I have noticed that many columnists and editorial writers on Japan commit factual errors when they comment on (1) the Kurile Islands, (2) the Senkaku Islands, (3) the school textbook issue and (4) Japan’s “naval action” against Taiwanese fishermen. So the Arab News editorial titled “Oil on Troubled Waters” (June 22) came as no surprise.
First of all, it is utterly wrong to maintain that “Japan’s modern claims to the Kuril (Kurile) and Daioyu (Senkaku) islands stem from the very same reasons that it went to war in 1941 — oil.”
With reference to the Kurile Islands, the editorial reflects the confusion and misunderstanding of historical and geographical facts. In 1951 Japan renounced all right, title and claim to the Kurile Islands, as stipulated in Article 2 (c) of the San Francisco Peace Treaty. Since then Japan has never demanded its sovereignty over these islands. On the other hand, the Northern Territory, or the four islands (Etorofu, Kunashiri, Shikotan and Habomai) off the northeastern coast of Hokkaido, whose return Japan is demanding from Russia, are Japan’s inherent national territory. They have never been under foreign sovereignty since 1855, when Japan and Russia signed the Treaty of Commerce, Navigation and Delimitation, which stipulated unambiguously that these islands belonged to Japan. These four islands, therefore, are not a part of the Kurile Islands that Japan renounced. The Soviet Union abrogated the Neutrality Pact with Japan unilaterally on Aug. 9, 1945, and entered into the war against Japan. It continued its aggressions even after Japan made clear its intention to surrender by accepting Potsdam Proclamation on Aug. 14, and occupied these four islands. For sixty years Japan has been demanding the return of these islands from Russia.
As for the Senkaku Islands, the editorial fabricated the story from erroneous recognition of the historical facts in three points.
1. The claim that Japan “discovered” the islands in 1895 is untrue. This was actually the year when Japan formally and legally incorporated them into its territory according to international law. Since then, these islands have always been an integral part of Japan’s Nansei Shoto Islands.
As a result of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, these islands were temporarily under the United States’ administration, but they were returned to Japan in 1971 by an agreement between the United States and Japan. China claimed, abruptly and for the first time, its right in 1970s, when this area attracted broad attention for potential marine, oil and other natural resources. Therefore, it is China’s claim to the islands that is rather recent and “modern.”
2. The Senkaku Islands were integrated into the Japanese territory by a Cabinet decision on Jan. 14, 1895, after a number of field surveys conducted by Japan since 1885, which confirmed that they were not inhabited and that there was no trace of China’s control over the islands. These islands were not included in either Taiwan or the Pescadores Islands, which were ceded to Japan by China according to the Shimonoseki Treaty.
3. The assertion in the Arab News editorial that “Japan’s geographical case is patently weak. While the islands stand at the edge of the Mainland Chinese continental shelf, they are nowhere near Japan” is utterly unjustifiable. According to international law, geographical adjacency has nothing to do with territorial title. There is no room for doubt on the effectiveness of Japan’s sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands, as long as Japan has incorporated them legally according to international law. Therefore, the assertion that “this dispute …needs to be settled by international arbitration” is totally irrelevant.
Secondly, the editorial’s description of our school textbook as “whitewashing Japanese wartime atrocities” reveals ignorance about Japan’s textbook authorization system. In Japan the government does not impose any view of history based upon specific interpretation of the past. The authorization system is aimed at examining textbooks for correcting factual errors in the light of the latest academic research findings and references. In addition, the teaching guideline issued by Japan’s Ministry of Education calls for teaching students how Japan entered into the wars, giving an emphasis on its relations with neighboring countries, and how much suffering they caused to the whole mankind. None of the twenty-six approved textbooks for Japanese secondary schools, for example, fails to describe what happened in Nanking in 1937.
As for Japan’s “naval action” against Taiwanese fishermen, the editorial dramatizes the incident. On June 18 Japan’s Coast Guard arrested the captain of a Taiwanese fishing boat, which was engaging in an illegal fishing inside Japan’s Exclusive Economic Zone. This is merely a matter of law enforcement by the Japanese authorities concerned, and not more than that.
— Toshio Sano is minister, Embassy of Japan in Saudi Arabia.
