「宗主權」不是「主權」：中共另開戰場騙沖繩

【雙魚之論】
When the Japanese Prime Minister merely answered a Diet member’s question — “Would a Chinese military invasion or blockade of Taiwan constitute an ‘existence-threatening crisis’ (存亡危機事態) for Japan?” — the CCP seized the opportunity to erupt in extraordinary fury. It not only unleashed cultural and tourism boycotts on a scale far exceeding the 2012 Senkaku (Diaoyu) Islands nationalization crisis, but went even further by dredging up historical documents claiming that “the Ryukyu Islands have belonged to China since ancient times,” openly challenging Japan’s sovereignty over Okinawa.

This is no longer a mere overreaction to the phrase “existence-threatening crisis.” It is an active, deliberate escalation of hostility toward Japan, weaponizing history as a tool of CCP’s territorial expansion. Beijing’s real objective is binary: either force Japan into submission, or provoke greater unity and an even stronger backlash across Japanese society.
The historical facts are as follows: For centuries before the modern era, the Ryukyu Islands existed as an independent kingdom. As early as 1429, the Sho Dynasty established a fully functioning state with its own monarchy and governance system. From the Yuan Dynasty onward, Ryukyu repeatedly faced Chinese encroachment. From the Ming Dynasty onward, it entered a “dual tribute” (兩屬) relationship, paying tribute simultaneously to the Ming (later Qing) Empire and Japan’s Satsuma Domain. This was a classic peripheral relationship within the East Asian tribute system — not modern sovereign annexation. At that time, the modern concept of “sovereignty” simply did not exist in East Asia; at most there was “suzerainty.”
Deliberately conflating suzerainty with sovereignty in order to mislead the international community is one of the CCP’s standard cognitive-warfare tactics. If one truly applies the criterion of “invasion by external forces,” then the Yuan, Ming, and Qing empires were equally qualify as aggressors and oppressors of Ryukyu.
In the modern era:
1879: Japan formally annexed Ryukyu and transformed it into Okinawa Prefecture.
End of World War II: Okinawa was conquered solely by the United States and placed under full U.S. military government exercising complete executive, legislative, and judicial authority.
1951: Under the San Francisco Peace Treaty, Okinawa was placed under exclusive United Nations trusteeship administered solely by the United States.
1972: The United States returned above administrative rights to Japan; U.S. forces continue to be stationed there to this day under the Okinawa Reversion Agreement and the U.S.–Japan Security Treaty.
By reviving the long-buried “Ryukyu belongs to China” narrative today, the CCP is mounting a direct challenge to Japan’s territorial integrity and national polity — a provocation far graver than mere verbal disputes over Taiwan contingency terminology.

日本首相僅僅回覆眾議院議員詢問：「若中國對台灣動武或封鎖台灣，是否構成日本的『存亡危機事態』？」中共卻藉機異常暴怒，不僅發動遠超2012年釣魚台（尖閣）國有化事件規模的文化、旅遊全面抵制，甚至進一步搬出「琉球自古屬於中國」的歷史文件，公開質疑日本對沖繩的主權。
這已不再是單純對「存亡危機事態」說法的過激反應，而是中共主動升高對日敵意、把歷史當作擴張工具的積極攻勢。其真正目的只有兩個：若非逼日本低頭，就是激起日本社會團結與更強烈的反彈。
歷史事實如下： 琉球在近代以前長期是獨立王國，至少自15世紀（1429年）即建立尚氏王朝，並擁有完整國家體制。自元朝起即屢遭中國侵擾，明朝之後形成對明帝國與日本薩摩藩的「雙重朝貢」（兩屬）關係。這是典型的「東亞朝貢體系」下的邊陲國際關係，並非近代主權納編。
當時東亞根本不存在現代「主權」概念，最多只有「宗主權」。將「宗主權」偷換成「主權」以欺騙國際社會，正是中共慣用的認知戰手法之一。若真以「被外力侵略」來論，則元、明、清帝國對琉球同樣是侵略者與壓迫者。
近代以來，琉球於1879年被日本正式併為沖繩縣。二戰末期，沖繩被美國單獨征服並實施完整軍事統治；1951年《舊金山和約》將沖繩置於美國唯一的信託統治之下，擁有行政、立法、司法三權；1972年美國將前述施政權歸還日本，並以《沖繩返還協定》及《日美安保條約》繼續駐軍至今。
中共如今翻出「琉球屬中」舊帳，已構成對日本國土完整與國家體制的直接挑戰，其危險程度遠超過單純的台海危機言論爭議。

反制高市 陸展示「明諭琉球國王敕」：琉球曾是中國藩屬    聯合 20251130

為反制日本首相高市早苗相關涉台言論，中共近期頻頻打出「琉球牌」。新華社報導，大連旅順博物館近日再次展出「明諭琉球國王敕」，引起各方關注。旅順博物館原副館長韓行方指稱，這道敕諭揭示琉球曾是中國藩屬的重要史實，也為研究琉球歷史和日本對其侵略史提供了重要印證。

琉球即今天的日本沖繩。報導稱，這次展出的「明諭琉球國王敕」係仿製品，原件存放於旅順博物館庫房。敕諭落款為明崇禎二年（公元1629年），為黃色紙本，四周有金色雲龍花紋，鈐有「廣運之寶」朱文方印，行文採用工整的楷書。

敕諭內容為：「皇帝敕諭琉球國王世子尚豐，得奏，爾父王尚寧，於泰昌元年九月十九日薨逝，爾為世子理宜承襲，特遣戶科右給事中杜三策、行人司司正楊掄，封爾為琉球國中山王，嗣理國政，並賜爾及妃冠服彩幣等物。念爾父紹膺國統，作鎮海邦，率職輸誠，慎終如始，中遭鄰侮，旋致堵安，克綏提封，迄於沒世。爾以元胤，國人歸心，嗣服之初，倍宜兢惕。其尚祗循侯度，恪守王章，褆身以率勵臣民，飭政而輯寧邦域，綢繆牖戶，保固藩籬，庶無忝爾前人。用副予之顯命，欽哉，故諭。頒賜……」其後，敕諭詳細開列了所頒賜的物品及數量。

韓行方曾在其《明崇禎朝冊封琉球始末考辨》一文中指出，敕諭中提到的「中遭鄰侮」，指明萬曆四十年（公元1612年）日本出兵三千入侵琉球，尚寧王被俘一事。

此事在《明史》中也有記載：「琉球外禦強鄰，內修貢不絕。四十年，日本果以勁兵三千入其國，擄其王，遷其宗器，大掠而去。」

然而，「已而其王歸釋，復遣使修貢……四十四年，日本有取雞籠山之謀，其地名台灣，密邇福建，尚寧遣使以聞，詔海上警備……」

新華社指出，由此可見，當時琉球的尚寧王對明王朝確實是「恭謹勤勞、忠心耿耿」，因此才有敕諭中對其功績的表彰，即「念爾父紹膺國統，作鎮海邦，率職輸誠，慎終如始」。

據韓行方考證，明王朝冊封琉球共計15次，崇禎年間的冊封是最後一次。清順治十一年（公元1654年），琉球國王尚質遣臣進京，送回「舊詔二道、敕諭一道、鍍金銀印一顆」，並請頒敕新印。由此，這道明崇禎年間發出的敕諭輾轉歸來。此後，清王朝基本沿用明制，繼續對琉球的冊封。