日本蓄意小事化大 圖謀已超越釣魚島

<轉載自2010年9月21日 明報 社評>

日本延長拘留「閩晉漁5179號」船長詹其雄10日至本月29日，說明中國政府循外交施壓，要求日本無條件放人，已經失敗，也顯示日本根本不在乎所謂「損害中日關係大局」。中國政府已經被日本逼入死角，為了國家和人民的尊嚴，中國政府必須顯示不惜與日本斷交的決心，以實際行動營救詹其雄和捍衛釣魚島的領土和主權。

過去這些年，日本艦艇驅趕兩岸漁船既為常態，除非另有蓄謀，否則無法解釋日本為何先扣留「閩晉漁」，接着只放船和船員，但把船長扣押至今。因為事態發展迄今，日本「挾持」詹其雄為「人質」，在政治上已經達到目的，例如確立了以國內法處理與釣魚島相關的案例，但是日本並未「見好即收」；另外，日本刻意不給自己或雙方下台階，例如詹其雄祖母上周三的喪禮、中國人歷來重視一家團聚的中秋節（明日），只要從日本人道主義出發，讓詹其雄回家奔喪或團聚，事態就不會如此鬧得那麼僵。

中日過去爭拗歷史問題  已質變為爭奪海底資源

這次事件破壞中日關係的程度，與拘留詹其雄已經不成比例。所以日本應該有更大圖謀，才能解釋為何堅持要把「閩晉漁」事件小事化大，而爭奪資源和在靠近中國的島嶼駐紮自衛隊，是日本製造這次事端的深層背景。

日本媒體報道，日本政府計劃宣布25個離島「國有化」，以此作為「劃定大陸架面積和確保海底資源的基點」。這些島嶼就包括釣魚島。此一做法，將大大擴張日本的「海洋版圖」，其大陸架面積擴大到447萬平方公里，相當於日本國土面積的11倍；島嶼「國有化」之後，周圍的海域就納入為日本的「專屬經濟區」，要開採這海域內的資源，都必須得到日本許可。另外，相伴而來是日本要在這些島嶼駐軍，日本傳媒已報道，日本計劃38年來首次擴編陸上自衛隊，由現時的15.5萬人擴充到16.8萬人，所增加1.3萬人，全部分配到包括釣魚島在內的所謂「西南諸島」。

放在這個背景之下，日本蓄意延長拘留詹其雄，甚至把中日關係也押上的真正意圖就浮現出來了。就釣魚島而言，這是日本由低調控制走向法理擁有的步驟；就與中國爭奪海底資源而言，這是為日本擴軍、在靠近中國的島嶼駐軍，鋪墊法理依據。

對於中國政府，其實保衛釣魚島已經迫在眉睫。日後當日本正式宣布把釣魚島「國有化」之時，中國怎樣對應？難道又是口頭發表「釣魚島是中國固有領土」、「中國神聖領土不可侵犯」而已？中國單方面「顧全中日關係大局」之時，日本傳媒報道今年12月，日本和美國將在「西南諸島」舉行大規模「奪島」演習，目的明顯針對釣魚島。可見，日本已經作了最壞打算，就是若中國搶先登陸釣魚島，日本將會同美國以軍事行動奪回。

日本對於釣魚島主權爭議，根本不打算搞什麼訴諸國際正義，而是準備與美國一起，對中國打一場局部的島嶼戰爭。今年5月，日本已經通知台灣當局，決定把日本最西端的與那國島上空的台日防空識別區界線，擴大至該島外海較靠近台灣一側的上空。日本這項修改，實質是擴大了領空範圍，同時壓縮了台灣防空識別區的空間。種種迹象顯示日本已經策劃以軍事部署和準備軍事行動，擴大海洋版圖以爭奪海底資源，「佔領」釣魚島只是整個大圖謀的其中一點。

從這個背景，折射出「閩晉漁」事件發生以來，中國外交部雖云6次召見日本駐華大使，但是效果甚微，而日本延長拘留詹其雄之後，中國政府宣布的3項反擊措施﹕暫停省部級以上交往；中止增加航班、擴大航權事宜商談；推遲中日煤炭綜合會議等。這3項措施，當然對日本不利，但是這類「制裁」也是雙刃劍，日本可能有損失，中國也不能說並無負面影響。不過，與日本的大圖謀比較，日本會輕易就此讓步？看來可能性不大。

中國與日本的分歧，已經質變。過去，中日經常就日本首相參拜靖國神社、篡改教科書、是否有南京大屠殺等歷史問題爭拗，基本上這是虛的；但是，日本悄然改變分歧的本質，與中國爭奪戰略資源，這是現實利益的爭逐。從已知事態看來，日本在新階段爭逐處於優勢，並已取得主動權和話語權。中國當局是否意識到或認識到情况改變，已經做好了準備？身為炎黃子孫，看到近期中日互動的情况，我們有理由深以為憂。

