of war Japan had taken by force.

Howdy voiceofokinawa!

Thank you for your seemingly thorough and gentlemanly response !

To answer your question we should look thoroughly at the so-called da-kine much vaunted Treaty of San Francisco .

That treaty IMHO is the root cause of the present vagaries regarding the conflicting claims on Ilan county’s Tiayutai isles aka the Senkakus.

Why? Simply for the sole reason that Taiwan, ROC and Mao’s PROC had no voice whatsoever in tailoring the pockets and buttons of the grand treaty itself!

Moreover the Treaty of Taipei which was really a poor copy of the TOSF already became a very insignificant piece of paper after the Tokyo High Court in 1980 made it null and void!

Can you imagine Reykjavík declaring Bobby Fischer the winner without even inviting Boris Spassky ?

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Absent the middle name S., your code name sounds like Japanese. So I had first thought you were Japanese. But I assume your real name is 広信正or something like that, which you translated into Japanese as such.

At any rate, I am very curious how you will argue why the Senkakus/Tiayutaos are an integral part of Taiwan.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Hiro S NobumasaToday  03:17 pm JST

Guten tag OA!

Thank you for finally not debunking the truth that the Tiauyutai solely belongs to Ilan county of Taiwan!

祝你有美好的一天五毛!

Nobody said the Senkakus belong to Taiwan. I said that "Taiwan has a claim". Which is now put aside as Taiwan has already reached an Agreement with Japan.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

OssanAmericaToday  07:14 pm JST

Nobody said the Senkakus belong to Taiwan. I said that "Taiwan has a claim". Which is now put aside as Taiwan has already reached an Agreement with Japan.

Hello OA!

Thank you for finally making it official that Taiwan has a claim!

Coming from you that means a ton!

Of course Japan gladly had an agreement with Taiwan coz Tokyo knows that the TYT are actually an inherent part of Ilan county!

If not for the WUMAO countries that adamantly refuses to establish diplomatic ties with Taiwan then Nippon could already have handed those isles back to the rightful owner.

祝你有美好的一天五毛!

Thank you for identifying yourself!

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

@voiceofokinawa:

It will be so easy for you to know what 'S' stands for if your heart really belongs to Okinawa.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Please show us the precise paragraph where it's clearly stated that the Tiayutai/Senkaks belongs to Japan.

*-8**( +0 / -8 )*

Thank you for the -8!

The more (-) signs the more the TOSF stuff becomes irrelevant to Tokyo's claim on the TYT isles!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The US should at this point publicly explain the history of the islands, their status within the context of the San Francisco Treaty and subsequent US administration as part of the post WWII occupation of the Ryukyu Islands. The US should then state clearly it was a US decision to hand the islands over to Japan in 1971 and that decision is both final and not negotiable. Any attempt to change their status by force with invoke the US-Japan defense treaty. That would clear the air and take the onus off Japan. Let China whine to the US, and let US forces protect those islands. US Coast Guard cutters have guns too.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Hiro S. Nobumasa,

Can you imagine Reykjavík declaring Bobby Fischer the winner without even inviting Boris Spassky ?

Of course, you can't. But at the same time, you can't say Spassky the winner, either. You can't claim the Senkakus/Tiayutais are Taiwan's territory and incorporate them as part of Yilin County of Taiwan without consulting anyone.

It is this point that I'm asking you to clarify: why you think the islands in question belong to Taiwan historically and under international law.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

voiceofokinawaToday  08:07 am JST

Of course, you can't. But at the same time, you can't say Spassky the winner, either. You can't claim the Senkakus/Tiayutais are Taiwan's territory and incorporate them as part of Yilin County of Taiwan without consulting anyone.

It is this point that I'm asking you to clarify: why you think the islands in question belong to Taiwan historically and under international law.

voiceofokinawa,

Using the Treaty of San Francisco to decide the ownership of those isles is null ad void coz ROC-TW wasnotinvite

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@voiceofokinawa:

sorry... strong waves today... ROC-TW was not invited.

It's like declaring Spassky the winner when. Bobby was not even invited to the tournament!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

It's true that either ROC or PRC wasn't invited to the San Francisco Peace Treaty for the reasons I don't know why. 

But even if they had been invited, do you think either of them could have argued for why the Senkakus/Tiayutais were part of ROC or PRC? It is this point I want you to clarify.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

voiceofokinawa

In every territorial dispute there are always two corners in a curve.

When one of the claimant is weak to the point of being snubbed and uninvited then the resulting verdict is null and void.

