The Diaoyu (Chinese name) or Senkaku (Japanese name) Islands sit in disputed waters and are claimed by China, Japan and Taiwan. The recent spat of violent protests over the Islands was the culmination of a tense year, brought about by a patriotic Japanese citizen planting the Japanese flag on the Islands on the 18th of August. This is one of a number of points of particular tension to Japan and China. While not mentioned on the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs site, their Chinese counterpart has labelled seven so called “Sensitive Issues”. These sore spots for the Chinese are currently listed as the issues of History, Taiwan, the Diaoyu Islands, Japanese-American Security Co-operation, War reparations, Japanese chemical weapons discarded in China and Guanghualiao*.
While on the surface these 'islands' are little more than uninhabited rocks, the seabed on which they sit may be the site of rich natural resources. At the same time as fighting for the potential resources, it is also a bigger battle ground for pride and nationalism, from which neither side looks willing to step down. A former Prime Minister of Japan, Hatoyama, pledged a further $7 million to strengthen its footing on the small island of Okinotori, which China argues cannot be part of Japan’s Exclusive Economic Zone. For the Chinese, and South Koreans, Japanese ownership of the territory would impede their “fleet’s freedom of navigation along some key routes”. Yet these rocks have national prestige embedded within them, and the increased activity of both countries’ navies around such areas leads to an increase in tension and a higher possibility of military accidents.
What is evident in the region is China’s much more active navy, that has popped up near Guam, in Japanese waters and near American aircraft carriers. Despite apologising for their “error”, these are most likely displays of Chinese naval capabilities. Yet why would a country that claims to only have an army for internal security need a navy? This question has unnerved officials in Tokyo, and there are considerations to amend their post war constitution to allow for a Japanese force instead of solely relying on the USA. While the Chinese navy might be a form of its acceptance as a world superpower by taking to the stage at sea, it also has people ominously considering the navy preparation for its designs on disputed territories, like the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands.
The Chinese state that their “sovereignty over these islands is fully proven by history and is legally well-founded”, as the Chinese were the first to document the existence of the Islands. Whereas the Japanese state “[the islands] showed no trace of having been under the control of China… [the] Senkaku Islands have continuously remained as an integral part of the Nansei Shoto Islands which are the territory of Japan”. I read an interesting blog on the NY Times, researching the Japanese National Archive's Diplomatic Records Office for documents regarding the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands (read here). It essentially concluded that the Islands were seized by Japan in 1895 as 'war booty', while the Japanese say they legally own the Islands under the Japan-US Security Defence Treaty. The Japanese Prime Minister further inflamed Chinese nationalists by proposing to 'purchase' the islands.
As of yet, there has been no detente over the issue, but at least the protests that erupted all over China have discontinued. Japanese property and embassies were stoned, Japanese products were (and in many places, still are) boycotted, and in one extreme case, the Chinese owner of a Japanese car was viciously struck by a brick to the head in a frenzy of anti-Japan feeling. Fortunately, other members of the crowd thought this was too much, and he was eventually given help, although he remains in a coma from the attack.
Both sides seem unable to back down, each sending vessels into the disputed waters in a 'to-me-to-you' fashion. As this persists, there will be no visible end to the discord.
*An issue based around a youth hostel that was located in Kyoto, and in 1950 it was purchased by the Taiwanese, the debate circles around whether the property it belongs to China or Taiwan, as China states that it is not just a lawsuit but about the legal rights of the Chinese government.
No comments:
Post a Comment