Very scary news reported the other day in the Taipei Times. The National Security Council (NSC) has ordered that Taiwan students be taught that the Senkaku Islands, which are currently part of Japan, actually belong to China.The Ministry of Education (MOE) has caused a stir with its recent directive that elementary and junior high schools teach that the disputed Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) “have been a part of China since ancient times,” and consequently belong to the Republic of China (ROC).The position that the Senkakus belong to "China" is an invention of both Chinese governments since the late 1960s (Ampontan has a long post discussing this, with many maps and references). Prior to that time, both governments regarded the islands as uncontroversial Japanese territory. The claim to the Senkakus is thus another item in the long wave of Chinese territorial expansion that Asia has witnessed since the 1930s, which follows the typical pattern of Chinese making claims to a given territory based on some interaction that the government has followed in the past.
Critics called it “brain-washing under the guise of education.”
Huang Chi-teng (黃子騰), head of the ministry’s Department of Elementary Education, said the directive was sent after an interministerial meeting convened by the National Security Council (NSC), in which it was decided that the ministry would give schools a paper for use as reference in teaching “the relations between the Diaoyutai Islands and Taiwan.”
The paper, which includes comments such as “Japan stole the Diaoyutai Islands,” places China and Taiwan on the same side opposing Japan, using the claim that “the Diaoyutai Islands have belonged to China in the past” to argue that sovereignty over the Diaoyutais belongs to the ROC.
On so many levels this is scary. For one thing it is bound to peeve Japan. It shows that the KMT continues to regard education as a process of ideological indoctrination. It also gives a glimpse of the Party-State mentality that continues to drive the KMT's interactions with the rest of society. It shows how the KMT Administration regards itself as "Chinese." And finally, as many of us noted at the time, it is a prophecy of conflicts to come.
Will Taiwanese voters notice? Perhaps the DPP can somehow make them pay attention....
This directive coincided with a forum between scholars from China and ROC scholars from Taiwan at which a MOFA official declared that the Senkakus (Diaoyutais to the Chinese) belonged to China.
Earlier at the forum, Wu Jinan (吳寄南), director and senior fellow of the Department of Japanese Studies at Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, Shaw Han-yi (紹漢儀), a research fellow at the Research Center for the International Legal Studies at National Chengchi University, as well as other Chinese and Taiwanese academics, presented papers to rebut Japan’s claims to sovereignty over the islands.Frighteningly, this official envisions Taiwanese boys dying to make the Senkakus safe for Beijing's expansion. Fortunately China will never declare that the Senkakus belong to Taiwan, but the mentality exhibited here is scary.
Examining related legal claims and historical evidence under international law and traditional East Asian order, the academics concluded that the Diaoyutais belong to “China.”
Asked to comment on the conclusion, Shaw Yu-ming said he did not find it problematic saying the islands belong to China as opposed to the ROC.
“Like I said, the Diaoyutai Islands were incorporated into the Kavalan Prefecture administration office in 1837. At that time, the ROC had not been established. Furthermore, the ROC is also part of China. China is the generic term for the ROC and the People’s Republic of China [PRC]. This case shows why the ‘1992 consensus’ is necessary. For us, it’s the ROC, and for the mainland, it’s the PRC. Together, it’s China,” he said.
Shaw Yu-ming said he agreed to the suggestion made by several Chinese academics at the forum that “China shall publicly declare its position that the Diaoyutai Islands belong to Taiwan.”
“If we say that the Diaoyutais belong to ‘China,’ it would lead some people in Taiwan to wonder why they need to fight for sovereignty of the islands. But if China declares that the Diaoyutai Islands belong to Taiwan, which I think it would not oppose because Taiwan is part of its territory in China’s view, the problem would be solved,” Shaw Yu-ming said.
Note also the use of terms like "stolen territory." Many Chinese believe that Okinawa is similarly "stolen territory". The public rhetoric suggests a revanchist position that will make it difficult to avoid conflict between Japan and China. This rhetoric also shows how Taiwan, the Senkakus, and Okinawa are all basically linked in Chinese minds and thus, how expansion into any one area will lead to more expansion into the others. Brrr......
I took a short look at Shaw Han-yi's long piece on the Senkakus here. It is simply a sophisticated bit of ultra-nationalistic historical exegesis that utterly fails to establish its case, but gives a good look at how such things are constructed.
________________________
Daily Links:
- Steve Yates, former Bush Administration official, in Mandarin, on Taiwan-US relations (video)
- Jamestown Brief on the latest White Paper from the Ministry of National Defense.
- Taiwanese-American California Supreme Court Justice Goodwin Liu's swearing in speech
- Drew blogs on our ride along historic 137 today. We swung around Bagua Shan on 152 and then went the length of 137 back to Changhua City. Really an enjoyable ride, 125 kms for me in total.
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.
Claiming the Senkakus for China when one has outlasted ones welcome on Japanese Taiwan? Bigu, bigu missuteku.
ReplyDeleteThe Formosan Japanese are waking up to their status. Rally held to commemorate 1951 San Francisco Treaty.(http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/
archives/2011/09/05/2003512486)
“The aim of the parade was to say to both the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the international community that Taiwan does not belong to China, organizers said."
Sadly, they spoiled a good opportunity to warn the Formosan Japanese against voting in elections held by the Chinese occupier and in which the Chinese refugees (exiles) will participate.
The following quote gives an insight into what the Formosan Japanese need to deal with before Formosa can see the light at the end of the tunnel.
“Nobody can deny the fact that Taiwan is a sovereign country,” DPP Secretary-General Su Jia-chyuan (蘇嘉全) told reporters before the parade.
