politics

Japan names islets in disputed area, around nation

62 Comments

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

© Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

62 Comments
Login to comment

It was proven that the Senkakus are part of Japan many times, so I don't see any problem Japan naming their own island, but yeah we can expect outrage from the others. Hope they won't cause riots again.

5 ( +15 / -9 )

Cool! I'm looking forward to what the names are. Finding good names is always difficult.

2 ( +9 / -6 )

"What's in a name?" dispute will remain call it by any other name. By the way, what happened to those three Chinese boats that used to sail in disputed waters? Perhaps they are there just disappeared from j.media after passage of collective self defense resolution.

-3 ( +4 / -6 )

Naming at this point will be used as evidence that the islands were not claimed until now.

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

So someone just unilaterally just drew up a list of 158 names with no input from the public? As a result, I guess the names are probably going to be extremely boring and as uncontroversial as possible. They will probably be completely descriptive of geographical features ie. twin peaks island, 3 rocks island etc.. There will probably be none named after important historical figures or events etc.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

@Nessie

Very good point. Are you, by any chance, a lawyer?

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

It should be pretty easy to name them they can call them all the same thing, わたしたちの じま !

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

It would be interested to see what is the reaction from you know who?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

So someone just unilaterally just drew up a list of 158 names with no input from the public?

What the heck? Why would anyone think the public needs to be involved anyway?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

This is a great idea. However, I can see that naming 158 Islands is going to be too great a task for bumbling politicians. Therefore, I suggest that we take a national ballot to see who are the 158 most popular members (both past and present) of AKB, NKB, and all other idol groups, and name the Islands after those lases. That way we will easily get a name for each Island, and they will be names that all Japanese people feel a strong association with, and will want to protect. It will also tie in nicely with the recent JSDF recruitment drive.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

What the heck? Why would anyone think the public needs to be involved anyway?

That's generally how things are named these days. For example, one of the proposed names that Tobu came up with for the Tokyo Sky Tree, was 'Rising Tower'... can you imagine that drawing in the tourists? It's good the public was asked and rejected it.

Also, I'm sure local fisherman and residents already have unofficial names for these islands. They might just be making them official.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I think Clarence and Mildred are available.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

@Farmboy

You'll have to do better than that. Clarence is a town in New South Wales. Mildred is a town in Kansas. : )

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Lucabrasi...good point should they be named these. Can Japan claim them too?

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Look at the shapes of the islands and base it on that. Suffix them with 'kun' and 'chan' to raise awareness among the public.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I think more "provocation" is not such a good idea...

4 ( +7 / -4 )

Go Japan....maybe those Yankies occupying your country with 3 military bases can actually earn their salt and show China some muscle.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

"Cool! I'm looking forward to what the names are. Finding good names is always difficult."

Howz about Abe Shima, Ishihara Shima, Hashimoto Shima, Hirohito Shima and Tojo Shima?

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

How about Battle Island, War Island, Hostilities Island, Skirmish Island and Militarization Rocks?

To name them at this time, it sure seems Abe and pals are itching for all the above.

Maybe next time they visit China, they could just prod the diplomats and politicians with pointy sticks and intentionally trod on their toes?

1 ( +4 / -4 )

2 rocks are off 1 of the Senkakus out of 158 Islands. The outrage, so out of proportion, fanned by the media. How surprising.

Naming even small rocks anywhere is a sensible and normal navigation precaution/point of reference.

Any jumping up and down is laughable.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Long overdue . . It BOggles the mind that too often Japanese tend to do things AFTER THE FACT . .

0 ( +3 / -3 )

These islands belong to Taiwan. They are called Diaoyutai Islands and were stolen at around the time of the Sino-Japanese War. Japan did the same thing with Dokdo at around the time of the Russo-Japanese War over Korea. It is a pattern.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

In this country if the public got involved with naming these islands it would take DECADES to get a consensus opinion.

Right...they would be called doraimon, crayon-shin-chan, chibi-maruko, etc etc etc...not to mention sazae-jima!

It's ludicrous to think that the government NEEDS public opinion to name these islands as they see fit.

Anyone who thinks otherwise......japanophile/jet-fumes still sticking/.....whatever

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Good for Japan.

About time they stick up to these insane anti Japan nations and peoples.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

What a Fantastic Idea!

