LANG371 – MAJOR ESSAY

Sino-Japanese Territorial Dispute & The Media

An examination of how the media portrays the dispute between Japan and China over the sovereignty of the Senkaku Islands.

Chelsea Fraser

3647213

In what is seen as the most volatile issue in Sino-Japanese relations at the present time, the dispute over ownership of a group of islands in the East China Sea continues. The islands, known as the Senkaku Islands in Japanese and the Diaoyu in Chinese are central to a territorial dispute between Japan and the People’s Republic of China. The archipelago contains five uninhabited islands and 3 barren rocks. Interestingly, neither China nor Japan are pursuing sovereignty of the islands for the land but rather for the territorial waters that are contained within the area. These waters are not only a major fishing area, but a 1969 report by The United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East speculates that there may be untapped oil reserves under the surface. The Japanese Government’s is view that the Senkaku Islands are “clearly an inherent territory of Japan, in light of historical facts and based upon international law,” and the Senkaku Islands “are under the valid control of Japan”. With access to information at the click of a mouse, the world’s media plays a critical role in influencing the debate surrounding the sovereignty of the islands. This report will examine news articles from Japan, China and abroad in order to

The first indications of Sino-Japanese relations can be traced back to the year 57 AD when Emperor of the Han Dynasty gave a golden seal to Japan. After the establishment of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in 1949, Sino-Japanese relations changed from hostility and an absence of contact to cordiality and extremely close cooperation in many fields. The Treaty of Peace and Friendship between Japan and the People's Republic of China was signed on August 12 and came into effect October 23, 1978. In 2008, China-Japan trade grew to $266.4 billion, a rise of 12.5 percent on 2007, making China and Japan the top two-way trading partners. China was also the biggest destination for Japanese exports in 2009. According to a 2013 BBC World Service Poll, 5% of Japanese people view China's influence positively, with 64% expressing a negative view, while 17% of Chinese people view Japanese influence positively, with 74% expressing a negative view, the most negative perception of Japan in the world. Sino-Japanese relations continue to be impacted by the territorial dispute and the declining relationship possess significant risk to stability in the Asian region, the BBC stated that the situation is regarded as "the most serious for Sino-Japanese relations in the post-war period in terms of the risk of militarised conflict."

The territorial dispute in relation to the Senkaku Islands can trace its origins back to 1895 when the Japanese first surveyed the groups of islands that become known as the Senkaku Islands in Japanese. The Japanese found that the islands were uninhabited and claimed them, citing terra nullius. With the exception of the period dated 1945-1972, the Senkaku islands have been controlled by Japan since 1895. China first publically laid claim to the islands in December 1971, the dispute remained peaceful until the mid-to-late 1990’s and has escalated further since 2004. Since 2004, the dispute has been heightened by naval encounters, scrambled fighter jets, diplomatic efforts and public protests both in China and Japan. Both countries have launched into a propaganda war aimed at influencing public opinion and casting the other country in a negative light. Key events in the escalating dispute include; the 2008 clash between the Chinese and Japanese Coast Guard Services, , a 2010 collision between a Chinese fishing trawler and the Japanese Coast Guard, protests by Ganbare Nippon in 2010 and 2012 and military escalation in 2013. In 2012, the Japanese government, using public funds, purchased three of the islands from their Japanese owner in response to Shintaro Ishihara, the governor of Tokyo, announcement in April that he would purchase the islands and have them administered by the city government. The purchase of three of the Senkaku Islands by the Japanese Government caused wide spread protests in China.
From the perspective of China, the islands have been owned by China dating back to the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) and moreover, they were reportedly used as “…navigational aids and an operational base” for Chinese fishermen (Pan, 2007, p. 77). China says that it incorporated the islands into its “…maritime defenses in 1556,” Pan explains; also, in 1893, just a couple years before Japan claims that it held title to the islands, Tsu His of Qing issues “an imperial edict, by which she awarded the Diaoyu Islands to a Chinese alchemist” who had reportedly harvested medical herbs on those islands (77).
Another reason why China clings to the notion that it, not Japan, owns the islands is a study by a Japanese professor at Kyoto University, Kiyoshi Inoue, who studied the issues closely and published a claim that the islands do indeed belong to China. Pan quotes the professor: “The so-called Senkaku Islands were recorded in Chinese documents in the middle of the 16th century at the latest” (78). After doing detailed research into the islands’ ownership issues, Inoue concluded that “…these islands are territory of the People’s Republic of China, the only authority over the entire China” (Pan, 78).
As regards the San Francisco Peace Treaty, the Chinese have never accepted that treaty as legally binding, Pan continues. In fact China issued a strong objection in the form of a formal protest with the U.S. government right after the peace treaty was signed in 1951, Pan explains. If the islands are really Japan’s territory, then why did Japan “…claim the islands in 1895, but not earlier, for example, in 1885, when Japan took over today’s Diato Islands?” Pan asks. Professor Inoue supports this aspect of investigating the ownership issue. Inoue agrees that the hesitation of the Japanese government when the governor of Okinawa asked to “…take over the Diaoyu Islands” shows that island was “clearly” Chinese territory, not just a piece of property “…the title to which was uncertain” (Pan, 82).
In Pan’s conclusion, he notes that both Japan and China have done their best to “…downplay the issue, keep the dispute as low-key as possible, and prevent the trouble from deteriorating bilateral relations” (87). In fact by maintaining the “status quo” is what is most likely to be happening between these two nations as time goes on. A military conflict seems “improbable” because self-restraint over a relatively obscure issue is in the best interest of both sides, Pan writes (88).

Conclusion
200

Japan’s a