Japanese insistence

In Japan, they express an opinion that possession of Senkaku Islands of Japan is historically fair in international law. On investigation the Japanese claim about the issue of Senkaku Islands greatly separates three them.

 Primarily, Japan declared the possession of Senkaku Islands in January, 1895, but this was the act that was totally fair in the international law called "the occupancy" of "the place of lack of ownership". The Meiji government performed a field work from 1885 and confirmed what control of clean (China) did not extend to. A cabinet meeting determined it and admitted you into Okinawa after having confirmed that I belonged to neither country carefully.

 The China says, "an uotsurizima(Diaoyu Islands) is a peculiar territory from Akiyo and Kiyo ". However, the China cannot show the record to prove that China gave effective control and insisted on possession nationally, and the "territory idea of the Chinese peculiarity" does not consist.

 Second, the biggest problems of the chinese claim are to never perform both the objection and the protest for Japanese possession for 75 years from 1895 through 1970. In the sun Francisco peace treaty, Senkaku Islands were not included in the territory which Japan abandoned either and were placed under the administration of the United States of America as a part of the South-West Islands and came back to Japan by Okinawa return in1972.

 China did not say an objection against the fact that the archipelago was included in the area under the administration of the United States conventionally. When I do not declare my intentions of the objection including the protest to this while knowing the fact of the occupation by the other country, what is considered to have consented tacitly to the possession of the other country is a principle of law establishing globally. China cannot make an effective argument for these biggest problems.

 Third there is the center point of the claim of the Chinese side about Senkaku Islands taking advantage of Sino-Japanese War from 1894 through 95 in the place that Japan took away unfairly. In the United Nations General Assembly, China added criticism using the expression "that Japan stole".

 However, Senkaku Islands do not enter the Chinese domain ("Taiwan and attachment islands" and "Hpuko islands") that Japan recaptured in war unfairly even if we watch a peace treaty (Shimonoseki Treaty) of the Sino-Japanese War and all negotiations records about it. It is clear that the claim of the China in the United Nations General Assembly does not hold good. The possession of Senkaku Islands by Japan were fair acts and they are different from aggressive policy and expansionism called the cession of Taiwan, Houko island by the Sino-Japanese War.

 Considering these three points, as if Japan is surely fair. but this wrote pro-Japanese to the last and cannot decide an answer to see only this. China, Taiwan strongly insists that still Senkaku Islands are one's territories. You must listen to the opinion of the partner well.

 Japan wants to be settled by talks as means of the solution to international dispute in constitution. In addition, the United Nations Charter by the United Nations determines the pacific solution of the dispute in Chapter 6 and denies solution by the military means. Also, the Security Council can decide an action based on Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter that determined the military sanction for the country which planned dispute solution by the military power. Also, the People's Republic of China which is one of the people concerned is a permanent member, but, in Article 27 Clause 3, "the decision of the Security Council about the matter of or other none is performed by the affirmative vote of 9 members of the council of the United Nations including the agreement vote of the permanent member". But, about the decision based on Chapter 6 and Article 52, the dispute country concerned must renounce a vote,”But China temporarily plans solution to issue of Senkaku Islands by the military power, even the yes and no cannot announce.

They push forward the construction of the lighthouse in Japan at a private level, and there is the plan that they are going to settle down in, but the Japanese Government stops it. I think that it is clear that Ministry of Foreign Affairs is weak-kneed toward China. However, the solution to the problem is very difficult because China may choose the terrible means when Japan stimulates China.