I can see the Storm Brewing in the Teacup already.

I hope the J-Embassy is ready for the onslaught of Dirty Water Bottles and Uniqlo in Beijing needs to Rig the Burglar Bars in preparation for the Wild Commie Maniacs soon to be Looting and Pillaging...

0 ( +3 / -3 )

So how long before China announces THEIR names that they will say were fund in records from 2000 years ago?

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

This is good. Considering the conniption fit the Chinese had because of "nationalization", this will have them frothing nicely.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

First steps to better future. It will be best to put light houses and Japan coast guard stations on these islands. Tokyo need to put people on these islands.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Quite many suggestions of names.'

@FarmboyAUG. 01, 2014 - 05:43PM JST I think Clarence and Mildred are available.

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

I doubt both Chinese and Japanese will use the names somewhere in USA. They know the islands are not in USA

So. my guess is that Japan will use Japanese words, China and Taiwan will use Chinese words. Nonsense to guess the names of American places.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Well, one thing for sure, the Chinese won't be happy.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

China already has it's panties in a knot claiming Japan's naming of their own islands is "illegal" and "invalid". Right on cue.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

If they had a months-long contest to let people name the islands, it would just stretch out the media exposure, greatly increasing the net amount of complaining from other countries. Doing it all at once is the better option.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

According to UN maps those islands are part of Japanese territory. I just cant understand why China want to be against UN maps. And I dont understand why Chinas is claiming Senkaku when actually she proved herself that those islands are part of Japanese territory.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/de/PRCmap-senkakuislands.jpg

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Mitsuo MatsuyamaAug. 02, 2014 - 07:07AM JST According to UN maps those islands are part of Japanese territory. I just cant understand why China want to be >against UN maps

Why not? They killed UN troops in 1950.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

158 islands to name? Better put your thinking caps on. It'll be interesting to see what these names are (wonder if the site would also provide the translation for those not yet fluent in Japanese?) China's reaction will be quite predictable. Something along the lines of "Hurr durr! You can't go naming our islands! They're our islands because we say so without any evidence. This is just yet more proof of Japan's return to its Imperial ways! Sure it's just naming islands now, but tomorrow it'll be invasion. We told you this would happen, and you didn't believe us!" Pssh. Shut up China. You're like a broken record.

You'll have to do better than that. Clarence is a town in New South Wales. Mildred is a town in Kansas. : )

There's also a Birmingham in both Britain and America (actually, there seems to be many towns and cities in the US and Canada sharing the same names as those in Britain). There's a Perth in Scotland and Australia. I seem to recall there being another Harlow somewhere in the world. God help us all. One's bad enough.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@ lucabrasi

Yes, towns. But are they islands? I think not. Mildred Jima. Yes, I like the sound of that.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Some take the side of China. Some take the side of Japan. And it seems to all about love/hate biases.

I take the side of truth and fairness. And the truth is that these islands were called the Diaoyu islands long before they were called the Senkakus. If some of the specific islands had Chinese names I simply don't know. But these tiny and geographically insignificant islands sure don't need names at this point in time. Even for navigation, numbers could be used just fine.

This is a propaganda ploy. To the logical mind, its silly, because it highlights the fact that Japan does not have names for them now. which logically works against Japan's claim that the islands are "integral Japanese territory". But most people do not possess logical minds. For many here, if Japan does it, it must be made of gold. If China does it, it must be made of dung.

It is nothing but never-ending despair to have to deal with these illogical people I am surrounded by. It is no wonder wars break out with so many people in the world like this.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Crush Them, you even dont know what are you talking about. Your statement is bias and not based on truth.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Crush Them, you even dont know what are you talking about. Your statement is bias and not based on truth.

@Mitsuo Matsuyama Three paragraphs there. I should think if you had a leg to stand on, you would have been more specific about what statement you take issue with. Or are you just wasting my time?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

158 islets. Both Japan and China must be concentrating on naming. Enlarged map. Mildred is a cute name but not for Japanese use. Japanese does not use 'l' sound in katakana and hiragana. Both countries use kanji. 'd' is ambiguous. 'do' has road and island kanjis. So, forget about naming in English. We have to depend to Japan and China renaming. Maybe male sounds? Misogyny Japan naming a cute English name?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Crush ThemAug. 02, 2014 - 12:43PM JST Some take the side of China. Some take the side of Japan. And it seems to all about love/hate biases.

And some from Communist China can produce freshly inked worthless maps and claim that those fantasy maps back-up their claims. Funny how they fear taking their case before the IOC, because they know that they would be laughed out of court and shown to be full of bunk.

Speaking of maps, how does the 1735 d’Anville map make you feel? Reality can be a giant slap in the face.

http://time.com/46414/angela-merkel-xi-jinping-china-germany-map/

Crush ThemAug. 02, 2014 - 12:43PM JST I take the side of truth and fairness. And the truth is that these islands were called the Diaoyu islands long before they were called the Senkakus. If some of the specific islands had Chinese names I simply don't know. But these tiny and geographically insignificant islands sure don't need names at this point in time. Even for navigation, numbers could be used just fine.

If they are geographically insignificant islands then why care so much of what Japan does with them? Here's something fun and really funny. Did you know that in 1950 the Communist didn't give one rats behind about Senkaku? Hell, they even said that the Senkaku islands were part of Japan.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2012/12/29/national/china-1950-paper-says-senkakus-are-japans/#.U91gj6PlqJB

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/sep/15/inside-the-ring-145889960/

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00927678.2012.678122#.U91ixKPlqJA

http://books.google.co.jp/books?id=MZGsi1ptLvoC&pg=PA11&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

Funny how the discovery of oil changes Islands that were unwanted from 1945-1969 to national treasures in a blink of an eye!

Crush ThemAug. 02, 2014 - 12:43PM JST This is a propaganda ploy.

No, a propaganda ploy is sending out hundreds of thousands of paid posters around the net making wild claims without a shred of proof to back them up.

Huge difference.

Crush ThemAug. 02, 2014 - 12:43PM JST To the logical mind, its silly, because it highlights the fact that Japan does not have names for them now. which logically works against Japan's claim that the islands are "integral Japanese territory".

No, to a logical mind it speaks volumes, because if it weren't Japan's territories Japan couldn't name these islands in the first place and if these islands were Communist China's they would have named them already or had a name for them long ago.

Communist China didn't think squat about these islands until Japan decided to name them. But, never fear, I'll give you and your handlers a few hours to ink a new "ancient Chinese map" that will prove that each of those islands had names.

But, be careful not to name Niijima/Snoopy Island/Nishino Shima since that will make your ancient map look a bit suspicious.

Crush ThemAug. 02, 2014 - 12:43PM JST But most people do not possess logical minds. For many here, if Japan does it, it must be made of gold. If China does it, it must be made of dung.

Your trying to hard to sound logical, but keep failing to produce a shred of proof.

Crush ThemAug. 02, 2014 - 12:43PM JST It is nothing but never-ending despair to have to deal with these illogical people I am surrounded by. It is no wonder wars break out with so many people in the world like this.

If you are surrounded by people that don't agree with what you are saying, maybe, just maybe they are not the one's being illogical.

To a logical mind, if everyone around you disagreed with what you believe then usually that means you are the one who is wrong.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Crush Them, again you dont know what you are talking about. If you dont wanna be bias or taking side, so just say "You dont know" It is prettier to say such thing rather than showing arrogance in topic which you are not aware.

Joe Bigs has argumentum, now you have a lot to learn. Hopefully you are not Western, otherwise it will be a shame for western society.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

again you dont know what you are talking about.

@Mitsuo Matsuyama I double dog dare you to be specific. Apparently, you don't know anything to be specific about.

Speaking of maps, how does the 1735 d’Anville map make you feel? Reality can be a giant slap in the face.

@JoeBigs You know why its called the d'Anville map? That is because it was made by a Frenchman. In 1735. An outsider from half a world away in an age of sailing ships and horse drawn carriages. That said, I am sure the map is fantastic despite some rather obvious handicaps.

But what does bringing that up help us solve? Are the Diaoyu islands on it? No mention of them in the article. How do you feel about the 1786 map by Hayashi Shihei that names the islands with the Chinese characters for Diaoyu?

If they are geographically insignificant islands then why care so much of what Japan does with them?

Because while they may be geographically insignificant, they are politically very significant.

Did you know that in 1950 the Communist didn't give one rats behind about Senkaku?

