 |
| A Taiwanese fishing boat, Japan coast guard ships |
The dramatic standoff between dozens of Taiwanese fishing boats, Coast Guard Administration (CGA) vessels and Japanese patrol ships near the disputed Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) on Tuesday morning made global headlines and fueled speculation that President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration may have orchestrated the incident to divert attention from domestic issues or to do Beijing’s work. However, observers said that things are not that simple.
Following the announcement by Tokyo on Sept. 11 that it had nationalized three islets in the Diaoyutais — known as the Senkakus in Japan — Taipei and Beijing, which both claim the island chain, protested the move, which had generated violent demonstrations across China and a much smaller rally in Taipei on Sunday.
On Sept. 20, the Suao Fishermen’s Association in Yilan County announced that several dozen Taiwanese fishing boats would set sail for the Diaoyutais on Monday to protest against what they called Japan’s “illegal occupation” of the island group and “harassment of fishermen” around the islands.
Although the Yilan County Government, headed by Commissioner Lin Tsung-hsien (林聰賢) of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), turned down a request for NT$5 million (US$170,000) in fuel subsidies for the fishermen, the sortie was eventually made possible by a donation of that amount by Want Want China Times Group chairman Tsai Eng-meng (蔡衍明), who has often been portrayed as pro-China.
My article, published today in the Taipei Times, continues here.
The fishing rights concern is not convincing. Didn't Taiwan and Japan have an agreement to allow fishing in these waters. What has happened to that? Sovereignty and fishing rights are two different issues, of course, but they have been conflated, and perhaps deliberately so, by those who have political motivations.
ReplyDeleteThe fishing rights concern is not convincing. Didn't Taiwan and Japan have an agreement to allow fishing in these waters. What has happened to that? Sovereignty and fishing rights are two different issues, of course, but they have been conflated, and perhaps deliberately so, by those who have political motivations.
ReplyDeleteTaiwan and Japan have failed to reach a consensus after 16 consultative meetings on fishing rights over the years. Both Lee Teng-hui and Tsai Ing-wen, not to mention KMT and DPP officials in Suao, have said that the No. 1 priority should be to reopen bilateral talks on the issue. So yes, fishing rights is very much relevant to this issue. I'm not saying there aren't people who'd wish to conflate the two, but for most fishermen — and that's the object of my article — access to fisheries, and not the sovereignty issue, is at the heart of the matter.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDPP does not know what it is losing from refusing to participate in this protest against Japan. KMT went and now many believe KMT is the only party who is brave enough to fend of Japan in times of crisis. Backed by China or not, this incident will further weaken DPP's credibility as a viable leader. Seeing DPP's reluctance and hesitation to confront this incident openly, I strongly believe, that DPP has lost its civil justice mandate。
ReplyDeleteOn the fishing issue; it has clearly been co-opted by the Chinese nationalists here. Are there not other areas of these seas that can be fished?
ReplyDelete"Seeing DPP's reluctance and hesitation to confront this incident openly, I strongly believe, that DPP has lost its civil justice mandate."
Not at all.
The DPP does not, and cannot have a a "civil justice" mandate; they believe in social justice. A "civil justice" mandate would require stipulation to a strict limitation of State powers against inalienable individual rights - something which would be ractopamine to the low-calorie socialists in the DPP. But whilst DPP officials and certain academics might refer to "rights" for PR value (with some academics even citing Locke in doing so), what they actually have in mind are permissions rather than rights.
Obviously, we're not privy to the contents of those 16 discussions, but wouldn't Japan be more amenable if Taiwan dropped the sovereignty claims?
ReplyDeleteMaybe not, but I'll hold onto my fantasy for now.