If Taiwan-ROC was invited then the following voice could have been heard:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/23/ma-ying-jeou-diaoyutai-islands-are-republic-china/

In addition you can immerse yourself with the historical records at the University pertaining to the Ryukyuan narration of those isles which certainly is not in favor of Yamato.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Hiro S. Hiromasa,

Thank you for referring me to the piece Ma Ying-jeou contributed to The Washington Times. Ma says the description about the Senkakus/Diaoyutais was first appeared in a 1403 book called "Seeing off with a Favorable Tail Wind."

Could you elaborate how the book describes the Senkaku Islands?

The oldest document that I thought described the Senkakus was Chen Kan's "Record of Royal Emissary to Ryukyu"(使琉球禄)he wrote after he had visited Ryukyu in 1534 on a tributary mission. In the document, he reveals how much he was exalted to hear that a trade ship had just arrived at Fuchu from Ryukyu and therefore that he could learn much about the waterway to Ryukyu from the Ryukyu sailors.

He recorded island names one by one in Chinese, but it's apparent that he translated these names from what he heard from the Ryukyu sailors who were aboard the same tributary ship as he was on board.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

voiceofokinawa,

There are so many Ryukyuan narratives about the DYT isles that one can scan at the University.

Some peculiar ones mentioned the destruction of tombs of ancient Ilan fishermen to hide evidence of the islands already being occupied on and off before Yamato's annexation.

But the most important modern contemporary evidence proving that there is an existing dispute of ownership over those isles comes not from Japan, China nor Taiwan but from Uncle Sam himself!

The Nixon Administration removed the Senkakus from its inclusion in the concept of Japanese "residual sovereignty" in presenting the Okinawa Reversion Treaty to the U.S. Senate for ratification. On 20 October 1971, U.S. Secretary of State William Rogers sent a letter to U.S Congress. In his letter, Acting Assistant Legal Adviser Robert Starr stated "The United States believes that a return of administrative rights over those islands to Japan, from which the rights were received, can in no way prejudice any underlying claims. The United States cannot add to the legal rights Japan possessed before it transferred administration of the islands to us, nor can the United States, by giving back what it received, diminish the rights of other claimants... The United States has made no claim to the Senkaku Islands and considers that any conflicting claims to the islands are a matter for resolution by the parties concerned."[86] 

Thank you again for your kind and scholarly response.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Hiro S. Nobumasa,

Where did you pick up the quote? You have to add the source of it to prove its authenticity.

At any rate, the quote says the U.S. has no responsibility to prove or disprove to what country the Senkakus belong; that the matter should be resolved between parties concerned.

This is a cowardly attitude on the part of the U.S. because it administered the Senkakus as part of the Ryukyu Islands from 1945 to 1972, using one of the islands, Kubajima, as an aerial bombing training site, which technically remains so even today. In other words, Kubajima is a U.S. base even today just like Kadena Air Base or USMC Air Station Futenma.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

voiceofokinawa,

I hope you will find the following excerpts helpful.

" The Government of the Republic of China and Japan are in disagreement as to sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands. You should know as well that the People's Republic of China has also claimed sovereignty over the islands. The United States believes that a return of administrative rights over those islands to Japan, from which the rights were received, can in no way prejudice any underlying claims (of ROC and/or PRC). The United States cannot add to the legal rights Japan possessed before it transferred administration of the islands to us, nor can the United States, by giving back what it received, diminish the rights of other claimants. The United States has made no claim to the Senkaku Islands and considers that any conflicting claims to the islands are a matter for resolution by the parties concerned. I hope that this information is helpful to you. If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to let me know."

Sincerely yours,

Robert I Starr,

Acting Assistant Legal Adviser

for East Asian and Pacific affairs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@voiceofokinawa:

https://apjjf.org/-Mark-Selden--Yabuki-Susumu/4061/article.pdf

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hiro S. Nobumasa,

On the basis of these documents, do you want to say it's legitimate to integrate these islands with Yilan County of Taiwan? Or do you want to simply say that there's a dispute about sovereignty over the islands?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

It's true that either ROC or PRC wasn't invited to the San Francisco Peace Treaty for the reasons I don't know why. 

Sigh. What was going on between the US and PRC in September 1951 when that treaty was signed? This should not be too hard to understand. The political status of Taiwan and the Penghu was still uncertain when the San Francisco Treaty was signed and there were strong disagreements among other parties to the San Francisco treaty over whether PRC or ROC should participate. Absent any agreement neither side was invited. The Republic of China and Japan would sign the Treaty of Taipei in April of the following year. The negotiations between Japan and Taiwan were going on while the separate San Francisco treaty was being negotiated. In the Treaty of Taipei Japan renounced claims to Taiwan, Penghu, the Spratley and Paracel Islands. All treaties between Japan and Taiwan made prior to 1942 were null and void. No mention of the Senkaku Islands.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

voiceofokinawa,

I would like to know your scholarly opinion too!

