|
楼主 |
发表于 2014-12-22 01:38:58
|
显示全部楼层
There is a report in DEC24's Newsweek, under the title of "China Wants Land", the writer said the disputed islands were China's land-grap, & that the islands were uninhabited & Japan took them under the rule of "terra nullius" or land belonging to no one.
I posted a rebuttal with NW; whether NW will publish it or not, then I have no control. Anyway, here it is:
Quote
The following is in response to your DEC24 2012’s issue of “CHINA WANTS LAND”
Putting it bluntly, your analysis is a classical example of your reporter’s ignorance of history & geography re Diaoyu Islands.
The "islands in dispute" were part of Taiwan Hsien (縣) which was part of Fujian Province (省) during the Ching Dynasty. There was a naval battle in the 19th century between the Ching Dynasty & Japan in which Japan won & Okinawa (called Ryuku Islands 琉球群島by Chinese) + Taiwan Hsien were annexed by the Japanese.
Japan, due to its land & resources limitations, had its eyes on "swallowing" China whole *, particularly after the formation of the Republic in 1911 & had army stationed in the northern provinces of China. The Japanese Imperial Army even boasted to the Emperor of conquering China in 3 (yes 3) months. So Japan, un-provoked, started its attack on China on JUL07 1937. This incident was quite similar to the attack on Pearl Harbour but was rarely reported.
*To understand Japan’s grand scheme, one must study the “Tanaka Referendum” submitted to the then emperor in the 19th century.
The Chinese army was still in its early stage of modernization defended vigorously, particularly in Shanghai which prompted the Japanese Army to initiate the infamous Rape of Nanjing (which was the capital city of the Republic) to set an example as a punishment of Chinese resistance.
This Sino-Japanese war lasted 8 years until Japan's surrendered to the allied countries, & China (the Nationalist Government) was one of the signatories accepting Japan's surrender on board USS Missouri.
As a result of Japan's surrender, Taiwan Hsien was returned to China, unfortunately Okinawa (Ryuku Islands) was not included.
The islands in dispute were so small and uninhabited that nobody paid much attention to it; and since the islands were part of Taiwan Hsien, theoretically, they should be part of the return.
Civil war soon started in China, & the Nationalist Government retreated to Taiwan Hsien & renamed it as Taiwan Province 省.
Soon after that, the Korean War broke out, USA needed Japan to form a defense link & to isolate the Communist block, even up to this date.
Here comes the murky part, in the 1970's USA unilaterally decided to "give/return" the now disputed islands to Japan. How can USA decide on islands which they had no troops on + they did not own/administer, & give them to a country which surrendered as a result of its aggression, while sacrificing an ally of WWII?? Who gave USA the authority to decide who is the owner of a foreign land/island???
The islands were returned in name to the Japanese government, but were never inhabited, how could the Japanese Government bought the islands from "private owners" who did not exist????
I am sure USA has many uninhabited island, & if “terra nullius” is a valid reason, does this mean any country can lay claim on uninhibited islands on US maps?
Japanese politicians, deep inside, have never forfeited the desire to be the centre of “Great East Asia Co-Prosperity Circle”, took advantage of US politicians ignorance of history & geography, staged a "paper purchase" of the disputed islands.
Chinese Government, the one on the mainland, is getting stronger economically & militarily, definitely will not allow Japan’s new aggression.
If a foreign country lays claim on an uninhabited US island based on “terra nullius”, I am sure the US Government will react much more strongly!
For USA politicians, they better study Asian history & geography before taking sides.
Unquote
For 747 brothers, "Great East Asia Co-Prosperity Circle" is 大東亞共榮圈. I didn't make up any of the events, they are historical facts, I just enjoy reading history. |
|