Japan’s political map has been redrawn again as the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) returned to power on the promise that it will be tough on China.
The next likely prime minister Shinzo Abe, has always been friendly toward Taiwan, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement saying that relations between Taiwan and Japan have always been good and that the ministry is confident that once the LDP takes over, this foundation will result in an even smoother development of bilateral relations. Domestic experts on Japan also agree that this development will lead to better relations between the two countries.
We should not forget the past, but instead let it be a guide for the future.
As we all know, when former US president Ronald Reagan was still governor of California, he angrily denounced then-US president Jimmy Carter for treachery when his administration abandoned the Republic of China and transferred diplomatic recognition to the government of the People’s Republic of China.
Reagan was a staunch anti-communist and famously said that “the march of freedom and democracy which will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash-heap of history” in a speech delivered on June 8, 1982.
When Reagan was elected president in late 1981, the feeling among US and foreign affairs experts was one of optimism. Indeed, Sino-US relations took a great leap forward, and on Aug. 17, 1982, the US and Chinese governments issued their second joint Shanghai Communique, also known as the 817 Communique.
The communique said that “… the United States Government states that it does not seek to carry out a long-term policy of arms sales to Taiwan, that its arms sales to Taiwan will not exceed, either in qualitative or in quantitative terms, the level of those supplied in recent years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the United States and China and that it intends gradually to reduce its sale of arms to Taiwan, leading, over a period of time, to a final resolution.”
Needless to say, no mature democracy will intentionally harm its national interests based on the preferences of one person.
When it comes to the rights in its surrounding territorial waters, Japan has to cope with China’s activities around the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) where enforcement and military vessels continue to enter the 12 nautical mile zone (22.2km) around the islands for “routine” patrols. This has now been followed by government-owned aircraft entering the zone.
Japan also has to face pressure regarding territorial water rights from the UN, where China on Dec. 14 submitted a document to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, claiming waters extending beyond its 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone and reaching into the East China Sea continental shelf.
Considering China’s importance to the Japanese economy, in particular today when Japan’s military economy is not what it once was, a common sense view tells us that Abe’s China policy is unlikely to be as tough as he claimed during the election campaign, nor will he sacrifice Japan’s national interests for the sake of Taiwan.
Japan already knows that Taiwan is under both domestic and international pressure. In terms of the Diaoyutai Islands and the continental shelf issues, Taiwan also has irrevocable national interests. If Japan adopts the same basic view as China and restricts itself to the so-called “one China” principle and enters into negotiations with China without ensuring that Taiwan is allowed to take part, Taiwan’s interests in this region will be ignored.
If pro-China forces in Taiwan then start to apply pressure on the government, forcing it to become fully dependent on China or to follow its direction, Japan will lose its geographically closest ally.
In reality, faced with China’s continued expansion of its interests in waters neighboring its territory, Taiwan’s and Japan’s interests will not only converge, they will become interdependent.
The bilateral talks about fishing rights between Taiwan and Japan will undoubtedly be an important measure when trying to judge whether or not relations between the two countries will continue to improve, even more so following President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) East China Sea initiative, which calls for disputes to be shelved and for cooperation.
Both Taiwan and Japan should be ready to discuss the fishing rights issue, and use this opportunity for a resolution of sorts. One can only hope that the new Japanese government will bring a breath of fresh air and improved efficiency.
Chiang Huang-chih is a law professor at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US