Japan talk of warning shots heats up China dispute

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

  • 14

    semperfi

    Dog:

    just hope the US has the wisdom to get out of its obligation of coming to Japan's defence over the islands.

    If USA renegs on its Treaty Agreement with Japan - then it may as well roll up the sidewalks in Okinawa and Yokohama ( and wherever else it has basis here) and take American troops home ..............................and allow Japan industry to manufacture its own war machines for defense purposes.................................US can't have it two ways.

  • 2

    Outta here

    Maybe the US should also be telling Japan to pull its head in over this issue just like they told the Chinese to. Firing weapons, even if it is just to warn the other side is awful risky and provocative. This will not end well for Japan if they are off target and hit a Chinese plane or vessel. I wonder if the US would be so supportive then?

  • -6

    Disillusioned

    If Japan fires first on a Chinese plane isn't that against the constitution and surrender agreement of 1945? it doesn't seem like self-defense to me. It seems more like first-strike.

  • 0

    marcelito

    Yeah..that`s all that is needed now fools..start shooting. The situation needs to be de-escalated and not made worse. You can imagine Chinese reaction if their planes are shot at, don,t think Japan can afford to take that risk now.

  • 11

    Redcliff

    I think both sides need to take a step back and consider the consequences if presses ahead with this sort of tit for tat actions. In recent days the visit of Hatoyama to China has shown to China that there are many Japanese who do not want a repeat of the incidence happened in WWII. I applaud Hatoyama for doing Japan a great service and together with Japan ex PM Tomiichi Murayama's apology to all Asians who suffered in the WWII.

    It shows that the Japanese and the Chinese people wanted sustained peace between two countries they need to let their leaders know of their desire. I am sure it only take both countries to take the first step, without third country involved, of extending a friendly hand and to sit down and resolve the dispute with mutual respect.

  • 8

    Sentiments

    Interesting to read that the Chinese response is that japan should now its own limitations. I think that tells all you need to know about Chinese policy. Basically that we are big and strong and you should back down and accept our supremacy. A stronger military always lead to an inflated ego and now someone needs to help loose some air.

  • 1

    SamuraiBlue

    Disillusioned

    No since they are only talking about warning shots and if PRC continues invading air space Japan does have the right within the constitution to defend herself against intrusions. Self defense includes firing upon intruding potential hostile vehicle into airspace that does not designate her intentions. Merely stating this is our land so we can do the hell we want does not fly since they may well spray the area with deadly gas or drop mines within the area as precurser to an full fledged invasion.

  • 0

    Ewan Huzarmy

    since they may well spray the area with deadly gas or drop mines within the area as precurser to an full fledged invasion

    So who's paranoid ?

  • 15

    Laguna

    Never fire "warning shots" unless you're willing to take the next step.

    Foolish, foolish thinking.

  • -2

    ebisen

    Liz:

    You know how some people have these little habits that get you down? Like Bernie. Bernie liked to chew gum. No, not chew. POP. So I come home from work one night and I'm real irritated, and I'm looking for a little sympathy. And there's Bernie, lying on the couch, drinking a beer and chewin'. No, not chewin'. POPPIN'. So I said "If you pop that gum one more time..." And he did. So I took the shotgun off the wall and fired two warning shots... into his head.

    Chicago, 2002.

  • -2

    combinibento

    Anyone else sick of reading, hearing or otherwise knowing about the existence of any debate involving China and Japan? Raise your hands.

  • 11

    Farmboy

    I still think opening Senkaku Disney is the correct diplomatic path.

  • -11

    Ewan Huzarmy

    Those rocks are just a smokescreen to cover all the suffering the inept J-gov has caused it's own people. 'Lets incense the Japanese public and get them chest beating and flag waving'.

  • 1

    House Atreides

    Never fire "warning shots" unless you're willing to take the next step.

    The next step is "Air-Sea Battle." Ishigaki island is 92 nautical miles from the Senkaku islands. Mainland China is 200 nautical miles. The Japanese also have airfields on Shimoji Island and Miyako Island. Japanese airfields are closer and more numerous. Attacks by the Chinese on any of those Okinawan islands would immediately bring the U.S. into the fray. The only prudent course of action would be for the Chinese to back off, revert back to their stance in 1950 and reaffirm that the Senkaku islands are a part of the Yaeyama Islands.

  • 3

    Hansaram

    Just go to the ICJ already and settle the dispute there.

  • 0

    Chinafujianren

    @SamuraiBlue

    Do you really think the warning shot is going to help ?? Do you think China will be afraid of that shots??? Believe that if Japan does, China will respond fiercely, at least firing the "warning shots" too. A lot of Chinese are not satisfied with the communism, and the society. They want a change. Also due to the historical reason, if the Communism want to have a war with Japan, they will get a lot of support, which will help the communism to keep ruling the country. So don't underestimate this issue.

    From Chinese media, it said that abe sent a letter to China which suggests that "let the next generation solve this issue". This is good. But it may be not going to work. The Japan government has "nationalized" the islands, but China get nothing. A better solution may be is : the private takes the islands back from the Japan Government and Japan could still administer the islands , China can send the fishing ship to the sea around the islands, but China cannot send the surveillance ship to that area..

    But I doubt if Japan is going to do it .... And I think that may be the bottom line for China.

    PS: I don't care if there is a war or not. Because I have nothing in China. Nothing to lose... And probably I like something that could ruin the communism.

  • -5

    Hiroicci

    These remarks are unneeded. The gov should have ignored all the bluffing from China.

  • 0

    highball7

    Up until this point, its still all talk from both sides. But when that first shot gets fired from Japan, all bets are off.

    A rational and realistic person will never talk about firing the first shot against a power that's greater than yours. You do not fight a battle you cannot win on your own. What I don't understand is how can anyone depend his national security and possibly the survival of his people on others? If that other country has some blood or ethnic relationship with you that runs deep for centuries, maybe. But we're talking about USA here. They are all about their own national interest. And honestly I doubt anyone of them would go to war against China for Japan's national interest in a few pieces of uninhabitable rocks.

    Also, it takes the US at least 6-8 months to pass a bill through Congress, Senate, and WH in order to prepare its military for war. By the time the core of the US military reaches Japan, the war is already over. Can anyone of you reasonably think that the 7th fleet and Pac-com along with the JDF can withstand an all out attack from China?

    I don't think so and you always have to prepare for the worst. So all these saber rattling talk from Abe seems a bit delusional. It seems like he doesn't understand Japan's own strength but gambles everything on some empty words in a shaky alliance. A solid alliance would be a proclamation by the President of the United States stating that the US will defend these islands for Japan and its people. That these islands's ownership, sovereignty and forever rights belong to Japan and we will do everything we can to help Japan protect them.

    That's not what the US is saying is it? US is telling the FM to calm down and stop talking about firing any shots. So why the poker face Abe?

  • 0

    Chinafujianren

    For the guys who are talking about the ICJ:

    I am not familiar with the ICJ. But I guess if you administer the islands, you will have more chances to win.
    For these islands, we think that they belong to China. Japan stole them when we were weak. Since China is controlled by communism and don't have a good relationship with US, US is not willing to give it back. In fact , US use these islands to cause trouble between China and Japan. (Think about it , Japan is the ally of US, why US only give the administration right to Japan, not the sovereignty..... the answer is : these islands don't belong to Japan. If it belongs to Japan, it make no sense that the US didn't hand over the sovereignty to Japan.)

    US is celever. It knows this issue is going to be a big issue. The tension (not the war) between China and Japan is the best interest of US.

    But who knows if this is not going to lead to a war..

    Nobody can assure of that..

  • 0

    e.nonymous451

    would china risk going to war over one shot down airplane? highly doubt it. especially not when the US navy is hanging out just a few miles away waiting for china's response. i say shoot one down and see just how loud is china's bark.

  • -3

    Chinafujianren

    @ e.nonymous451

    Well, it will be good if Japan could shoot one down. I doubt if the US will help the Japan in that case. I believe the communism will fight back. Because , for them , the best interest is keeping ruling the country. (Do you know, if the communism collapses, a lot of communist will have a tragic life.) If they don't fight back, they are risking in losing the control of the country.

    Take the korean war for example. a lot of Chinese lost lives in that war. But by fighting with US and building up the North Korean, the communism has more chance to survive. ( Now the communism in China give a lot of money , food to the North Korean, they don't want the North Korean to collapse)

    The Diaoyu island could be a second "korean war" for the communism to survive in China.

    Let's wait and see.

  • 6

    SuperLib

    Seems like China is just going to keep sending more and more hardware to the area and expects Japan to just leave. The fact is that China will keep escalating things unless Japan does something.

  • 2

    neobios

    As highball7 mentioned, if buying the disputed island can trigger such huge response, imagine if a surveillance plane being shot by a military plane even tracer shots would simply allow China to have the excuse to further their actions from sanctions to strategic military strikes while the US cannot do much cause that's not the excuse they are looking for which is why Abe's "there's no room for negotiation" need to be taken back and engage talks which is the best option as China did not demand Japan to give away the islands without any conditions where cooperation is possible.

  • 0

    bajhista65

    This tension has been and will be going on until kingdom come unless the UN and other world organization founded to attend to this kind of dispute move their butts and start settling the ownership of the islands between Japan and China. The officials of both countries are like kids fighting for a piece of candy. China threatening and bullying while Japan relying for the big brother to help but to no avail. IMO, the best solution is to erased this islands from the map. No islands, no dispute. har...har...har..

  • -2

    e.nonymous451

    china invades senkaku airspace, japan fires tracer shot, china fires at f-15, japanese f-15 shoots down both chinese f-10s, china invades and takes over senkaku, abe cries to obama that japanese are being invaded, us navy comes in and dominates the chinese force. check mate.

    that's planning out 7 moves in advance.

    now the question is, just how good is the chinese chess player?

  • 2

    FPSRussia

    A fools game.

    You don't point your weapon, you don't engage, you don't missile lock your enemy unless you are prepared to pull the trigger.

    As soon as they fire a single shot it's on. You turn that war machine on there's no shutting it down right away.

    Everything in this region will heat up. It won't just be China. North Korea will hit the northern part of Japan. American forces will be on alert but we won't provoke that situation.

    The people of Japan are going to suffer due to their politicians. If they fire shots they'll never do business with China for decades.

  • 1

    Chinafujianren

    @SuperLib

    The Chinese media keeps on reporting the island issue. I believe it is for the political purpose. The communism is pushed to initiate a political reform. But I doubt it would like to do it...( how many years have passed?? ). So the Diaoyu islands is used by the politician.( Also in Japan).. This is why it could be dangerous.. For the politician , they care about their interest..

    As the ordinary people , we are too small that we are always used by the politician to achieve their political goal. They don't care how many people will die.. They care their interest.. Especially for the communism, they really don't care..

  • 3

    Xeno23

    There are two kinds of brinksmanship games: one is serious "chicken" with two cars hurtling straight towards each other to see who veers off first, and neither party is joking. This is a dangerous game, because three out of four outcomes are bad: neither veers off - crash; one veers off too late - crash/damage; one veers off in time - humiliation & anger; both veer off.

    The other is for show: both parties rattle sabres enough to provide for a mutually "heroic" backing-off, and then get to the business of compromise that other factors wouldn't have otherwise allowed them to engage. National pride might not allow for any other route than an orchestrated escalation of terror, from which cooler heads, at the last moment, can prevail - the plan all along.

    The problem is, which is it? And if it's really the latter and not the former, is everyone really on-board, or could confusion and uncontrolled events push things into a genuine collision? The US and the USSR played these games many times during the Cold War, but they had the luxury of playing with proxies. China and Japan do not have proxies; this significantly raises the stakes.

  • 3

    Tamarama

    Mmmm. The onus is really on China to stop the incursions - especially if they know the Japanese are getting really fed up. Continually flying over the territory is an obvious provocation in a very sensitive period. Having said that, I wish the Japanese hadn't said this. It's not helpful.

  • -3

    Chinafujianren

    ishihara did a great job, I should say.. Right now, he has achieved his goal, that is , he is extremely famous. The history will remember him. The politician like to play games, they are seeking the opportunity in the games.. The ordinary people, like us, are just played with by them. They brainwashed us to believe we should fight for the country, but they can enjoy the champagne and the fame.

    Finally , got a little tired about typing now.

    The truth is : this issue is not going to be a war......

    Bye.

  • 2

    House Atreides

    This is a dangerous game, because three out of four outcomes are bad: neither veers off - crash; one veers off too late - crash/damage; one veers off in time - humiliation & anger; both veer off.

    Chinese pilots tend to be overly aggressive, often to their own detriment. Back in 2001 Wang Wei rammed his jet into a U.S. Navy EP-3E. He was never seen again.

  • -1

    megosaa

    ChinafujianrenJAN. 22, 2013 - 03:20PM JST ....... The Diaoyu island could be a second "korean war" for the communism to survive in China.

    FIxed..

    The Senkaku island could be a second "korean war" for the communism to survive in China.

  • 5

    smithinjapan

    How much stupider could Japan -- the Japan that promised at elections, and only a couple of days ago once again vowed, to better ties with China -- get? Unlike Japan, China would not be afraid to confront Japan with force if they fired even warning shots on their jets or ships. Japan, on the other hand, would probably radio the US first and ask them to come help before even firing. Then they'd blame it all on China and say they had no choice, that it's "very regrettable", etc. etc.

    All this over a few rocks and Ishihara's bombast. Anyway, my guess is this is all talk to stir the pot and get more support from the nutters at home, as well as to justify an increase in defense spending while ignoring the real problems that need money. There's no way they are THAT dumb to fire on the Chinese.

  • -1

    highball7

    Xeno23, I agree with some of your statements.

    Here's the problem with Japan in its current state, its economy is getting weaker, the average Japanese citizen's livelihood since the 70s had never been this bad. Japan's own military compare to China is just incomparable. China can kill Satellites and destroy global communications. Battle over.

    Another issue I have is Japan doesn't have any proxy. In fact, it shouldn't even be mentioned and compared with China. In reality, Japan is a proxy for the USA. And China has proxies such as Pakistan, North Korea, Iran, Myanmar and its support from the Shanghai Cooperation Organization aka SCO. And much of the Asean are dependent on investment and the purchasing power of Chinese consumerism. You have to understand that behind the curtains of the Asean, the political and economic of these nations are mostly supported by local ethnic Chinese. They comprise as the elites that control much of these nations.

    So its an uneven comparison between Japan and China. Japan is a economic super power but not a world power. Japan's power is limited to the economy. It cannot sway foreign policies and strategic gov't decisions. Japan in reality is a proxy of the USA which projects USA's power. Japan's territories are being occupied by US as military bases. That makes Japan a proxy of another.

    On the other hand, If China sneezes, all of the aforementioned countries catch a cold. These countries are the one appeasing China, not the other way around. Most of its neighbor are just thankful China is not stationing its troops and expanding its reaches onto their soil. That makes China having proxy and influence of others. Just ask the North Korean and Pakistani about it.

    Abe is trying to start a fire in China's backyard and leverage its way through. Problem is, these countries had a long standing understanding on where China stand. Nobody is crazy is enough to mess with a wide awake and hungry lion. And all Abe is doing is sending signals to China and showing its hand to China. Not a good move if you can't close.

  • -5

    Hiroicci

    Ignoring China's bluffing and propaganda was the best, just as the DPJ did, so that China would have looked like a mad man shouting in the street. Japan shouldn't have become like a cheeky little kid screaming, "Bring it on!", behind the Big Brother, the US, who must also be embarrassed by all this.

  • 1

    hatsoff

    Maj Gen Peng Guangqian of the Chinese Academy of Military Sciences was quoted as saying

    “Japan’s desire to fire tracer warning shots as a way of frightening the Chinese is nothing but a joke [...]

    Firing tracer bullets is a type of provocation; it’s firing the first shot”.

    The usual double-speak from the Chinese. Is it a joke or is it firing the first shot in an act of war? Pathetic school playground talk.

  • 0

    viking68

    Maybe 15 years back, China brought down a U.S. PC3 Orion in international waters off of China.

    They allowed their pilots to harass the spyplanes, and one idiot clipped the Orion. It plummeted and almost crashed. It did have to make an emergency landing in China, and the pilot and plane were detained for a period of time.

    So, I have no problems with Japan firing tracers at these planes. China would do worse if in the same position.

  • 0

    viking68

    hatsoff, good one. Joke or Provocation, hard to tell now.

    The joke is all China.

  • 3

    stephen424

    so basically

    It's ok for China ships to roam Japan's water. It's ok for China planes to freely entrane Japan's airspace. It's ok for China to openly grab lands from its neighbors.

    WE ARE NOT LIVING IN THE 19TH CENTURY, COLONIALISM AND IMPERIALISM ARE LONG GONE YA KNOW!!!

    "China has proxies such as Pakistan, North Korea, Iran, Myanmar and its support from the Shanghai Cooperation Organization aka SCO. And much of the Asean are dependent on investment and the purchasing power of Chinese consumerism. "

    oh please, do you seriously think any of those countries would actually come to China aids when needed? Pakistan has India to worry, N Korea care more about S Korea, Iran is in no position for any international conflicts, and Myanmar is by no mean going to help China nor Asean will allow it. As for the SCO, they are LOYAL TO RUSSIA, NOT CHINA.

    within Asean, Japan is currently its #1 investor and #2 business partner(go look up on wikipedia for reference). Not to mention the current shifting of investment from China to SEA by Japan, they are more than welcomed. China and Japan can fight for all they want, Asean will give no S**t to either sides.

    If war really broke out, China will be alone. America either participate in full combat or with unlimited supplies of weapons and necessity goods to Japan along with NATO. Russia won't help simply it needs check and balance in the East, if China grew too strong it would be bad for Russia as well in the future.

  • -4

    edojin

    Perhaps this is what China wants. When he was still running the country, President Hu Jintao told China's Central Military Commission in a speech to it to "make extended preparations for warfare." China is busily building & updating its military ... and could be pushing for a provoked incident to unleash something we all don't want to see. Could "warning shots" trigger military action? We might just get to see what this would do ...

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    stpehen424: "If war really broke out, China will be alone."

    You oversimplify. IF war broke out over these few rocks in the sea it would at first be a little skirmish between Japan and China, which China would dominate through sheer force. Japan would demand US assistance, for which the US has already said they are not going to get involved in a bilateral issue. The US NEEDS China, almost more than it needs Japan if not so already -- and the last thing they want is to get involved, because once they do, it's over for all of us. So Japan would stomp its feet and shake its fist, ALONE, while the world powers pushed both nations into reconciling.

    Any worse than that and it would be WWIII, and game over for all. China has nukes, which they would use if push came to shove. They would grab Taiwan and put an end to talks of independence once and for all, and they WOULD be supported by other nations, including Russia and NK. Japan would glow in the dark before they knew what was happening.

  • 2

    Tom DeMicke

    Wait, the United States won't be able to assist in any of this until they mint that 1 trillion dollar coin. Without that they won't even have money to pay their troops or their veterans (that would be I).

  • -1

    Tiger_In_The_Hermitage

    The ICJ, what is it? Some institution to justify the Western stance? We need to recognise that the only thing at play here is money. US makes money selling weapons of mass distruction and as after sales service, they offer protection by bases and drunken sailors. Meanwhile they play both sides, selling bonds to finance their existence to they Chinese.

  • -2

    Crazedinjapan

    We need to recognize china signed a legal document turning those islands a long time ago. Chinese need to pull their heads out of their a$$es and realize that the only result from their bullying is going to be having a very pissed off USA at them aside from the Japanese who are backed by the USA. They(china) won't take it to the ICJ because they don't have a leg to stand on. Their only recourse is nuclear weapons because their conventional methods as advanced as they may be are not enough to stop the USA from taking control of the situation. The world will really see what china is made of after they shoot directly at any Japanese aircraft or vessel. They talk tough but do they walk tough.

  • -2

    smithinjapan

    Tiger in the Hermitage: "The ICJ, what is it? Some institution to justify the Western stance?"

    The ICJ is indeed a bit of a joke, given it's resolutions are non-binding and both countries have to agree. Given that they cannot agree in the first place it's unlikely any decision by the ICJ would be followed. Japan says there is no dispute on the Senkakus, so why would they go there even if China said they wanted to? It creates an element of doubt, and would prove that Japan acknowledges the dispute. Likewise with Dokdo -- Japan suddenly wants to take it to the ICJ you rightfully criticize (I hope you still do in that case!), but SK says there is no dispute and therefore no need.

    "They(china) won't take it to the ICJ because they don't have a leg to stand on."

    I'd say it's more because they feel the same way Japan does -- sovereignty of the island is indisputably theirs.

    "The world will really see what china is made of after they shoot directly at any Japanese aircraft or vessel."

    After being provoked, you mean. Why do you guys always play like this thing is one-sided? Both nations are children in this situation, and Japan especially so. China has at least been willing to bring the talks to the table and said they need to meet halfway. Japan? nope.

    "They talk tough but do they walk tough."

    That's rich, for a guy defending the Japanese side of this. Why is Japan suddenly visiting all the neighbours 'surrounding' China? Why suddenly sucking up to the US from weapons sales and the base issues to signing the Hague Convention on child abduction? They can't even walk but are being nursed by Uncle Sam.

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    edojin: "President Hu Jintao told China's Central Military Commission in a speech to it to "make extended preparations for warfare."

    And Ishihara, when he started this whole carfuffle in the first place, said he would welcome war with China and even pines for it. So what's your point?

  • 7

    House Atreides

    China has at least been willing to bring the talks to the table and said they need to meet halfway.

    China has no valid claim to the Senkaku Islands so there is no reason to meet them at all. What China needs to do is revert back to their stance in 1950 when they stated the Senkaku Islands were a part of the Yaeyama islands.

    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)."

    If the Chinese were in control of the Senkaku islands, they wouldn't be meeting Japan half way. Just look at their stance with regard to the Paracel Islands. The Chinese refuse to discuss the matter with the Vietnamese. China even vetoed the Paracel issue at the U.N. and blocked all efforts to bring up the matter. Seen in this light, Japan's stance is in accord with China's own rules of conduct, ripped right out of China's own playbook on how to settle island disputes.

  • -1

    Hiroicci

    Now the ball is on China's side.

    If it takes military action, it might be embarrassed by the US and Japan.

    If it doesn't, it'll be seen "scared" by many of its own nationalists.

    Besides, if China moves, it'll be a clear message to other Asian countries that have lad disputes with China that they need some strong allies (Japan and the US). If it doesn't, they'll see the whole thing as just bluffing by China.

    Having said that, I have to say that there was the Philippines and China confrontation a few months back, in which both sides retreated a bit.

  • 2

    SamuraiBlue

    IF a military conflict was to occur over Senkaku and the US does not get involved. PRC will probably become more daring and probably go after Taiwan next.

  • -1

    bokuwamo

    This is getting waaay out of control. Hillary Clinton should be replaced with someone that has the knowledge and experience to be in the position she has.

    Everyone should be hoping that this all stops and there can be an answer found to this using discussions between Japan and China.

  • 1

    Cortes Elijah

    Maybe China should stop taunting and trespassing on Japanese land. There is no doubt the U.S would flaten China. The U.S controls the satnav for one example....has amazing technology compared to China that rebuilds cheaper versions of Russian scrap. Personally I do not want a war but if it comes down to it...I know the U.S will win.

  • -3

    bokuwamo

    Cortes Elijah-- ""Personally I do not want a war but if it comes down to it...I know the U.S will win.""

    I m just amazed at this comment. You live in Japan and it does not bother you that, you would most likely die if a war took place? This is not some internet game on an iphone, we're talking about.

    If America gets involved in this using weapons. It will be a sad day for Americans. Hillary should be removed from all this as quickly as possible.

  • 7

    SamuraiBlue

    bokuwamo

    I believe the US is doing the right thing, even if it is a bluff you can't show any sign of weakness especially give the impression towards PRC that the US will not intervene. If PRC even gets a hint of weakness they will invade Senkaku to develop a foothold knowing that there will be no rain of nuclear tipped missile heading toward Beijing.They don't care if couple of hundred lives are lost as long as they can score a point without the fear of MAD. The next they will go after is Taiwan with the usual official statement, "This is an internal affair so other nations should not interfer."

  • 4

    Cortes Elijah

    @Bokuwamo Where did I write that I was not bothered that I would die? No where.

    If America gets involved in this using weapons. It will be a sad day for Americans. Hillary should be removed from all this as quickly as possible.

    So... It would be a sad day for Americans you say? Yes I also did not say it would not be. It would be a sad day for the whole world my friend. I am aware this is not a video game... It clearly states it is real and it is all over the headlines. I was simply stating that if there was a war I am placing my money on the U.S and that China will be making a big mistake. If it goes to war against Japan and the U.S it will get knocked out of the 1st world and will be labeled as bad as North Korea.

    I hope for everyone this ends peacefully.

  • 4

    Shiningfinger

    @SamuraiBlue

    You're dead right. I think Japan is doing the right thing here by standing firm on this issue. You can't show any weakness at this point. The PRC will be looking for any opening to exploit on any issue now and in the future. No one wants to be seen in the international community as the aggressor or the protagonist in any conflict so land/island disputes can be a good way to generate public support at home and an excuse to others abroad. Even if u are really just looking to grab resource rich areas for economic gain... thats all the chinese are looking to do here and eventually in other areas across asia.

    Japan must start preparing for the reality of a armed confrontation either now or later. warning shots today, but tomorrow those shots might be ignored.

  • 3

    José Simón Álvarez-Benavides

    I still cannot understand how two countries like Japan and China are unable to discuss this problem. The two countries are amongst the most powerful economies in the world and the two of them have and are producing people of universal value for the benefit of humanity. And yet they cannot find a diplomatic way to tackle their dispute over this archipelago. All I hear is threat after threat from one to the other. Has either country taken their grievances to the United Nations Assembly? Further more, I seem to recall that the Japanese government bought these islands not long ago from their former Japanese private proprietor, so again, why is China still claiming the Diaoyu as theirs? Both countries are wasting valuable time they could put to better use by looking for a solution to their differences on this tricky issue. Otherwise, there is always the possibility this conflict may escalate to a full blown armed one. By the way, I disagree with some of the commentators in this forum-- and Maj Gen Peng Guangqian-- when they say that the use of any kind of warning shots are a way of provoking whom ever is being warned. Unless the infractor is looking for any excuse to engage in bellicose retaliation that is.

  • 0

    Jay Que

    War with communist China is coming and the current POTUS is fundamentally heading in the wrong direction. Tis our future, coming quickly like a bug about to hit the windshield.

  • 3

    Chris Lowery

    If japan were to fire a warning shot, I don't think China would do anything. But perhapes after the second or third provocation, it may put a few rounds down range. Then I think things would actually calm down. Neither side wants war on the high seas, And Japan with a rightfully so now, pacifist mentality, would then begin dialogue with China, but this time China may come to the table as well, so to speak. Perhaps a little trigger play in open ocean will get everyone back to the table. But for goodness sake do not hurt anyone. If the U.S. has to get involved, we can be sure they will be in no mood for a drawn out battle, the task would be quick, huge, and destructive to the Chinese. For this reason, there really is no threat of real conflict. There is a chance for real diplomacy to take a hold though, and bring this thing to a close, with everyone satisfied. Peace.

  • 3

    JanesBlonde

    CHINA IS STARTING TO EXPERIENCE REAL FINANCIAL TROUBLE. - This is the real reason behind this "Ongoing dispute".

    92% of the Chinese population are still extremely poor by international standards and cost of Chinese labour and doing business in China has increased dramatically over the last 10 years that businesses have not only stopped setting up in China, they are actually relocating OUT OF CHINA to other parts of SE Asia and central and south America.

    This whole Senkaku Island dispute is a convenient side show which the CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY uses to distract their general public from the real issues that are facing them. Corruption, fraud, land theft and UNEMPLOYMENT. Numerous desperate rulers over the years have fanned the flames of NATIONALIST HATRED to distract the general public from the very real issues that face them.

    The SMART thing for Japan to do is to just play out China's endless game of cat and mouse WITHOUT giving China the opportunity or excuse to escalate the issue, because that is EXACTLY what China wants.

    So the real question here is ..... Is Japan smart enough to quietly continue this "game" without losing face or escalating it. Based on the "Lets fire a warning shot" comment, it appears that Japan is not.

  • -1

    OssanAmerica

    Firing a warning shot is on an intruder that does not comply is standard accepted international protocol. A warning shot is not "firing upon". China knows this. China needs to stop this fame of harassment and bullying, not just with Japan but with all the other Asian nations as well. China needs to follow the rule of law and take it's claims to the ICJ. When one side is determined to escalate the issue, concessions and appeasement merely results in further escalations. Like any schoolyard bully, the only thing that will stop a bully is standing up to him and not giving an inch. Japan must be prepared to play China's game and up the ante if that's what it takes to stop their harassment. Japans actions have a significant effect on many other Asian nations as they too are victims of China's harassmen as well as U.S. strategic policy.

  • 3

    Seiharinokaze

    It is rather AP or Asahi that wants to fuel worries that the situation could spin out of control. (Asahi had a similar record before and during WW2.) "Japan is prepared to respond infallibly according to the international standard" is what Onodera said as he should as Defense Minister. But he didn't say in his comment that Japan would use a tracer fire against Chinese fighters. That part is what Asahi officiously expatiated on. And a news reporter from a Hong Kong media inquired of the Defense Ministry about it and found out that it was a false report by Asahi and pointed it out in his blog. AP didn't even bother to check it.

  • 1

    OssanAmerica

    Patrick SmashJan. 22, 2013 - 09:32PM JST The US does not go to war against powerful countries. The US was not capable of beating Vietnam and has all but >lost to the Afghans. China has a population of 1.3 billion, is the world's second biggest economy, bankrolls the USA by >all buying all its debt, and has nuclear missiles that it could land on top of New York.

    You're arguing the wrong argument. Nobody, most of all China wants an all-out nuclear war, a level of war in which China is entirely outclassed and would cease to exist. Population means nothing when 90% of the populace are suffering at the hands of the CCP, the 2nd biggest economy is GNP not GDP where the separation of the haves and have-nots is immense, the holding of US securities means nothing as they would be seized and frozen. China's nuclear missiles aimed at New York mean nothing compared to the U.S. pre-emptive and retaliatory capabilities. The U.S. historically has never let one power take compete region hegemony. And in past cases such nations, be it Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan or Hussein's Iraq have always been authoritarian dictatorships.

    Why on earth would the US get involved in a war with China for idiots like Ishihara and Abe, over some uninhabited >bits of disputed rock off the coast of Taiwan, particularly if the Japanese fire the first shots?

    Again. barking up the wrong tree. The U.S. has it's own strategic Asian policy and China is trying hard to step on it. What rational person actually believes the U.S. will silently allow China to take a part of the Japanese prefecture the houses the largest U.S. military concentration in Asia? As for "idiots" the only idiots I see escalating the issue and trying to start a war is China.

    Ishihara did not have to kick off this round of senkaku, and the US knows that Japan and China are both run by >dangerous extremists. Perhaps the US whiffs another arms race and can see two very wealthy nations to flog its latest >weapons of mass destruction to.

    Ishiara didn't kick off anything. If you actually study the background of the Senkaku dispute, Communist China has been conducting an operation under a government agency (East China Seas Fisheries Research Institute) directing Chinese fishermen to go to the Senkakus at specific times. September 2010 was one of them if the events of that time that ring a bell. As for being run by extremists, the right wing in Japan are a minority which could never fly unhindered in the democratic system. The military are constrained by the constitution. In contrast the CCP controls the one-party dictatorship. The politburo has gone with the nationalism as a solution to the many internal problems China faces. We saw this in post WWI Germany. Adding fuel to the fire is the growing power of the Chinese military, not just in hardware and size, but in it's ability to influence the politburo. It doesn't take a historian to see the dangerous path that China is now talking.

  • 0

    Saketown

    HELL YEA! My Man Shinzo! "Shoot First and Ask Questions Later..."!!! We should send our F-35's & our Drones to help out and we'll call it "Operation: Cowboys & Samurai's" ;)

  • 1

    AkashiAussie

    All that said, I always flick across to the China Daily for a look at the Chinese take on any incident that occurs. Currently, there is no article about Japan threatening China with warning shots...

  • 0

    Sentiments

    Forget old style wars. There are no old style wars anymore. It doesnt matter if China has an enourmous population and Japan or the US has a smaller population. On the contrary it is severly negative to have a big population. The reason is that modern wars are executed from a distans destroying infrastructure and military capablities with missiles and bombs. When the infrastructure is down, who is going to feed and give water to the population, especially in the megacities? The bigger the population the bigger the problem.

  • 0

    cracaphat

    As much as I favor Japan not allowing China to punk them anymore,how about going to the Sun Tzu playbook as in,"The supreme act of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting."

  • 0

    yosun

    Barking dogs don't bite! Abe talked about warning shots, great! pls show everyone real action! China military guy talked about second shot, ok! do it after you see 1st shot! I believe both sides are scared barking dogs and nothing'll happen!!! Or please shut my mouth with real SHOWDOWN!!!!!!

  • 4

    axle14

    Try it on CHIna, Japan's NOT bluffing more. If you think you have all the power to destabilize Japan, go for it and see for yourself what you are going to deal with. It's NOT in numbers , justl ike your commodities - cheap and many, that is going to be the deciding factor here, it;s quality and precision in the highest level of technology that you could ever imagine is what's going to be the winning factor. . PRC knows what exactly they are going to face here if gotten worse, Casualties for sure will be on all sides, but the smaller Japan in histroy alone is top brass. You would need an A-Bomb just to get them to surrender for having a huge number of civilian casualties. Not because they lost.

    THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE EVERYONES CALL, IT'S NOT ONLY JAPAN AND CHINA ARE AT STAKE HERE, IT'S EARTH ITSELF GETTING INTO HARMS WAY AND WORSE FROM SELF-DESTRUCTION. PEOPLE FROM ALL WALKS OF LIFE SHOULD STAND AND SAY NO TO THIS WAR TO COME, IT'S EVERYONE'S RESPONSIBILTY TO KEEP THE EARTH THAT WE LIVE IN TO BE PEACEFUL AND SAFE.

    THIS IS THE TIME TO WALK THE TA.LK. PEACE TO ALL MANKIND!

  • 3

    lachance

    Hey, dog, stop whining. The US is here to stay. Our military far surpasses China's.

    As the Pentagon well knows, a war unfolding in the Asia-Pacific region would most likely be fought at sea and in the air, which may not require the US to act since Japan is highly capable in these two areas -- in fact, far more advanced than China which will take another generation to catch up to Japanese capabilities.

    While Japan may want to deal with Chinese aggression on its own, even if only to demonstrate its dominance in such an arena, the US is committed and determined to act with overwhelming force in the protection of the islands of Japan against any invasion.

  • -5

    Tony Ew

    Japan is given administrative rights over the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands by US. Administrative rights is not the same as sovereign rights and it is only a temporary permission to manage the assets, land in this case. Where is it written that Japan have the right to administer the sea and the air space? Even if it is not clear cut Japan does not have the right to take aggressive action against intrusion by any country, China or others. The correct course of action for Japan to take is to ask the giver of the administrative rights, in this case US and ask what is the right procedure to handle any intrusions which may not even be legally classified as one in the first place. This is because the administrative handover to Japan did not specifically define air space or sea jurisdiction. I hope people don't confuse sovereignty with administrative rights. There will then be no need to talk about firing tracer bullets if the US decides to deal directly with China on this matter since US is the giver of this administrative rights and thus hold ultimate responsibility to clarify the situation.

  • -2

    OssanAmerica

    Tony Ew, there's nothing more for the U.S. to clarify. We have said who administers the islands and we have said what we will do if anyone tries to unilaterally change it. That makes harping on sovereignty meaningless from the Chinese perspective.

  • -2

    Tony Ew

    @e.nonymous451 would china risk going to war over one shot down airplane? highly doubt it. especially not when the US navy is hanging out just a few miles away waiting for china's response. i say shoot one down and see just how loud is china's bark.

    We should be more worried about the Rogue PLA military leaders than Mr Xi. Command and control in China is not that strong. PRECISELY because of US threat of Air Sea Battle with stealthy F22 Raptors a dozen in Okinawa and superior submarines to launch ICBM's deep into China military installations, this WILL cause some rogue PLA leaders to hit the panic button and use ASAT to shoot US spy/military satellites first. If China Yaogan spy satellites see F22 Raptors and even worse F35 with nuke capable B61 tactical weapons leave the Okinawa air fields en mass what would China military leaders think? THEY WILL THINK AN ATTACK IS IMMINENT AND THEY WILL SHOOT FIRST! This is how WWIII nuclear armageddon could happen and military planners must be aware of the dangers of Rogue PLA leaders forcing Mr Xi to give them the launch code (military men knows best danger calculus) just like US is afraid nof madman N Korean nuke strategy. It is not who can win, it is serious miscalculation and panic that will turn the whole world into one big Fukushima/Chernobryl!

  • 2

    lachance

    HERE IS CHINA RUNNING SCARED OF AMERICAN/JAPANESE STRATEGY TO ENCIRCLE CHINA AND WEAKEN THEIR ECONOMY:

    Shinzo Abe's election has pushed the Diaoyu Islands crisis into the edge of all-out confrontation between China and Japan.

    While Japan's high-profile move on the Diaoyu Islands is a direct confrontation against its neighbor, its actions in Myanmar are a secret detour against China.

    As the Diaoyu Islands dispute gripped the attention of China and the whole world, Japan's newly appointed Finance Minister Taro Aso visited Myanmar to write off its debt of 500 billion yen ($5.58 billion), followed by major financial groups covertly pushing into Myanmar's economic field.

    In fields where China is also involved, Japanese financial groups, with their advanced technology, strong capital and national support, are in a race with Chinese enterprises.

    They do not aim for profits at the moment, and some would rather suffer a loss.

    This is not a healthy competition, but a vicious economic war which aims to drive out Chinese companies, control Myanmar's economy, and finally, cut off China's energy passageway to the Indian Ocean.

    Soon after the US focused on hedging against China in Myanmar, Japan immediately started annihilating Chinese enterprises under the umbrella of the US' strategy.

    China has three grand strategic projects in Myanmar - the Myitsone hydropower project, which has been forced into a total shutdown, the Monywa-Latpadantaung copper mine, where several public protests have taken place, and finally, the construction of an oil and gas pipeline between China and Myanmar, where recent signs have become increasingly disturbing.

    Myanmar joins sea and land in the US' C-shaped encirclement of China, which includes the Pacific Ocean, the Indian Ocean, East Asia and South Asia.

    After the US decided on an eastward strategic shift centered on encircling China, an East Asian alliance, with Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam as the axis, promptly came into being and endangered vast areas in the East China Sea and the South China Sea.

    It is a fatal threat to China, which relies heavily on the sea for its trade and energy. Under such circumstances, Myanmar's vital strategic position is evident, which is why the US and Japan have concentrated on the country.

    Due to the strong US-Japan alliance, it is very difficult for China to achieve a decisive breakthrough in the East China Sea and the South China Sea issues, while a westward focus may be the best solution.

    However, Myanmar, one of the four westward passages, was seized initially by the US and Japan, which have launched a strategic offensive in what seems like a showdown posture.

    Through the powerful intervention of the US and Japan, great changes have taken place in Myanmar's political situation, and Myanmese military forces' large-scale attack on the Kachin Independence Army is only one event that shows this.

    Thus, Myanmar has become the arena where China, the US and Japan play out a strategic game. We hope China can develop a proper strategy to deal with the situation in the new century.

    After the US' public announcement of its eastward strategic shift, some Chinese have given up their fantasies about the US.

    A number of Chinese have another fantasy of China uniting with Japan to isolate the US, as Japan's national strategy aims to keep abreast with China and the US in its politics.

    But the US' usefulness is much greater than China's, and will be for quite some time. Japan will align with the US strategic direction in this period, rather than move closer to China.

    I suggest strategy planning departments deploy unified strategic actions with regards to Myanmar and the Diaoyu Islands from the perspective of the overall Sino-Japanese duel.

  • 0

    Tony Ew

    @OssanAmerica Tony Ew, there's nothing more for the U.S. to clarify. We have said who administers the islands and we have said what we will do if anyone tries to unilaterally change it. That makes harping on sovereignty meaningless from the Chinese perspective

    Really! You are putting words into US mouth. US keeps repeating the 'take no position' on sovereignty. Being a friend of Japan, US is trying to give you 'face' by not outright saying the islands are not Japan's sovereignty. This can only be meant to say the islands does NOT belong to Japan, otherwise why dance around with Administer? Last time I check the dictionary these two words have very different meaning. Sovereign is permanent ownership and all encompassing, land, sea, air space. Administer? Where did US say it includes air and sea? And where did US ever say it is permanent? And where did US give you the ground rules to 'administer' with military assets and tracer bullets?I think we should not deceive people with words gymnastics/jujitsu. Just assign the correct meaning to the word 'administer' and act accordingly. '

    You say " we have said what we will do if anyone tries to unilaterally change it. " Who is WE? You invent WE to embed US policy into Japan policy? Did Hillary ever say that? Did Clinton allow you to transform Administer into Sovereign? It is precisely your attempt to misrepresent the meaning of the words that is sowing the seed for so much problem for everybody.

    Since Japan is given adminstrative rights and not sovereign rights, Japan should consult and take orders from US to handle this situation. Did US give Japan the permission to use military planes and also to shoot tracer bullets? I don't see US Coast Guards acting the way Japan do even in US own territorial sovereign water. No military planes, no navy ships to chase off intruders. Why is Japan so aggressive?

  • 2

    lachance

    While China continues on its path of growth and seeming political confidence, a number of problems lie beneath the surface of its apparent success. A sense of political uncertainty -- as well as a fear of sociopolitical instability -- is on the rise in China.

    Many in the country worry about environmental degradation, health hazards, and all manner of public safety problems, which were created by an overheated economy. These pitfalls could trigger any number of major crises: slowed economic growth which would result in widespread social unrest, vicious political infighting among the elite, rampant official corruption, and heightened Chinese nationalism in the wake of territorial disputes.

    In this rapidly modernizing but still oligarchic one-party state, it is not hard to see how such a crisis could take the form of a Mao-styled revolution, especially if a territorial war with Japan goes badly for China. China would be ripe for revolution with a free Tibet soon appearing, a free Inner Mongolia soon joining Outer Mongolia, a free Xinjian soon aligning with Muslim nations in Central Asia.

    Shortly afterwards, PLA generals whose army, navy and airforce have been decimated will see themselves simply as warlords trying to ensure their own little fiefdoms on the coast in Han China, further dismantling the empire, leaving six new countries where once there was a Red China. And then, according to our computer models of the Senkaku situation, we will have peace in the world and another century of American hegemony. Long live the current World Order...without the PRC.

  • 1

    Eric Schneider

    China has no business unilaterally coming up with the "nine-dashed-line" and then trying to bully the neighboring countries into accepting it. The idea of territorial waters and how to settle disputes is well understood and has been practiced for years. But China wants to force other countries to kow tow to their will. Japan has to stand up against China or all the neighboring countries will be run over in turn. The US understands this as well and will back Japan.

    China is behaving a lot like Japan did back in the beginning of the 1900s. It's amazing that they could be so stupid. What have they got to gain from this? Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. How could China's leaders be so inept?

  • 1

    joserock

    Though there have been no outright clashes, the increased sea and air operations have fueled worries that the situation could spin out of control.

  • 0

    Tony Ew

    @Ossan Firing a warning shot is on an intruder that does not comply is standard accepted international protocol. A warning shot is not "firing upon".

    Before you call China an intruder you have to first clarify your ownership position on Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands. Japan is only given right to adminster by US. Shouldn't Japan seek permission from US first on how to proceed when a so called 'intruder' come calling? Remember US never give sovereignty to Japan otherwise Hillary will have explicitly say so. America is just being polite to Japan and helping herself to say 'take no position' on sovereignty otherwise why would a friend of Japan not say so clearly? Since US is your master, being the giver of the administrative rights, you should consult US how to proceed. This is like a manager having a tough problem and need to ask the owner/chairman how to proceed. What are the ground rules US have in place when a so called 'intruder' come calling? Use water cannon? Fire tracer bullets? Where is the Rules Of Engagement manual US give to Japan so she can act properly instead of taking matter into her own hands? However much you want to defend Japan you must play by the rules of engagement meaning go back to your master US and seek clarity on this matter. You do not have sovereignty and thus cannot do what you like. In a corporate world such a misbehaving manager/administrator will be fired by the owner/chairman.

  • 0

    YuriOtani

    These islands belong to Japan and are thus Japanese territory. China and Russia shot down a civilian airliners in the past. This is a warning to the Peoples Republic of China about sending in armed military planes into Japanese airspace. Japan does not need the permission of the Americans to defend herself from the Chinese.

  • 0

    flowers

    I’m amazed to see some posters kept mentioning that China should take its claims to the ICJ. Here is a part of an article about the ICJ , “The fact is, NATO wields an enormous power over the selection of the ICJ. There is substantial evidence that the ICJ is pro-America. As Korea Times coins it, there's a Japanese judge in the ICJ and Japan's being a bully. The fact that it Challenges Korea to the ICJ regarding Dokdo and refuses to do so with Russia and China shows that Japan is obviously afraid that Russia and China wield more international power. And Russia and China is obviously afraid that the ICJ leans towards USA.” Has Japan ever issued a statement challenging China to take it to the ICJ? I’ve never seen one. This is an analysis of the fairness of the ICJ http://www.iacenter.org/warcrime/21_just.htm.

  • -1

    sfjp330

    Japan should not feel that it has U.S. umbrella protection on the Senkaku Islands dispute. China knows very well its limitations in pushing the U.S. towards a military response. China knows that there is a limit to what it can do to achieve its geostrategic goals in the region. The U.S will back Japan if there is a serious military attack on the Senkaku Islands by China. But China will be ever so careful as to not let this happen. Skirmishes are one thing, but China will be careful to draw a line so as not to force the issue. China, will keep the conflict at a level below hostilities. If they break out by miscalculation and accident, it will escalate and de-escalation is very, very hard to do without giving the appearance of weak commitment, which neither side ever wants to give.

    The issue here is how its huge risks and ramifications at any level serve even the short term, much less the long term serve interests of U.S. that a needs partership relationship with China. Most of the post-war establishment in Japan wants to deny and disbelieve. But it is undeniable. The fact that the existing strategic defense order of alliances and treaties in Asia do not reflect the new U.S.-China relationship.

  • -3

    Tony Ew

    @lachance

    I see you keep on highlighting US Japan superiority over China's military. Assuming the AirSea Battle actually occurs, what would happen if China military leaders panic and force Mr Xi to hand over the launch code to start shooting ASAT and command micro satellites to destroy US eyes in the sky? At that point all submarines and F22 and F35 will be useless. The art of war calls for hitting the enemy first if the SHADOW is seen. No need to wait to actually see the real enemy, not enough time. The war will be over in a couple of hours, so I don't see any reason why the Chinese military leaders want to waste time consulting with Mr Xi. In fact they may force him at gun point to launch if they think the survival of China is at stake. Military men knows better! Still think US Japan superiority matter anymore when the eyes in the sky are plucked out? At that point US/Japan may declare this is an act of war, but who cares? Perhaps half of US satellites are plucked out, China will be able to deal with a vastly degraded US arsenal without navigation signals. I bet China ICBMs will also be on the way to US and Japan and Guam so this is going to be fun isn't it? Hiroshima, Nagasaki not enough?

    China Yaogang satellites are monitoring Okinawa air bases 24/7 365 days. Any sign of mass disappearance of F22 or F35 in the future will be interpreted as tactical nukes on F35 and conventional bombs on F22 heading towards China plus submarines ICBMs that are harder to detect.

    By taking out US satellites first, yes, China ASAT can hit geostationary orbit military satellites, all US submarines will be useless in warfare. No GPS no nothing. So what is the use of your superior technology and overwhelming power?

    Still want to mess around with a potentially mad Chinaman, like N Korea?

  • 0

    aidenrock

    I think It shows that the Japanese and the Chinese people wanted sustained peace between two countries they need to let their leaders know of their desire. I am sure it only take both countries to take the first step, without third country involved, of extending a friendly hand and to sit down and resolve the dispute with mutual respect.

  • 0

    sfjp330

    Tony Ew Jan. 23, 2013 - 06:35AM JST The art of war calls for hitting the enemy first if the SHADOW is seen. No need to wait to actually see the real enemy, not enough time. The war will be over in a couple of hours, so I don't see any reason why the Chinese military leaders want to waste time consulting with Mr Xi. In fact they may force him at gun point to launch if they think the survival of China is at stake. Military men knows better! Still think US Japan superiority matter anymore when the eyes in the sky are plucked out?

    Would it profit China or any world power to have a war with the U.S.? The results would be catastrophic and China know it. Is there another miltary including China's that can stand toe to toe and then subdue U.S. both miltarily and technologically for a sustained period of time? It might hold its own for a while and that would be that unless Chinese proceeded to guerilla warfare like the taliban.

  • -1

    volland

    Get real guys.... the simple fact is, that nothing is better against an economic crisis, than a war.

    Lapan is a democracy, the japanese people have decided who they want to rule over them, and they knew what the liberal Party is.

    Where is your problem?

  • 0

    highball7

    I actually think the Chinese are quite restrained compare to history. Everything that happens in the conflict zone is still civilian ships and planes. Non of them are controlled by the PLA. Which means that the issue at hand had to escalated to the level of national security in China.

    I thought that sending military fighters to intercept surveillance planes was a mistaken. And that sent a message to the PLA brass that Japan is willing to kick it up a notch. If you understand how the Chinese culture, especially to the PLA, they don't take hardballs. Which means that if the civilian side can't hold it that much longer, it would be a swift and potentially deadly response by the PLA. I just googled who's in charge of the PLA, all of them are airforce and navy guys instead of the traditional army corps. That tells you what the top leaders in China are preparing for future.

    I honest can't see the Chinese backing down from this. And you can't blame them because the rise of the right in Japan is seen as a threat to all of its neighbors. Many of you feels that 70 years was a lifetime ago but that's not how the Chinese think. They think in terms of decades and centuries. Most of their plans and build-ups for preparing for decades and centuries. Its evident that they function in their own time and that's why people outside of China often have trouble gauging its development, growth, and security.

    It takes two to tango. China is willing to get back to some unofficial accord that it set with Japan years ago. Japan is unwilling to acknowledge that there's even a dispute going on. This isn't just with China. Taiwan, the enemy of China also has this same dispute with Japan. So it is clear that Japan is the one that need to lower its stance. It can stipulate many terms within the accord to guarantee Japan's security but if it cannot even acknowledge that there is a dispute, nothing can move forward.

  • -3

    Tony Ew

    @sfjp330

    Would it profit China or any world power to have a war with the U.S.? The results would be catastrophic and China know it. Is there another miltary including China's that can stand toe to toe and then subdue U.S. both miltarily and technologically for a sustained period of time? It might hold its own for a while and that would be that unless Chinese proceeded to guerilla warfare like the taliban.

