Batan: islands in question by HoonTing
Batan: islands in question by HoonTing
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2013/05/25/2003563102
It is the principle of international law that “The only form in which a cession can be effected is an agreement normally in the form of a treaty between the ceding and the acquiring state,” written in the “Oppenheim’s International Law.”
Japan, shortly after securing Taiwan by the Shimonoseki Treaty in 1895, concluded a declaration with the Kingdom of Spain, in which “the parallel passing through the middle of navigable Channel of Bachi is taken as the dividing line between Japanese and Spanish possessions in the western Pacific Ocean.”
In the peace talk after the Spain-US war, the US intended to assert that the northernmost line of the Philippines should be 21.5 degrees of north latitude; however, Spain expressed that they could not cede to the US anything which did not belong to Spain. Therefore, the Treaty of Peace between the US and Spain at Paris in 1898, the line in the declaration of 1895 was later defined as the 20 degrees of north latitude by the US and Spain.
Two years later, on November 7th, 1900, the US concluded a sole article treaty, to make clear the realm of the Philippine archipelagoes. In the Treaty, the two parties explicitly identified Cagayan Sulú Island, which is located 6 degrees of north latitude, and Sibutú Islands, which locates in 4.83 degrees of north latitude, were a part of the archipelagoes as a whole. They did not mention a word on the Batan Islands, which is at 20.42 degrees of north latitude.
However, the US had already sent a gunboat, USS Princeton (PG-13), and occupied the Batan Islands on January 10th, 1900, which also proves that the Batan Islands was nothing to do with the Treaty. The US did not receive any mandate in 1895, 1898 or 1900 to rule the Batan Islands.
The US then transferred her power and recognized the independence of the Republic of the Philippines in the Treaty of Manila of 1946. Article VII stipulated that “the Republic of the Philippines agrees to assume all continuing obligations assumed by the United States of America under the Treaty of Peace between the United States of America and Spain concluded at Paris on the 10th day of December, 1898, by which the Philippine Islands were ceded to the United States of America, and under the Treaty between the United States of America and Spain concluded at Washington on the 7th day of November, 1900.” Only the treaties of 1898 and 1900, which do not refer to the Batan Islands at all, were mentioned.
In light of the above four treaties, it is clear that the Philippines holds no sovereignty over the Batan Islands and accordingly no rights to its Exclusive Economic Zone.
In other words, Taipei, which is under the criminal argument and fishery dispute with Manila, needn’t to leave the “Batan blank” with courtesy in so-called “Temporary Enforcement Line” of 20 degrees of north latitude. Also, there is no such issue to abolish the said enforcement line or not.
The question of which party holds the sovereignty of the Batan Islands should be solved among Japan, the US, and Taiwan. The Batan question has nothing to do with the Philippines or China.
So, just dispatch our Coast Guard vessels there!
姊妹文章：
放心護漁 巴丹島主權不屬於菲律賓
Batan:
islands in question
參考資料：
1895.08.07〈有關日西兩國西太平洋版圖國境宣言〉
1898.12.10 美西〈巴黎和約〉第三條
1900.11.07〈美西割讓菲律賓偏遠島嶼條約〉
菲律賓出生證明：1946.07.04〈馬尼拉條約〉