Nevertheless those official US documents proves that those isles are indeed disputed territory that Nippon can't deny.

https://www.chinausfocus.com/foreign-policy/the-senkakudiaoyu-islands-controversy-much-more-than-a-territorial-dispute

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Desert Tortoise,

Yet, Boris was declared the winner even when Bobby was not even invited and therefore not present at Reykjavik!

The USA, the PROC and Japan are all ganging up on the democratic and peaceful Taiwan, ROC by their deliberate and concerted efforts to isolate Taipei diplomatically.

But the fact that those isles belongs to Ilan county , TW can't be altered.

The Taiwanese people are the most Japanese friendly in the world so Japan giving the Island Republic diplomatic recognition is the right Bushido thing to do.

If that happens then a dialogue amongst like minded friends will certainly have a satisfactory result.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't deny there exist conflicting views and claims as to the Sankakus/Diaoyudaos/Diaoyutais' sovereignty between Japan, on one hand, and ROC and PRC, on the other.

That much said, I want to know why you insist the islands belong to Taiwan, being integrated with Yilan County your own way. I've been asking you this question many times, but you haven't answered it as yet.

You can’t simply say the islands are Taiwan’s territory because they are incorporated into Yilan County, Taiwan or because the sovereignty over them is in dispute among three claimants.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's my assumption that, during the Japanese administration period before 1945, Yilan fishermen used the Senkaku waters as a rich fishing ground which remained so until 1972 when Okinawa‘s administrative rights were returned to Japan. As soon as Okinawa was returned to Japan, however, Tokyo prohibited Taiwanese fishing boats from entering the Senkaku waters. This must be the source of Yilan fishermen's grudge because formerly they could fish in the Senkaku waters as if the area were their own backyard.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

voiceofokinawa,

Here’s a very interesting fact that the world press ignored since eons ago.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/twn.youbianku.com/area/%25E5%25AE%259C%25E8%2598%25AD%25E7%25B8%25A3%25E9%2587%25A3%25E9%25AD%259A%25E8%2587%25BA%25EF%25BC%259A290%3Famp%3D

0 ( +0 / -0 )

voiceofokinawa,

Please try this if the link above is blocked again.

Thank you.

https://zipcode.pixnet.net/blog/post/88570804-%e3%80%90290%3f%3f-%e5%ae%9c%e8%98%ad%e7%b8%a3-%e9%87%a3%e9%ad%9a%e8%87%ba%e3%80%91%e9%87%a3%e9%ad%9a%e8%87%ba%e5%88%97%e5%b6%bc-diaoyutailiey

0 ( +0 / -0 )

voiceofokinawa,

I think all those links are blocked for whatever reasons.

I’ll just give the content below:

Diaoyutai, Yilan County 290

臺灣地區郵遞區號表

290 宜蘭縣釣魚臺 釣魚臺列嶼

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Very interesting that the Senkaku/Diaoyutai Islands have the postal address of 290 宜蘭縣釣魚臺 釣魚臺列嶼 in Taiwan. Other than this, don't you have any comment on my post above? If there is none, you have confirmed my assumption in the post. 

However, you have to be aware that simply thinking or believing that the Senkaku/Diaoyutai Islands are your own territory because Taiwanese fishermen fished there with impunity during the pre-war Japanese administrative period and the post-war period from 1945 to 1972 doesn't warrant the islands belong to Taiwan, albeit they have a Taiwanese address.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

voiceofokinawa,

Thank you for your kind reply.

Have you heard about the Japanese monk’s wise proposal?

Nevertheless , I agree with you that those isles are clearly without any doubt disputed territory so Japan not acknowledging this bare facts is not contributing to peace in the region.

The wise thing for Tokyo to do is re-establish diplomatic ties with TW-ROC and start dialogue on how to resolve the dispute.

Imitating China’s move to authorize the use of force in the island row will not be beneficial to all parties involved .

Any missteps could be costly and devastating that will result in war.

Nippon should heed the suggestions of both President Ma and the aforementioned Japanese monk.

Peace.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think Japan and Taiwan (ROC) have fishing agreements which they have renewed from time to time. So all you want is similar agreements over the territorial issue? But how? To have Tokyo acknowledge Taiwan has partial sovereignty over the islands?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Have you heard about the Japanese monk’s wise proposal?

Probably, you're talking about monk Ikkyu Sojun (一休宗純)'s maxim that said, "The source of trifling bickering comes from selfish human nature which has been genetically handed down in humans from generation to generation. If you walk your way with this heavy load on your shoulders, it'll really be hardship and miserable tribulations.” (translation mine)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites