Senkaku/Diaoyu/Tiaoyutai/Pinnacle Islands dispute

[Sumeragi]

That's the problem: There is no "first to discover and name" situation with Senkaku. Furthermore, Taiwan itself was never part of China Proper until the Qing invaded it when Ming Loyalists escaped the to island. At no time was there any consideration of Senkaku as Chinese territory.

[forfrosne]

So you've completely arbitrarily decided that while W, X, and Y are perfectly valid means of claiming an island, Z isn't. You haven't provided any reasoning or evidence for your claim that historical documents are not enough to claim land.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

When it comes to Senkaku and the following there are answers.

2. Force of arms was completed last by the United States. They had ownership of the islands until they decided to hand them over to the Japanese.
3. The Treaty of San Francisco is the primary international treaty recognized. The Treaty of Taipei added little that is relevant to the issues on the islands in question. Japan gave up claims to a large swath of territories. They did not all return to their previous owners. A few went to the United States. These islands included. When the US decided to withdraw, they handed the islands back to Japan.

@2. Force of Arms is not about how things were, but about how things are. If the Chinese have superior military power to Japan (and it's allies), then there isn't much Japan can do to stop them taking them. Of course, these kind of aggressive acts are dangerous...

@3. It's a treaty, sure, but treaties only exist with the consent of the parties involved, as far as I can see, the Chinese never actually consented to that treaty, and so are free to take issue with it.

Originally Posted by Kokukirin

I don't see your reasoning for not counting historical documents and therefore the right of ownership by discovery in territorial claims. Providing an absurd example with little relevance to the current situation does not count.

If we were to use how things were 300 years ago, then Austria should own half of central Europe, the Turks the Middle East and Balkans, Britain should own the eastern United States and Mexico should own all of the Western United States. As for the USA, it doesn't even exist...

The world has changed a lot since 1700.

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

Because those historical documents do NOT mention the islands at any point in connection to onwership until the Japanese brought them up.

Even if they did, it wouldn't matter. They're just pieces of paper.

Originally Posted by willx

And the Moon .. although we've been down this route before. People will "change their minds" when it becomes feasible and viable to exploit it.

Ultimately, with regards to territorial disputes, realistically what will happen is after a massive cost-benefit analysis and a lot of pride and headbutting .. nothing will get resolved..

Man.. Everything should just go to whoever is closest to it, barring populated areas, where inhabitants that have lived there for >(insert arbitrary long period of time) get to vote themselves on which country they want to be part of.. Oh, wishful thinking..

Indeed. Even if there is an antarctic treaty, as soon as people figure out a viable way to exploit the continent, it'll go right out the window.

Originally Posted by Kokukirin

I am quite sure being first to discover and name an uninhabited land is a valid argument for ownership. Whether being uninhabited after discovery means others are free to take over is really up for dispute.

No, it isn't. Just because you saw it first means jack. The Spaniards saw America first, does that mean they got to take it all? No, every other European power stepped in and took chunks for themselves. The Spanish only got as much as they were able to defend.

Anyway, even if you see it and claim it, you can't really own it if you don't use it. Squatters get precedence(in western property law...). You can't keep property if you're not prepared to defend it.

Originally Posted by forfrosne

So you've completely arbitrarily decided that while W, X, and Y are perfectly valid means of claiming an island, Z isn't. You haven't provided any reasoning or evidence for your claim that historical documents are not enough to claim land.

There is good reason to discount historical documents, and that is that there is a statute of limitations on crimes. If you steal from me, then it is reasonable for me to claim compensation. But if your dead great-grandfather stole from my dead great-grandfather, and you now own that property, it is not reasonable for me to prosecute you. While the great grandfather committed a crime, no one is now alive who remembers it, and you did nothing wrong. What was my great-grandfather's property is now your property. Your grandfather committed an unjust act, but you are just an innocent. My seizing your property due to my great grandfather is more of an injustice.

In the case of 1700, it's not even my great grandfather. It's my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-Grandfather.

So what if the Qing dynasty though they owned it? Under what basis could they claim it? It's not like they occupied it. In terms of unoccupied unused territory, might makes right. No one can be said to reasonably own it. The Islands are unoccupied, and have never been occupied. They are a no-man's land. No one has legitimate claim to the islands.

If Ming dynasty maps list them as Chinese it doesn't mean a thing, the Ming never posted anyone there. And you know what? The Ming thought they owned the whole world anyway. I'm sure the Japanese would love the Chinese claiming Japan on that basis.

[Ridwan]

I wonder why some people just keeps forgetting that Chiang declined Senkaku/Diaoyu when it was offered to him. And before that, the thing was formally Japanese for years since First Sino-Japanese War, decades before the place started to matter. Japanese claim in this matter is just stronger here.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Ridwan

I wonder why some people just keeps forgetting that Chiang declined Senkaku/Diaoyu when it was offered to him. And before that, the thing was formally Japanese for years since First Sino-Japanese War, decades before the place started to matter. Japanese claim in this matter is just stronger here.

How does Chiang's decision have any bearing?

[Ridwan]

How his decision doesn't ? He was THE leader of China when post-WW2 territorial exchange happened. That much explains everything, really. Neglecting the fact that Senkaku was already formally Japanese before Chiang refused it doesn't show much objectivity of stance regarding this matter. It means, Senkaku has never been Chinese since the First Sino-Japanese war, period.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Ridwan

How his decision doesn't ? He was THE leader of China when post-WW2 territorial exchange happened. That much explains everything, really. Neglecting the fact that Senkaku was already formally Japanese before Chiang refused it doesn't show much objectivity of stance regarding this matter. It means, Senkaku has never been Chinese since the First Sino-Japanese war, period.