Still reeling from Japanese occupation and even more so from a civil war, with the People's Republic only up for literally months, with the Korean War breaking out...uh...yeah. It does not really matter. They never GAVE the islands to Japan. They may have NEGLECTED them. They may have recognized that Japan was occupying them, but that does not indicate an acceptance of transfer of ownership.

If you stole my bicycle while I was in the middle of moving house and getting a divorce and being sued all at the same time, I might not say anything about it right away even though I know you have it.

Funny how the discovery of oil changes Islands that were unwanted from 1945-1969 to national treasures in a blink of an eye!

Yeah, if I found out that the bicycle you stole turned out to be a vintage collectors item, yeah, I would start wanting back once the strife you sowed upon my house was finally abated.

But of course that neglects the fact that the PRC had been denied access to the U.N. until 1970, and one of the first things they did was state their claim to the Diaoyu islands.

if these islands were Communist China's they would have named them already or had a name for them long ago.

Diaoyu is an ancient name.

To a logical mind, if everyone around you disagreed with what you believe then usually that means you are the one who is wrong.

"Usually" is not good enough. Odds are not good enough. You suggest I succumb to the ad populum logical fallacy. No. If you had any understanding of logic, you never would have written that.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The usage of analogy is getting stale and basically meaningless since nations are not individuals and sovereign territories cannot be carried away.

PRC does not have any claim to Senkaku since PRC and/or mainland Chinese had never administered the island.

If PRC really believes their claim then take it up with ICJ.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

PRC does not have any claim to Senkaku since PRC and/or mainland Chinese had never administered the island.

Your use of the word "administered" is pure beaurocratic cod swallop. Its totally contrived and tailor made to suit your bias on the issue. China did with Diaoyu for centuries precisely what Japan is doing with them now...absolutely nothing. Some pieces of paper in a file and some periodic visits by ships to peer at them, in the real world, don't mean a whole hell of a lot in the grand scheme of things. Historically, its meaningless, since such invented and contrived concepts are much newer than China's historical claim.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Crush Them

Sorry but that is how sovereignty is recognized internationally and since PRC and/or mainland China does not retain the document that Mainland China had ever administered the island, there is no nation that going to ratify china's claim.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Crush ThemAug. 03, 2014 - 06:08PM JST "PRC does not have any claim to Senkaku since PRC and/or mainland Chinese had never administered the island." Your use of the word "administered" is pure beaurocratic cod swallop. Its totally contrived and tailor made to suit your >bias on the issue. China did with Diaoyu for centuries precisely what Japan is doing with them

China's clam to the Senkakus is totally contrived. The above statement is false, as Japan had approximately 200 Japanese living there with structures. There exists NO RECORD whatsoever of Chinese ever having lived there or any physical evidence suggesting it. In fact there is nothing about China's claim that ISN'T contrived. When the Chinese UN Ambassador gave a speech before the UN General Assembly claiming that the Senkakus were "stolen" from China by Japan during the 1885 Sino-Japanese War, China lied with a straight face to the entire world. What China failed to answer, as well as every China supporter on the internet, is "why would Japan go through the process of incorporating the Senkakus as Terra Nullius in January 1885, when they had won the war and intended to demand the Spratlys and Taiwan from China at the Treaty of Shimonoseki in April 1885"? There would be no reason to go through the incorporation process if Japan for a moment thought the Senkakus were Chinese, they could just demand it. Likewise no mention of the Senkakus was made by China because they too did not consider it theirs, China's current claim is entirely fabricated and after-the-fact that wouldn't survive a legal determination. To wit, China refuses to take this issue to the ICJ and prefers to use harassment tactics. The reality is that China has failed miserably in it's efforts to take the Senkakus, Japan did not cave in as hey hoped, and the U.S. did not abandon military defense responsibility for the islands. Hence, China can only now take the Senkakus if they are prepared to engage the United States in a shooting conflict, which they are not, Finally you should know that apart from China's current military and territorial expansion agenda being a concern to all of Asia as well as the world, China is the world's largest and most powerful dictatorship which suppresses it's own people through censorship, repression of human rights and totalitarian means. There are countless Chinese throughout the world who lost their families and property when the CCP took over and have no love for the PRC dictatorship. This begs the question of why anyone would support a dictatorship in today's world.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

And at the end we see that the barking dog has no bite. LoL

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Crush Me, everyone here has proven that your argument is based on absolutely nothing but touchy feely bunk. You have provided nothing as proof, the only thing you keep claiming is your personal opinion and evry time that something has been laid before you to refute all you can do is try and dance around it.If you can prove that the islands have been part of China since ancient times, well please do so. Silence us all with your proof and claim victory for your nation and your beliefs. But, you, i and the rest of the folks here know the truth.In other words, you have absolutely nothing to support your argument other than propaganda fed to you via Communist China's propaganda department.Try harder and next time provide something other than your spoon-fed propaganda as proof.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

.If you can prove that the islands have been part of China since ancient times, well please do so.

The Chinese used the islands for navigation to their vassal state of Okinawa, as was their practice at the time, to use islands for navigation. That was from the 15th century that the Ryukyu Kingdom was a tributary state, but the islands were known before then as The Ryukyu Kingdom was known. The islands were not part of Okinawa. The islands were given Chinese names and I have already provided proof that the Japanese used those names as early as 1786. The name Senkaku did not appear until after 1900, after the Japanese annexed (read stole) the islands from China during the Sino-Japanese War.

Since you obviously have great difficulty with simple facts and what they mean and what they don't mean, I will lay it out clearly. I technically support the Japanese claim as they have exercised control for so long, through America for a time, yes.

I have not been disputing the Japanese claim here. What I have been doing is explaining the valid historical claim of China, something which you and others have denounced as being invalid and unfounded and without proof. That position is not only insulting to China, it is insulting to reason. I have come to believe that you don't understand the meaning of the word "valid".

It is also insulting to reason to pretend that Japan laid claim to the islands in a fair and impartial manner when its clear they just stole the islands during a war and the terra nullius stuff was a smokescreen. Hindsight is 20/20 on the intentions of Imperial Japan of the time. Yet you seem to be stuck in the late 1800s as to knowledge. The islands are spoils of war, and I accept that only because there were no people living there and none now.

But I know honesty won't be appreciated by most of those in favor of the Japanese claim. Lies are much prettier to their ears. In fact, they seem to favor and love the lying, stealing methodology of Imperial Japan. (no surprise).

So technically I think Japan has the stronger claim despite all the dishonesty. I think its sad and lame that people like yourself feel the claim so weak you have twist, contort and deny the truth of the situation, not to mention being wildly accusatory. Its you that needs to be weaned of your propaganda.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Simply using islands as navagational points does not make them first claim. Second Senkaku is the name of Isles and not name of the island. The name of the island is Uotsuri Jima. Third Uotsuri Jima is the name used by the Ryukyu people and was adopted by the Chinese not the other way around. Sorry but your argument had been busted from the start.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Simply using islands as navagational points does not make them first claim.

They were mapped and noted on a Japanese map as being Chinese in 1785..

Formal international methods of land claiming were not in force at the time, and further PRC was admitted to the U.N. until 1970 so its unfair to apply those rules ex post facto.

The name of the island is Uotsuri Jima.

There are several islands not just one.

Third Uotsuri Jima is the name used by the Ryukyu people and was adopted by the Chinese not the other way around.

Uotsuri is a Japanese name. Japanese is not the native language of the Ryukyu people.

Sorry but your argument had been busted from the start.

So your contention is that China has the stronger claim. Got to admit, I am surprised. Or are you not reading my posts completely? No surprise there.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Crush ThemAug. 03, 2014 - 10:22PM JST The name Senkaku did not appear until after 1900, after the Japanese annexed (read stole) the islands from China >during the Sino-Japanese War. It is also insulting to reason to pretend that Japan laid claim to the islands in a fair and impartial manner when its clear >they just stole the islands during a war and the terra nullius stuff was a smokescreen. Hindsight is 20/20 on the >intentions of Imperial Japan of the time. Yet you seem to be stuck in the late 1800s as to knowledge. The islands are >spoils of war, and I accept that only because there were no people living there and none now.

So please explain WHY Japan would go through the process of incorporation as Terra Nullius which was concluded in January 1885, if all they had to do was demand that "China hand it over" in April 1885 along with the Spratlys and Taiwan, which were actual "spoils of war". Why didn't China raise an objection that the Senkakus were "theirs"? And please don't give me this nonsense about they couldn't because of the war, the war was over and the Chinese delegation were sitting across the table at Shimonoseki negotiating the peace treaty.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

And please don't give me this nonsense about they couldn't because of the war, the war was over

@OssanAmerica Well, that was out of left field. But no. Japan annexed the islands in January 1895, during the war, not after. The war was not over until April, and Japan had already gone with terra nullius and could not just backtrack without looking like a fool and a liar.

So please explain WHY Japan would go through the process of incorporation as Terra Nullius which was concluded in January 1885, if all they had to do was demand that "China hand it over" in April 1885 along with the Spratlys and Taiwan

Excuse me, but you have 1885 confused with 1895. Its a huge difference.

I have some theories why Japan at the time decided to go with the terra nullius excuse. But nobody has any magic to divine the reasoning of others absolutely.

But here is a question for you: Japan was going to annex the islands 1885 claiming terra nullius. Why did they put that plan on hold and wait until 1895 and war to annex Diaoyu?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Ryukyu was a dialect of Japanese not an independent language. Uoturi jima is just pronounce in Japanese but the island's name is not Chinese in orign. The document you claim are of Ryukyu origin in which were copied in the late 16th century. The manuscript is now owned by Oxford University Libary and have been verified that it can be divided into two parts, one which was probably copied from a western origin and the later half which mention Uotsuri Jima is identified to originate from the 16th century since it also discribes of Portugeuse living in Nagasaki which only happened after 1570's.

There is also the naging fact that in an offical document by the Ming Dynasty announced in 1451, states that the region around Senkaku isles is marked as no man's land and any documents onwards all Chinese documents continually states that the national borders does not extend to Senkaku.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@OssanAmerica Got admit I was still a bit sleepy when I wrote my last reply to you. Holy moley, but I cannot believe you actually wrote the dates yourself, but still wrote that they annexed the islands after the war! No dude. At the time they annexed the islands, they still did not know how the war would turn out. And that offers us insight into the Terra Nullius smokescreen. If they lost the war, they could still cry Terra Nullius. Another possible reason is because all that Terra Nullius stuff was set up ten years previous, and if they backtracked, they would be exposed as frauds. This whole thing kicked off Japan's empire of lies, and they just kept lying and inventing excuses for everything. Another fine example coming up:

@SamuraiBlue

Ryukyu was a dialect of Japanese not an independent language.

WWII propaganda. They said the same about Korean! Translate this into Japanese: "Shinjichi nu ada nayumi." That is no dialect!

. The document you claim are of Ryukyu origin in which were copied in the late 16th century.

I claimed no document.

Uoturi jima is just pronounce in Japanese but the island's name is not Chinese in orign.

So you say, but the Chinese characters are Chinese characters and Ryukyu had no Chinese characters until the Chinese sailed past Diaoyu and taught them Chinese characters. I find it rather unlikely the Chinese went to the trouble of translating Ryukyu into Chinese and then named the islands from the translation. Possible, but unlikely. I would need to see proof of that.

But what does it really matter? You will note that when Japan annexed Okinawa, they did not include Diaoyu. Therefore, they did not consider even themselves that Diaoyu was part of Okinawa and apparently, neither did the Okinawans. No. No. They annexed Diaoyu later, knowing it was separate and knowing the Chinese would have something to say about it.

an offical document by the Ming Dynasty announced in 1451, states that the region around Senkaku isles is marked as no man's land

I don't think "no man's land" is a technical term that means precisely what you want it to mean. Death Valley is a no man's land. I challenge you to go claim it for yourself from the United States. Seriously, good luck with that venture!

Fact remains that Japan paused ten years between surveying the islands for annexation, and then waited for war to actually make the move. Its obvious to anyone the basics of why they did that. They were being sneaky because they knew they were stealing.

I have also read that the Chinese considered the islands the border between themselves and Ryukyu and later Japan. If we got technical about that, that would mean they are either 1) split down the middle between the two nations or 2) considered untouchable neutral territory. But to make either consideration shows the Chinese were using them for more than navigation. Use as a border is a use. And the ten year pause in annexation and the statement of Yamagata Aritomo that taking the islands would alert the Chinese to Japanese intentions, both are strong evidence that the Japanese actually recognized that they were NOT in fact terra nullius, because if they were, they could have expected China to say nothing. But they DID expect a Chinese response, didn't they?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Tell me, is it not Beijing dialect and Cantonese are the same language and yet neither can understand each other? There you are busted.

