20101008 Diaoyutai claim not upheld by old papers

Diaoyutai claim not upheld by old papers

BY JAMES WANG 王景弘

China has been making endless claims that Taiwan has been a part of Chinese territory since ancient times and Taiwanese have been using ancient and vaguely worded Chinese documents to try and prove that the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) belong to Taiwan.

While these documents may be interesting, they are devoid of meaning in terms of international law.

The sovereignty issues surrounding the Diaoyutais have nothing to do with researching ancient documents; they involve international treaties.

Before the Treaty of Shimonoseki was signed in 1895, Japan had already incorporated the Diaoyutais into its territory. In terms of the territories handed over to Japan in this treaty, the latitude and longitude of the Pescadores Group were clearly stated, while, as far as Taiwan goes, it only specified “the island of Formosa, together with all islands appertaining or belonging to the said island of Formosa.”

Article 2, (b) of the Treaty of San Francisco states: “Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores.” It did not, however, list any other appertaining islands or any latitude and longitude and therefore this cannot be used to say that Japan gave up the Diaoyutai Islands.

Instead, for the Diaoyutais, the treaty stated that, “Japan will concur in any proposal of the United States to the United Nations to place under its trusteeship system, with the United States as the sole administering authority, Nansei Shoto south of 29 degrees north latitude (including the Ryukyu Islands and the Daito Islands), Nanpo Shoto south of Sofu Gan (including the Bonin Islands, Rosario Island and the Volcano Islands) and Parece Vela and Marcus Island.”

In 1953, the US civil administration of the Ryukyu Islands announced that the territory of the Ryukyus would include all islands, atolls and rocks between 28 degrees north latitude, 124 degrees 40 minutes east longitude and 240 degrees north latitude, 122 degrees east longitude.

In negotiations with the US in 1970, the then-Republic of China ambassador to the US, Chow Shu-kai (周書楷) admitted that this clearly defined latitude and longitude placed the Diaoyutais within the area under US trusteeship.

According to the Treaty of San Francisco, Japan did not renounce the Nansei Shoto and therefore the US admitted that Japan still has residual sovereignty over these areas.

In 1972 at the end of their entrustment, they were returned to Japan and the US merely stated that it did not hold any position on sovereignty disputes over the region before the Treaty of San Francisco was in existence.

However, before the Treaty of San Francisco, there were no disputes over the sovereignty of the Diaoyutai Islands.

To now rely on archaic Chinese documents to proclaim sovereignty over the Diaoyutais is as ludicrous as claiming that because Taiwan has temples devoted to the God of War, Guangong (關公), Guangong once ruled Taiwan.

James Wang is a media commentator.