UNDERLYING INTERESTS ARISING FROM THE SUBSTANCES OF THE NEGOTIATION / POSSIBLE ROOTS CAUSES THE PROBLEMS AND NEGOTIATION SOLUTIONS

* China and Japan use a lingering conflict for their own domestic political interests. * Presenting Problem: a longstanding territorial dispute over who has sovereignty over the Senkaku islands. * Chinese believe the islands were unlawfully seized by Japan in the war 1895. * Japan argues that possession is nine-tenths of the law and that there can be no dispute since they have occupied the Senkakus for the past over 100 years. For the past 40 years Japan has managed to avoid the conflict over the islands by not raising questions of sovereignty and not engaging in any economic development. * China fully expected that the islands would be returned to them in 1972 when the United States gave up its occupation of the Okinawan chain. * As Japan’s Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda purchased the islands by buying them for Japan , the Japanese illusion that “ no territorial dispute exists” was undermined. * This offended China and immediately made violent protests for the purchase of the islands. * The Noda-decision and the Chinese protesting response mean that Japan can no longer adhere to the view that the islands are not dispute. * The challenge facing both countries is what to do about this, so they requested negotiated solutions to the dispute. * The questions now are whether or not both countries are hostage to extreme nationalist agendas and what conditions will be helpful to successful negotiations. 1. There has to be an acknowledgement of a divisive territorial dispute. As the Japanese government bought the islands, they acknowledged that the islands were contested and now both countries need to decide between a negotiated or confrontational solution. 2. Because Japan ignored the dispute, they should think about some suitable conciliatory gestures that could create conditions for both countries to come and to negotiate. 3. Political leaders on both sides should think about the enormous cost of the negative economic, social and political impacts of continuing this conflict -> 340 billion dollars of annual bilateral trade / China accounts for 21 % of Japanese exports and 20 % of its imports/ conflict is already declining tourism and trade between both countries -> makes no economic or political sense to continue this dispute. 4. If there is no agreement for having bilateral talks, both countries should think about whether it would be better to have mediated or arbitrated negotiations. These could be under the United Nations secretary general or more formally, the case could be taken to the International Court of Justice for arbitration.

* This case also shows the need for some permanent North-east Asian security mechanism and rules, which would manage the dispute between the countries of North-east Asia.

5. For that the conflict is resolved in the long term, both China and Japan, but particularly Japan need to devise processes for coming to terms with their common history and memories of war. The Chinese believe that Japan has not yet admitted its responsibility for the Second World War. The current generation of Japanese decision makers feel diminished responsibility for events such as the Nanking Massacre. These traumatic memories are reactivated every time when disputes like the Senkaku occur. Without paying attention to traumatic history and the humiliating consequences of military defeat, territorial issues such as this will continue to undermine a positive and peaceful relationship between Japan and China in North-east Asia need to devise processes for coming to terms with their common history and memories of war.

RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL LAWS AND OTHER RELEVANT ISSUES * Japan declared on January 14, 1895 that it incorporated the Senkaku Islands into Japanese territory. This act was totally justified as "occupation" of terra nullius, whose legitimacy was recognized under international law; * Although China claims sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands, the biggest problem with its argument is the fact that for 75 years, from 1895 to 1970, China never raised any objections or made protests in regard to Japan's territorial rights over the islands, and;

* The focal point of China's argument is that the Senkakus are part of China's territory as islands appertaining to Taiwan and were unjustly taken over by Japan in the Sino-Japanese War. However, the Senkakus were not included among the territories that Japan unjustly took from China. So China's argument does not hold water. Japan's possession of the Senkaku Islands was a justified act which fell under a different category from the cession of Taiwan and the Penghu Islands that Japan robbed from China unjustly in the war.

Historically, the Japanese government took two problematic approaches. * First, it put the territorial question related to the Senkakus in "temporary suspension" when diplomatic relations between Japan and China were normalized in 1972 as well as when the Japan-China Peace and Friendship Treaty was concluded in 1978. * During the negotiations over the Japan-China normalization, the then Japanese Prime Minister raised the issue by asking, "What do you think about the Senkaku Islands?" and the then Chinese Premier answered, "It is not good to talk about it now." This constituted a virtual agreement between both sides to put the issue in a state of "temporary suspension." * Just before the Peace and Friendship Treaty was signed between two countries in 1978, Chinese vice premier, said to the then Japanese Foreign Minister "Let us leave it there," and Japan responded, "You do not need to say more." Again, there was a tacit understanding between both sides to put the issue on hold. * The Japanese government should have made a clear case regarding the legitimacy of Japan's sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands to the Chinese side as rationally as possible when diplomatic relations were normalized or when the peace treaty was concluded. Putting the issue on hold was a meek attitude to adopt in diplomatic negotiations. * At the same time, putting the Senkaku Islands issue in "temporary suspension" meant nothing other than Japan admitted to the existence of a territorial dispute in the negotiations with China.