All parties to Diaoyu islands shy away from International Court

Kai Fung 2 returns flying Taiwan flag!

Between Taiwan & Okinawa

Whose Diaoyu islands - Taiwan’s, China’s or Japan’s?

Considerable heat was generated on the streets of Chinese cities recently with enraged mobs burning Japanese cars while a fishing boat load of ‘national heroes’ planted China and Taiwan flags on the disputed Diaoyu islands in the East China Sea.

Apart from plentiful bluster and jingoism there is neither clarity nor consensus over the legal merits of the claims by Taiwan and China. Japan controls the island cluster which they refer to as the Senkakus. No party is eager to take its claim to an international court. Politicians have no strategy to deal with legal rejection after fanning nationalistic flames. Any legal dispute brought to court will have a winner and a loser with binding obligations.

Chinese Imperial maritime logbooks going back to the 1400s refer to the Diaoyu Islands as navigational landmarks. Imperial Japan formally incorporated the Senkaku Islands as national territory on 14 January 1895, converting their prior terra nullius (no man’s land) status.

After Japan’s WWII surrender to America, the Senkakus was administered as part of the Okinawa Prefecture under the United States Civil Administration of the Ryuku Islands from 1945 to 1972 when they reverted to Japan under the Okinawa Reversion Treaty ratified by the US Congress in 1971.

The UN Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE) report of 1969 raised the potential of large oil reserves around the Senkaku/Daioyu archipelago. That energized the territorial claims between Taiwan, China and Japan, which continue unresolved.

Since 1972 the civic administration of the Senkaku Islands was placed under the mayor of Ishigaki but he is not permitted to develop them or initiate commercial activity without clearance from the central government.

Private ownership of Senkakus problematic

At the turn of the 20th Century private entrepreneur Koga Tatsushiro took advantage of the rich fishing around the Senkakus to erect a bonito processing plant with 200 workers. The business did not thrive and fell into disuse with the WWII disruption till the 1970s when Koga Tatsushiro’s grandchildren sold four of the islands - Uotsuri, Kita-Kojima, Minami-Kojima and Kuba to the Kurihara family of Saitama Prefecture.

Since 2002 the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications pays the Kurihara family ¥25 million a year to rent Uotsuri, Minami-Kojima and Kita-Kojima. Kuba island is rented by the Ministry of Defense and is used by the US Air Force for bombing practice.

On 17 December 2010, the Ishigaki mayor declared that January 14 would be ‘Pioneering Day’ to commemorate Japan's 1895 annexation of the Senkaku Islands. That brought swift condemnation from China. In 2012, the central government and Tokyo municipality announced plans to purchase Uotsuri, Kita-Kojima and Minami-Kojima from the Kurihara family to properly centralize administration of the Senkaku Islands.

These attempts to tidy-up the private ownership status of the Senkakus against national sovereignty priorities, add to the rising tensions of the dispute. The moves are seen as further provocations by China and Taiwan.

National Heroes return from Diaoyu mission


The returning heroes arrived in two batches - seven on a deportation flight and the other seven on board the Kai Fung 2 which docked at Tsim Sha Tsui pier, Wednesday August 22, ten days after it evaded Hong Kong’s marine police to spirit 14 professional protestors to the cluster of disputed islands in the East China Sea.

They landed on the main island, planted Chinese and Taiwan flags, sang the Chinese national anthem, denounced Japan’s illegal occupation of Chinese territory and collected three rocks as souvenirs. Mission accomplished.

The rocks got lost in transit. If anyone finds a heavy red plastic package, please return it to the patriots. They will gift one rock to the HK Museum. Where the other two rocks will go has not been decided yet if they turn up.

The protestors aim to replay their action on the Diaoyu islands in October on China’s national independence anniversary -- if they find sponsors to finance repairs to the fishing boat and underwrite expenses.

Japanese are not amused

The mood in Japan meanwhile is dismay that nine coastguard vessels could not prevent a lone fishing boat from landing Chinese activists on the Senkaku and anger at the Noda government for allowing the adventurers to return home without being charged for illegal entry. There are calls for firm deterrent action to be taken and for the Self Defence Forces (SDF) to be deployed.

Captain Yeung Hong of the Kai Fung 2 relished outmanouvering and slipping past the naval blockades of the Hong Kong marine police and Japanese coastguard boats: “We could break the cordon because both the Hong Kong and Japanese authorities made mistakes in stopping us.”

Boat owner Lo Hom-chau was more concerned with the safety of the party, funds to repeat the trip in October and younger manpower to carry on the heroic mission. “The expedition is a success because all crew members returned safe.”

The last time a Hong Kong boat ventured to the Diaoyu islands 16 years ago, one of the party drowned. Mr Lo is worried that the activists of the Action Committee for the Defense of Diaoyu Islands are all in their 60s and young recruits are not forthcoming. He also estimates HK$200,000 worth of repairs to fix the damage caused by Japanese coastguard ships.

It is unlikely that another Hong Kong fishing boat will be able to unload more heroes on the Daioyu or that flag-planting patriots would be sent back in triumph. The chances for tactical miscalculation and unintended consequences to life and limb are high, which the governments involved may wish to avoid.

Should Hong Kong have a role in maritime disputes?

In an unusual step-up for the mayor of a Chinese city, chief executive CY Leung had called in the Japanese Consul to assure the safety of adventurers aboard the Kai Fung 2 which Hong Kong’s marine police failed to stop from leaving territorial waters. It was a breach of marine regulations and it is not clear what action will be taken, if any.

There is considerable ambivalence about Hong Kong’s role in what is a sovereignty dispute between China, Taiwan and Japan over a group of five islands and three rocky outcrops in the East China sea under Japanese control. The Basic Law which is the territory’s mini-constitution, reserves international relations and national defence as functions of the central government. The national government has not outsourced maritime territorial claims to Hong Kong.

Both China and Taiwan prevent international adventurism being launched from their shores by civilians. Tokyo disallows nationals from similar theatrics. Hong Kong as a port of departure for Diaoyu activists seems to somehow allow provocation with deniability.

Japan does not recognize Taiwan as an independent state. Neither does China which waits to resume sovereignty over the ‘renegade province’ at some point in the future. To complicate matters, China agrees that the Diaoyu islands belong to Toucheng Township in Taiwan’s Yilan County. Does Taiwan have legal capacity to stake a claim? With whom should Japan negotiate to resolve the dispute?

CY Leung reportedly donated HK$1million to the Action Committee for Defense of Diaoyu Islands but did not show up to welcome the returning heroes. However, candidates from across the political spectrum gathered with bouquets of flowers as the Kai Fung 2 docked with its cargo of patriots. The crowd at the Tsim Sha Tsui pier jeered the ‘shameless’ politicians jostling for TV coverage. The Legislative Council and District Council ‘super seat’ elections are due Sept 9 and free publicity is useful for the candidates.

Righteous mass anger can be a double-edged sword

Expediency has played a large part in allowing jingoism to be stoked to add pressure and urgency to the diplomatic stalemate with Japan. The press in Hong Kong, China and Taiwan dutifully hailed the professional activists as national heroes and patriots. The 14 activists included Shenzen, Macao, Taiwan and Hong Kong residents. There were demonstrations in cities across China and Taiwan in an outpouring of mob hate against the Japanese, fuelled by lingering bitter memories of wartime atrocities.

Things got out of hand in Shenzen where crowds overturned and burnt Japanese cars -- including a police vehicle. That is exactly the sort of unscripted pandemonium the Chinese Communist Party loathes more than anything else. Every time it allows mass mobilization outside Party choreography, it risks unpredictable consequences.

Already the serial outbreak of persistent public protests against environmental damage and health hazards has the CCP worried. The social activism beyond Party control in so many Chinese cities has come to be referred to in mainland media as the ‘Shifang-Qidong Model’ of public action -- a challenge the Party is still trying to find a way to pre-empt.

President Hu and prime minister Wen continue to exhort ‘stability and social harmony’ as code for administrative prudence and public restraint. That has not been enough to stop public anger over secret mega projects that discharge toxic waste into rivers and the arrogance of local party chiefs who routinely unleash police violence on citizens.

ENDS

HK Ombudsman probes $12m funding to patriotic centres

Parents, students & teachers protest
'patriotic education' booklet

NPC Dy Yeung Yiu-chung
gets HK$12m per annum

Michael Suen believed to
have siphoned funds to pro-Beijing
National Education Centres

Education Department asked to clarify

Besides provoking 90,000 Hong Kong parents, students and teachers to protest-march last Sunday (July 29) , the government’s clumsy attempt to force ‘patriotic education’ on schools has now attracted a probe by the Ombudsman’s Office. It seeks to establish how HK$12 million taxpayer dollars is being funnelled annually without open tender, into two pro-Beijing agencies, both headed by the same person, for production of patriotic education materials.

The agencies which enjoy the government’s unusual largesse are the National Education Centre and the National Education Services Centre, both headed by National Peoples’ Congress (NPC) deputy Yeung Yiu-chung and run by the 26,000 member Federation of Education Workers (FEW).

The Ombudsman’s letter notifying the 80,000 strong HK Professional Teachers’ Union of the probe, refers to study of ‘relevant materials’ - presumably the output of the twin national education outfits - as the basis for its action.

Before citizens get too excited about the Ombudsman’s involvement, note that his office is also investigating three government departments for failing to curb a hawker stall, the Fisheries Department for not removing stray cats and the Lands Department for not dismantling an unauthorised structure on government property.

Patriotic study tours for select HK schools

While at it, Ombudsman Alan Lai-nin should also check out the Education Bureau’s facilitation and subsidy of reportedly HK$1million for 450 students from 35 secondary schools in July, to tour scenic spots and the Mao Zedong Relics Museum in Hunan. The Education Bureau does not list the schools involved. It will be useful to know if there is a common thread underpinning this select group which is so favoured. The Bureau provided tour booklets which tell how Mao “sought the truth to save the country and citizens”.

Part of the student experience includes a display of Chairman Mao’s pyjamas replete with 73 repair patches as evidence of his “hardworking, frugal and noble character.” A Hong Kong girl interviewed by Hunan TV News gushed “I think Chairman Mao grandpa is quite amiable”. It is on YouTube. That about wraps up the educational value of the tour.

Education funds diverted without open tender

Last year the Donald Tsang administration siphoned HK$86 million for a six year program of patriotic education to cover teaching materials, study tours and training courses. The Professional Teachers’ Union however does not have any role in the Education Bureau’s program. That has been reserved for the Federation of Education Workers which is paid out of taxpayer dollars without any competitive tendering. What special educational expertise the FEW has is unclear other than its ‘United Front’ role in the education sector.

The HK government has deviated from standard procurement procedures without transparency or accountability, setting a precedent which the public wants stopped. Why the secrecy in deploying public funds? What else is the HKSAR administration hiding from its citizens? Why?

Financial Secretary Michael Suen who was Secretary for Education in the Donald Tsang administration, is widely believed to have engineered the funding for NPC deputy Yeung Yiu-chung, who chairs both the beneficiaries. Incoming Education Secretary Eddie Ng Kam-hai was caught with the dirty secret Michael Suen left behind. His lack of prior briefing showed as he dithered while the patriotic education farce unravelled. He was summoned to Beijing and stiffened up to mouth support for what his conscience told him was clearly against Hong Kong’s core values.

Hong Kong citizens and legislators - outside those complicit in the plot - are only now becoming aware of the extent of diversion of education funds to unknown agencies for problematic patriotic education campaigns.

National education or indoctrination?

Neither parents, students nor teachers who participated in the protest march through the blazing Sunday have any problem with factual national education about the motherland’s culture, traditions, geography, space exploration, economic progress, pollution or ecology. They draw the line at disguised party propaganda, distortion of history, silence on major policy disasters, hero-worshipping of Mao and widespread human rights abuses unacceptable in any civilised society.

That is a crucial distinction the propaganda promoters refuse to acknowledge. They conflate national education with indoctrination. Hong Kong society is too aware and alert for that to fly. They want clarity of intent from their government and professional scrutiny of teaching materials to excise propaganda. Information yes, indoctrination no. Critical thinking yes, regimentation no.

Dire warnings to HK ‘troublemakers’

A Basic Law Committee stalwart of the Standing Committee of The National Peoples’ Congress, Lau Nai-keung, used his column in the South China Morning Post (Aug 3, Op-Ed, A13) to warn HK citizens of punishment for challenging authority. The piece titled ‘Hong Kong courts disaster with culture of opposition’ intimated that Beijing’s patience is running out for ungrateful HK residents who refuse to salute the wisdom of the Party.

Mr Lau raises the spectre of a China challenged by external and internal threats and declares that Hong Kong is a ’springboard’ to destabilize the mainland, suggesting Beijing will move beyond benevolence to squash dissidents if they don’t hew to the party line.

What these external and internal threats are is not spelled out by Mr Lau. How punishing Hong Kong parents, teachers and students for demanding a clear separation between education and propaganda can resolve China’s domestic contradictions, remains unclear.

Next CCP leadership to set new priorities

The legitimacy of the CCP is being challenged by village communities left behind in the Dengist economic reforms of the last three decades. The wealth gap, rampant official corruption, theft of farmlands by bullying Party apparatchiks, polluting industrial facilities that poison rivers and food-chain, tainted milk and other food products churned out by factories protected by local Party chiefs, arbitrary arrest and torture of citizens who dare protest and petition for their rights and arrogant abuse of power and privilege, coalesce into the cracked social mirror that scares the ghosts who unleash these iniquities.

The ‘divine right to rule’ of the last imperial regime was ended by Sun Yat Sen’s republican revolution of 1911. The Chinese Communist Party re-educated the last Emperor as a repair workshop mechanic after releasing him from prison in 1959. The CCP has no divine right to rule either. Respect for the Party has to be earned.

More mature heads at the apex of the CCP leadership are preparing to announce an inclusive development policy to address the wealth gap, environmental degradation, social equity and the cancer of corruption at all levels of the Party, in the October session of the 18th National Peoples’ Congress which will confirm the fifth generation CCP leaders.

HK citizens do not fear their government. Dissidents do not expect to be kidnapped in the dead of night by secret police. Their families are not punished. They do not ‘disappear’ nor are they ‘suicided’ in custody. The incoming leadership in China will hopefully have the greater wisdom and confidence to finally liberate citizens from abuse by an unfettered police state apparatus, six decades after the promise of social justice.



ENDS

Why NASA matters to Earthlings