ROC DPP Secretary-General Su Jia-chyuan (蘇嘉全) is irretrievably brainwashed. And Su Jya-chien had not read any of the literature handed at the demonstration.
Either at San Francisco or at Taihoku, nobody received the sovereignty of Taiwan. And that “nobody” includes the Formosan Japanese who had reneged on their motherland in her times of woes when they “deemed” themselves “liberated” by their foe and occupier.
By the time SFPT came into force, Formosa had been part of metropolitan Japan for seven years and twenty seven days. The martyrs of 228 are Japanese victims of Chinese atrocities.
The funny thing about many of these island disputes, including the Senkakus, Dokdo, Paracel and Spratly islands is that under the UN Law of the Seas, virtually none of them can be claimed since they are not considered "habitable". Putting a few people on an island does not make it habitable under the UN definition. So what all this really comes down to is politics; it's all negotiable. I can't see Japan getting Dokdo from South Korea or China getting the Senkakus from Japan. Remember, Japan has the second best Navy in the world. The South China Sea is more wide open since none of the participants have a powerful navy, though China is getting there. The US Navy is the key factor in terms of who ends up controlling those islands.
ReplyDeleteIt's sad that so much vitriol is wasted over a few rocks. which are irrelevant to all parties. What is relevant are fishing, petroleum, natural gas and geopolitical navigation issues, all wrapped up in nationalistic fervor. Sure seems similar to pre-WWI Europe.
The Senkakus are habitable. Two of the islands have springs. Many of the disputed islands in the South China Sea are habitable as well.
ReplyDeleteAnd that “nobody” includes the Formosan Japanese who had reneged on their motherland in her times of woes when they “deemed” themselves “liberated” by their foe and occupier.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't include the locals, Waltzer. Under the SFPT, sovereignty has reverted to the locals. Moreover, the UN agreements on postwar decolonization mandate a plebiscite for decolonized areas like Taiwan.
"Doesn't include the locals, Waltzer. Under the SFPT, sovereignty has reverted to the locals. Moreover, the UN agreements on postwar decolonization mandate a plebiscite for decolonized areas like Taiwan.
ReplyDeleteSeptember 5, 2011 8:17 AM"
Hi Michael, I agree with you but there are some very few old folks likely in their seventies who still have that fervent colonial mentality.
I suspect this guy even possess that 'Imperial Japanese' forehead and marches with a samurai by his side.
Him insisting on labelling the Taiwanese as 'Formosan Japanese' is insulting .
If he doesn't believe that Taiwan is a sovereign country then I think he is not only an Imperial Japanese antique but also a modern Beijing conniver .
I do believe that both China and Japan is a much better place for him to ply his trade and him using that ' Formosan Japanese' slur is a little bit abusive.
Please don't abuse Taiwanese hospitality.
Respectfully,
Taiwan is Taiwan
Hi Michael,
ReplyDeleteUnder UNCLOS, the Senkakus are not considered habitable islands regardless of a couple of springs. That's not my definition, it's theirs. The claims made by both China and Japan are based on other factors: http://www.scribd.com/doc/39076809/CIN305
As far as the islands in the South China Sea, you are correct that some come under UNCLOS' "habitable" definition but many that are included in that dotted line on Chinese maps that go right up the the borders of several countries, certainly do not. China is really pushing it on these claims, which are more nationalistic than realistic.
Back when I was at Villanova University during the '70s, I took an international political science class and our professor spent the entire semester on UNCLOS, of which he was heavily involved on the original committee. It was very complex! Since that time it's evolved but I remember how tricky some of these disputes could be.
"Doesn't include the locals, Waltzer. Under the SFPT, sovereignty has reverted to the locals."
ReplyDeleteWhere’s the item, article or chapter of SFPT supporting your definitely bold assertion that a government of the Formosans by the Formosans was ever declared or recognized the recipient of the sovereignty of Formosa?
"Moreover, the UN agreements on postwar decolonization mandate a plebiscite for decolonized areas like Taiwan."
And Michael J. Cole’s latest post on how Ban Ki-moon got corrected in 2007 for having assigned the sovereignty of Taiwan to China illustrates perfectly why Dulles took great care not to allow for Formosa to be handled by the UN.
As for a referendum, who will vote? The "people on Taiwan" or only the "people of Taiwan"? Who will be in charge?
Nobody ever received the sovereignty of Taiwan. And that “nobody” includes the Formosan Japanese who had reneged on their motherland in her times of woes when they “deemed” themselves “liberated” by their foe and occupier.
I insist that by the time SFPT came into force, Formosa had been part of metropolitan Japan for seven years and twenty seven days. Not a disposable colony anymore. The martyrs of 228 are Japanese victims of Chinese atrocities.
Tkacik addresses that claim that UNCLOS does not include the Senkakus as habitable here.
ReplyDeletePeterson's article gets much of the history wrong. The 18th century maps prove nothing but what one individual mapmaker located far from the territories in question thought. China recognized them as Japanese from their seizure in 1895, not in the twenty years since WWII.
Michael
Michael, thanks for that link. As I said before, the issue can be argued from different sides. Personally, I feel Japan has the stronger case. I don't think either side wants the UN involved because neither wants to take a chance that they could lose a ruling, and the UN isn't particularly objective about such matters.
ReplyDeleteRegardless of who develops the oil and gas deposits, the only realistic pipeline would be to China because of the ocean depths on the Okinawa side. That's why I think in the end, they'll work out some kind of deal once China can get past her nationalistic sentiments. In the end, this comes down to negotiation, not law. Since Japan has the second best Navy in the world, I wouldn't be too worried if I were them.