环保志愿 发表于 2014-6-4 22:54 
把琉球主权收回来自己管理则无须渔业谈判
網路文章:
大敌[日本]当前,台湾当局还在自顾个人团伙经济与政治利益,虽然台湾当局在国际力争钓鱼岛主权与其东海和平搁置争议的说明,但其万宗百变下,依旧离不开一个原则,就是在国际上凸显台湾当局主权/治权的延续/正当/合法性等等,并借尸还魂的将中华民国[1911-1949年]存在台湾地区事实,作为钓鱼岛主张历史法原根据,甚至意图鼓吹钓鱼岛争议送往联合国等组织去处理.
台“外交部”10日在《华盛顿邮报》等美四大报刊登全版广告，提出“钓鱼岛是中华民国（台湾）领土十大理由”，并附历史文件。 图片来源：台湾《联合报》
台湾《联合报》报道，马英九10日在“双十”演说中，宣示“领土不容侵犯，主权不能动摇”立场，并说将以“扞卫主权渔权，和平处理争议，共同开发资源”原则，致力东海和南海稳定，为东亚和平继续努力。
台“外交部”10日发布新闻稿称，当局在《纽约时报》、《华盛顿邮报》、《洛杉矶时报》及《华尔街日报》等美国四大主流报纸要闻版，刊登全页彩色广告，题为“中华民国（台湾）提出东海和平倡议”。
附注:
台湾当局于2012年10月10日在《华盛顿邮报》等美四大报刊登全版广告，提出“钓鱼岛是中华民国（台湾）领土十大理由”，并附历史文件。
英文版:
THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA(TAIWAN) PROPOSES: THE EAST CHINA SEA PEACEINITIATIVE Amajor territorial dispute is brewing in the East China Sea. Asone of the founders of the United Nations, the Republic of China(Taiwan) believes it has the responsibility to resolvethe dispute in a peaceful manner underthe principles of the U.N. Charter. We are committed to the peacefulresolution because at the heart of the dispute are islandsthat belong to Taiwan. Theseislands are known as the Diaoyutai Islands, which means "fishingplatform" in Chinese. We see the islands as more thana platform for fishing; we also see them as a platform forpeacemaking. OnSeptember 26, 2012, Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda delivered a speechat the United Nations, during which he proclaimed to the world "no disputeexists." This is truly regrettablesince the rest of the world sees a major dispute—one with potentially graveconsequences to regional peace and economic prosperity. Unless therelevant parties recognize that a dispute does indeed exist, aresolution cannot possibly be reached. PrimeMinister Noda also called for “stronger rule of law” to resolve territorialdisputes, yet he rejected our proposal to submit the dispute to theInternational Court of Justice. He addedthat “any attempt to realize a country's claim by force or threat isinconsistent with the spirit of the U.N. Charter,” but continues to obfuscatethe fact that Japan annexed the islands on January 14, 1895, amid the ongoingSino-Japanese War (August 1894‒April1895). TheRepublic of China (Taiwan) cherishes the close friendship with Japan overthe past sixty years. However, since Japan instigated the recent flareup, we urge the Japanese government to take responsible steps towardrecognizing and resolving the dispute. We have carefully reviewed Japan'ssovereignty claims regarding the Diaoyutai Islands and we cannot agree withthem. To summarize our position, we have laid out 10points. We believe it is important toset the record straight and let the facts speak for themselves. Our Sovereignty Claim 1. TheDiaoyutai Islands were first discovered, named, and used by Ming China(1368–1644). · In the 15th century, the Chinese discovered theislands and named them Diaoyutai (Fishing Platform), Huangwei (Yellow Tail),and Chiwei (Red Tail), demonstrating intimate knowledge of the rich fishingresources in nearby waters later used by Taiwan fishermen. · Chinese used them asnavigation posts en route to Ryukyu Kingdom (now Okinawa). · The islands wereincorporated into Ming China’s coastal defense system. 2. TheDiaoyutai Islands, along with Taiwan, became the territory of Qing China(1644-1912). · Chinese envoy mission records describedthe islands as withinthe “border that separates Chinese and foreign lands.” · Taiwan gazetteers recorded “DiaoyuIsland canaccommodates ten or more large ships” and placed it under Kavalan (Ilan) County, Taiwan. Forexample, Revised Gazetteer of TaiwanPrefecture (1747), Subsequent Revision of the Gazetteerof Taiwan Prefecture (1764), Gazetteerof Kavalan County (1852), PictorialTreatise of Taiwan Proper (1872). · Theseofficial records demonstrate Qing China’s long and continuous effectiveadministration over the islands as part of Taiwan. 3. TheDiaoyutai Islands were secretly annexed by Meiji Japan on January 14, 1895,during the Sino-Japanese War (August 1894~April 1895). · Today, the Japanesegovernment asserts: “From 1885 on, it repeatedly conducted on-site surveyswhich confirmed that the islands were uninhabited and there were no signs ofcontrol by the Qing Empire. It therefore made a Cabinet Decision on January 141895 to formally incorporate the islands.” · However, old Meijiperiod documents unearthed from Japanese archives demonstrate that the Meiji government acknowledged Chineseownership of the islands in 1885. · In October 1885,following the first onsite investigation, Foreign Minister Inoue Kaoru andForeign Ministry Public Communications Director Asada Tokunori described theislands as “close to the Chinese border... next to Taiwan and belonging toChina” and “at this time, if we were to publicly place national markers, thismust necessarily invite China’s suspicion.…” · In November 1885,Okinawa Magistrate Nishimura Sutezo confirmed “since this matter is notunrelated to China, if problems do arise I would be in grave repentance for myresponsibility”. · Ten years later, in May1895, Okinawa Governor Narahara Shigeru wroteto the Home Ministry confirming no investigations of the islands took placesince 1885. · In August 1894, theSino-Japanese War broke out. On September 17, Japan defeated China’s BeiyangNaval Fleet. On October 24, Japancrossed the Yalu River and invaded China. By November 21, Japan captured the Chinese city Port Arthur. · In December 1894, theJapanese Home Ministry stated that the incorporation of the disputed islands“involved negotiations with China… but the situation today is greatly differentfrom back then.” · Japan accordinglyincorporated the islands secretly based on a cabinet decision of January 14,1895 amid the ongoing war. The cabinet decision was marked“Confidential” and, contrary to established convention, was never publiclyannounced. 4. Chinaceded “Taiwan and its appertaining islands" to Japan in 1895. · Following China's defeatin the Sino-Japanese War, Qing China was forced to sign the Treaty ofShimonoseki on April 17, 1895, which ceded"Taiwan and its appertaining islands" to Japan. · Since the DiaoyutaiIslands were part of Taiwan, the only basis of Japan’s legal rights is the 1895Treaty of Shimonoseki, which was nullified after WWII. 5. PostWWII arrangements restored the islands to their pre-1895 legal status. · The 1943 CairoDeclaration stipulated “all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese,such as Manchuria, Formosa (Taiwan), and the Pescadores, shall be restored tothe Republic of China. Japan will also be expelled from all other territorieswhich she has taken by violence and greed.” · The 1945 PotsdamProclamation stated, “…terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out...” · The 1945 JapaneseInstrument of Surrender accepted the terms of the Potsdam Proclamation. · All three internationallegal documents remain legally binding on the respective countries today, including the U.S., Japan and theR.O.C. (Taiwan). 6. TheDiaoyutai Islands, when secretly annexed by Japan in 1895, were placedunder Okinawa and later renamed. · Japan annexed theislands and placed them administratively under Okinawa in 1895 and formallyrenamed them "Senkaku Islands" in 1900. · These unilateral actsmasked the islands' original Chinese ownership and identity, whichresulted in their omission from the post-WWII arrangements asdescribed in (5). · WhenJapan returned Taiwan to the R.O.C., both sides adopted the 1945 administrativearrangement of Taiwan, with the AlliedPowers (including the R.O.C.) unaware that the uninhabited “Senkaku Islands”were in fact the former Diaoyutai Islands. 7. The Republic of China(Taiwan) neverrecognized Japanese sovereignty over the islands after WWII. · The Diaoyutai Islands,per the mistakes described in (6), were placed under U.S. trusteeship according to Article III of the 1951 SanFrancisco Peace Treaty, which the R.O.C. (Taiwan) was not invited to sign. · The 1952 Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty signed in Taipeibetween R.O.C. (Taiwan) and Japan did not include references to Article III ofthe San Francisco Peace Treaty. 8. From 1945-1971, the Diaoyutai Islands were under theadministration of the U.S., not Japan. · Thus, Japan's claim thatit has administered the islands for over a century ismisstating the facts. · Prior to 1971, Taiwandid not lodge protests to the Japanese government because the islands wereunder U.S., not Japanese, administration. 9. The U.S. did not transfer the islands’sovereignty to Japan in 1972. · Since 1971, the U.S. hasreiterated that the transferring of administrative rights of these islands toJapan does not constitute a transfer of sovereignty. · The U.S. has maintaineda policy of neutrality and has reiterated that it does not take a position onthe ultimate sovereignty of these islands. 10. Japan’ssovereignty claim over the Diaoyutai Islands is invalid ab initio (from the onset) under international law. · Ex injuria jus non oritur (a legal right or entitlement cannot arisefrom an unlawful act or omission) is a general principle of international lawrecognized by civilized nations. · Japan’s claim of sovereignty over the Diaoyutai Islands isinvalid ab initio(fromthe onset) under international law since the islands were never terra nullius(land without owner). OUR PROPOSAL: THE EAST CHINA SEAPEACE INITIATIVE Theresolution of the sovereignty issue will take time, but there are steps wecan take immediately to reduce tension and foster peace. Peacefulresolution of disputes is generally achieved in one of the fourways: negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and litigation. These approaches arenot necessarily mutually exclusive, but must all begin with negotiation. OnAugust 5, 2012, Republic of China President Ma Ying-jeou proposed atwo-stageEast China Sea Peace Initiativebasedon the concept that while sovereignty is indivisible,resourcescan be shared. Therefore, the Peace Initiative calls upon the parties concerned to replace confrontation with dialogue, shelve territorial disputes through negotiations, formulate a Codeof Conduct in the East China Sea and engage in jointdevelopment of resources. STAGE 1: Shelve territorial disputes through meaningful dialogue STAGE 2: Share resources throughjoint development KeyIssues: · East China Sea code of conduct · Jointconservation and management of the East China Sea’s living resources · Jointexploration and exploitation of the East China Sea’s non-living resources · Jointmarine scientific research & protectionof the marine environment · Jointexercises to maintain conventional and unconventional security in the East China Sea Overthe long run, we can move from three parallel tracks of bilateral dialogue(between Taiwan and Japan, Taiwan and the Chinese mainland, and Japan andthe mainland) to one track of trilateral negotiations. Wesincerely hope the U.S. government and its people will support this peaceinitiative.
Picture Captions: Subsequent Revision of the Gazetteerof Taiwan Prefecture (續修臺灣府志) (1764)listed territories belonging to Taiwan and recorded “Diaoyutai Island canaccommodate ten or more large ships.” Source: National Palace Museum, Taipei, Taiwan Asada Tokunori (浅田徳則), Foreign Ministry Director of Public Communications,wrote in October 1885, “Most recently, Chinese newspapers have been reportingrumors of our government’s intention of occupying islands of the Taiwan regionbelonging to China and have urged the Qing government to be aware of thismatter.” Source: Diplomatic RecordsOffice, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan Letter from Narahara Shigeru (奈良原繁), Okinawa Governor, to Egi Kazuyaki (江木千之), Director of Prefectural Administration, Home Ministrydated May 12, 1894. In the letter,Narahara stated, “Ever since the islands were investigated by Okinawa policeagencies back in 1885, there have been no subsequent field surveysconducted.” Source: Diplomatic RecordsOffice, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan.
中文版:
中華民國（臺灣）提出： ---東海和平倡議--- 一項重大領土爭端正在東海醞釀中。 中華民國（臺灣）身為聯合國的創始國之一，有責任依據聯合國憲章所訂原則和平解決這項爭端。我們決心和平解決，是因為這項爭端的核心，正是臺灣的附屬島嶼。 這些島嶼的名稱是釣魚臺列嶼，中文意義是「釣魚的平台」。我們認為這些島嶼不僅是釣魚的平台，也是締造和平的平台。 2012年9月26日，日本首相野田佳彥在聯合國發表的演說中，對全世界宣稱「並無爭端存在」，此舉實在令人遺憾，因為世界其他國家都認為，這是一項可能對區域和平與經濟繁榮產生嚴重後果的爭端，除非有關各方都承認爭端確實存在，否則將不可能獲得解決。 野田首相也曾呼籲「強化法律原則」來解決領土爭端，但他拒絕了我們提出將爭端提交國際法院審判的建議。他又補充說道，「任何要以武力或威脅實現領土主張的作法，都不符合聯合國憲章精神」，但他卻一直迴避日本是趁著中日甲午戰爭（1894年8月至1895年4月）的機會，在1895年1月14日兼併釣魚臺列嶼這個事實。 中華民國（臺灣）珍視過去六十餘年與日本的密切關係。但是，因為最近爆發的事端是日本主動挑起的，我們呼籲日本政府採取負責步驟，承認有爭端存在，並且加以解決。 我們仔細檢視了日本對釣魚臺列嶼的各項主權主張，我們無法同意。綜合我們的立場，特提出十點主張。我們相信，釐清事實，並讓事實呈現真相，是極為重要的。 我們的主權主張 1、 釣魚臺列嶼是中國明朝（西元1368-1644年）首先發現、命名及使用 l 早在第15世紀，中國人即發現這些島嶼，並且命名為釣魚臺、黃尾嶼、赤尾嶼，顯示這些列嶼周邊海域的魚源豐富，後來臺灣漁民常來此捕魚。 l 中國人使用這些島嶼作為航行到琉球國（今名沖繩）的航路指標。 l 這些島嶼被納入中國明朝的海防體系。 2、 釣魚臺列嶼隨同台灣成為中國清朝領土 l 中國清朝派往琉球的冊封使所撰寫的《使琉球錄》中，記載該列嶼位於「中外之界」界限之內。 l 臺灣志書多次記載「釣魚臺可泊大船十餘艘」，並且列入臺灣府的噶瑪蘭廳（今宜蘭縣）管轄。例如乾隆12年（1747年）范咸的《重修臺灣府志》、乾隆29年（1764年）余文儀的《續修臺灣府志》及同治11年（1872年）周懋琦的《全臺圖說》。 l 上述官方紀錄顯示：中國清朝長期而且持續將這些島嶼視為臺灣的一部分，實施有效管理。 3、 中日爆發甲午戰爭期間(1894年8月至1895年4月)，釣魚臺列嶼在1895年1月14日被日本明治政府竊占。 l 今日，日本政府宣稱「自1885年以來，日本政府透過沖繩縣當局等途徑在尖閣諸島再三進行實地調查，慎重確認尖閣諸島不僅為無人島，而且沒有受清朝統治的痕跡。遂於1895年1月14日以內閣決議方式，正式兼併這些島嶼」。 l 然而，依據從明治時期官方檔案找出的文件可以證明，日本明治政府其實瞭解釣魚臺列嶼在1885年是清朝所屬的領土。 l 1885年10月，日本第一次實地調查之後，外務大臣井上馨及外務省公信局局長淺田德則描述釣魚臺列嶼為「接近清國國境…臺灣近傍之清國所屬島嶼」，且「此時倘公開建立國標，無疑將招致清國猜疑」。 l 1885年11月，沖繩縣令西村捨三也在公文中證實：「此事與清國不無關係，倘生意外，將不知如何應對，殷盼指示」。 l 十年後，1895年5月，沖繩縣知事奈良原繁致函內務省，確認自1885年以來，十年之間未再進行實地調查。 l 1894年8月，中日甲午戰爭爆發，9月17日日軍擊敗中國北洋艦隊。10月24日日軍跨越鴨綠江入侵中國，11月21日佔領旅順。 l 1894年12月，日本內務省認為兼併釣魚臺列嶼「涉及與清國交涉…，但今昔情況已殊」。 l 1895年1月14日，戰爭還在進行中，日本以內閣秘密決議正式兼併釣魚臺列嶼。這項內閣決議是以「機密」等級標示，不僅違反國際慣例，且從未對外公開。 4 中國在1895年割讓「臺灣全島及所有附屬各島嶼」給日本 l 中國在甲午戰爭戰敗，被迫在1895年4月17日與日本簽定《馬關條約》，將「臺灣全島及所有附屬各島嶼」割讓給日本。 l 釣魚臺列嶼本屬臺灣的一部分，因此日本取得這些島嶼唯一的法律基礎，就是《馬關條約》，而《馬關條約》在第二次世界大戰後就已經被廢止了。 5 第二次世界大戰後的安排，使臺灣及其附屬島嶼回復到1895前的法律地位 l 1943年《開羅宣言》明定「在使日本所竊於中國之領土，例如東北四省、臺灣、澎湖群島等，歸還中華民國，其他日本以武力或貪慾所攫取之土地，亦務將日本驅逐出境」。 l 1945年《波茨坦公告》明定，「《開羅宣言》之條件，必須實施」。 l 1945年《日本降伏文書》明白宣示接受《波茨坦公告》。 l 上述三項國際法律文件迄今對相關當事國依然有拘束力，包括美國、日本及中華民國（臺灣）。 6 當釣魚臺列嶼在1895年被日本竊占時，是劃歸沖繩縣管轄並改變名稱 l 日本在1895年兼併釣魚臺列嶼並置於沖繩縣管轄，並在1900年將名稱改變為「尖閣諸島」。 l 日本這些單方面行為，掩飾了釣魚臺列嶼為中國固有領土的真實身分，以致於第二次世界大戰後的戰後處置（如第(5)項所述之各項）並未完全執行。 l 當日本歸還臺灣給中華民國時，雙方沿襲了1945年日本殖民下的臺灣行政區劃，因此盟國（包括中華民國）對於無人居住的「尖閣諸島」事實上就是「釣魚臺列嶼」這一點，毫無所悉。 7 自第二次世界大戰之來中華民國從未承認日本對釣魚臺列嶼的主權 l 依據中華民國並未獲邀簽署的1951年《舊金山和約》，因上述第(6)項所述的錯誤，該和約第三條誤將釣魚臺列嶼置於美國託管之下。 l 1952年，中華民國與日本在臺北簽署的《中日和平條約》並未包括上述1951年《舊金山和約》第三條的規定。 8 自1945年至1971年止，釣魚臺列嶼係置於美國託管之下，而非日本管轄之下 l 日本自稱有效管理釣魚臺列嶼超過一世紀之久，是誤導事實。 l 在1971年之前，由於釣魚臺列嶼係置於美國託管之下，而非日本，因此當時中華民國並無向日本政府提出抗議之理。 9 美國在1972年並未移轉釣魚臺列嶼主權予日本 l 自1971年以來，美國一再重申將釣魚臺列嶼的行政權交予日本，並不構成主權的移轉。 l 美國迄今仍然維持中立政策，並一再重申：對釣魚臺列嶼的最終主權，不採取任何立場。 10. 日本對釣魚臺列嶼的主權主張，在國際法上「自始無效」 l 依據文明國家所承認的一般國際法原則，「一國不得以違法作為或不作為取得合法權利或資格」。 l 日本對釣魚臺列嶼的主權主張，在國際法上「自始無效」，因為釣魚臺列嶼從來就不是「無主地」。 我們的提議：東海和平倡議 主權問題的解決頗為費時，但有些可以立即採取的步驟以降低緊張情勢及建立和平。 一般而言，和平解決爭端的方式有下列四種：談判、調解、仲裁及訴訟。 這些方式不必然互相排斥，但都得先從談判開始。 2012年8月5日，中華民國馬英九總統基於「主權無法分割，資源可以分享」的理念，提出一項二階段式的「東海和平倡議」。因此，本項和平倡議呼籲相關各方以對話取代對抗，經由協商以擱置領土爭議，建立「東海行為準則」以及共同開發資源。 第一階段：透過有意義的對話以擱置領土爭議 第二階段：經由合作開發共享資源 關鍵議題： l 東海行為準則 l 共同養護及管理東海生物資源 l 共同探勘及開發東海非生物資源 l 共同進行海洋科學研究與海洋環境保護 l 共同就東海海上安全與非傳統安全進行合作 長期而言，我們可以從「三組雙邊對話」（臺灣與日本、臺灣與中國大陸、日本與中國大陸）邁向「一組三邊協商」。 我們誠心盼望，美國政府及人民支持這項和平倡議。 圖片說明 圖一：乾隆29年（1764年）余文儀《續修臺灣府志》記載臺灣所屬區域，包括「釣魚臺可泊大船十餘」（來源：臺北故宮博物院） 圖二：1885年10月日本外務省公信局局長淺田德則記載「近時清國報紙揭載我政府欲佔據清國所屬臺灣地方之島嶼的傳聞，並促清國政府注意」（來源：日本外務省外交史料館） 圖三：1894年5月12日沖繩縣知事奈良原繁致函內務省縣治局局長江木千之，謂：「自明治18年（即1885年）中，由（沖繩）縣警部派出的調查以來，期間未再進行實地調查」（來源：日本外務省外交史料館）
| 
楼主