The Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands Dispute

[Update: I recently completed a more extensive analysis on the dispute; that article is available here.]

I’d like to share a couple brief thoughts on the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands dispute, which has intensified pretty dramatically in recent weeks. The islands together comprise only seven square kilometers and have supported virtually no economic activity other than the collection of guano and bird feathers, but China and Japan both vigorously claim them as their own. This disagreement has been intractable for a variety of reasons. One is the economic stakes—sovereignty over the islands will dictate rights to potentially massive oil and gas deposits under the East China Sea, so there is no financial incentive for conciliation. Another reason is historical animosity—having suffered from Japanese colonialism and militarism during much of the first half of the twentieth century, China is particularly keen on defending against what it perceives to be expansionist Japanese territorial claims. Finally, the dispute is intractable for legal reasons, as I hope to illustrate below.

First some historical background: Chinese sailors reportedly used the islands for a number of purposes for centuries, but Japan formally annexed them in 1895 and then, at the end of World War II, transferred administrative authority to the United States. A 1968 study first raised the possibility of extensive oil and gas resources around the islands. Approximately four years later in 1972, China objected to Japanese sovereignty, and the United States returned the islands to Japanese administration. To demonstrate its control, Japan has since leased the islands to private businessmen, built a weather station and heliport, conducted land surveys, and patrolled the surrounding waters. China has consistently objected that these activities are irrelevant, at least in part because the annexation was illegal and Japan never had sovereignty to begin with.

Continue ReadingThe Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands Dispute

This Day in Legal History—September 28, 1918

On September 28, 1918, outside of the French village of Marcoing, British Private Henry Tandley of the 5th Duke of Wellington Regiment came across an escaping wounded German soldier. The encounter took place near the end of the British capture of the village, and thus the military situation, though winding down, was still very much rife with hostilities. The soldier was presumably armed and posed a potential threat to Private Tandley and his fellow infantrymen.

Private Tandley was presented at that moment with a serious ethical question: shoot preemptively in self-defense, not knowing the capability of the German soldier or the extent to which other German soldiers were present, or spare the soldier’s life and let him return to his unit, either to survive or to die in the arms of his own comrades. Private Tandley did not then know that an armistice with Germany would come within a matter of weeks, nor did he know whether the soldier had a wife and children to whom he might return after the war. He knew nothing of this German soldier other than that he was another human being who was injured.

Private Tandley decided to spare the soldier’s life, and the soldier continued on his way, apparently nodding to Tandley in appreciation.

This story is presented in here because, if Tandley’s account is correct, his decision to spare the life of this German soldier changed the course of the 20th century, with vast consequences not only for the law but also for every other aspect of culture and society across much of the world.

Continue ReadingThis Day in Legal History—September 28, 1918

What’s on your phone?

There has been plenty of news with the release of the new iPhone and new operating systems for Apple and Android. We’ve recently had a post on the volume of phone texting here. We haven’t had a conversation on how your phone helps you as a lawyer. I know that Dean Parlow and Prof. Grenig are dedicated iPad users and the teaching law librarians all have iPads. Those of us in the Media & Technology Group are both heavy Android and Apple users, although Android has a 3-1 lead for mobile phones and a greater lead in tablets.

What is the one legal app that you find indispensable on your phone or tablet? Obvious choices are email and calendar as the essential tools, so we’ll skip those. My choice is the productivity app Evernote.

Here are links to places that have lists of law and law-related apps:

eLangdell Commons (CALI); University of Florida – Apple and Android; Indiana Bloomington Mauer School of Law; Maryland School of Law; UCLA School of Law

Continue ReadingWhat’s on your phone?