Japan scrambles jets against Chinese military planes

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

  • 2

    kimuzukashiiiii

    Hurry up with that budget please ... This is getting scary...

  • 3

    lachance

    I admire Japan. With a miniscule population in relation to China, Japan will NOT allow itself to be bullied. The US should pay heed and stand shoulder to shoulder with our ally, using our own fighter aircraft in the air around the Senkakus.

    I mean, "shoot the buggers down." Stand firm. Escalate. Protect. Will China start something? No. China is all noise, trying to see what it can get away with. The longer China behaves in this fashion, the harder it will be to disabuse them of this notion.

    If the sovereignty of these islands is really open to debate, then debate it in the international courts. Until then, defend these islands as if they are under attack. SHOOT THE BUGGERS DOWN.

  • -3

    volland

    @kimuzukashiiiii

    How true ! The best idea would be to simply attack China, yes?

  • -1

    flowers

    Thinking about deeper budget deficits and more trouble economy, that would be much scarier.

  • -7

    smithinjapan

    "On Wednesday, the conservative Sankei Shimbun reported that the number of Chinese military planes nearing Japanese territory had increased since Japan nationalised the islands."

    Duh! And now they're increasing a lot more since Abe took office and made all the anti-neighbour promises. You see what rampant nationalism gets you, Japan? Funny thing is, they think they're better than China in all this, when it seems all they're doing is aspiring to act like they perceive China to be.

  • -10

    smithinjapan

    kimuzukashiiii: "Hurry up with that budget please ... This is getting scary..."

    If they put the budget towards ACTUALLY mending ties instead of towards building missiles and upping defense, there would be no problems. It's suggesting they're going to do what they SAY they are going to that is prompting all these incursions.

  • 2

    Crazedinjapan

    As long as there is oil/gas/minerals to be hauled in from the water around those areas there will be no other way to curb Chinas greed and ignorance. No amount of dialog will deter the bullying of China towards any Asian neighbor that has the resources it so desperately needs.

    If they aren't sneaking around trying to buy up land in other countries they are just forcibly trying to excert control. I agree with most recent posts. Put a continued presence of ships in those waters and keep up routine patrols in that airspace ....don't give them a inch !

  • -5

    Ewan Huzarmy

    This is getting scary

    No, what's getting scary is the fact that there are many people in Japan who would rather see billions squandered on arms, whilst it's own people continue to suffer due to incompetent leaders (cough Tohoko cough).

    Even worse, there is a picture reminder below, which shows where Japan's aggression lead .

  • 0

    kimuzukashiiiii

    volland - Attack China, no. How did you jump to such a ridiculous conclusion from such a short comment I made?

    However when they said in the article above that Japan had to "Scramble jets" , it implies that they don't really have that many at their disposal, that it was somehow not that easy to do?

    It seems that they need much more defense in the area - perhaps constant Japanese air and sea patrol. China are pushing the boundaries further and further every day, it seems.

  • 1

    fds

    if japan really thinks the islands are theirs just build a base on the it already!

  • -7

    Outta here

    They did not violate territorial airspace over the islands but flew inside Japan’s so-called air defense identification zone, the report said.

    Yeah, claimed by Japan recognised by no-one else! Funny how when its Japan claiming land and waters they scramble their military. But when Japan enters other nations claimed waters they say tough luck we can do as we please! A karma is good. As much as l don't really like china it's good to see them giving Japan grief....,

  • 3

    Debucho

    "claimed by Japan recognised by no-one else!"

    Outta Here you are a little misinformed. The Senkaku islands were given back to Japan by the US in 1971 with Okinawa and the US congress recently approved an official statement that the Senkaku islands belong to Japan.

    The US clearly recognizes the islands as Japan's which is why China might fly around like a little fly but they would never dare touch those islands or risk getting spanked by the US.

  • 0

    kurisupisu

    Where will this escalate to? The military posturing and the economic attacks via a vis the yen devaluation might be seen for the destruction of Japanese shops and factories last year-the question is where will all this stop?

    China possesses nuclear weapons so would the US really be Japan's defender in a time of conflict?

  • 1

    Debucho

    would the US really be Japan's defender in a time of conflict?

    The US signed a treaty after WWII saying they would, and revised Japan's constitution in return for that signature. You bet they would.

  • 4

    Cortes Elijah

    Good job Japan. You did the right thing.

