The Council of Agricultural Affairs has demanded that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs lodge a protest against Tokyo after one of Japan's coast guard patrol boats chased, intercepted and fined a Taiwanese fishing boat, the Tsengchinshun No. 168, based out of Ilan County.
I believe, however, that the government should first thoroughly investigate the incident, as the matter risks upsetting Taipei-Tokyo relations, and could even have a negative impact on the next round of Taiwan-Japan fishery talks scheduled for March.
Where the Tsengchinshun No. 168 was operating will be crucial to determining the legitimacy of Japan's action against it. If it was operating outside Japan's exclusive economic zone (EEZ), then Japan's interception and inspection of the boat was a violation of international law.
Each state has exclusive jurisdiction over boats that carry its flag on the high seas. Other nations can exercise jurisdiction over foreign ships on the high seas only when there are other treaty regulations that have precedence, or if the ship is suspected of slave trading, drug smuggling, illegal broadcasting or piracy.
Conversely, if the boat was operating within Japan's 200-nautical-mile (370km) EEZ, then the Japanese patrol boat was indeed entitled to intercept, check and detain it, and deal with it in accordance with domestic Japanese law.
If the boat was illegally fishing within Japan's EEZ and fled to the high seas after it was discovered, then, according to international law, the Japanese patrol boat had the right to chase the boat.
In fact, it could chase it to Taiwan's territorial waters up to a distance of 12 nautical miles (22.2km) off the coast.
In the late 1980s, a US patrol boat followed a Taiwanese fishing boat suspected of illegally catching salmon off the coast of Seattle. The pursuit continued all the way to the edge of Taiwan's 12-nautical mile territorial waters.
If the Tsengchinshun No. 168 was equipped with an automatic location communicator and entered the details into its log as it was required to, the data can be used to prove where the boat was operating.
However, the ship asked another Taiwanese boat, the Hsintungchuan 168, to pick up 10 of its 30 fishing nets that had been carried by the current into Japan's EEZ. This, together with the attempt to flee and to refuse an inspection by the Japanese patrol boat, has caused some to believe that it was doing something illegal in the region. Therefore, we have to confirm and clarify where the Tsengchinshun No. 168 was operating.
If the Ministry of Foreign Affairs cannot confirm that the Tsengchinshun No. 168 was operating within the Japan's EEZ, it must consider whether it is appropriate to lodge a protest against the Japanese government.
If the council and the ministry are able to determine that the Tsengchinshun No. 168 was operating outside Japan's EEZ, then the government should not only lodge a protest with the Japanese government, but also file claims against the Japanese government for damages.
The question is whether the Tsengchinshun No. 168 was, as Japan has claimed, operating within the EEZ of Japan's Parece Vela Island, the very southern tip of Japan.
In the past, this island was so tiny that it was literally uninhabitable. However, over the past 10 years, Japan has reclaimed land on the island, built a weather station and erected a landmark in an attempt to expand its EEZ.
This is a violation of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea concerning claims for a 200 nautical mile EEZ based on islands, reefs and the continental shelf.
It is understandable that Taiwanese fishermen are dissatisfied with Japan's attempt to protect fish in waters 200 nautical miles around Parece Vela Island.
However, the call by Ilan County's Suao fishing association for fishermen to "blow up" the island was a bit too emotional. Therefore, the government should study the feasibility of bringing this issue to an international court of law or even the UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
The government should also study the possibility of emulating the US and passing a law to render assistance to Taiwanese fishermen who have been detained and fined by the Japanese government when working in waters near Parece Vela Island.
If the government remains silent on this issue, it will be indicating that it tacitly accepts Japan's behavior.
This would constitute a precedent and would only jeopardize the rights of Taiwanese fishermen working in the region.
The government should play a more active role in this matter and study the feasibility of bringing it to the UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea for deliberation.
Song Yann-huei is a research fellow in the Institute of European and American Studies at Academia Sinica.
Translated by Daniel Cheng
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations