Brian Hioeby Brian Hioe
語言:
English
Photo Credit: Philippine Air Force/Public Domain
CLAIMS BY Chinese scholars that Batanes, which constitutes the smallest province of the Philippines, belongs to China were widely circulated in Philippine media last month. In particular, the claims were advanced at a conference by scholars from Chinese institutions, such as the School of International Studies at Jinan University and the Center for South China Sea History and Culture at the National Institute for South China Sea Studies.
It may not be surprising that China claiming Philippine territory has been an object of anger. There are already tensions between China and the Philippines regarding maritime territory in the South China Sea, affecting fishing grounds.
Interestingly, such claims over Batanes are made on the basis of the claim that Batanes is a feature of Taiwan. If China claims Taiwan to be part of its territory, then, by virtue of this claim, Batanes would also be part of China.
In June, 60 Tao residents of Orchid Island set out on a voyage to Batanes onboard a wooden plank vessel, retracing a migration and trade route used by their ancestors. The voyage highlighted the strong historical and cultural connections between the Indigenous Tao residents of Orchid Island, also known as Lanyu, and Batanes. Apart from clear linguistic links, mythological tales point toward the historical link between the two islands.
This connection, however, has been cited by Chinese state-run media to suggest Chinese claims over Batanes. As Chinese state-run media also claims that maritime negotiations between Japan and the Philippines are illegitimate as part of this assertion of sovereignty over Batanes, Chinese claims over Batanes seem to be a response to warming ties between the Philippines under Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and Japan under Sanae Takaichi–ties driven by concerns over regional security in light of an increasingly assertive China.
Such argumentation is not exactly new. Fringe arguments in Taiwan, usually from domestic Chinese nationalists, have, too, attempted to claim Batanes. Nevertheless, while Chinese nationalist academics may be aiming to quickly hit out at the Philippines because of strengthening ties with Japan, it is probable that Chinese nationalist scholarship will simply push the Philippines and Japan further together, as well as more broadly raise regional concerns about Chinese annexation.
After all, China has historically claimed that–unlike the US–it does not seek to interfere in the affairs of other countries, nor does it have any imperialistic or colonial ambitions toward them. But claiming Batanes is a clear example to the contrary.
Likewise, on past occasions, Chinese nationalist scholars have drawn on the strong historical and cultural ties between Okinawa and China to cast doubt on Japan’s sovereignty over Okinawa. Sometimes, though rarely, this goes as far as claiming that Okinawa is part of China.
If Chinese nationalist scholars begin to double down on historical claims about the territory of any country at odds with China, this could have far-reaching implications in terms of amplifying regional concerns about China. Apart from undermining China’s claims to not have annexationist ambitions, one notes that China’s historical influence in the region is strong and wide-ranging. There are any number of connections that China could double down on to claim sovereignty over other nations in the region–whether on the basis of geopolitical claims that date to dynastic antiquity, cultural and linguistic influence, or ethnic descent.
Yet the effect may simply be to push countries already at odds with China further together in terms of geopolitical alignments, given this shared concern about Chinese territorial claims that could eventually serve to justify irredentist actions. In this sense, Chinese nationalist bluster may be self-undermining–and provide an avenue for Taiwan to explain to other countries how China’s territorial claims prove rather flexible in nature according to the dictates of contemporary nationalism, rather than dating from actual historical basis and, in this way, strengthen ties with other possible regional allies.