  • -1

    lachance

    As regards the Senkaku Islands, Japan must not change face and even consider the Chinese claim unless the Qing emperor makes those claims. The Senkakus belong to Japan, as won from the Qing dynasty in 1895. Since the Qing dynasty no longer exists, no one else has a claim to adjudicate.

    The Senkakus have nothing to do with WWII, which was settled in Potsdam, Cairo, and San Francisco, irrelevant documents that are forever quoted by the Chinese. Find the heir to the Qing dynasty, and then there might be a reason to discuss sovereignty of this small island chain. Otherwise, the Red Chinese are simply usurpers themselves, not heirs to the Qing dynasty.

    Likewise, if the US does not fully support Japan in this moment of crisis regarding this issue, China will eventually be so emboldened as to come to our shores and demand California as their sovereign territory, simply because Chinese people helped build much of our railroad system...or they will use some other similarly ridiculous pretext.

    If China succeeds with its ridiculous claim, then China will eventually claim the entire planet. It is up to Japan to STOP this war-monger now. Japan must not change face and compromise on the sovereignty of the Senkakus. Japan must save face. The Japanese people must save face.

  • 0

    nandakandamanda

    More than ten Chinese jets apparently.

  • -1

    Outta here

    Debucho

    Outta Here you are a little misinformed. The Senkaku islands were given back to Japan by the US in 1971 with Okinawa and the US congress recently approved an official statement that the Senkaku islands belong to Japan.

    Debucho, l think it is you that is a little misinformed. The US didnt give the islands to Japan. They gave Japan administration of the islands NOT sovereignty. That is a very very big difference. Not to mention the US has while reaffirming Japanese ADMINISTRATION of the islands always said that does not legitimise Japan's claim to sovereignty over the islands and intact the US has stated it has no opinion on that matter and that the parties should seek a peaceful outcome I.e. ICJ.

    The US clearly recognizes the islands as Japan's which is why China might fly around like a little fly but they would never dare touch those islands or risk getting spanked by the US.

    Again the US recognises Japan's administration off the islands and nothing more. If you have a quote that disputes this please put it forward...

  • 1

    Betraythetrust!

    This is silly boys in power who want to stir up support from nationalists who cannot think for themselves. There is no question of any major conflict occuring in the region but perceived threats of war are good for business for the elite and their friends.

  • 2

    Patrick McCormick

    What Japan should do is buzz some Chinese ships with F-15s on full afterburn going supersonic at low altitude. THAT should get the "DON'T F- WITH US" point across quite nicely.

  • -1

    all4faj

    kimuzukashiiiiiJan. 11, 2013 - 10:00AM JST

    Scrambling jets does not imply that they do not have many jets at their disposal and that they need more, It implies that they have jets on standy or alert ready to take off as quickly as possible in the case of a threat, Scramble means to get them airborne as quickly as possible. Imagine what would happen to all the US bases around the world if they didn't come to Japan's aid in the event of a hostile move from China. Must be awkward for the US on the edge of a fiscal cliff with two out of the three largest holders of US debt.

  • 0

    kimuzukashiiiii

    Exactly Aff4faj - The jets should have ALREADY been there before china arrived. They should be patroling and defending, and when their jets are sitting in an airfield somewhere, they are not doing that.

    The thing is about these chinese planes, boats, etc, they ARE hostile military moves. Its only a matter of time before one of those chinese military planes drops something, and Japan are not going to be ready.

  • 0

    bajhista65

    Hehehehe.... this is like kids intriguing games to one another but does not want to give the first punch.

  • -2

    hidingout

    It's suggesting they're going to do what they SAY they are going to that is prompting all these incursions.

    I pity folks who are so blinded by their ideology that they actually believe stuff like this. The "incursions" are prompted by communist greed and a desire to look like the big boss in Asia. Pretty transparent stuff ..... and not at all unexpected given communist china's track record on working and playing with others.

  • -5

    Frungy

    Idiotic move Japan. The Chinese are laughing their heads off, they just successfully goaded you into wasting tens of thousands of dollars in fuel and maintenance fees, and those so-called "Chinese military aircraft", that the Japanese only saw on radar, but weren't seen by the coast guard so no-one has a clue what type they were, were probably dirt cheap to launch.

    Simply put one of the patriot missiles they used to counter the N. Korea situation and shoot down the next Chinese plane (and even then you'll probably make a loss... those things are expensive...).

    Japanese military don't even realise this is an attempt to bleed Japan dry financially, not a military conflict in a traditional sense at all.

  • -7

    Tiger_In_The_Hermitage

    We should stand down our military and stop these provokative acts towards China. Its only after Japan announcing that it will fire luminous rounds at Chinese planes did the Chinese reposition their fighter jets towards the area. First the privitisation and now the authorising to shoot first. Ofcourse the Americans will usher us on, afterall they get to increase their colonisation of Japan and we need to buy their weapons.

  • -1

    all4faj

    kimuzukashiiiiiJan. 11, 2013 - 01:58PM JST

    What is it that you actually mean?

    You want the budget in a hurry presumably to purchase more jets and you want the jets in the air waiting for the Chinese, but you don't want a war and you don't know what scrambling jets means..

  • 2

    nandakandamanda

    From the Chosun Ilbo: "Nihon TV reported that the Chinese fighters were J7 and J10 jets that flew in formation and entered the zone three times. They all withdrew before the Japanese jets arrived and did not enter Japanese airspace. The ADIZ is an area on the periphery of sovereign airspace where foreign aircraft must identify themselves."

  • 2

    Saketown

    It's time for Japan to start looking at the Senkaku Islands like America looks at The Persian Gulf. What I mean is that Japan needs to start Deploying Warships on a Routine Patrol around the Senkaku Islands and Defend the Senkaku's with Military Force. Bilateral Talks have repeatedly Failed, Diplomacy has Failed - It's Time for Japan to get "Haze Grey & Under Way"...

  • 3

    Hide Suzuki

    @Outta here

    "The US didnt give the islands to Japan"

    Wrong, The US did give the islands to Japan. They can't give a right to administer an island that belongs to someone else to Japan.
    If you have a quote that disputes this please put it forward.

    And no, your words don't mean anything.

  • 4

    OssanAmerica

    smithinjapanJan. 11, 2013 - 09:00AM JST "On Wednesday, the conservative Sankei Shimbun reported that the number of Chinese military planes nearing Japanese territory had increased since Japan nationalised the islands." Duh! And now they're increasing a lot more since Abe took office and made all the anti-neighbour promises. You see >what rampant nationalism gets you, Japan? Funny thing is, they think they're better than China in all this, when it >seems all they're doing is aspiring to act like they perceive China to be.

    Rampant nationalism? When China is bullying Japan, Phillipines, Malaysia, Brunei and Vietnam? When nationsa from India to Singapore to Australia consider China to be the biggest threat to peace in the region you go on about nationalism in Japan? Please wake upand smell the 개장국.

  • 3

    OssanAmerica

    FrungyJan. 11, 2013 - 03:03PM JST Idiotic move Japan. The Chinese are laughing their heads off, they just successfully goaded you into wasting tens of >thousands of dollars in fuel and maintenance fees, and those so-called "Chinese military aircraft", that the Japanese >only saw on radar, but weren't seen by the coast guard so no-one has a clue what type they were, were probably dirt >cheap to launch.

    China is spending far more money and fuel on playing this 6 year old "if we hang around here long enough everuone will consider it ours" game. The Chinese aren't laughing at anything because the United States has told them what's going to happen if they try to take the islands. Why do you think the Chinese always run away before the Japanese planes get there?

  • 4

    OssanAmerica

    TigerInThe_HermitageJan. 11, 2013 - 03:17PM JST We should stand down our military and stop these provokative acts towards China. Its only after Japan announcing >that it will fire luminous rounds at Chinese planes did the Chinese reposition their fighter jets towards the area. First >the privitisation and now the authorising to shoot first. Ofcourse the Americans will usher us on, afterall they get to >increase their colonisation of Japan and we need to buy their weapons.

    Bring your Chinese military planes into Japanese airspace. See what happens.

  • 2

    gelendestrasse

    Routine patrols would be a good start. Bouncing the Chinese aircraft would send a message. Low level runs over the intruding ships is a good idea.

    Somebody has to stand up to the Chinese....

  • 3

    nigelboy

    Debucho, l think it is you that is a little misinformed. The US didnt give the islands to Japan. They gave Japan administration of the islands NOT sovereignty. That is a very very big difference. Not to mention the US has while reaffirming Japanese ADMINISTRATION of the islands always said that does not legitimise Japan's claim to sovereignty over the islands and intact the US has stated it has no opinion on that matter and that the parties should seek a peaceful outcome I.e. ICJ.

