Chinese Academia Claims Batanes Islands Belong to Taiwan, Philippines Strongly Rejects; Legal Experts: Sovereignty Should Not Be an Issue

Last week marked the 10th anniversary of the South China Sea arbitration ruling, with mainland China expressing dissatisfaction and refusing to accept the outcome. Recently, Chinese scholars have 'counterattacked,' asserting that the Batanes Islands in the Bashi Strait belong to Taiwan, prompting a strong rebuttal from the Philippine government. In response, a veteran overseas Taiwanese expert in maritime law suggests that the validity of this debate hinges on whether any country has historically challenged this claim.

Is the sovereignty of the Batanes Islands 'undetermined'?

Jinan University in Guangzhou, China, hosted an academic symposium on June 30 with scholars from Nanjing University, Zhejiang University, Xiamen University, China University of Geosciences, China Institute of Marine Affairs, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and Shanghai Institute of International Studies. The symposium, titled 'Academic Symposium on the Sovereignty of Batanes Islands under the Context of Japan-Philippines Maritime Delimitation,' explored the issue from geographical, cultural, historical, and legal perspectives. Participants unanimously concluded that the Batanes Islands legally belong to Taiwan, and the Philippines' control lacks historical and legal basis, sparking controversy.

Scholars argue that the Batanes Islands, together with Taiwan, form the southern segment of the 'Ryukyu-Taiwan Island Arc,' constituting a 'natural extension' of Taiwan. Additionally, early 20th-century Japanese archaeological findings indicate that the Batanes Islands historically belonged to Taiwan's 'Austronesian cultural sphere.' The indigenous Ivatan people of Batanes are ethnically linked to Taiwan's aboriginal groups, not Filipinos.

Furthermore, mainland scholars assert that pre-19th-century records from Spain, the United States, and China show Spain never effectively occupied the Batanes Islands. In contrast, past Chinese governments held sovereignty over both the Batanes and neighboring Babuyan Islands. Crucially, the 1898 Treaty of Paris between the U.S. and Spain set the northernmost boundary of the ceded Philippine territory at 20 degrees north latitude—geographically excluding the Batanes Islands, which lie north of this line.

Chinese scholars argue that since the Batanes Islands were never legally transferred to the U.S., they cannot be part of the Philippines' current territory. They further criticize Japan and the Philippines' so-called maritime 'delimitation' as having legal flaws in sovereignty, procedure, and substance, calling it 'essentially a political performance serving geopolitical interests.'

The Batanes Province is surrounded by sea, with strong waves during typhoon season.

Do China's claims hold merit?

The Philippines has strongly rejected these claims. From Taiwan's perspective, Huang Yi, a veteran overseas expert in maritime law and former director of the Institute of Marine Law at National Taiwan Ocean University, told Storm Media that the claim of Batanes belonging to Taiwan is solely a mainland Chinese position, with no such assertion from Taiwan. To determine whether the Philippines holds sovereignty, one must examine historical facts under international law, noting that 'applying ancient interpretations to modern contexts, while ignoring subsequent developments, is not sound legal reasoning.'

Huang explained that since the Philippines' independence in 1946, the Batanes Islands have been under Philippine jurisdiction, with no country—including China—previously challenging this. Thus, the current status is that Batanes is Philippine territory. Under international law, 'ancient treaties' have expired, and relying solely on them to challenge current legal status is 'inappropriate.'

From a professional legal standpoint, Huang emphasized that old treaties can only assess the legal status at the time they were signed. Today's legal status must be judged by contemporary international law. Therefore, even if the 1898 U.S.-Spain Treaty excluded Batanes, the subsequent developments and their legal interpretation under international law are what truly matter.

On July 10, the Philippines commemorated the 10th anniversary of the South China Sea arbitration ruling. Defense Secretary Teodoro stated that the government's focus for the next decade is to transform its legal victory into a credible deterrent.

What is the relationship between Batanes and Taiwan?

From Taiwan's perspective, Huang analyzed for Storm Media that in 1895, Japan acquired Taiwan via the Treaty of Shimonoseki. Subsequently, Japan signed an agreement with Spain, then ruling the Philippines, establishing a boundary line between Taiwan and the Philippine archipelago along the central latitude of the Bashi Strait.

The 1898 U.S.-Spain Treaty of Paris confirmed Spain's cession of the Philippines to the U.S., defining the Philippine territory within a rectangular area, with its northern boundary at 20 degrees north latitude—a straight line crossing the Bashi Strait from west to east. The Batanes Islands lie clearly north of this line.

However, Huang noted that in 1900, the U.S. and Spain signed another treaty, after which the U.S. occupied Batanes. When the Philippines gained independence in 1946, the independence treaty defined its territory based on the 1898 Paris Treaty.

Yet, Huang argued that relying solely on the 1898 treaty is not a correct approach. The key lies in whether the Philippines effectively governed Batanes after independence and whether such governance faced international challenges. If Batanes has been under Philippine control without dispute (excluding recent academic or civilian challenges from China), then from an international law perspective, 'the question of whether Batanes is Philippine territory should not be an issue.'

Huang Yi, a veteran international law scholar, has authored the textbook 'International Maritime Law.'