《釣魚島是中國的固有領土》白皮書（英漢對照）

二、日本竊取釣魚島

II.Japan Grabbed Diaoyu Dao from China

日本在明治維新以后加快對外侵略擴張。1879年，日本吞并琉球并改稱沖繩縣。此后不久，日本便密謀侵占釣魚島，并于甲午戰爭末期將釣魚島秘密“編入”版圖。隨后，日本又迫使中國簽訂不平等的《馬關條約》，割讓臺灣全島及包括釣魚島在內的所有附屬各島嶼。

Japan accelerated its invasion and external expansion after the Meiji Restoration. Japan seized Ryukyu in 1879 and changed its name to Okinawa Prefecture. Soon after that, Japan began to act covertly to invade and occupy Diaoyu Dao and secretly "included" Diaoyu Dao in its territory at the end of the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. Japan then forced China to sign the unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki and cede to Japan the island of Formosa (Taiwan), together with Diaoyu Dao and all other islands appertaining or belonging to the said island of Formosa.

(一)日本密謀竊取釣魚島

1. Japan's covert moves to seize Diaoyu Dao

1884年，有日本人聲稱首次登上釣魚島，發現該島為“無人島”。日本政府隨即對釣魚島開展秘密調查，并試圖侵占。日本上述圖謀引起中國的警覺。1885年9月6日(清光緒十一年七月二十八日)《申報》登載消息：“臺灣東北邊之海島，近有日本人懸日旗于其上，大有占據之勢。”由于顧忌中國的反應，日本政府未敢輕舉妄動。

In 1884, a Japanese man claimed that he first landed on Diaoyu Dao and found the island to be uninhabited. The Japanese government then dispatched secret facts-finding missions to Diaoyu Dao and attempted to invade and occupy the island. The above-mentioned plots by Japan triggered China's alert. On September 6, 1885 (the 28th day of the 7th month in the 11th year of the reign of Emperor Guangxu of the Qing Dynasty), the Chinese newspaper Shen-pao (Shanghai News) reported: "Recently, Japanese flags have been seen on the islands northeast to Taiwan, revealing Japan's intention to occupy these islands." But the Japanese government did not dare to take any further action for fear of reaction from China.

1885年9月22日沖繩縣令在對釣魚島進行秘密調查后向內務卿山縣有朋密報稱，這些無人島“與《中山傳信錄》記載的釣魚臺、黃尾嶼和赤尾嶼應屬同一島嶼”，已為清朝冊封使船所詳悉，并賦以名稱，作為赴琉球的航海標識，因此對是否應建立國家標樁心存疑慮，請求給予指示。同年10月9日，內務卿山縣有朋致函外務卿井上馨征求意見。10月21日，井上馨復函山縣有朋認為，“此刻若有公然建立國標等舉措，必遭清國疑忌，故當前宜僅限于實地調查及詳細報告其港灣形狀、有無可待日后開發之土地物產等，而建國標及著手開發等，可待他日見機而作”。井上馨還特意強調，“此次調查之事恐均不刊載官報及報紙為宜”。因此，日本政府沒有同意沖繩縣建立國家標樁的請求。

After the secret facts-finding missions to Diaoyu Dao, the governor of Okinawa Prefecture sent a report in secrecy to the Minister of Internal Affairs Yamagata Aritomo on September 22, 1885, saying that these uninhabited islands were, in fact, the same Diaoyu Tai, Huangwei Yu and Chiwe Yu that were recorded in the Records of Messages from Chong-shan (Zhong Shan Chuan Xin Lu) and known well to imperial title-conferring envoys of the Qing court on their voyages to Ryukyu, and that he had doubts as to whether or not sovereignty markers should be set up and therefore asked for instruction. The Minister of Internal Affairs Yamagata Aritomo solicited opinion from the Foreign Minister Inoue Kaoru on October 9. Inoue Kaoru replied in a letter to Yamagata Aritomo on October 21, "At present, any open moves such as placing sovereignty markers are bound to alert the Qing imperial court. Therefore, it is advisable not to go beyond field surveys and detailed reports on the shapes of the bays, land and other resources for future development. In the meantime, we will wait for a better time to engage in such activities as putting up sovereignty markers and embarking on development on the islands." Inoue Kaoru also made a special emphasis that "it is inappropriate to publicize the missions on official gazette or newspapers." As a result, the Japanese government did not approve of the request of Okinawa Prefecture to set up sovereignty markers.

1890年1月13日，沖繩縣知事又請示內務大臣，稱釣魚島等島嶼“為無人島，迄今尚未確定其管轄”，“請求將其劃歸本縣管轄之八重山官署所轄”。1893年11月2日，沖繩縣知事再次申請建立國標以劃入版圖。日本政府仍未答復。甲午戰爭前兩個月，即1894年5月12日，沖繩縣秘密調查釣魚島的最終結論是：“自明治十八年（1885年）派縣警察對該島進行勘察以來，未再開展進一步調查，故難提供更確切報告。……此外，沒有關于該島之舊時記錄文書以及顯示屬我國領有的文字或口頭傳說的證據。”

The governor of Okinawa Prefecture submitted the matter for approval to the Minister of Internal Affairs once again on January 13, 1890, saying that Diaoyu Dao and other "above-mentioned uninhabited islands have remained under no specific jurisdiction", and that he "intends to place them under the jurisdiction of the Office of Yaeyama Islands." On November 2, 1893, the governor of Okinawa Prefecture applied once again for setting up sovereignty markers to incorporate the islands into Japan's territory. The Japanese government did not respond. On May 12, 1894, two months before the Sino-Japanese War, the secret facts-finding missions to Diaoyu Dao by Okinawa Prefecture came to a final conclusion, "Ever since the prefecture police surveyed the island in 1885 (the 18th year of the Meiji period), there have been no subsequent investigations. As a result, it is difficult to provide any specific reports on it... In addition, there exist no old records related to the said island or folklore and legends demonstrating that the island belongs to our country."

日本外務省編纂的《日本外交文書》明確記載了日本企圖竊取釣魚島的經過，相關文件清楚地顯示，當時日本政府雖然覬覦釣魚島，但完全清楚這些島嶼屬于中國，不敢輕舉妄動。

Japan's attempts to occupy Diaoyu Dao were clearly recorded in Japan Diplomatic Documents compiled by the Japanese Foreign Ministry. Relevant documents evidently show that the Japanese government intended to occupy Diaoyu Dao, but refrained from acting impetuously as it was fully aware of China's sovereignty over these islands.

1894年7月，日本發動甲午戰爭。同年11月底，日本軍隊占領中國旅順口，清朝敗局已定。在此背景下，12月27日，日本內務大臣野村靖致函外務大臣陸奧宗光，認為“今昔形勢已殊”，要求將在釣魚島建立國標、納入版圖事提交內閣會議決定。1895年1月11日，陸奧宗光回函表示支持。同年1月14日，日本內閣秘密通過決議，將釣魚島“編入”沖繩縣管轄。

Japan waged the Sino-Japanese War in July 1894. Towards the end of November 1894, Japanese forces seized the Chinese port of Lushun (then known as Port Arthur), virtually securing defeat of the Qing court. Against such backdrop, the Japanese Minister of Internal Affairs Yasushi Nomura wrote to Foreign Minister Mutsu Munemitsu on December 27 that the "circumstances have now changed", and called for a decision by the cabinet on the issue of setting up sovereignty markers in Diaoyu Dao and incorporating the island into Japan's territory. Mutsu Munemitsu expressed his support for the proposal in his reply to Yasushi Nomura on January 11, 1895. The Japanese cabinet secretly passed a resolution on January 14 to "place" Diaoyu Dao under the jurisdiction of Okinawa Prefecture.

日本官方文件顯示，日本從1885年開始調查釣魚島到1895年正式竊占，始終是秘密進行的，從未公開宣示，因此進一步證明其對釣魚島的主權主張不具有國際法規定的效力。

Japan's official documents show that from the time of the facts-finding missions to Diaoyu Dao in 1885 to the occupation of the islands in 1895, Japan had consistently acted in secrecy without making its moves public. This further proves that Japan's claim of sovereignty over Diaoyu Dao does not have legal effect under international law.

(二)釣魚島隨臺灣島被迫割讓給日本

2. Diaoyu Dao was ceded to Japan together with the Taiwan Island

1895年4月17日，清朝在甲午戰爭中戰敗，被迫與日本簽署不平等的《馬關條約》，割讓“臺灣全島及所有附屬各島嶼”。釣魚島等作為臺灣“附屬島嶼”一并被割讓給日本。1900年，日本將釣魚島改名為“尖閣列島”。

On April 17, 1895, the Qing court was defeated in the Sino-Japanese War and forced to sign the unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki and cede to Japan "the island of Formosa (Taiwan), together with all islands appertaining or belonging to the said island of Formosa". The Diaoyu Dao Islands were ceded to Japan as "islands appertaining or belonging to the said island of Formosa". In 1900, Japan changed the name of Diaoyu Dao to "Senkaku Islands".