    The 1971 Agreement between Japan and the United States of America Concerning the Ryukyu Islands and the Daito Islands Article 1 states

    "assumes full responsibility and authority for the exercise of all and any powers of administration, legislation and jurisdiction over the territory and inhabitants of the said islands. "

    Many refer to this as "sovereignty".

  • 1

    PnoyMafia7thFLT

    Shoot em Commie aircraft and maritime vessels down entering Japan illegally that will teach them how to behave properly. Enough with PRC's foolishness.

    You know what happened when the Chinese fishing vessels entered Guam and Russian EEZ and tried to outrun the Navy and coastguard? got shot up and ended as an artificial coral to preserve marine life that they have been poaching and destroying.

  • -4

    Outta here

    Nigelboy,

    Many refer to this as "sovereignty".

    Agreed many Japanese and pro Japanese indeed do. However the US doesn't and have specifically said as much in the past that while the Japanese administer the islands and the US support this it does not mean they are sovereign Japanese territory.

    So because the US administered them after WW2 does that make them sovereign US territory? How about other nations that administer territory without sovereignty overt?

  • 1

    nigelboy

    Agreed many Japanese and pro Japanese indeed do. However the US doesn't and have specifically said as much in the past that while the Japanese administer the islands and the US support this it does not mean they are sovereign Japanese territory.

    So you're saying that "sovereignty" does not equal to "responsibility and authority for the exercise of all and any powers of administration, legislation and jurisdiction over the territory"?

  • -4

    Outta here

    Nigelboy,

    Late last month, the US senate passed an amendment reaffirming Washington's commitment to Japan on the Senkaku Islands, but repeated that it would not take sides on the sovereignty issue.

    Enough said....

  • -4

    flowers

    nigelboy, OK, let’s look at common sense, Japan said the islands were terra nullius but China had Japanese official letter that said the islands belong to China and Japan did not complete the survey. China came up with numerous documents and maps as proofs of ownership a lot more than Japan. Japan lied and denied about the agreement in shelving the issue. During the last 40 years China kept its promise while Japan broke it. Japan transferred private ownership to state ownership and claimed that it was to prevent problems with China, but even kid knows that there is a distinct difference. Japan insisted that there was no dispute but you and I and the rest of the world know there is a dispute. J PM has been escalating the issue by provoking China in every turn and we don’t see Chinese PM say anything to provoke Japan. Sending fighter jets to chase after Chinese ordinary plane, 8 of them at one time! Japan is a bully and has been a bully as seen by the atrocities committed during the WW. Abe even wants to change the history book and deny about the atrocities. China was too poor and weak then to stand up to the bully but not any longer. From common sense, do you see what I am pointing at, J govt (the same govt since the WW) is flip-flopping and lying, now do you see my point.

  • 3

    nigelboy

    Outta here. I'm firmly aware of the current U.S position but you still didn't answer my question which is the definition of "sovereighnty".

    Based on my understanding of the word, U.S. Did in fact give sovereignty to Japan in the 1971 agreement. Was there an amendment by which both parties agreed to limit 'administration" only leaving out the exercise of any power regarding jurisdiction and legislation??

  • 2

    nigelboy

    nigelboy, OK, let’s look at common sense, Japan said the islands were terra nullius but China had Japanese official letter that said the islands belong to China and Japan did not complete the survey. China came up with numerous documents and maps as proofs of ownership a lot more than Japa

    Official letter to whom? Where do you get the idea that the survey wasn't completed? What specific agreement are you referring to??

  • -3

    volland

    @all4fajJan. 11, 2013 - 04:05PM JST

    Your comment sums it up nicely. What is not so good, actually it is a little frightening, that he describes the state of thinking on Japan's part, even many other of the commentaries show that. There are actually people around here believing, that it is great idea for Japan to star a war against China. And they actually believe they would win that one?

  • -1

    Nessie

    And now they're increasing a lot more since Abe took office and made all the anti-neighbour promises. You see what rampant nationalism gets you, Japan?

    You do know the Chinese leadership changed before Abe took office. You can't lay it all on him.

  • 2

    House Atreides

    Japan's position on the Senkaku islands is the same as the position China had on the islands in 1950. The Senkaku (Sento) islands are a part of Okinawa. In 1950, the Chinese published the document "Draft platform on issues and arguments in the parts concerning territories in the peace with Japan." In the document the Chinese stated that:

    The Ryukyus "consist of three parts--northern, central, and southern. The central part comprises the Okinawa islands, whereas the southern part comprises the Miyako islands and the Yaeyama islands (Sento islets)."

