the ownership of the Diaoyu Islands. In 2004, Murata published his that unsettled questions need to be “carefully unraveled,” but that Ishibook The Disputes Over the Senkaku-Diaoyu Islands, which concluded hara’s statements had had the opposite effect. based on historical precedent and international postwar treaties that “Ishihara as a local government official with no means to settle territhe Diaoyu Islands belong to China. Murata’s argument is essentially torial disputes… knew clearly this would negatively impact the governrooted in the same one that Inoue made in ment’s foreign policy; showing nothing but the 1970s. Ishihara’s total lack of a sense of responsibilAccording to Inoue, China had hisity,” says the editorial. torical sovereignty over the Penghu Islands Yet, few Japanese criticized Ishihara’s sover“On this issue, we should learn (Pescadores) and Taiwan, along with the eignty claim. Ukeru Magosaki, a former senior from Premier Zhou Enlai and nearby Diaoyu Islands, before losing them official of the Japanese Foreign Ministry, said Mr Deng Xiaoping,” Murata to Japan during the 1894 Sino-Japanese in his signed article in Yomiuri Shimbun in July told our reporter. “At the same War, which saw the Qing fleet annihilated that the Japanese should consider the Diaoyu a time, we should be aware that by Japan’s navy. Japan brought these anplace whose ownership remains unsettled rathwe have not surpassed their nexed territories under the jurisdiction of er than Japan’s inherent territory. His remarks Okinawa Prefecture, where they remained made quite a stir because such unorthodox political wisdom. For a scholar, until the Empire of Japan was defeated by views are rarely heard in the country. truth comes before national the Allies in 1945. Tadayoshi Murata, meanwhile, has been interests.” The Cairo Declaration, designed to demarginalized in Japanese academic circles termine the legal and ethical terms of the since he published his Diaoyu treatise eight Allied military campaign against Japan and years ago, labeled an “ultra-leftist” and “traisigned by China, Great Britain and the tor” and denied media coverage, in Japan, at United States in December 1943, stated least, for his views. that all former Chinese territories annexed Murata has thus turned to his professorship by Japan since 1894, including Manchuria at the University of Yokohama to spread his (now the northeastern provinces of Liaoning, Jilin and Heilongjiang), ideas, chairing forums for Japanese and visiting Chinese students to deTaiwan (Formosa) and the Penghu (Pescadores) should be returned to bate the Diaoyu issue before retiring this year. China, then under the control of Chiang Kai-shek’s Kuomintang. The Potsdam Declaration determining the terms of Japan’s surrender Second Book Now, at the height of the diplomatic furor, Murata is writing a second signed by the Allies in July 1945, reiterated as binding the terms set in Cairo. In Professor Inoue’s view, the Diaoyu Islands should automati- book on the Diaoyu. He claims that the escalation of the disputes over the islands has already wrought damage to Sino-Japanese relations at cally have been restored to China. In his book, Murata theorizes that as ancient Chinese records and a time the two countries should celebrate the 40th anniversary of the maps have included the Diaoyu Islands in Chinese territory since the establishment of their diplomatic relations (1972). He believes that the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644), that they are as historically integral to best approach at present is to shelve the feuds, provided that the disChina as Taiwan or Manchuria. Murata also uses geology to further putes cannot be resolved for the time being. Meanwhile, in his view, it is emphasize China’s claim, stating that as Taiwan and the Diaoyu Islands advisable for Chinese and Japanese academics to share historical records are linked underwater by the East Asian continental shelf, the two are in their possession and find a reasonable solution to the issue. Murata holds that China and Japan are indispensable to each other physically integrated. Therefore, Murata concluded in his book that the Japanese occupa- and the two sides should continue to promote their strategic ties. When territorial disputes arise, he claims, both sides should “maintain a sober tion of Diaoyu Islands in 1895 was nothing but a “robbery.” In April this year, Shintaro Ishihara, governor of Tokyo and a right- mind” and resolve their differences in a peaceful way. “Fanning the flames of petty nationalism masquerading as patriowing politician, made remarks in Washington that the Diaoyu Islands would be purchased from their Japanese owners by the Tokyo govern- tism,” in Murata’s view, should be “avoided at all costs.” In this respect, Murata has more in common with former Chinese ment. Then the Japanese government stepped in and officially “nationalized” the islands on September 10-11 by signing a contract to pur- premier Zhou Enlai, and late Chinese President Deng Xiaoping, both chase them from a private owner, sparking a wave of protests in China. of whom advocated shelving territorial disputes in order to promote In its April 18 editorial, conservative newspaper Yomiuri Shimbun healthy bilateral relations between the two former enemies of China criticized Ishihara for making “irresponsible remarks.” The article said and Japan. NEWSCHINA I November 2012
13