Rethinking Taipei Tokyo Relations Based on National Interest

Rethinking Taipei Tokyo Relations Based on National Interest 
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC) 
A Translation 
August 1, 2016

Executive Summary: The “ruling” over the South China Sea has already led to major changes in East Asian international relations. It has impacted cross-Strait relations. It has changed Taiwan Japan relations. The DPP regime must discard its one-sided policy towards Japan. It must rethink its strategy. It must reject flowery rhetoric for substantive diplomacy. The change in Taiwan Japan Maritime Cooperation Dialogue confirms this necessity.

Full Text Below:

The DPP regime has long seen the "Taiwan Japan Maritime Affairs Cooperation Dialogue" mechanism as a breakthrough in Taipei Tokyo relations. But a few days ago, the dialogue abruptly ended, causing an uproar. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the issues were too many and too varied to deal with, and that out of "caution", it decided to postpone the event.

Taiwan Japan Maritime Affairs Cooperation Dialogue includes cooperation on fisheries, environmental protection, emergency rescue, and scientific research. The Department of Fisheries, the Ministry of Science, and the Ministry of the Interior, have negotiated these issues with the Government of Japan in the past. But they have now returned to square one, and are starting from scratch. The issues may be many and varied. But Taiwan and Japan should have reached a tacit agreement by now. It is not as if they lacked the time.

Take the issues one by one. Taiwan Japan Maritime Affairs Cooperation Dialogue includes fishing grounds, research vessel classification and identification, maritime conservation legislation, and emergency rescue notification mechanisms. These are bureaucratic level technical issues, not politically sensitive issues. The issues may be varied, but the difficulties are not that great.

The agenda was agreed upon long ago. So why have the two governments put the talks on hold? For two reasons. Reason One. The recent “ruling” on the South China Sea demoted Taiping Island to the status of a "reef", provoking a public outcry on Taiwan. This forced the Tsai regime to get tough and protest this “ruling” by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague.

The Japanese government on the other hand, declared that the “ruling” on the South China Sea constituted binding arbitration. It demanded that the parties comply. The gap between our perception and Japan's is huge. That is the reason for the delay. Not because the issues are varied and many, but because the atmosphere has been poisoned.

Reason Two. The Taiwan Japan Maritime Affairs Cooperation Dialogue mechanism was originally intended to resolve differences over Taiwan fishermen fishing in waters near Cong Zhi Niao Reef. Before that, the two sides had already agreed to address only fishing disputes, and shelve any disputes over Cong Zhi Niao Reef sovereignty. They had also reverted to the 2002 Chen era agreement to "first report, then withdraw". The problem is that once Taiping Island was demoted to the status of a reef, the understanding evaporated overnight. Now, if the two sides were to address fishing rights for Taiwan fishermen in the waters near Cong Zhi Niao Reef, that would imply its recognition as an "island". That would assuredly provoke a backlash on Taiwan. Therefore the talks have been postponed indefinitely, not because of the two sides lacked time for preparation, but because the circumstances have changed.

The indefinite postponement of Taiwan Japan dialogue has revealed two blind spots in DPP policy towards Japan. Blind Spot One is the Tsai regime's wishful thinking vis a vis the Japanese government. The moment the DPP came to power, it boasted that it was the most pro-Japanese government ever on Taiwan. During the Tung Sheng Chi 16 incident the Ma Ying-jeou government formally declared that Cong Zhi Niao Reef was merely a reef. But as soon as the DPP came to power, it attempted to pander to Japan. The DPP regime claimed that in order to comply with international law, it was now referring to the reef as “Cong Zhi Niao”. It was no longer specifying whether it was a reef or an island, in order to avoid offending the Japanese.

The recent “ruling” on the South China Sea demoted Taiping Island to the status of a “reef”. The Japanese government added insult to injury. It demanded that the ROC abide by the International Court of Justice ruling. It unilaterally call a halt to the Taiwan Japan Maritime Issues Cooperation Dialogue. When Taiwan Japan relations and Japan's national interests collided, the Japanese government chose its own national interests. The DPP, on the other hand, in order to persuade Japan to assist it in opposing the Mainland, groveled before the Japanese. They not only sacrificed our national interests. They even undermined relations with Japan.

Blind Spot Two is ignoring the impact of regional security on Taiwan Japan relations. As soon as the DPP came to power, cross-Strait relations chilled. The DPP attempted to join the US and Japan in “containing” Mainland China. Under this policy, the DPP must adopt an ambiguous policy on the South China Sea in order to comply with US and Japanese strategy, and avoid the impression that Taipei and Beijing are on the same side. But the “ruling” on the South China Sea has frustrated this attempt. It has put Taiwan and the Mainland on the same side. It has undermined the DPP's original plan for relations with Japan. It has also disrupted the Tsai regime's plan to confine talks with Japan to fishing rights. Its desire to avoid talking about Cong Zhi Niao Reef sovereignty has turned out to be wishful thinking. Public outrage is growing. The status of Cong Zhi Niao Reef has become an unavoidable obstacle to Taiwan Japan Maritime Affairs Dialogue, and become a major concern in DPP Japan relations.

The “ruling” over the South China Sea has already led to major changes in East Asian international relations. It has impacted cross-Strait relations. It has changed Taiwan Japan relations. The DPP regime must discard its one-sided policy towards Japan. It must rethink its strategy. It must reject flowery rhetoric for substantive diplomacy. The change in Taiwan Japan Maritime Cooperation Dialogue confirms this necessity.

從國家利益再思台日關係
2016-08-01 聯合報

一直被民進黨政府視為對日關係新突破的「台日海洋事務合作對話」，日前突然宣布喊卡，引起各界譁然。外交部的解釋是：因為議題眾多、層面廣泛，為求「周延」，故決定延期舉辦。

攤開這次台日海洋合作對話設定的議題，包括了漁業合作、環境保護、海上急難救助及科學合作等四大項。這些，都是過去幾年漁業署、科技部及內政部與日本政府協商過的議題，這次化零為整重新包裝。可見，議題雖多，但台日雙方應早有默契，並非措手不及。

但檢視各議題涉及之層面，這次「台日海洋合作對話」含括漁場作業規範、科研船隻之歸屬認定、海域保育的法令制定、急難救助的通報機制等。這些，均屬官僚層級的技術性議題，並未涉及高層的政治敏感議題。可見，儘管對話面向廣泛，議題難度其實不高。

既然議題設定早有共識，涉及的層面也相當單純，那麼，兩國為何突然宣布延期呢？這可以從兩點觀察：第一，日前南海仲裁案將我國所屬的太平島矮化為「礁」，引發台灣內部民意的不滿；對此，蔡英文政府不得不硬起來，抗議海牙常設仲裁法庭的判決。

對照之下，日本政府卻宣稱南海仲裁案具有法律約束力，更呼籲各當事國能夠遵守；這樣的立場，與我方的認知存在極大的差距。亦即，延期的理由其實不在議題「周延」與否，而在對話「氛圍」不佳。

其次，這次「台日海洋合作對話」，原是為解決台灣漁民在沖之鳥礁附近海域的捕魚問題而發；之前，雙方原已達成「不談沖之鳥主權、只談漁權」的默契，並決定回歸二○○二年扁朝時代訂下的「先通報、後撤離」之規範。問題是，在太平島遭矮化為「礁」後，此默契一夕走調。如今，若台日雙方談台灣漁民在沖之鳥海域的捕魚權益，等於間接承認沖之鳥為「島」，這勢必引發台灣民眾的大反彈。因此，延期的理由亦不在「準備不及」，而在於主客觀情勢轉變。

從這次台日對話的延期，便可以發現民進黨政府的對日政策存在兩個盲點。第一個盲點，是蔡政府對日過度一廂情願。民進黨一上台，便自我定位為有史來最親日的政府。當年馬英九政府因為東聖吉十六號事件，宣布我國公文書稱沖之鳥為「礁」；但民進黨上台後為了迎合日本，以遵守國際法為由改稱「沖之鳥」，而不判定其屬性，以免觸犯日本政府的底線。

但這次南海仲裁案將我國太平島認定為礁，日本政府卻對台灣落井下石，呼籲我國應遵守國際法院的裁定，更片面中斷「台日海洋合作對話」之協商。由此可見，在台日關係與國家利益權衡下，日本政府選擇的是該國利益，而民進黨則為了反中而一味向日本傾斜，不僅喪失國家利益考量，也使對日關係愈發進退失據。

第二個盲點，是忽視區域安全對台日關係的連動性。民進黨上台後，因兩岸關係氛圍轉冷，於是採取聯合美日抗衡中國大陸的策略。在此策略下，民進黨只能對南海問題採取曖昧態度，以迎合美日兩國的戰略，並避免留給外界兩岸聯手的印象。但南海仲裁案出爐後，卻將海域主張受挫的台灣與中國大陸打成一線，進而衝擊到民進黨原先對日關係的布局；同時，也打亂蔡政府對日原本只談漁權、不觸及沖之鳥屬性的如意算盤。在國內民意高漲下，沖之鳥的認定與屬性，已成為台日海洋對話難以迴避的問題，也成為民進黨對日關係的一大隱憂。

南海仲裁案後，東亞國際關係已經出現重大變革，不僅衝擊著兩岸關係，也改變了台日關係。在這種情況下，民進黨政府應該擺脫過往對日一面倒的政策，重新思考戰略，也要跳脫只操弄華麗辭藻、卻缺乏實質內涵的外交模式。「台日海洋合作對話」生變，即是最佳證明。