In mid-September, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said that the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) originally belonged to China’s Qing Dynasty and were ceded to Japan under the Treaty of Shimonoseki. This meant that they should have been given back to the Republic of China (ROC) at the end of World War II. In contrast, former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) says that Japan should have sovereignty over the Diaoyutais.
For serving and former presidents to have such starkly different opinions about their country’s national territory is not just a first for Taiwan, but also a rarity in world history. So, who is right?
Without records, there can be no history. There are two kinds of historical record — primary and secondary sources. There are dozens of historical documents that provide secondary sources about the Diaoyutais, the most well-known among them being The Book of Sui (隋書), written by Wei Zheng (魏徵) and others during the Tang Dynasty, and the New Book of Tang (新唐書) composed by Ouyang Xiu (歐陽修) and others during the Song Dynasty.
These works tell us that the Diaoyutai Islands were discovered in the fifth century AD by people from Ryukyu, which is the ancient name for modern-day Okinawa.
At that time, the Diaoyutai Islands were notable merely as a navigation mark for ships sailing between Ryukyu and China. They were tiny islands that neither Ryukyu nor China wished to possess.
For about 1,000 years from the fifth to 15th centuries, although people knew of the existence of the Diaoyutais, they did not give the islands a name.
The University of Oxford’s Bodleian Library has in its collection a guidebook written in the 15th century that describes more than 10 historical sea routes in East Asia. This book is the earliest primary source concerning the Diaoyutais, which it calls the Diaoyu Islands (釣魚嶼).
At almost the same time, the Kingdom of Ryukyu started paying tribute to China’s Ming Dynasty, which sent envoys to Ryukyu and conferred titles on Ryukyuan officials. This is recorded in more than 30 extant works dating to the end of the Qing Dynasty, most of which mention the Diaoyutais.
There are dozens of other documents that include records about the Diaoyutais, including descriptions of shipping routes as well as collected works, notes, gazetteers and other documents.
Among more than 60 Chinese documents from the Ming and Qing dynasties that mention the Diaoyutais, aside from one which is an inaccurate record, none record the Diaoyutais as belonging to either China or Ryukyu.
Toward the end of the 19th century, international law as practiced in Western countries spread to East Asia, and the first territory to which the norms of international law were applied was the formerly unwanted Diaoyutai archipelago.
The Japanese government found that the Diaoyutai Islands were terra nullius, or unclaimed territory, which met the conditions laid out in international law under which a state could acquire sovereignty over terra nullius by being the first to occupy it.
In 1885, Japan officially declared its occupation of the islands, and in 1890 it incorporated them into its sovereign territory, placing them under the jurisdiction of Okinawa Prefecture. On Jan. 14, 1895, Okinawa Prefecture installed national emblem markers on the Diaoyutais with the central government’s approval.
This sequence of actions was in accordance with the procedure for acquiring territory by means of first occupation as stipulated in international law. From that time on, the Diaoyutais were no longer terra nullius, becoming instead part of the Japanese Prefecture of Okinawa.
From 1945 until 1971, the islands were under US trusteeship, and in 1972 they were returned to the jurisdiction of Okinawa Prefecture.
It should be noted that contemporary Chinese newspapers reported on Japan’s declaration of its occupation of the Diaoyutais in 1885, but the Qing Dynasty government did not raise any objection either at the time of Japan’s declaration or thereafter.
The Republic of China (ROC), which followed the Qing Dynasty, did not protest about it either, and neither did the People’s Republic of China (PRC) complain about it before 1970. In fact, it even published maps showing the Diaoyutai Islands as belonging to Japan.
Taiwanese should note that when Japan installed national markers on the Diaoyutai Islands on Jan. 14, 1895, the First Sino-Japanese War was still raging.
Although the Chinese navy was suffering one defeat after another, it had not yet surrendered. Therefore the Diaoyutai Islands issue is not related to the Treaty of Shimonoseki, which was signed on April 17, 1895.
Besides, the map of Taiwan that was delineated in the Treaty of Shimonoseki does not include the Diaoyutais. This means that Ma’s statement that the Diaoyutai Islands were ceded to Japan together with Taiwan in the Treaty of Shimonoseki is untrue.
Lai Fu-shun is a professor in the Department of History at Chinese Culture University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
Mainland Affairs Council Deputy Minister Shen You-chung (沈有忠) on Thursday last week urged democratic nations to boycott China’s military parade on Wednesday next week. The parade, a grand display of Beijing’s military hardware, is meant to commemorate the 80th anniversary of Japan’s surrender in World War II. While China has invited world leaders to attend, many have declined. A Kyodo News report on Sunday said that Japan has asked European and Asian leaders who have yet to respond to the invitation to refrain from attending. Tokyo is seeking to prevent Beijing from spreading its distorted interpretation of wartime history, the report
RSS