UPSC Prelims 2022 Q86: Senkaku Islands Dispute — Explained
Which one of the following statements best reflects the issue with Senkaku Islands, sometimes mentioned in the news?
- It is generally believed that they are artificial islands made by a country around South China Sea.
- China and Japan engage in maritime disputes over these islands in East China Sea.
- A permanent American military base has been set up there to help Taiwan to increase its defence capabilities.
- Though International Court of Justice declared them as no man's land, some South-East Asian countries claim them.
Answer: (b) China and Japan engage in maritime disputes over these islands in East China Sea.
Statement-wise explanation
- a: incorrect — The Senkaku Islands are natural, uninhabited islands and rocks in the East China Sea, north-east of Taiwan. They are not in the South China Sea. The artificial islands that make news are the reefs China has built up in the Spratly and Paracel groups of the South China Sea, and this statement mixes up the two seas.
- b: correct — Japan has administered the islands since 1895, when a Cabinet decision of 14 January 1895 incorporated them into Okinawa Prefecture. China calls them Diaoyu, Taiwan calls them Diaoyutai, and both claim them. The dispute grew in the early 1970s, after a 1968 UN ECAFE survey pointed to possible oil and gas on the surrounding continental shelf. It became sharper in September 2012, when Japan's government bought three of the islands from a private owner.
- c: incorrect — The United States has no military base on the Senkaku Islands, and they are uninhabited. The US link is a treaty: it says the islands fall under Article 5 of the 1960 US–Japan Security Treaty because Japan administers them. The US takes no position on who owns them. The base and the Taiwan-defence angle are made up.
- d: incorrect — The International Court of Justice has never ruled on the Senkaku Islands, and no case on them has been brought. Neither China nor Japan treats the islands as no man's land, and the claimants are China, Taiwan and Japan, not South-East Asian states. The statement borrows features of the South China Sea disputes, where South-East Asian states are claimants and a 2016 UNCLOS arbitral tribunal, not the ICJ, ruled in the Philippines v. China case.
How to eliminate
You can solve this with a map and basic current affairs. Step 1: place the islands. Senkaku is in the East China Sea, between Okinawa and Taiwan. Two statements put the issue in the South China Sea or among South-East Asian claimants, and both fail on location alone. Step 2: look for invented details. The ICJ has never ruled on the islands, and ICJ cases need the parties' consent, which China and Japan have not given. A 'permanent American military base' on islands that are disputed and uninhabited is not plausible. Step 3: three statements make specific claims that can be checked and turn out false. The only one left is the plain description of the dispute. The fact to remember: Senkaku/Diaoyu is in the East China Sea, Japan administers it, and China and Taiwan claim it.
Know more
Senkaku / Diaoyu Islands are a group of five small islands and three rocks in the East China Sea, north-east of Taiwan and west of Japan's Okinawa chain.
- Japan's case: The islands were incorporated by a Cabinet decision of 14 January 1895, on the ground that they were terra nullius (land belonging to no one). The US administered them after 1945. They went back to Japan with Okinawa under the 1971 Okinawa Reversion Agreement, which took effect in 1972.
- China's and Taiwan's case: They cite Ming-era records. They argue the islands were taken along with Taiwan under the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki and should have been returned after 1945. Both pressed their claims from about 1970–71, after a 1968 UN ECAFE survey pointed to possible hydrocarbons.
- Flashpoints: a trawler collision in 2010; Japan's purchase of three islands in 2012; China's East China Sea Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) in 2013; frequent Chinese coast-guard patrols since then.
- Stakes: EEZ and continental-shelf rights under UNCLOS, fisheries, possible oil and gas, and sea lanes near Taiwan.
East Asian island disputes, side by side
| Islands | Sea | Held by | Claimed by |
|---|---|---|---|
| Senkaku / Diaoyu | East China Sea | Japan | China, Taiwan |
| Kuril Islands / Northern Territories | Pacific / Sea of Okhotsk | Russia | Japan |
| Dokdo / Takeshima | Sea of Japan (East Sea) | South Korea | Japan |
| Paracel Islands | South China Sea | China | Vietnam, Taiwan |
| Spratly Islands | South China Sea | Several | China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei |
| Scarborough Shoal | South China Sea | China | Philippines, Taiwan |
Only the South China Sea dispute has gone to an international ruling: the 2016 award in Philippines v. China, given by a tribunal under UNCLOS Annex VII, not by the ICJ.
In the news
Chinese coast-guard ships stayed near the Senkakus for record lengths of time in 2021–22, after China's Coast Guard Law of February 2021 allowed its coast guard to use weapons. Over the same period, Quad and Japan–India statements kept naming the East China Sea alongside the South China Sea.
NCERT Concepts to Revise
- South China Sea: Two statements move the issue to the South China Sea. Knowing where that sea lies helps you test them against the islands' real location.
- Spratly and Paracel Islands: The artificial islands and South-East Asian claimants that two statements mention come from the Spratly and Paracel disputes. Telling those disputes apart is what this question tests.
- Exclusive economic zone: The islands matter because whoever owns them gets a surrounding exclusive economic zone with fishing rights and possible oil and gas.