The sea faring Ryuku people had better skills in navigating the oceans and was closer to the islands then mainland China. On top it was the Ryuku people who seeked trading with mainland China not the otherway around so naturally the Ryuku people had more knowledge of their territory then the mainland Chinese.

Playing dumb? Terra Nullius means no man's land in Latin in case you really didn't know.

Basically there are documents after historical documents written by the Chinese themselves saying it was outside their territorial borders and yet PRC suddenly claims Senkaku isles are theirs of ancestry. They must think we are daft in accepting that.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Tell me, is it not Beijing dialect and Cantonese are the same language and yet neither can understand each other? There you are busted.

@SamuraiBlue You seem very desperate to bust me. Are you Candace Flynn?

Chinese is a bit more complicated, as at least written Chinese is understood by all literate Chinese. Even so, many linguists consider Cantonese and Mandarin to separate languages. I have to agree. I think Italian speakers understand Spanish better!

But when fascists got together during WWII and decided Ryukyan languages and Korean too were dialects of Japanese...then go on to suppress them as not Japanese...come on. It has about as much validity as the Nazis deciding Jewish is a race.

The sea faring Ryuku people had better skills in navigating the oceans and was closer to the islands then mainland China.

The Chinese invented the compass before the 2nd century A.D. and provided ships to the Ryukyuans for the purpose of trade. I have to doubt your statement about navigation. Taiwan is 170km away from them, same as Ishigaki. Naha is further from the islands than China. I have seen nothing that proves or even suggests the Ryukyuans were there first and indeed, neither considered the islands part of the Ryukyu Kingdom at the time.

Playing dumb? Terra Nullius means no man's land in Latin in case you really didn't know.

Yeah, and its derived from ancient Roman Law, not Chinese Law. So whatever similar terms the Chinese used, we can expect differences from Roman Law or any law the Chinese were not a part of right up until they were accepted into the U.N. in what, 1971?

Basically there are documents after historical documents written by the Chinese themselves saying it was outside their territorial borders and yet PRC suddenly claims Senkaku isles are theirs of ancestry.

Meanwhile, the Japanese claim they are theirs because no one lived there. Well still no one lives there! So we consider other things, and China has the better historical claim.

But it does not end there. It seems to me the rules of the game were that Diaoyu was the border between Japan and China and Japan decided to change that not through mediation, but by one sided action during a war. I call bullox on that.

Final analysis is that Japan stole them, but has controlled them for so long and there are no inhabitants to dispute it, so I technically rule in favor of Japan and the status quo, shameful as it is.

Yet you fight me over this little crumb of the historical claim.

Yes, I think they are Japan's now. That said, if Japan were a decent, honest, war refuting and intelligent country, they would give the islands back to Taiwan. That would end it, and it would shut the PRC up.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

In other words Crush Then is taking China side without even having prove about this topic.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

The Chinese invented the compass before the 2nd century A.D. and provided ships to the Ryukyuans for the purpose of trade. I have to doubt your statement about navigation.

You need alot more to navigate the sea then just a simple compass, requiring to read the winds and currents which the Ryukyu people were most good at. Ryukyu people were island hoping and settled in most of the far flung islands. Okinawa was only the capital of a chain isles kingdom reaching from Amami Oshima to Yonaguni. And ships? You must be kidding. The Ryukyu people had ships before any mainland Chinese came to the island.There is enough prehistoric evidence that human lived on those islands before any Chinse dynasty.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@Mitsuo Matsuyama And you have yet to say anything specific. Is your only purpose here to harass me?

I challenge you either say something specific about my words, or type an opinion without referring to me at all.

You need alot more to navigate the sea then just a simple compass,

@SamuraiBlue Yes, I know. But the Chinese have a widely known history in early navigation in addition to that very important invention. Their Junks were capable of sailing around the world even if they didn't actually do it, and one of the main reasons they didn't was because of a nutbag Confucian insular emperor.

You make a lot of unsubstantiated claims about the Ryukyu people. You offer no sources or I see no way to verify what you say. But Chinese history is out there, ancient, recorded and well known. And that is why Chinese historical claims are valid claims even if they are not the strongest claims.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites