Senkaku Islands dispute has roots in history

(February 1945), the Potsdam Declaration (July 1945) and the Treaty of San Francisco (September 1951).

Similarly, the dispute between Japan, China and Taiwan over the ownership of Senkaku/ Diaoyu/Tiaoyutai Islands has its roots in history. Claiming that the islands were originally theirs, China is incensed by Japan’s administrative control of the islands since 1972, courtesy of the US. Japan claimed that China ceded the islands under the Treaty of Shimonoseki after the Qing dynasty lost the war in 1895. China accused Japan of forcefully annexing the territories when it was weak.

In 2013, China established an air defence identification zone over the East China Sea, including the airspace over the disputed islands. In November 2014, Tokyo and Beijing reached a four-point agreement calling for the development of a “strategic relationship of mutual benefit” and the establishment of a crisis-management mechanism between the two countries. However, due to intervening domestic and international factors, the effort has not produced any positive result. Both parties remain suspicious of each other’s motives.

Tokyo viewed Beijing’s militarisation of features in the South China Sea and the construction of artificial islands as a threatening trend that does not bode well for its security in the East China Sea. Beijing, on the other hand, is wary that Tokyo is not keen to settle the bilateral dispute amicably, so long as the USJapan Security Treaty remains intact. Article V of the treaty mandates the US to come to Japan’s defence if any of its territories, including the disputed Senkaku, is under attack. However, in an unlikely situation of China crossing the red line over the Senkaku, no Japanese, in my view, will commit harakiri or seppuku, if the US fails to honour the treaty.