    The Chinese specifically put the Sento Islets in parenthesis next to the Yaeyama islands indicating that they were with the Yaeyama islands. There's also an article from January 1953 in the Chinese newspaper, the People's Daily, stating that the Ryukyu Islands comprise seven groups of islands, including the Senkaku Islands. China's stance on the Senkaku islands only changed in 1971 when natural resources were discovered in the area.

  • 0

    CraigHicks

    Acting to promote and protect ones interests is a natural necessity. That includes includes keeping an open mind, considering long term plans and goals, and understanding the values of friends and cooperation. Yes Japan is the only country to ever build a structure on the island, but that structure was only used for a short time and it was not actually a place where Japanese children were born and raised like Hopporyoudo is. So would it really be necessary to consider it a violation of self-esteem to make some sort of offer to share resources? Couldn't it be a source of pride to take the initiative to be reasonable in the face of unreasonableness? I am not saying a reciprocally friendly reply should be expected; just as a matter of principal it is better to have tried and failed.

    And supposing I am wrong above, and it really is necessary to take strong action today just to prevent being overrun tomorrow. Then wouldn't it be strategically advisable for Japan to really be negotiating together with Vietnam, the Philippines and Korea? But you will notice no coordinated response to China's occupation of the shoals just 100 miles off the Philippines shoreline. Yes the US drugged up on foreign debt did nothing, but that's only more reason for Japan to take initiative, not less.

    In fact, Japan might be better off strategically in the long run by at least trying compromise on the Sentakus, while simultaneously re-directing the outrage to support the Philippines and Vietnam, and even making a big territorial gesture with South Korea. And in fact it will help China too in the long run because they would be less likely to fall into the trap of unilateral military action.

    Nobody wins the Tour De France by insisting on winning every stage. Flexibility and thinking out the box is necessary for success.

  • -4

    Outta here

    Nigelboy,

    Based on my understanding of the word, U.S. Did in fact give sovereignty to Japan in the 1971 agreement.

    Well you would be wrong then.

    was there an amendment by which both parties agreed to limit 'administration" only leaving out the exercise of any power regarding jurisdiction and legislation??

    From US legal advisor re senkaku revision.

    The Governments of the Republic of China and Japan are in disagreement as to sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands. You should know as well that the People’s Republic of China has also claimed sovereignty over the islands. The United States believes that a return of administrative rights over those islands to Japan, from which the rights were received, can in no way prejudice any underlying claims.

    This was written October 20 1971 In response to the sec of state for the US. As previously stated he US returned administration not sovereignty. The US says it. It's documented, yet you deny it...

  • 2

    nigelboy

    No. You failed to answer my question which is the definition of "sovereignty" which I believe U.S. did in fact gave to Japan or else the whole Okinawa would be in the same status as Senkaku which you claim is "administration" only.

    Did U.S. give " full responsibility and authority for the exercise of all and any powers of administration, legislation and jurisdiction over" Senkaku to Japan? Yes.

    So as to the definition of sovereignty, what else is there?

  • -4

    Outta here

    Nigelboy,

    The definition of sovereignty is irrelevant, your opinion is irrelevant. It is documented that many times by the US government that hy only gave administrative rights not sovereignty. And it's the US words that matter not your belief to mine end of story

Login to leave a comment

OR
  • 海外営業事務

    海外営業事務
    株式会社セドナエンタープライズ、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥220,000 ~ ¥400,000 / Month Negotiable
  • African Speaking Sales manager

    African Speaking Sales manager
    JPC TRADE CO.,LTD. (株式会社JPC)、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥200,000 ~ ¥450,000 / Month Negotiable Basic Salary + Incentives
  • Recruitment / HR Generalist

    Recruitment / HR Generalist
    Temple University, Japan Campus - テンプル大学ジャパンキャンパス、Tokyo
    Salary: Commensurate with experience plus transportation from/to TUJ
  • Program Assistant

    Program Assistant
    Temple University, Japan Campus - テンプル大学ジャパンキャンパス、Tokyo
    Salary: Commensurate with experience plus transportation from/to TUJ
  • Portuguese Speaking Sales Manager

    Portuguese Speaking Sales Manager
    Autocom Japan (オートコムジャパン株式会社)、Kanagawa
    Salary: ¥270,000 ~ ¥800,000 / Month Commission Based

More in National

View all

View all