官民應該聯手保釣「火燒趙家樓」值得殷鑑

無論日本有多大圖謀，釣魚島仍然關鍵。現階段中國政府不應該再壓制中國人民的保釣行動，如有人民自發到釣魚島宣示主權，中國政府還應該派出艦艇護航，要有在釣魚島海域與日本軍艦對峙的準備，只有中國以實際行動宣示擁有釣魚島主權，才可以打破日本對釣魚島予取予攜的困局。

這次「閩晉漁事件」，日本當局蔑視中國和中國人的心態，表露無遺。中國政府若不帶領人民保衛釣魚島，日本正式「佔領」釣魚島之日，中國人民的怒火會燒向哪一方？第一次世界大戰後舉行的巴黎和會，列強恣意踐踏中國主權，當時中國的北洋政府未能捍衛國家利益，在列強面前顯得軟弱，使國人異常不滿，從而上街遊行表達憤慨。1919年的5月4日，北京高校3000名學生代表衝破軍警阻撓，雲集天安門，然後遊行到交通總長曹汝霖的住宅，火燒曹宅，是為「火燒趙家樓」事件。這段歷史，值得現在的中國政府殷鑑。

Access to spot news information

THE police force renewed the Command and Control Communications System it had used for years towards the end of 2004. As they can no longer tune into police communications, spot news reporters can no longer rush to the scene. When it did so, Commission of Police Dick Lee (as he then was) repeatedly urged the media to trust him, vowing that, despite the new arrangement, the force was willing to continue to work with the media. It is a shame that this pledge has yet to be effectively carried out.

The Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) released a report on the issue on September 12. It says that, in the second half of 2009, the police released on average only 2.7 items of such information, or only 1.27% of the reported crimes. Only 20% of the items were released less than 20 minutes after the incidents had happened. Information on some of the cases was released more than four hours after they had arisen.

According to the HKJA, Alfred Ma, who was chief superintendent that headed the Police Public Relations Branch, estimated the police would release a hundred items a day. The management of the force did aim at disseminating between 30 and 40 items a day. In fact, in the second half of 2009, it released only 2.7 items a day on average and, on nine of the days, it sent out no items at all.

An incident that seems unimportant or insignificant may have much bearing on the public interest. It is undesirable for the force to decide unilaterally whether any item is newsworthy. Hong Kong Island saw a minor road incident that involved a tram in October, 1997. It seemed too minor to be of much interest to the public. However, in covering it, our reporters discovered that tram drivers had no lunch breaks. Many trams drivers had to eat their box lunches while they were at the wheel. Our story about that raised a public outcry and triggered tram drivers' campaign to fight for their reasonable breaks. They were eventually allowed reasonable lunch breaks. That has helped improve passenger safety.

Furthermore, when they gathered spot news, reporters often came across police officers that courageously attempted to save life and limb. Stories about them would certainly have helped raise the force's prestige. Now reporters can no longer rush to the scene, stories about police officers' valiant deeds are rare. Because it has adopted the new information dissemination mechanism, the force has lost out too.

The force has told the media that because it is short-handed, its officers have to deal with large numbers of cases every day and it has a duty to verify all items of information before disseminating them, it has yet to meet the quantity and time-lag targets it has set itself.

If the force has omitted to disseminate or delayed disseminating any spot news information for no other reason than its short-handedness, it ought to consider adopting the proposal media organisations have made. It should set up a website which only local reporters may visit or designate a room adjacent to the office of its Public Relations Branch to which only media organisation representatives have access. It should then allow media organisations free and full access to preliminary spot news information after deleting personal data. Media organisations can decide by themselves whether to have their reporters follow up any cases. By doing so, the force can save on manpower (because it need not have items screened), promptly disseminate spot news information, protect the privacy of people involved in criminal cases and ensure the public's right to know.

內地學者：借鑑香港反貪腐

<轉載自2010年9月20日 明報 論壇版>

“編按：上周四至六（9月16至18日）香港廉政公署舉辦了一個名為「管治協作與誠信管理」的研討會，來自香港、兩岸及外國的多名學者及官員參與會議，分享各地反貪反腐的經驗，其中三位內地學者——北京大學政府管理學院教授李成言、清華大學公共管理學院教授任建明，以及中國人民大學公共管理學院教授毛昭暉接受了傳媒的專訪，講述了香港的反貪經驗有什麼地方值得內地借鑑。”

 以下為訪問節錄。

李成言教授：制度執行力問題

記者：中國法制甚嚴，但為何貪腐總是無法對付？

任：政府不斷推出新的制度、法規，但未能達到預期效果。政府也知道執行不力是主要問題，但在法律的制訂上問題更多。制度的執行問題，設計制度時就應解決，例如官員財產申報，申報後是否要審查？審查後如果有問題本應問責，但這部分卻很弱或者是缺乏的。

李：制度及規定很多，眼花撩亂，當中有一個核心問題，就是制度執行力、政策執行力。例如，財產申報制度，若不提升至法律層面，很難落實。只是內部政策，只是部門性需要，根本不足夠。第二，申報後是否能讓大家知道，公布媒體？在西方來說，申報後是要公布的，如果只是內部掌控，就失去執行力。這部分還要努力改進，走向「陽光化」，這需要一個發展的過程，這路程還不會太短。

任建明教授：反貪機構必須獨立

記者：香港的反貪制度，內地有可以借鑑的地方嗎？

任：香港廉署1970年代成立前後，貪污情况有很大變化，但香港當時的政治制度框架基本上是一樣的，為什麼出現這麼大變化？我不認為兩地的制度不同，經驗就不能學習。反貪機構必須有以下數點特徵：

1. 高度獨立；

2. 充分授權，有足夠資源、權力來執行法律；

3. 對這個反貪部門本身要有足夠監督。

內地也許就是正處於未有這類獨立機構的時期，反貪機構缺乏必要的獨立性，授權也不充分。雖然說是一國兩制，兩地有很大差異，但反貪的目標一樣。

李：內地與香港有差異，但可學習的有很多，最少有三點。第一是權力獨立性，第二是依法，第三是香港的廉潔教育、防貪教育，香港的宣傳很形象化、市民化，但內地的宣傳口號多、理論多，必須更好的聯繫實際情况。

毛昭暉教授：必須保障舉報人

毛：要落實反貪倡廉要走幾條道路：

第一，最核心是反腐制度仍不是深層次的制度，例如財產申報，出台後並不是真正嚴格法律上的財產申報，而只是報告制度。

第二，目前仍是力圖在體系內反腐，但其實應該體系內及體系外，例如要發揮社會民主監督，與體系內監督結合起來。內地的公民社會發育還不夠完善，香港的案件大部分都是來自公眾舉報，但在內地是不可想像，現時對舉報者的保障嚴重不足。

第三是過去的政策都是由上而下，但反腐的制度創新，要更多的由下而上，發揮地方創新能力。例如深圳就實行了裸官（編按：即妻兒都已移民外國的官員）不能當黨政一把手，不能當核心部門領導班子。這就是很好的制度創新。

官方保釣不力 民間保釣受壓 神聖領土怎麼辦？

<轉載自2010年9月16日 明報社評>

釣魚島海域撞船風波，迄今所見，擁有公權力的兩岸政府，就捍衛釣魚島主權，縱使有心，但顯得無力，而民間的保釣行動，兩岸政府都有不同程度打壓；而在接近40年的炎黃子孫保釣歷程中，唯一曾經有人為此犧牲性命的香港（1996年陳毓祥在釣魚島海域游泳宣示主權時溺斃），特區政府對於準備出海的「釣魚台二號」，已經多番「關顧」，包括食環署以接到船上有老鼠的投訴為由，要派員登船調查。本港保釣人士擔心，這是特區政府再一次阻撓「釣魚台二號」到釣魚島海域宣示主權的序幕。

這次釣魚島風波發生之後，原本來自大陸、香港、澳門和台灣兩岸四地保釣團體代表，在台灣台北縣召開「保釣論壇」，但是大陸保釣人士被大陸當局禁足，未能赴台與會。大陸保釣人士雖然要到福建廈門乘船出海，與從台灣出海的台港保釣人士分途出發，準備在釣魚島海域會師宣示主權，不過，大陸保釣人士被阻撓，只能在廈門海灘露營，展示保釣橫額。台灣方面，則不准本港保釣人士乘船出海，最終只有兩名台灣保釣人士乘坐漁船出發到釣魚島海域。

台灣保釣人士在行動過程中，雖然有11艘台灣海巡署船隻尾隨，但是在釣魚島海域遇到11艘日本海上保安廳艦隻強力攔截，包圍保釣漁船，海巡署船隻被隔在外圍，雖然以廣播回應海上保安廳船隻的阻截，但是缺乏對抗意志，保釣漁船勢孤力弱，無力衝破海上保安廳的船陣，雙方對峙5小時後，保釣漁船只得回航。

其後，台灣外交部雖然對日方干擾台灣漁船表達「嚴正抗議」，與大陸當局連保釣人士也不讓出海比較，台灣當局總算做多了一點，但是台灣海巡署船隻在日本海上保安廳艦隻面前所表現出的「忍讓」，已經算盡力捍衛了領土和主權？當年的保釣悍將馬英九，現在貴為台灣總統，若他認為台灣這樣就可以捍衛釣魚島主權，未免使人失望了。

「釣魚台二號」準備出海 食環署突然要登船查鼠患

香港在保釣的角色，基於並非國家和政治實體，無資格對日本提出嚴正交涉，實際上，雖然香港的保釣也是「官冷民熱」，不過，市民對於保釣的熱情和投入程度，比照大陸保釣人士被打壓，香港的角色，不無禮失求諸野的實質。但是港人保釣的行動自由，去年開始被特區政府箝制了。

去年5月，保釣人士擬乘搭「釣魚台二號」到釣魚島宣示主權，但是特區政府一改以往的放行做法，出動海事處和警方，以違反牌照規定、消防設施不足等諸般藉口留難、查扣和強制攔截，使這次保釣行動夭折。當時，保釣人士透露中聯辦官員寧可資助他們赴台灣出海，可見特區政府罔顧維護「一國兩制」的責任，屈從中央當局的無理要求，回歸以來，首次限制港人行動自由，配合中央當局侵蝕港人的基本權利。

內地遏制民間保釣、台灣當局只讓保釣走過場，本港保釣人士將有什麼行動，備受關注。鑑於去年的教訓，今次本港保釣人士原本意圖秘密行事，事前不公布行程，待出了公海後才宣布，但是保釣人士的蠢蠢欲動，又怎能躲得過特區政府的耳目？據保釣人士透露，近日，食環署聯絡他們，表示收到投訴說「釣魚台二號」有老鼠，食環署與他們約好時間，派員上船調查。此時此刻，食環署這個舉措，按去年的經驗，保釣人士解讀為特區政府阻撓他們出海的序幕，完全合理和有根據。

除了食環署，據透露，海事處和警方連日來，也曾經查詢「釣魚台二號」何時出海。特區政府3個部門突然關顧「釣魚台二號」，以所知情，暫時不能確定特區政府又出手阻撓保釣，但是以去年的經驗，不會有人相信「關顧」之目的是協助「釣魚台二號」出海保釣。事態如何發展，相信日內會明朗化。

日藉「依法辦事」保尖閣 港以「依法辦事」壓保釣

保衛釣魚島主權屬於大是大非的事，當局無理由阻撓港人自發行動。這次日本藉撞船事件，首次以國內法處理中國漁船及船長，中國政府雖然多番強硬要求放人，日本仍然我行我素，以完成司法程序為由，堅持不釋放船長詹其隆，中國政府以外交途徑解決此事並捍衛釣魚島主權的努力，嚴格而言已經失敗。中國政府有什麼後續行動，尚待觀察，但是中國民在此事上所感受到的屈辱，日益強烈，這股民氣猶如在壓力煲內，需要宣泄，否則後果堪虞。我們認為，中央當局不但不應該透過特區政府阻撓港人的保釣行動，反而應該讓內地民公開表達對日本恣意妄為的憤慨。

至於特區政府，應該向中央當局陳以利害，爭取中央當局放棄打壓港人保釣。在憲制上，本港實施一國兩制，行動自由示威自由是港人的基本權利，特區政府和特首曾蔭權有責任維護港人的權益，若放棄責任，反而以「依法辦事」之名阻撓港人保釣，這是有虧職守，不會得到港人諒解和支持。

這次釣魚島風波，日本圍繞所謂法律、司法做文章，但是他們的「依法辦事」，卻起到實質上「保衛尖閣諸島主權」的效果；反之，大陸當局根本不講什麼法律，只是赤裸裸地打壓保釣人士出海。在香港，去年特區政府「依法辦事」阻撓「釣魚台二號」出海，這一次，特區政府設若再重施故技，即使遏制成功，則整體中國人口口聲聲保衛釣魚島主權，但是所表現的窩囊，日本人看在眼裏會心中竊笑。「依法辦事」於釣魚島主權爭奪中，在日本和中國（包括兩岸四地）竟然起到絕然不同效果，實在是咄咄怪事。

China's sovereignty over Diaoyu Islands

The Diaoyu waters saw Japan Coast Guard vessels collide with a Chinese trawler. Neither Beijing nor Taipei has seemed capable of defending China's sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands, though they may want to do so. And both have to different degrees thwarted Chinese people's baodiao (safeguarding the Diaoyus) activities.

Not being a political entity, Hong Kong is not in a position to make representations to Japan, but Hong Kong citizens are enthusiastic about and committed to baodiao. However, the SAR government has restricted their baodiao freedom since last year.

In view of what happened last year, Hong Kong baodiao activists intended to keep their plan secret. They decided not to bring it out into the open until they were on the high seas. But how can they ever escape the SAR government's notice? According to some activists, the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) contacted them the other day, saying it had received a complaint about rats on Baodiao II. It wanted to agree with them on the time when its officers should inspect the vessel. Because of what happened last year, the baodiao activists have reasonable grounds for suspecting the move the FEHD has just made to be a prelude to the SAR government's attempt to prevent them from sailing to the Diaoyus.

Not only has the FEHD contacted the baodiao activists. We gather that, over the past few days, the police and the Marine Department have tried to find out when Baodiao II will set out. Three government departments have suddenly tried to "look after" the boat. As yet there is no conclusive evidence that the SAR government will again try to thwart Hong Kong citizen's baodiao activities. However, it did such things last year that none would believe it has "looked after" the vessel with the intention of helping it to set out smoothly. We think it will be clear in a few days how the affair will unfold.

Chinese people ought to safeguard China's sovereignty over the Diaoyus. This is a principle of cardinal importance. There is no reason why the authorities should thwart citizens' spontaneous baodiao activities. Japan has for the first time tried to deal with the captain of a Chinese vessel under its domestic law. Though China has repeatedly demanded in strong terms that Captain Zhan Qixiong be released, Japan just sticks to its own way. It refuses to free him on the grounds that the judicial proceedings involved have to be completed. Strictly speaking, Beijing's attempt to settle the trawler dispute and safeguard China's sovereignty over the Diaoyus through diplomatic channels has failed. It remains to be seen what it will do next. However, Chinese people feel more and more intensely they have been humiliated in the affair. The sentiment is pent-up like steam in a pressure cooker. Unless it is vented, we will see very worrying consequences. In our view, the central government should not have attempted to thwart Hong Kong citizens' activities through the agency of the SAR government, and it should have allowed mainlanders freely to express their indignation at Japan's wilful acts.

The SAR government should tell Beijing what may be consequent on such an attempt and dissuade it from obstructing Hong Kong people's baodiao activities. Under the "one country, two systems" principle, the SAR's system is different from the mainland's though it is part of China. Hong Kong people enjoy under the Basic Law fundamental freedoms including that of travel, of movement and of assembly. It is incumbent on the Tsang administration to safeguard Hong Kong people's rights and freedoms. It will be derelict in its duty if it thwarts their baodiao activities in the name of the law. No Hong Kong people would understand or support such behaviour.

中國外交施壓效微 日本仍然恣意妄為

<轉載自2010年9月14日 明報 社評>

日本保安廳巡邏船在釣魚島海域碰撞中國漁船、扣押漁民漁船一事，日本昨日雖然讓14名船員和漁船離去，但是漁船船長詹其雄仍然被拘留，日本以國內法處理此事的本質不變，顯示在中國多番循外交途徑施壓下，日本實際行使釣魚島主權的做法並無改變。事態說明，中國政府以外交手段解決此事，迄今未算成功，也未改變日本實質控制釣魚島的現實。我們認為，中國政府應該拿出實際行動，使「釣魚島是固有中國領土」並非口頭宣示的空話，而是讓世人看到有實質內容的立場。

日本雖准船員漁船離去 以國內法處理本質不變

事發在9月7日，到12日為止，6天之內，中國外交部4次表態，有關官員最少4次約見日本駐華大使。外交部發言人姜瑜所表達言辭，指摘日本以國內法處理此事乃「荒唐、非法、無效」等，不能說立場不強硬；召見日本駐華大使官員層級方面，由外交部部長助理、副外長、外長到國務委員，對日本所施加外交壓力，不能不說是逐步加強，但是中國得到了什麼？只得到並未被拘留的14名船員獲准離去，被拘押的漁船由代理船長駕駛返國；最關鍵的船長，仍然被日本按國內法覊押。也就是說，日本仍然透過拘留船長詹其雄，宣示日本在行使釣魚島（日稱尖閣諸島）的主權。

事發之後，姜瑜每次發言，內容火辣程度無疑逐步升級，但是昨日14名船員和漁船離開日本之後，姜瑜說「目前日方仍非法扣押中國漁船的船長。中方再次強烈敦促日方立即予以放還」，語態顯得有點放軟，不若日前警告「日方如繼續恣意妄為，必將自食其果」般強硬，莫非中國政府已經收貨，任由詹其雄被非法扣押？我們認為，中日這一次外交角力，中國政府的立場和取態逐步升級，或許迫使日本「釋放」了船員和漁船，不過，若中國政府未能改變日本以國內法處理詹其雄船長，則中國政府仍然失敗，日本則藉着日本法律在釣魚島海域有效執行，向世人宣示更實質地控制釣魚島。

這次釣魚島風波，再一次說明領土爭執，無論言辭多麼強硬，效果仍然有限，最多只能得回少許面子，對於裏子卻毫無所得。這種情况，日本知之甚詳，也飽嘗其中苦澀。在庫頁島與北海道之間的所謂北方四島和日本海的竹島（韓國稱為獨島），日本都聲稱擁有主權，但是北方四島和竹島，現在都由俄羅斯和韓國分別以武裝力量實質控制，日本只能徒呼荷荷。中國在釣魚島的處境，其實是日本在北方四島和竹島的翻版。

1979年，鄧小平訪日回答日本記者提問時，對於釣魚島爭議，表示暫時擱下，由更聰明的後代去解決。當時中國在釣魚島問題上放軟態度，若日本以相應君子取態處理，雙方就無爭議，但是，日本卻利用中國的忍讓，不斷部署實質控制釣魚島，包括容許日本團體在釣魚島豎立燈塔、保安廳船艇則在釣魚島海域巡邏，每遇到有中國人乘船到釣魚島宣示主權，都被保安廳船艇攔截和撞擊等。事態顯示中國政府一再忍讓，日本則步步進逼，最新的攔截和扣押漁船、以國內法拘留船長事件，乃日本試圖把低調控制釣魚島，公開向公然佔領過渡，若中國仍然不採取實質有效舉措，則「釣魚島乃中國不可侵犯的神聖領土」只會淪為自欺欺人的空話。

日本霸佔釣魚島是既定國策，哪一個政黨執政都不會偏離，只有執行程度的差別而已。民主黨執政，鳩山一郎雖然對華較友好，但是在要求美軍撤離沖繩一役慘敗下台後，接任的首相菅直人在中國經濟總量超逾日本、日人對中國充滿戒懼之際，又遇上黨內小澤一郎挑戰其相位，在這樣的背景下，菅直人政府藉着這次漁船事件，可能有製造中國這個「敵人」，以撈取政治利益的考慮。當然，最終還要是服膺日本的國家利益。

面對這種局面，兩岸政府的表現使人失望。大陸當局的所謂強硬，停留在口頭上，實際行動付諸闕如，民間義憤填膺要到釣魚島宣示主權，兩岸政府都予以阻撓；這種兩岸政府無力、人民無奈的情况，看在日本人眼裏，一定心中竊笑。

中國艦艇應巡防釣魚島 加快東海油氣資源開發

台灣當局力量有限，能夠有能力保衛國土的，唯有北京政府。我們認為，關於此事，目前中國政府必定要擺出更強硬態度，並以實際行動迫使日本無條件釋放船長詹其雄，真正顯露保衛領土主權和國民權益的決心。

另外，經此一事，中國政府應該改弦更張，把釣魚島列為中國執法船艇（包括軍艦）巡防的範圍，並要有與日本執法船艇在釣魚島海域對峙的準備。中國不應害怕對峙，若中國的船艇不敢在釣魚島巡防，而容許日本船艦在那裏恣意妄為，又怎能向世人說明釣魚島是中國的領土？有人戲稱所謂「保衛釣魚島」，真正做到的卻是日本人。此乃對中國人的諷刺，也是中國人的悲哀！所以中國政府一定要強硬起來，以實際行動展示保衛神聖領土的決心。

至於所謂東海主權爭議，是日本為了爭奪海底資源而創造出來的議題，中國在這方面既佔有先機，就應該加快和加大開發東海油氣的力度，不能再陷身釣魚島的吃虧狀態。

Japan's wilful behavior

THE other day Japan Coast Guard vessels collided with a Chinese trawler. The boat, its captain and its crew were detained. Yesterday the boat and fourteen members of its crew were allowed to leave. However, Zhan Qixiong, its captain, remains in custody. Japan still intends to deal with him under its domestic law. Clearly, though China has repeatedly pressured Japan through diplomatic channels, it remains essentially the case that Japan virtually exercises sovereignty over the Diaoyus.

In the six day between September 7 (on which the incident happened) and September 12, the Foreign Ministry has commented on it four times, and the Japanese ambassador were called in at least four times. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu has criticised Japan, saying it is absurd, illegal and invalid for it to deal with the case under its domestic law. China's stance on the matter cannot but be described as tough. The Japanese ambassador has been called in by officials of higher and higher rank (an assistant to a vice foreign minister, a vice foreign minister, the foreign minister and then a state councillor). One cannot but say China has gradually increased its diplomatic pressure on Japan. But what has China got? Only fourteen crew members, who had not been detained, were allowed to go home. The trawler went home with an acting captain at the helm. However, Captain Zhan Qixiong, the key figure, remains in detention under Japanese domestic law. In other words, the Japanese still want to make it clear to the world that they exercise sovereignty over the Diaoyus (which they call the Senkaku Islands) by detaining the captain.

China has again and again exercised forbearance, but Japan has kept pressing forward. By having the trawler intercepted and having it and its captain detained under its domestic law, Japan may have attempted to move from its low-key control of the Diaoyus to its overt occupation of them. If China still refrains from taking any effective measures, it will be grossly deceptive to assert that the Diaoyus are China's inviolable sacred territory.

It is Japan's policy to annex the Diaoyus. No ruling party would depart from it, though one party may carry it out more vigorously than another. The Democratic Party of Japan is currently in office in Japan. Yukio Hatoyama, who is rather friendly to China, stepped down after he had suffered a bitter defeat related to his demand that the US military leave Okinawa. Now China is a bigger economy than Japan, the Japanese are very wary of it. However, Naoto Kan, his successor, is faced with a leadership challenge from Ichiro Ozawa. This being the case, the Kan administration may have intended to use the trawler incident to make China an enemy with a view to gaining a political advantage. Needless to say, he must ultimately put Japan's interests first.

Beijing's handling of the incident is disappointing, as is Taipei's. The mainland is tough only in word. It has taken no action. Both governments have tried to stop indignant Chinese nationals from sailing to the Diaoyus to assert China's sovereignty over them. Both Beijing and Taipei seem weak, and Chinese people seem helpless. Seeing that, the Japanese must be laughing secretly.

Taipei is not strong enough. Only Beijing can safeguard Chinese territory. In our view, Beijing must take a tougher stance on the issue and do what may compel the Japanese to release Zhan Qixiong unconditionally. It must do so to manifest its determination to safeguard China's territorial integrity and its nationals' interests.

China should alter its approach completely. It should have its law-enforcement and naval vessels patrol the Diaoyu waters. It must be prepared for their confrontations with Japanese vessels there. China should not dread such confrontations. If, not daring to have its naval vessels patrol the Diaoyu waters, it allows Japanese vessels to behave wilfully there, how can it declare to the world that the Diaoyus are Chinese territory? Some have jokingly said only the Japanese can actually safeguard the Diaoyus. That is a mockery of China and Chinese people's sorrow. The Chinese government must be tougher and take action to manifest its determination to safeguard China's sacred territory.

中國政府若過度忍讓 最終只會失去釣魚島

<轉載自2010年9月10日 明報 社評>

日本海上保安廳的巡邏船，在釣魚島海域與中國漁船「閩晉漁5179」碰撞，其後日方巡邏船攔截漁船，拘捕了船長詹其雄，要以日本國內法治罪。我們認為，中國政府對於日本在釣魚島愈來愈明目張膽的霸佔行徑，不能再以忍讓對應，必須展示維護領土完整的決心和行動；眼前首要逼使日本立即放船放人，絕對不能容許在中國領海捕魚的中國人，竟然出現被日本懲罰的荒唐情况。

日若以國內法審船長 中國必須採有力措施反制

據知，詹其雄已被移交沖繩石垣檢察官，日方的後續行動，料日內有決定，消息說，日本將以「非法捕撈作業」、「妨礙執行公務」等罪名，檢控和審訊詹其雄，罪成判刑最高可囚3年。日方若以其國內法治船長以罪，將更突顯其控制釣魚島（日本稱為尖閣諸島）的實質。

中國深知箇中緊要之處，昨日，外交部發言人姜瑜代表中國政府，公開擺出了事發以來最強硬的態度，表示「日方對在該島海域作業的中國漁船適用日本國內法是荒唐、非法和無效的，中方決不接受」。日本處理此事，會否如中國的立場一樣，以中日關係大局出發，抑或刻意使事態升級，我們認為，以日本霸佔釣魚島的強烈企圖心，中國對日本的進一步挑釁，應該有心理準備和研議應變措施，若日本一意孤行，治詹其雄以罪，中國應該即時有適當行動保護國民和領土。

中國已派遣漁政船到釣魚島海域執法，這是歷來中國對釣魚島主權所顯現較有力舉措，我們認為甚為恰當，期望此乃中國保護釣魚島領土主權的第一步。

自從美國1972年移交釣魚島給日本「行政管理」之後，中日就釣魚島主權爭議不斷，當時中國以「擱置爭議、共同開發」暫時迴避此問題，雖然日本口頭同意，但實際上，日本容許國民登上釣魚島豎立燈塔，保安廳長期派遣船隻在釣魚島一帶海域巡邏，實現其「低度控制」的部署。近期，日方的舉措，可能已經加強了控制釣魚島的強度。

例如今次出事的「閩晉漁5179」，以往也曾在釣魚島一帶作業，遇到日方巡邏船，巡邏船只以大音量廣播喊話，要求漁船離開，這次則是兩船夾擊，驅趕漁船。此外，日本繼「閩晉漁5179」之後，前日在伊豆島嶼海域的所謂專屬經濟區，也扣押了一艘台灣漁船，拘捕船主和船長。從這些迹象顯示，日本在其西南外海的島嶼，取態愈來愈強硬。對於釣魚島，日本是否已經由「低度控制」向「公開佔領」過渡，值得關注。

近期，日本傳媒就日本對其西南外海島嶼一些軍事部署和意圖，消息甚多。包括（1）5至8年內，在宮古島、石垣島部署數百名部隊，另外，在日本最西端的與那國島，將首次派駐百人部隊，目的在觀察中國海軍活動；（2）日本計劃把25個離島「國有化」，以作為「劃定大陸架面積和確保海底資源的據點」，這些島嶼中，包括釣魚島。以此推論，日本要在釣魚島派駐部隊，誰說不可能。（3）今年12月，日美將在鄰近釣魚島的日本西南海域，舉行聯合軍事演習，模擬從敵人手中「奪回」具主權爭議的島嶼。（4）日本自衛隊將仿效美國海軍陸戰隊，組建「水陸兩棲部隊」，主要用以防衛九州與西南2500個島嶼。

上述消息，表面上是日本針對中國的軍事部署和舉措，究其實質，是日本配合美國重返亞洲、領導亞洲事務的戰略部署，目的在遏制中國，而日本利用這個契機，借助美國深化其軍事大國的部署。以此背景觀之，日本在釣魚島的取態愈趨強硬，是必然發展，因為釣魚島乃製造事端、圍堵中國的其中一枚棋子。

事態是複雜的，日美軍事聯盟軍力也是強大的，中國現有軍力難望其項背。但是日本的企圖，目前仍在紙上作業階段，暫時還不敢對釣魚島實行軍事佔領，不過，既然忍讓只換來日本步步進逼，中國應該調整策略，適當擺出較強硬態度，以顯示中國維護領土完整並非僅停留在口頭表態，而是有決心訴諸行動。

派遣漁政船到釣魚島執法、護漁以外，其實，中國軍艦到釣魚島海域巡邏，有何不可，至於民間要到釣魚島宣示主權，中國政府不僅不應該阻撓打壓，反而應該派軍艦隨後保護。中國就日本在釣魚島的行徑，採取適度反制措施，絕非要挑起戰爭，只是必須要有所作為。釣魚島是中國的領土，中國軍艦和國民為何不能在那裏活動？連象徵性宣示主動的動作也不敢做，說什麼神聖領土不可侵犯！若說為了中日關係大局而犧牲釣魚島主權，中國人民會同意嗎？

宣示主權官方不應遏制 中國軍艦應為保釣漁船護航

兩岸三地民間人士，正在醞釀組織船隊到釣魚島宣示主權，寄望三地政府與民間站在同一陣線，一起保衛釣魚島，即使政府不出面，也不要在幕後打壓，特別是香港特區政府，過去對本港人士的保釣行動，從不阻撓，但是去年以種種留難、攔截扣查手段，使「保釣二號」未能前往釣魚島海域宣示主權。特區政府這個做法，不但限制了港人的基本自由，也有違「一國兩制」的原則和精神。這次特區政府若再遏制港人保釣，必定會遭到唾棄。

Beijing should take tough stance

JAPAN Coast Guard patrol boats collided with Min Jin Yu 5179, a Chinese trawler, in the Diaoyu waters. Subsequently, it was stopped by the Japanese vessels and Zhan Qixiong, its captain, was arrested. The Japanese intend to deal with him under domestic Japanese law.

We gather that Zhan Qixiong has been handed over to prosecutors of Ishigaki, Okinawa. It has been reported that he may be charged with illegal fishing, obstructing officers on duty and other offences. He would on conviction be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years. If he is punished under domestic Japanese law, it will underscore Japan's virtual control of the Diaoyu Islands (which the Japanese call the Senkaku Islands).

Min Jin Yu 5179 fished there in the past. When they spotted it, Japan Coast Guard vessels used to warn it away very loudly. However, a few days ago, two Japan Coast Guard vessels chased it away. All the indications are that Japan takes an increasingly strong position on matters concerning islands lying to its southwest. It is noteworthy whether Japan's loose control over the Diaoyu Islands is giving way to its overt occupation of them.

Japan supports America's strategic plan for resuming its leadership in Asia. It is aimed at containing China. Japan intends to seize this opportunity to carry out more vigorously its plan to turn itself into a military power with America's help. In the light of this background, one may say Japan will certainly take a tougher and tougher stand on the Diaoyu Islands, for they are a pawn with which it can cause trouble with a view to containing China.

The situation is complex, and the Japanese-US military alliance is strong. China's military strength is still far from such that it can be a rival. Nevertheless, as yet Japan's schemes remain on paper. It does not dare now to take military possession of the Diaoyu Islands. As its forbearance would only encourage Japan to press forward, China must alter its policy. It must take a suitably tough stance to make it clear that it not just talks about safeguarding its territorial integrity but is determined to take action to do so too.

China has sent fisheries administration ships to the Diaoyu Islands to enforce the law and protect fishermen. In fact, there is no reason why China should not have its naval vessels patrol the Diaoyu waters. Some people are planning to go there to assert China's sovereignty. The Chinese government should not stop them. It should instead have its naval vessels protect them. China must suitably react to what Japan has done in the Diaoyu waters. In no circumstances should it do anything that may provoke a war. However, it must do something about the issue. The Diaoyu Islands are Chinese territory. Is there any reason why no Chinese citizens or naval vessels may go there? If Beijing does not dare even to sanction what would symbolically testify to China's sovereignty over them, how can it talk about China's sacred and inviolable territory? Would the Chinese people agree that China should forgo its sovereignty over them in the interests of Sino-Japanese relations?

 

Activists from the mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan are thinking about sending a group of vessels to the Diaoyu waters to assert China's sovereignty. We hope the three governments will work with them to safeguard the islands. They must not try to stop those activists even if they have to keep themselves in the background. Not until last year did the SAR government stand in the way of Hong Kong baodiao (safeguarding the Diaoyus) activists. It then detained Baodiao II and used others methods to prevent it from going to the Diaoyu waters. When it did so, it restricted Hong Kong people's basic liberties in contradiction with the spirit of the "one country, two systems" principle. It will be held in contempt if it again stands in the way of Hong Kong baodiao activists.