Administration is not ownership

Belmont, California

Regarding Ayako Mie’s Oct. 12 analysis article, “No quick Senkakus fix, but return to status quo likely,” Mie writes, “China has yet to indicate it is willing to back down and work to restore badly frayed bilateral ties.” The flip side of this statement is that Japan has yet to indicate its willingness to back down and work to restore badly frayed bilateral ties.

Mie’s statement “Although neither Japan nor China can afford to let the row escalate much further at this point, experts stress that the domestic political climate in each country is preventing their leaders from making any compromises” is a more apt description of the current situation.

I suggest the writer pays greater attention to objectivity and consistency in reporting.

In an absolute sense there is really no dispute as Japan maintains. Since the U.S. only unilaterally ceded administrative authority of the islands to Japan, their titles were never an issue. If the islands belonged to Japan all along, the U.S. only needed to return ownership to Japan and by not doing so the ownership of the islands and their administration are separate issues. The Cairo Communique and Potsdam Declaration clearly defined the fate of the islands without dispute.

The opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are the writer’s own and do not necessarily reflect the policies of The Japan Times.

philip law