A long-standing dispute with Japan over a fishing zone has reached a new climax, with reports of Taiwanese fishing boats being forcibly expelled from the disputed area. This is not the first such incident. Similar disagreements with other countries, such as the Philippines, have also occurred in the past. Unfortunately, the government's handling of such disputes has been weakened by the country's unique international status.
The disputed fishing zone in the Yellow Sea and East China Sea is in an area which Taiwan, Japan and China each claim to be within their 370km exclusive economic zones. Under normal circumstances, the three countries would have to engage in trilateral negotiations to resolve their overlapping claims. But Japan and China have negotiated a bilateral fishing pact, leaving Taiwan out in the cold.
The Sino-Japanese fishery pact took effect last June. In the pact, the two countries agreed that the disputed water will be deemed "intermediate water," in which the vessels of other countries are prohibited and for which the vessels of both countries will have to seek permission from the other before entry.
The agreement is not binding on Taiwan, which is an independent sovereign country. China has no right to negotiate on Taipei's behalf. Since bilateral negotiations between Japan and Taiwan are continuing -- even though the last round was in August 2001 -- the status quo between the two nations should be maintained. This means that Taiwanese fishermen should be allowed to fish in the disputed area. After all, putting aside the issue of overlapping economic zones, the area is a traditional fishing ground for Taiwanese fishermen.
It was totally inappropriate for Japan's coast guard to intercept Taiwanese fishing boats and to expel these vessels by firing water cannons and shooting paint bombs.
It is high time that the government took a firmer stand in such disputes. But the government's dilemma in handling the dispute is complicated by several factors. One is that many Taiwanese have traditionally felt a special tie to Japan. The second is that, pragmatically, Taipei cannot substitute diplomatic sanctions and pressure with economic ones -- the way it can with countries such as Thailand or Indonesia. After all, this country is still economically dependent upon Japan.
The same helplessness has long been reflected in the government's handling of its sovereignty dispute over the Tiaoyutai Islands.
The government must break this pattern of meekness and lose its inferiority complex over the country's international status. Begin to make loud noise, and take on a firm attitude in demanding amicable and fair resolution of such disputes. Insist on re-initiating bilateral negotiations with Japan to clearly map out Taiwan's fishing zones. Taiwanese fishermen have threatened to stand up to the Japanese coast guard themselves if they don't see any concrete action by the government. If that were to happen, the dispute would quickly escalate out of control.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS