Japan ex-China envoy: Tokyo erred in buying islands

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

  • -7

    ReformedBasher

    China is entirely to blame. It is THEY who should have done their own homework and realize that the Japanese government were trying to defuse the situation. Something THEY could have verified by camly discussing if their was any doubt on THEIR part.

    Nobody told them to make threats. In the meantime, have THEY stopped sending a continuous stream if ships and planes to show THEIR good faith.

  • 9

    ChibaChick

    ....and seemed driven by factors he could not explain

    Step forward and take a bow Mr Ishihara.

  • 1

    Tamarama

    I agree - they could not afford to let the islands be bought by Ishihara. They did the right thing.

    China have behaved like children over this - they are responsible for escalating the situation to dangerous levels.

  • 5

    kurumazaka

    I don't see what choice Noda had. Ishihara forced his hand. Would be nice if Beijing would acknowledge that.

  • 10

    nedinjapan

    Kudos to Uichiro Niwa, the first Japanese diplomat to put some sense into his words and the issue. The Japanese government should let him start classes on diplomacy for all diplomatic staff.

  • 2

    LiveInTokyo

    To allow Ishihara get involved in an international policy decision was a huge mistake. His views were widely known as were his opinions about the Chinese. It is easy to see how this whole started.

  • -12

    OssanAmerica

    This guy Niwa is an idiot. So...what would China have done if the J-govt had NOT bought the 3 islands, and Ishihara proceeded to buy them and develop them? Wasn't there an agreement between China and Japan that there would be no development of he islands? Furthermore, if the J-govt owning any of the islands is enough to make China practically start a war, why didn't they do so for decades when the J-govt already owned one of the islands and even the U.S. use it as a live bombing training site? By China's own claims, the United States has been "bombing Chinese Sovereign territory since ancient times" without any complaints? China has been planning on making a move on these islands, and others in e South China Sea for years and no one is buying their rather silly arguments today.

  • -1

    hoserfella

    Wow. So the time-honored Japanese tradition of old, incompetent, bitter, petty, ill-advised politics like Ishihara's backfired? Whoda thunk it?

  • 12

    marcelito

    Ossan - no Niwa is not an idiot ...you are way off with such an insult...in fact he sounds like a sensible guy giving good insight into the Chinese way of thinking. What would China have done had Japan not bought the islands ? Nobody knows but its a good bet they wouldn,t have done much and pretty much leave the Senkakus on the backburner as was the case for decades.

  • -6

    sfjp330

    Article (Niwa) saids: “There was a feeling on the Chinese side that Japan violated a relationship of trust,” he said. Coming shortly after a meeting between Noda and Chinese President Hu Jintao, it was viewed in Beijing as an “insult.”

    What trust is Niwa talking about? He must've have head in the sand. There is no bilateral negotiations with China over Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands or any islands in South China Seas. Does Niwa have any clue on Sansha? Why don't Chinese tell you about Sansha and ask how Vietnam and Philippines think about it? China's newest city Sansha is a remote island in the South China Sea barely large enough to host a single airstrip. It has a post office, bank, supermarket and a hospital, but little else. Welcome to Sansha, China's expanding to world's most disputed waters, portions of which are also claimed by Vietnam, the Philippines and other neighbors. The Philippines does not recognize the city or its jurisdiction, and Vietnam said China's actions violated international law. Sansha was stolen. Ask Vietnam and Philippines if China violated a relationship of trust, the answer is clear. And Niwa talks about relationship and trust? Got to laugh at this.

  • 7

    volland

    While some of you correctly recognize Ishihara as the cause of the problem, you still fail to see what it looks like to China, that this politician was again re-elected by the japanese people. And he do not run in some backward country village...

    You might also look at some of the commentaries here, and start worrying about the future....

  • -10

    OssanAmerica

    marcelitoJan. 29, 2013 - 08:53AM JST Ossan - no Niwa is not an idiot ...you are way off with such an insult...in fact he sounds like a sensible guy giving good >insight into the Chinese way of thinking. What would China have done had Japan not bought the islands ? Nobody >knows but its a good bet they wouldn,t have done much and pretty much leave the Senkakus on the backburner as >was the case for decades.

    China wouldn't have done much if Ishihara had bought and built on the islands???? Look what China has done when Japan prevented that from happening. I think your views do not reflect reality.

  • 2

    FightingViking

    "If we were a married couple, we could opt for a divorce, but we cannot," Niwa said.

    So who would have obtained "custody" ???

  • -2

    sfjp330

    marcelito Jan. 29, 2013 - 08:53AM JST What would China have done had Japan not bought the islands ?

    Same thing. In reality, China doesn't care about the islands. They are more interested in the resources that may exist in their vicinity (oil, gas, fish, etc.) and wants possession in order to extend its "exclusive economic zone." If you notice in any Chinese media, the $6 billion in ODA that Japan gave to China in the 1970's to build and moderize their infastructures, only the few communist goverment members knew at the time that Japan contributed greatly to rebuild China, but they took the credit. In the 1970's and 80's, Chinese goverment never publicly told their citizens that Japan help rebuild their airports, cities and facilities.

  • -11

    hidingout

    Niwa, whose former company Itochu Corp has extensive interests in China

    Yup. That's what I thought. Spoken like a man who puts his company's interests above those of his country.

  • 1

    Asianhometown

    If you think that Mr Ishibara did not plan for the central government to purchase the island them you fell for his deception. Of course Mr Noda and Mr Ishihara worked together for Toyko to purchase the island. It's called Good cop bad cop. If you recall the events leading up to the purchase , Chinese fishing boat ramming into Japanese coast guard ship, or Chinese nationals landed on the island and so on Noda and Ishihara felt that Japan needed to officially take control of the island. I read an article where Noda visited Ishihara several times before the purchase.

  • -3

    sfjp330

    Asianhometown Jan. 29, 2013 - 09:32AM JST Of course Mr Noda and Mr Ishihara worked together for Toyko to purchase the island. It's called Good cop bad cop.

    Ishihara is a local mayor of Tokyo and he should stay focuse on his city only. Why was he getting involved in a international problems? There are boundaries for politicans, and Noda should've shut this guy up. He got more problems in his rat infested city to take care of.

  • 1

    cabadaje

    Kudos to Uichiro Niwa, the first Japanese diplomat to put some sense into his words and the issue. The Japanese government should let him start classes on diplomacy for all diplomatic staff.

    Hmm...internal diplomacy, yes. Kinda of glad he's not still on the political stage. This was very much a business-environment strategic statement. A good one, sensible and reasonable to be sure, but ultimately, business, not politics.

    @issa1

    Niwa and Hatoyama are very lucky to own japanese citizenship. In any other country in the world would be arrested for endangering national security.Japan needs to rush to approve anti-spy law.

    There's nothing dangerous about this. It's covered under Freedom of Speech.

  • -1

    gokai_wo_maneku

    China is not so stupid. They know very well about Ishihara's plan and that the aim of Noda's purchase was to prevent him from redeveloping the islands. They just used this to push back the Japanese invasion of the Chinese economy. Japan was being too successful. Also, they needed a prop to support their ultra-nationalistic history they teach in school in which Japan is a great evil that the CCP defeated (actually, I think we were defeated by the US). That is part of the party's claim to ligitimacy. The island dispute is a chance for China to do many things. Also, I write "redeveloping" because the islands had already been developed for half a century in the early 1900s as a fish processing facility, with factories, houses, shops etc. There are even graves on the islands. China didn't complain then. Now they are just using the situation for their advantage.

    I guess that in those recent meetings with Chinese officials, Japanese officials must have agreed to have someone say it was wrong, so why not use Mr. Niwa who actually though it was wrong. Very convenient. There will be a few other Japanese apologists, then it will calm down. Otherwise, there will be war, with the US drawn in.

  • -1

    issa1

    To Asianhometown,

    Haha good joke,but you are wrong! Never forget that niwa and loopy Hatoyama held top positions in japanese government. I've never seen a former president or former U.S. ambassador to make so stupid comments.

  • 1

    hkitagj

    We can't never forget. The islands are not their real interest and they already sent ships before Tokyo governor try to buy the islands.

  • 3

    smithinjapan

    Everyone with a brain knows this, and yet some people insist all this is somehow China's fault, Japan is the victim, and China is doing all the provoking.

    Kurumazaka: "I don't see what choice Noda had. Ishihara forced his hand. Would be nice if Beijing would acknowledge that."

    That does not make it any less Japan's fault or wrong doing. The Japanese government could have easily 'said no' to Ishihara -- after all, he wasn't going to use his own personal funds to develop the islands, was he? And if the government can stop private owners from selling the islands to one party, they can do it for others. So blame it on the government, or blame it on Ishihara, but Japan wins the blame for all this escalation hands down.

    Kudos for Niwa for having the guts not only to have maintained decent ties with China while he was in office (before the government recalled him for face-saving measures), but for saying it like it is.

  • -1

    GW

    Both China & Japan knew that ishihara had to be taken out of the picture, OBVIOUS from both points of view!

    Problem as Niwa has pointed out was HOW Japan took the wind outta ishi's sails! If Japan had been its usual sneaky, behind the scenes, sounded out China & then invented some entity or some thing to "buy" the islands all this MAY have been prevented but no it was all out there, noisy, daft(from both sides) & then the govt bought the isles.

    China had no choice but to be pissed off! Both sides are idiots for sure but Japan REALLY blew this one

  • 0

    megosaa

    “There was a feeling on the Chinese side that Japan violated a relationship of trust,” he said.

    and how do the Japanese trust someone that lurks in their waters constantly?

  • 5

    herefornow

    Ossan - no Niwa is not an idiot ...you are way off with such an insult...

    Marcelito -- spot on. Ossan tends to shoot first and aim later. And any time he can dump on China as the big, bad bully of Asia, he does so without any thinking. In fact, his knee jerk reaction is just what Noda's government did, and Niwa is critisizing. A more calculated strategy might have been to communicate through back-channels with Beijing and advise them that because of domestic political reasons they were going to allow Ishihara to play his little game of foreign intrigue a little longer, and then, at the appropriate time they would step in and do what was in Japan's best interest -- most likely puchasing the islands -- but not throwing sand in China's face in doing so. Ishihara is an old fool and China could have been made to understand that and allow things to play out without costing Japanese companies billions in lost revenues in China. No mature country/government with any credibility in foreign affairs lets a mayor dictate their policies. The idiots here were the Japanese in forcing China's hand.

  • 3

    marcelito

    Ossan - as IF the J-government could not find a legal avenue ( or behind the scenes leverage ) to stop Ishihara from purchasing / developing the islands if they wanted REALLY wanted to.

  • 0

    gokai_wo_maneku

    @Smithinjapan Ishihara was not going to use government funds. He raised several billion yen privately to buy the islands for development. That was reported right here at JT.

  • 1

    HollisBrown

    Who is to blame? Who erred? What factors explain where we are now?

    Ishihara is to blame for igniting the whole issue. The people/institutions of Tokyo that donated money to support Ishihara's plan are partly to blame for their own ignorance of the situation. The Japanese government are to blame for not dealing with Ishihara strongly enough right at the beginning - (Ishihara was holding press conferences and making up his own foreign policy at one stage). The Japanese government are to blame for taking the actions they did in purchasing the island. There were other more diplomatic solutions available. The Chinese people who rioted and vandalised Japanese companies are to blame for inciting the issue further. The Chinese government are to blame for not stopping them. The Chinese government are to blame for the way they've continued to react and further fuel the situation. The UN is to blame for not trying hard enough to solve the dispute.

    This is why I will never be a diplomat.

  • 2

    chillguys

    Instead of buying the islands in a fear that they do not go in the hands of Ishihara, J-Gov should have amend the laws so that nobody can buy or sell these islands. I mean if they can make it illegal to step on these islands without their permission, they could have easily made the changes in laws to make sale or purchase without permission illegal. But then common sense is not very common these days.

  • -1

    Sentiments

    It is likely that the Chinese could not accept any actions taken by the Japanese about the Ishihara incident, since it would make there standpoint weaker on the Senkakus. The positions were locked in a symbolic and diplomatic way. But of course thats only one interpretation of several possible. Anyway I think Japans strong attitude is paying off now. Japan has a much better position to start negotiations.

  • 0

    Surf O'Holic

    It is somewhat interesting that while the US has indeed been using one of the islands for bombing practice for a long time, and China(and Taiwan) have recently been claiming "irrefutable sovereignty " over the same islands, that neither the Chinese nor Taiwanese have protested their sovereign historical land being flagrantly bombed. Perhaps because....it's not theirs?

  • -1

    CrisGerSan

    This is hardly a valid point of view from a man who is heavily invested in Chinese buisness himself. I dont pay much creedence to him sorry. All the facts remain on the side of Japan and that it did the right thing. China will continue to push and bully no matter what anyone does. This is the only reasonable course for Japan. Sorry. But thank you for the article, another example of vested interest betraying their own country.

  • 0

    highball7

    If what Niwa, the ambassador to one of 2 most important nations to Japan said is true about him not having access to pivotal information, then this is an absolute failure of communication within the Japanese gov't. Japan must re-evaluate and remedy this mistake immediately. Its a lack of command and control in foreign affairs. Nothing can be more dire especially considering Japan's position and relationship with all of its neighbors.

    Whether Noda was trying to avoid further damages caused by Ishihara or not is irrelevant because the Japanese gov't can nullify the purchase simply with a declaration of danger to national security. It is not up to Tokyo to decide but the central gov't to decide. Its the equivalent of blocking a potential M&A by a foreign firm to acquire a domestic strategic corporation. Which the Japanese gov't had blocked plenty of times.

    Noda was simply trying to milk the situation and panhandle to the right to acquire more support and votes. Both him, Ishihara, Abe and all of the LDP candidates had put their political agenda and financial support from the ultra-right over the security of the nation. Before all this mess, there were no Chinese gov't ships or planes patrolling these islands. In fact, Japan could arrest, detain, and confiscate Chinese fishing boats if they do not prosecute. Meaning Japan had control.

    Now, they don't. That means Japan's security has been breached. Japanese gov't had a duty of care for its own security. And actions by the Governor of Tokyo, an elected Gov't Official, and the PM of Japan along with all the PM candidates had caused Japan's security to be impeded (by its own merit) by a foreign power and constantly subject to its own view of foreign intrusion. There are no superceding intervening act to change the cause of their actions but their own personal political aspirations. These politicians are the cause of Japan's spiraling downfall. And the Japanese citizens voted for them. I think Japan as a whole should stop passing the bug to others and start looking within on what/who the problems are.

  • -1

    Tamarama

    By purchasing the islands, the Japanese government takes them out of the hands of private owners. This does 2 things. First, it ensures that the family are properly compensated for their asset. Secondly, it then frees the Government to dispose of the islands if, and how it sees fit. If that involves giving them back to China, or Taiwan, they are free to do so.

    You can be sure of one thing. Allowing Ishihara to purchase them from the family as the property of Tokyo would have been an unmitigated disaster.

    Had China not been so quick to blow an o-ring over the purchase it might have seen that there could be some promise in the move and some opportunity for diplomatic negotiation. But they screwed that up pretty quick smart with their hysterics. Silly.

  • 2

    gokai_wo_maneku

    @highball What is "a declaration of danger to national security" in Japanese? I didn't know we had such a thing, and I can't find it by Googling various Japanese words.

    Also, Japanese have to understand how the Chinese are going to react if they really do perceive that Japan is going back to the Japan of the 1930s.

  • -1

    nigelboy

    Let's review.

    The previous owner wanted to sell the land for his family wants getting threats namely from a Chinese national. He initially proposed the idea to the MOF but they weren't interested. (BTW, MOF had a lease agreement with the owner which was to expire March of this year). Through various channels, the owner and Ishihara were finally able to meet where the owner agreed to sell to Tokyo Metropolitan Government since at that time, the central government wasn't interested. Ishihara makes his intention known to the public. Noda cabinet steps in and purchases the islands. China and their brainwashed citizens go beserk(Please note that during the 8 year span, the Chinese government confiscated and destroyed 750K maps/documents which cites "inconvenient" facts i.e. their own map showing Senkaku's as Japan's territory mainly in 60's and 50's)

    In summary, I guess anti-Japan posters here would of love the idea of the owner of just selling the islands to the hands of Chinese which in a sense would appease them temporarily until their government finds something else to exercize their continuous anti-Japan agenda. Meanwhile, the said posters would cry that Japan has only "administrative" rights to the islands CONVENIENTLY FORGETTING the fact that China throughout their history NEVER for once even exercized "administration" of the said islands yet they argue that China may have soverignty claim. WTF??

  • -2

    flowers

    nigelboy, I think the article is meant to point out that “the Chinese side viewed Tokyo’s actions as a violation of an unstated agreement to avoid raising the dispute.” You know that the former leaders both agreed to put aside the dispute for the next generation to resolve which means the status quo has to be preserved. China did not see private ownership to be an issue before, what change now is it becomes a state ownership. You must have seen that “Japan violated a relationship of trust”. I like the theory proposed by Asianhometown better, when he said “Of course Mr Noda and Mr Ishihara worked together for Toyko to purchase the island. It's called Good cop bad cop.” It is highly likely that Mr Noda and Mr Ishihara planned all these for political reasons. So, don’t blame the Chinese for feeling betrayed. And, your point about China destroying their own maps is down-right silly, both sides have the rights to bring up evidence to support their own claims so what China did or did not do is their business. I can also point out to you that China has come up with foreign maps that Japan could not challenge. I also read that Japan had sent some people to the islands to clear out the evidence showing the Chinese had once lived on the islands. Chinese presence on the islands is possible as there were Chinese fishing boats sailing in the area for centuries. Notice that after seeing all the evidence presented by China, Japan has no longer used “terra nullius” claim. Also, “US was never sure of Japanese sovereignty on the issue, which is why US makes some delusional case about "right of jurisdiction" which is somehow "independent from sovereignty". To this day international law has not heard of such a concept, especially one stemming from a back door deal in which China was not invited.” Also, “U.S. forces periodically used the Diaoyu (Senkaku) island as an aerial bombing target. The U.S. military applied each time to the Chinese (Taiwan) government for authorization.” All these show that China discovered the islands and has sovereignty over the islands, though Japan had been given the “administrative rights” on which China has been opposing all along.

  • 0

    OssanAmerica

    marcelitoJan. 29, 2013 - 11:38AM JST Ossan - as IF the J-government could not find a legal avenue ( or behind the scenes leverage ) to stop Ishihara from >purchasing / developing the islands if they wanted REALLY wanted to.

    They did. They bought the 3 islands and prohibited anyone from landing on them, much less building on them. Japan is not an authoritarian one-partyu fascist state where the government can do whatever it feels like. Like other democracies, it too must act within the law.

  • -1

    sfjp330

    Neither side wants the settlement of this dispute to set an unfavorable precedent for the resolution of other similar troubles. For China, the sovereignty of the Senkaku/Daioyu Islands has a strong implication for concern with their sovereignty in the South China Sea. The reason that China cannot soften its attitude toward the Senkaku/Daioyu Islands is clear. If it softens its posture over the Senkaku, it might be considered as softening of its position on the Spratly and Paracel islands disputes in the South China Sea. For Japan, the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands dispute also implies Japanese attitude toward the territorial disputes with Russia over the “Kurile Islands” and with Korea over the Dokdo Island. Any softening on the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands dispute might undermine the Japanese claims to both the “Kurile Islands” and the Dokdo Island. Since international credibility is taken into account, both China and Japan are adamant and steadfast in their claims to the disputed islands.

  • 2

    nigelboy

    Flowers

    To state that Japan broke this so-called verbal "status quo" when in fact the lease was due in March as well as the fact that the former owner wanted desparately to sell these islands leaves me to believe that it's another BS rhetoric from China propaganda. Face it. "Status quo" was never honored by China from the beginning as the encroachment of the territorial sea dates back before the announcement to purchase the islands so let's just not play that game, shall we?

    I can also point out to you that China has come up with foreign maps that Japan could not challenge. I also read that Japan had sent some people to the islands to clear out the evidence showing the Chinese had once lived on the islands. Chinese presence on the islands is possible as there were Chinese fishing boats sailing in the area for centuries. Notice that after seeing all the evidence presented by China, Japan has no longer used “terra nullius” claim.

    Where do you get this stuff flowers?? The 750K confiscated materials comes from here.

    http://news.searchina.ne.jp/disp.cgi?y=2013&d=0110&f=politics_0110_010.shtml

    The only part of "destroying" is China here flowers. And yes. Japan still uses "terra nullius" claim as a reason for the incorporation. Where do you get this stuff?

    Also, “U.S. forces periodically used the Diaoyu (Senkaku) island as an aerial bombing target. The U.S. military applied each time to the Chinese (Taiwan) government for authorization.” All these show that China discovered the islands and has sovereignty over the islands, though Japan had been given the “administrative rights” on which China has been opposing all along.

    False. The two gunnery range (FAC6084, FAC6085) agreement is strictly between Japan and U.S. where the latter needs to inform the Japanese government 15 days prior to hold any exercize. There was no "permission" needed from ROC.

    http://www.shugiin.go.jp/itdb_shitsumon.nsf/html/shitsumon/b176044.htm

    Along with the inconvenient fact that ROC, despite having an embassy in Washington D.C. at that time NEVER asserted the ownership of the islands while printing their own maps using Japanese names and boundary clearly indicates that ROC recognized this as Japanese territory (Ryukyu).

  • -1

    sfjp330

    China and Japan are being pushed to extremes because they are approaching major shifts in the power holders of their governments. In Japan the right is beating the nationalism and China is increasing national pride but also distracting the public from China’s domestic problems. The mutual economic gains that these two large trading partners get from one another will keep them from seeing relations get worse or even breaking out in open conflict. In the end money is the name of the game for the China and China. Once the shifts in power settles down for both countries, rationality will prevail on both sides and the economic prosperity that these countries provide for one another will not be so easily thrown to the wind as their politicians would have one currently believe.

  • -1

    flowers

    nigelboy, it’s the matter of who do you believe, right? As I said before what matters is who comes up with more evidence and who has more contradictory evidence. You must admit China comes up with a lot more convincing evidence and some of which were not even produced in China, as an example, about 20 maps were cited by China and only about 3 by Japan. According to Nicholas Kristof of NY Times, “The most interesting evidence is emerging from old Japanese government documents and suggests that Japan in effect stole the islands from China in 1895 as booty of war.” So, you agreed that there was “status quo” implication and you thought that it was China who broke it. You came up with the idea that the “status quo” could not be maintained because the lease was up for renew; do you really believe in the game that the Japanese are playing? There are many other ways to approach this issue and “nationalization” is the least preferred option, but it has the most value in politics. And, for 40 years China had tried to keep the sovereignty issue under control and according to the news China in a number of occasions had mentioned about the agreement between the two leaders as the reason not to let the dispute get out of hand in order to maintain the “status quo”. On the contrary after the nationalization of the islands, J govt had flat out denied there was such agreement. Who do you believe? As for me I gather the info from all sides including the western media. So, when you quote the 750k confiscated materials, it leads me to believe that Japanese propaganda is really effective. As for the "terra nullius" claim, do you not notice that this claim has not been used any more? China has evidence that Japan knew that the islands were not terra nullius at the time. You also mentioned about an embassy in Washingtion D.C. at that time and never asserted the ownership, I fail to see the relevancy and at which time period. There was a blank period that China did not know the change of names of the islands and there was a public statement made by Chinese leader at the time who denied the validity of the Treaty because China was not part of it. The following are a few links that you asked: http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/the-inconvenient-truth-behind-the-diaoyusenkaku-islands/ http://www.skycitygallery.com/japan/diaohist.html Japanese Militarism & Diaoyutai (Senkaku) Island- A Japanese Historian's View http://japanfocus.org/-Narusawa-Muneo/3879 安倍晋三 新しい日本の首相は極右の歴史否定論者

  • 1

    nigelboy

    According to Nicholas Kristof of NY Times, “The most interesting evidence is emerging from old Japanese government documents and suggests that Japan in effect stole the islands from China in 1895 as booty of war.”

    Response to the nonsense article from late William Sakovitch

    http://ampontan.wordpress.com/2012/09/22/yes-it-is-inconvenient/

    So, when you quote the 750k confiscated materials, it leads me to believe that Japanese propaganda is really effective.

    It's from a Chinese source.

    As for the "terra nullius" claim, do you not notice that this claim has not been used any more?

    It is used. Just go to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs website.

    China has evidence that Japan knew that the islands were not terra nullius at the time.

    Presenting them would be nice.

    You also mentioned about an embassy in Washingtion D.C. at that time and never asserted the ownership, I fail to see the relevancy and at which time period.

    You don't? Republic of China had an Embassy in U.S. during which time Senkaku was under administration of U.S.

    "After the Republic of China (ROC) government relocated to Taiwan in 1949, the United States continued to recognize the ROC as the sole legal government of China. In the aftermath of the Korean War, given the continued strategic importance of the Taiwan Strait during the Cold War era, the ROC and the United States signed the Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty in 1954 to consolidate their military alliance. This action established the ROC as part of the collective security system in the East Asian and Pacific region."

    I don't know about you but a simple correspondence letter to U.S. State Department like "You know, that territory known as Senkaku is actually ours" would be logical if in fact China recognized those islands to be theirs at that time, instead of printing their own map using Japanese names and boundaries of Japan, don't you think?

Login to leave a comment

OR
  • 営業/建設機械  

    営業/建設機械  
    MB Japan 株式会社、埼玉県
    給与:給与要相談 歩合制 給与参考例・・・2013年度営業職月給平均 45万円  
  • TOEICインストラクター

    TOEICインストラクター
    Berkeley House Language Center / バークレーハウス語学センター、東京都
    給与:時給 3,000円 相談可
  • TOEFL・IELTSインストラクター

    TOEFL・IELTSインストラクター
    Berkeley House Language Center / バークレーハウス語学センター、東京都
    給与:時給 3,500円 相談可
  • 海外留学担当者

    海外留学担当者
    Berkeley House Language Center / バークレーハウス語学センター、東京都
    給与:月給 25万円 ~ 35万円 相談可
  • PR and Communication Specialist

    PR and Communication Specialist
    Italian Chamber of Commerce in Japan、東京都
    給与:給与についての記載なし

More in Politics

View all

View all