That was the ROC, was the recognized government of a China still mired in a civil war, which has little to do with the PRC, which is the current government of China today, which is a separate entity all-together.

Frankly, all of these paper-waving is ultimately pointless. In international politics, the one who wins in the end is the one with the bigger stick right now, whether militarily or economically

[Ridwan]

PRC has even less basis to claim it. But of course you're right that paper waving matters less compared to material and diplomatic power, but historical facts and precedents aren't useless to determine which has better legitimacy, especially when there is power. And for us civilian observers, it helps us to actually understand the situation.

[Sumeragi]

Food for thought: Mao agreed with Chiang's decision at Cairo.

[Kokukirin]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

That's the problem: There is no "first to discover and name" situation with Senkaku. Furthermore, Taiwan itself was never part of China Proper until the Qing invaded it when Ming Loyalists escaped the to island. At no time was there any consideration of Senkaku as Chinese territory.

Um, the earliest map to include the islands with a name attached to them is not "discover and name"? Not even the Japanese dispute this. It also has nothing to do with Taiwan, which at the time of discovery was barely in the circle of Chinese civilization. The Senkaku/Diaoyu was simply considered grouped with Taiwan at a later date because of proximity. And the Japanese occupation came later still.

[Sumeragi]

What is a map but just a record of whatever it's trying to record? Did anyone explicitly say who discovered it? Was a claim ever laid to it? The answer is no, except for retroactive justification.

Let's face it: Senkaku was truly terra nullius compared to the other two territorial disputes Japan is involved in (Dokdo and the Northern Territories).

[Ithekro]

The only known occupations of the Senkaku Islands were in the 1900s by Japanese citizens. First from 1900 - 1940 for a fishing purposes, and then much later the brief occupation to build a lighthouse in a fit of nationalism.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Ridwan

How his decision doesn't ? He was THE leader of China when post-WW2 territorial exchange happened. That much explains everything, really. Neglecting the fact that Senkaku was already formally Japanese before Chiang refused it doesn't show much objectivity of stance regarding this matter. It means, Senkaku has never been Chinese since the First Sino-Japanese war, period.

Originally Posted by kyp275

That was the ROC, was the recognized government of a China still mired in a civil war, which has little to do with the PRC, which is the current government of China today, which is a separate entity all-together.

Frankly, all of these paper-waving is ultimately pointless. In international politics, the one who wins in the end is the one with the bigger stick right now, whether militarily or economically

Indeed. It's who has the bigger stick now that matters. Chiang is long dead, his decisions don't matter anymore.

Personally I think the most equitable solution would be to draw the naval border as if the Senkakus weren't there at all.

Or maybe someone should just put some bombs under them and blow them up. Bye Bye Senkakus, bye bye territorial dispute. You can't have a dispute over rocks that don't exist.

[Ithekro]

The last treaty that involves these islands was in 1971 between the US and Japan.

Agreement Between the United States of America and Japan Concerning the Ryukyu Islands and the Daito Islands

The islands themselves, like all the previous treaties, are not specifically named. however at that time they were administered under the US controlled Ryukyu Islands government. When the Ryukyus went back to Japan in this treaty, so did the Senkaku Islands.

As for holding via force of arms. The Japanese have warded off the massive number of small craft the Taiwanese and Chinese have sent out that way using just the Coast Guard. While the issue is over sovereignty of the islands and probably more importantly the maritime borders, the question of who is administering the islands is not in dispute. Japan administers the Islands from Okinawa.

At least one of those islands is used as a bombing practise target for the United States. (Kuba, the second largest of the islands)

[maplehurry]

China claiming Senkaku makes as much sense as Native claiming American territories outside what they have been given, and that's their best case scenario.

It would be "fair game" if China wants to take it by force (not that I would support it especially since Japan is now "armless").

[NoemiChan]

Originally Posted by maplehurry

China claiming Senkaku makes as much sense as Native claiming American territories outside what they have been given, and that's their best case scenario.

I think its different... The Natives has the right since its attached literally to their land and it was their for hundred of years until the colonies driven them away...

However the disputed lands being claimed are actually group of islands surrounded by water and uninhabited.

Originally Posted by maplehurry

It would be "fair game" if China wants to take it by force (not that I would support it especially since Japan is now "armless").

But does that make them helpless? As if the other nations will just sit, watch and eat pop corn while China plants flag on every islands they claim.

[maplehurry]

^I don't disagree, i simply didnt elaborate... and you make it sound like as if I was "defending" China's claim on the island with the Native analogy. I did mention "best case scenario" meaning it could be less legit than Native's claim. And the Native did move around alot without officially owning many of the lands as a famous British philosopher/politician mentioned in his writings.

But does that make them helpless? As if the other nations will just sit, watch and eat pop corn while China plants flag on every islands they claim.

This is common sense but I will say this just in case. IF China escalate the situations, they would face the same or worse fate than Imperial Japan did in ww2. I mentioned "armless" because Japan is no longer invasive as it once was, not that they would be helpless.

[Ridwan]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

Indeed. It's who has the bigger stick now that matters. Chiang is long dead, his decisions don't matter anymore.

Since PRC's stick isn't big enough to convince everyone of their point of view, it still kinda matters.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Ridwan

Since PRC's stick isn't big enough to convince everyone of their point of view, it still kinda matters.

If the PRC doesn't have a big enough stick, then what are they going to do?

But to be honest, I don't think the PRC are stirring this up now because they legitimately want to defend their claims on the islands. It's to divert attention from certain other events currently taking place in China.

A few months from now it will all be swept under the carpet.

[Ridwan]

That is true.