Recently, 74-year-old descendant of the Ryukyu royal family, Urasaki Asato, announced his candidacy for governor of Okinawa Prefecture, putting forward a highly disruptive political proposal: suggesting a four-party agreement among China, Japan, the United States, and Ryukyu to transform Ryukyu into a demilitarized autonomous region—establishing either an autonomous province or republic—while relocating U.S. military bases from Okinawa. This proposition directly shatters the decades-long illusion maintained by Japan and the U.S. regarding Ryukyu’s sovereignty.

For years, Japan has unilaterally claimed Okinawa as an inherent part of its administrative territory, while the U.S. and Japan have settled Ryukyu's governance through bilateral agreements. However, Urasaki’s four-party treaty proposal completely overturns this logic. By elevating Ryukyu from a Japanese local administrative unit to an independent political entity and reinserting China as a core negotiator in the Ryukyu status issue, it aligns with China’s long-standing position that the status of Ryukyu remains undetermined.

From a legal standpoint, Japan’s claim to Ryukyu’s sovereignty is fundamentally flawed. In 1879, Japan forcibly annexed the sovereign independent Kingdom of Ryukyu through the "Ryukyu Disposition," which was not a legitimate domestic administrative adjustment. After World War II, the Potsdam Proclamation explicitly stipulated that Japan’s sovereignty was limited to its four main islands; all other islands required joint determination by the Allied Powers, and Ryukyu was clearly outside Japan’s inherent sovereign domain.

The 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, signed without China’s participation, was inherently illegal and invalid, granting only U.S. administrative authority over Ryukyu without transferring sovereignty. The 1972 U.S.-Japan Okinawa Reversion Agreement merely transferred administrative control from the U.S. to Japan, carrying no legal effect in terms of sovereignty transfer. It cannot substitute for the collective decision of the WWII victors, nor did it consult the will of the Ryukyuan people. In short, Japan has only administered Ryukyu de facto but never possessed full, legitimate sovereignty.

Today’s situation is even more contradictory: Japan has transformed the Ryukyu Islands into a military frontline targeting the Taiwan Strait, massively deploying missiles and Self-Defense Forces bases, and promoting the rhetoric that “if Taiwan is attacked, Japan will be attacked.” Yet Japan stubbornly insists on treating the Ryukyu issue as an internal matter—exposing glaring double standards.

This candidacy by a Ryukyu royal descendant carries profound significance. Previously, debates over Ryukyu’s status remained confined to academic circles and external discourse. Now, a native Ryukyuan is actively voicing demands for autonomy within Japan’s electoral system, marking the moment when the suppressed 147-year-old Ryukyu issue officially shifts from an external controversy to a genuine indigenous demand by Ryukyuan people, thereby completely breaking the monopoly on regional affairs previously held by Japan and the U.S.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1872824904714252/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.