Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, cilt.20, sa.1, ss.97-116, 2005 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
Overall, it seems quite hard to conclude that the "islands appeartaining or belonging" to the Island of Formosa might include the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands. Actually, the conclusion reached by the Japanese historian Kiyoshi Inoue, who contends that the Diaoyu Islands belong to China, that these islands were stolen in secret by Japan in the late nineteenthth century also suggests that the Shimonoseki Treaty does not address the legal status of these islands. Inoue, indeed, does not refer to this Treaty at all in another of his articles where he concludes that Jpan seized these islands as the victor in the 1894-1895 Sino-Japanese War. As underlined at the outset, all other arguments and claims of the parties are beyond the scope of the present study as each of them obviously requires extensive study. So, an overall conclusion about the legal status of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands can only be made after detailed studies of all the arguments of the parties. It shall, therefore, suffice to conclude at the present that it seems quite hard to argue that these islands were/are among the "islands appertaining or belonging" to the Island of Formosa ceded by China to Japan by the 1895 Shimonoseki Treaty. As a result, it seems hard to conclude that the legal status of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, whatever it might be, was affected by the Shimonoskei Treaty. © Koninklijke Brill NV 2005.