    I just thought of MAD. Typically this means Mutual Assured Destruction, but wait! It could also mean MAD Chinamen! When a person is MAD he is unstable and make irrational decisions. If you have a few drinks yourself you can understand what I mean. Some days they might just have a drink too much and act irrationally! Or he have a bad day with his wife to make him very irritable. After the Soviet breakup I think you have Boris Yeltsin as the Russian leader. He drank quite a bit. Who knows we may have such alcohol impaired military leaders maybe just back from a social function and half drunk he got news of stealth fighters, ICBM's shadows heading towards China. Do you think he will act rationally at that moment? That is my focus here. You don't know in times of extreme stress all logic is thrown out the window! The problem with modern warfare is it is like a video game. Opponents launches missiles at each other just like drones hitting terrorists with push button control in the war room in the Pentagon. There is no feeling of pain, no sense of killing other humans. Worse it is very hard to visualize millions dead, burnt. This can only be emotionally felt by actual visual smell old fashion fighting but in a push button war there is no emotion attach to it and because of this the risk of hitting the Go Button is very very high in the hands of a MAD illogical Chinaman! He don't care about losing. He only care about survival, that survival instinct overrides every other emotions logic he is trained to do. War is bad. I seriously want people to know US should NEVER NEVER NEVER put F35 with B61 tactical nuke weapons in Okinawa. This is like USSR putting nukes in Cuba and US went berserk. I think F22 OK, but F35 nuke capable is the red line US MUST NOT CROSS!

  • 0

    sfjp330

    highball7 Jan. 23, 2013 - 07:19AM JST It takes two to tango. China is willing to get back to some unofficial accord that it set with Japan years ago. Japan is unwilling to acknowledge that there's even a dispute going on. This isn't just with China. Taiwan, the enemy of China also has this same dispute with Japan. So it is clear that Japan is the one that need to lower its stance. It can stipulate many terms within the accord to guarantee Japan's security but if it cannot even acknowledge that there is a dispute, nothing can move forward.

    It's not just Japan. Japan has consulted with various countries like the Philippines, Vietnam, and India and they’re all finding out that they’re all on the receiving end of a Chinese strategy which aims at pushing China’s maritime outwards. That has spurred these countries towards a more strategic cooperation. The assertiveness of China has created defense alliances for more active utilization of Japan’s diplomatic and defense capability in establishing cooperative relationships with other countries.

  • 0

    sfjp330

    Take a look at world history some time. Every country has had its moments. Nobody's completely innocent. On our shrinking world and given the increasing interconnectedness and economic dependence among countries, it is foolish to deliberately want to start a war. China is an important cultural and economic partner. Some in U.S., Japan and China may or may not like it. Nevertheless this is a fact. Improved relationships is always welcomed.

  • -2

    Tony Ew

    @aidenrock

    I think It shows that the Japanese and the Chinese people wanted sustained peace between two countries they need to let their leaders know of their desire. I am sure it only take both countries to take the first step, without third country involved, of extending a friendly hand and to sit down and resolve the dispute with mutual respect.

    I think a practical solution is as follows: First japantoday or any Japanese newspaper should purposely not report about Chinese surveillance ships coming to the islands. Don't make the Japanese citizens upset at the 'infringements' Just self censor to cool the temperature. I don't think China will ever stop patrolling, perhaps with less frequency in order to please domestic politics.

    Next China should agree not to make air patrol into the islands. Japan is upset as it cost her money to send up fighter jets to chase the plane away. So there is a financial angle to this Japanese 'tracer bullet' threat as well.

    PM Abe letter to China should include saying he is not going to visit Yasukuni Shrine this year to calm everbody. This promise can be used as a bargaining chip to reduce Chinese frequency of marine intrusion into the seas around the islands.

    China and Japan should restart joint oil/gas exploration stalled for so long by previous Japanese government who may have mistaken China as being too scared to take on Japan.

    Now that Abe have 'gone through the motion' to keep his promise to his people, he should not continue acting tough. Time to be practical and solve the Asian problems by Asians themselves. Economic competition no problem, just don't let US get in the way of mutual prosperity for everybody there! People should wake up and realise US is the biggest source of tension in Asia. A bilateral negotations among neighbors in disputes without US shadows will see China more willing to bend without being seen as being pushed to settle by US meddling.

  • -3

    Tony Ew

    @YuriOtaniJan. 23, 2013 - 05:50AM JST

    These islands belong to Japan and are thus Japanese territory. China and Russia shot down a civilian airliners in the past. This is a warning to the Peoples Republic of China about sending in armed military planes into Japanese airspace. Japan does not need the permission of the Americans to defend herself from the Chinese.

    First of all you need to be very sure the world community recognizes the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands as belonging to Japan and not China before you can actually enforce sovereignty. Your foreign minister went to Europe late last year. Did he get any ringing endorsement from the Europeans? Since they don't it is fair to say the sovereignty of the islands is in dispute and is not Japan automatically even though you administer since the US handover in 1971.

    Will Japan agree with China to take the dispute to the ICJ? Here is an interesting observation if I am an ICJ judge: The judge will say Hmm, US being the giver of administrative rights to Japan never outright say the islands belongs to Japan sovereign. US even though a friend of Japan purposely say as close as possible to help Japan by saying 'take no position on sovereign' To declare so as sovereign is a lie because US does not have legal ground to do so.

    Now this have dragged on for over forty one years already under the 'administer' label. Nope, I don't think US being the most knowledgeable source of this mess with the brightest legal minds in Yale, Harvard, Princeton, Columbia universities, nobody can ever make a case that the sovereignty of the islands belongs to Japan.

    Therefore I as an ICJ judge have to conclude that Japan does NOT have sovereignty to the islands. Hope it make sense to you.

  • 1

    sfjp330

    Tony Ew Jan. 23, 2013 - 07:54AM JST A bilateral negotations among neighbors in disputes without US shadows will see China more willing to bend without being seen as being pushed to settle by US meddling.

    Are you kidding? There is no bilateral negotiations with China. Why don't you tell me about Sansha? China's newest city Sansha is a remote island in the South China Sea barely large enough to host a single airstrip. It has a post office, bank, supermarket and a hospital, but little else. Welcome to Sansha, China's expanding to world's most disputed waters, portions of which are also claimed by Vietnam, the Philippines and other neighbors. The Philippines does not recognize the city or its jurisdiction, and Vietnam said China's actions violated international law. China just stole it.

  • -2

    praack

    so if China gets away with flying surveillance and fighters there, what is the next step? oh Japan- you should not get upset that we have our military aircraft flying over Okinawa, it's within our rights and you need to know your limitations.

  • -1

    YuriOtani

    China would lose any atomic exchange and badly. So there is some fighter action over the South China Sea. They could look at it as combat testing their Russian spec equipment. Again even if they lose it is no reason to commit suicide.

    praack, Chinese fighters do not have the Range to operate over Okinawa.

  • 2

    sfjp330

    Tony Ew Jan. 23, 2013 - 08:20AM JST Will Japan agree with China to take the dispute to the ICJ?

    Doesn't matter. If China loses, what makes you think that China will follow the ruling set by the ICJ? They won't.

  • 4

    SuperLib

    smithinjapan: After being provoked, you mean. Why do you guys always play like this thing is one-sided? Both nations are children in this situation, and Japan especially so.

    China sent ships, then more ships, then planes, and now fighters. It has nothing to do with provocation on Japan's side. Nothing Japan says warrants an obvious trend to send more hardware to the area by China. China is in the process of trying to take the islands over and they're simply progressing to the next step.

  • -1

    Tony Ew

    @sfjp330

    Are you kidding? There is no bilateral negotiations with China. Why don't you tell me about Sansha? China's newest city Sansha is a remote island in the South China Sea barely large enough to host a single airstrip. It has a post office, bank, supermarket and a hospital, but little else. Welcome to Sansha, China's expanding to world's most disputed waters, portions of which are also claimed by Vietnam, the Philippines and other neighbors. The Philippines does not recognize the city or its jurisdiction, and Vietnam said China's actions violated international law. China just stole it

    The reason China got fed up and build Sansha is because Vietnam start drilling off the Gulf of Tonkin in the disputed areas first. This is where the rubber meets the road. For China it means stealing until the disputes are settled. So what is China suppose to do? Vietnam passes laws claiming the islands belongs to her. China say never mind! We will just create a township there to exert sovereignty. See what I mean? If you don't negotiate seriously with a big guy and you arrogantly poke her in the eyes by drilling for oil first and worse, you invite Russians, Indians, US oil companies to try to entangle everybody up you are actually creating a very toxic situation.

    Truth be said all parties in the South China Seas disputes have valid claims to those islands. Trouble is nobody really plant flags there all those years when they were poor and don't have manpower to man the islands so with fishermen, junkboats from China, Vietnam going there why is it China have no claim there? It does not matter how legally right you are and keep asking why China dare not go to ICJ now to settle. Fact is last time I check ICJ is stacked against China probably 60/40 due to US influence. So in the end, everything ends up with US as the big elephant in the room that causes China to do things her way without being seen as being pushed or bullied by US

    You can see the other side of the mirror in US politics. China always elephant in the room especially in this last presidential election. China is everywhere in US backyard and US is everywhere in China's backyard!

    If the smaller countries lke Vietnam and Philippines just accept reality that big country China is more likely to get 51 % and the smaller guys 49% just accept the reality and swallow it instead of hoping for US to get in the act as Hillary did to disturb the peace in S E Asia. You must know the pecking order. Small countries should behave with less clout than big countries. It is a fact of life, just accept it and hope for the generosity of the big guy! Just move on, these are very small pieces of islands and EEZ and not worth that much squabbling. I think a lot of colonial mentality is influencing Vietnamese and Philippines leaders in how they deal with China. You guys have a serious psychological scar for years of being abused by your colonial French, US, Spanish masters and you are way way over sensitive to whatever perceived injustice China do to you. Look, China had not being an invader across the oceans and yet I see many readers potraying China as dangerous trying to invade and take over the world. See how much nonsense against China to confuse people?

  • -2

    Tony Ew

    @sfjp330

    Tony Ew Jan. 23, 2013 - 08:20AM JST Will Japan agree with China to take the dispute to the ICJ? Doesn't matter. If China loses, what makes you think that China will follow the ruling set by the ICJ? They won't.

    Can't believe you think China will ignore the ICJ if she lose. This is not a childish matter and a country's reputation is at stake! A loser must accept the fact and express disappointment but move on and deal with reality. To ignore the ICJ findings after agreeing to the judgement however it turn out will put a country in a very bad spotlight and look like a pariah nation. No, China have too much self respect to ignore any negative outcome. But of course the outcome must be very clean, no grey areas that give the loser an opportunity to reinterprete and drag it on and on. So the ICJ have a big responsibility to issue a very clear ruling.

    By the way China WILL win the ICJ if presented to it. Here is why Japan is nervous and do not want ICJ ruling. First you see China have already establish prima facie evidence over the last few months that Japan have no jurisdiction of the sovereign kind. Why? Because Japan fail to enforce the 200 miles EEZ zone that is part of sovereignty. If I am a judge in ICJ I will use this fact as a strike against Japan as not a genuine holder of sovereignty.

    Second: this is interesting: The inherent value of sovereignty is not given to Japan by US in the 41 years since the Okinawa Reversion Treaty in 1971 As a judge I will question WHY Japan if she actually have sovereignty cannot EXERT ALL characteristics of sovereignty . Specifically this means not shooing away Taiwanese fishing boats coming to fish around the islands, and also Chinese fishing boats on and off there. Never mind the 12 miles limit. The Constant Pattern of penetration of the 200 miles EEZ is evidence that Japan's claim of sovereignty does not meet the strict criteria of sovereignty namely protecting the full 200 miles EEZ around the land mass.

    Third: the recent trips last Nov/Dec I think by Japan Foreign Minister to Europe does not get any recognition of Japan sovereignty over the disputed islands. As an ICJ judge, I will factor this in to determine since nobody acknowledge Japan sovereign claim the Japanese claim indeed is suspect. For a country sovereign claim to be valid the other countries around the world must acknowledge it. So far zero, nobody acknowledge Japan's position. In other words this looks to the judge like a self serving interpretation of sovereignty to suit one country's own selfish interest and thus this is not in compliance with international law. This is no different than Jerusalem where Israel say belong to her but nobody in the international community agree. Japan thus based on this lack of international acknowledgement of sovereignty should just accept her rights over the islands as administrative and not sovereign with all the attendant benefits including right to defend with military assets which is not a proper thing for an administrator to do without first consulting and getting a clear permission from US to do so since US is the giver of the administrative rights. In other words US should dictate how Japan should conduct the border protection, not Japan on her own free will.

    So you see Japan will clearly lose. The Treaty of Shimoseki will not hold water as it is superceded by whatever treaties after it and especially by US confering ONLY administrative rights to the islands to Japan, no more, no less, just that.

    This is precisely the reason Japan is fearful of ICJ and dare not co join China to bring the case to the court. If I am China I will make big publicity about it and ask the world why Japan fear to join with her for ICJ arbitration. It is interesting to note Japan may have a case with Dokdo Islands vs S Korea but here S Korea is fearful of loss and refuse to have a ICJ hearing.

  • 0

    dragon1971

    Chinese fighters do not have the Range to operate over Okinawa

    Dear, actually you made a mistake, J10,J11 even J7 which is out of date , will retire soon from military service , are able to reach Diao yu island.

    But nevertheless, war (even in small scale) really not good for both sides. hopefully , Japense and chinese leaders are smart enough to keep away from any war.

    china is on the course to modernlization, unsafe surrouding not good for progress in this direction. Japan is in desperate struggle for ecnomic rebounding. war will stop or slow down this progress. A full scale war? Japan is the only nation on earth suffered from Nuke, to be nuked the second time will take Japan to Anthropolithic age

  • 2

    highball7

    sfjp330,

    There is no doubt China is assertive over these islands or the control of South China Sea. If given the opportunity, any nation in its place will be assertive. Its just the nature of being a regional power.

    The so-called defensive alliance that you speak of is hearsay at best. The only notion that is evident is Japan donating supplies and military equipment that are outdated by its own term to countries that are irrelevant. Having alliance with the Philippines, which is really the only one that is getting with Japan is more of a liability than gain. Just watch that corrupted Filipino gov't try to milk every single good will and favor out of the Japanese gov't. It tried the same with Korea and China when just a few years ago.

    In reality, the only power that these Asean countries seek is USA. Not because they want to but because its free of cost. But US doesn't have the money and capability to exert or stretch any further than they can. And I don't see them getting any better in the foreseeable future. So the defense alliance that Japan or posters like you seek are merely a fantasy. It doesn't exist. Obviously Japanese would naturally support the notion of a defensive alliance in Asia. That's a one-sided wish that will never get reciprocated.

    There is a thing called practicality and reality. Truth of the matter is Bigger guns and Bigger bank rule. The foremost matter that Japan need to resolve is not being petty about something so insignificant as these islands but how to stop itself from sinking. The aura of the Japanese innovation and technology these days don't mean much anymore. You have the Koreans stepping up and the US tech firms leading the way and the cheap Chinese products flooding the market. The place for Japanese influence is almost non-existent. Take the car market for ex. You know the US gov't and car markers are pounding sand on Toyota. They will find every excuse to take it down. The Chinese don't care much about you either. That's 2 of the world's biggest market that shows animosity towards you. And the idea of Japanese products being trouble-free is also a fantasy these days due to all sorts of recalls and scandals.

    I've said it before and I will say it again, Japan need to stop worrying about the non-issues instead of focusing on what brought you here. You are spending way too much energies on these non-senses and wasting away opportunities. Just imagine if you are on China's good side. Look at South Korea and Taiwan. You could've been them and rake in tremendous amount of profits and make China co-dependent of you. That opportunity had come and gone.

  • 4

    Redcliff

    Sound like many of the readers here are warmongers. The way you guys carried on one wonders whether you are in for the action or you fancy yourself as military strategic planners.

    Both countries are currently under way to reduce the possibility of a confrontation. It would be in the interest of all of us here that the situation is not going to deteriorate further and hopefully US should stop making further inflammatory comments to aggravate the situation.

    I am one Asian who is looking for a peaceful solution for my next generation and I am sure many of you in this forum are in the same boat. If there is a major catastrophic war none of our countries' citizens will live to enjoy the resources below them. The benefits will pass to other country's hand

  • 0

    highball7

    Superlib,

    Your information is wrong. China did not send fighters to the proximity of the islands. They sent fighters to escort their own surveillance plane in a completely different region over international waters.

    Also these ships and planes are civilian in nature. Not military. So they had not escalated in value but only in number. If you look at what Japan did, Japan sent multiple F-15 fighters. That's a military action. That's an escalation in not only Japan's own national security but regional security. Its a dumb move. You don't want that type of attention.

    Also to posters who might not have a clear understanding on what type of military China currently possess. Well, its tough because the PLA hides them pretty well. But from the latest NSA reports, China has over 700 modern fighters including the following: J10, J11 or Su27, Su30mkk, J7FH, J15 (about 24 of them), and several prototypes of J16, J20 and J31. They also have several hundreds of modern UAV as well as thousands of J6 and J7 fighters that were modified to be UAV. Totaling upwards to 3-4000 fighters with modern warfare capabilities. That is about 40% of what USA has, twice of what Russia has and three times of what Japan has in both quality and quantity.

    And that's just the frontline fighters. We haven't talk about the weaponry that sets China and Japan apart- ballistic missile capabilities and spatial assault platforms.

    All these talks about warfare between Japan and China is really hogwash. Considering the totality of the circumstances, Its Japan against China, not Japan and USA against China. Those two notions are completely different. One can be sure, the other depends on a completely different set of criteria before it can happen, meaning its shaky at best. I honestly don't know why some of you or the Japanese gov't speak of it as a sure bet. Its not. And not realizing it is very dangerous and highly irresponsible.

  • 1

    neobios

    This is cold war for sake and it's mostly about economic power rather than conventional warfare which is why Japan is desperate as it's a fact its economy isn't strong enough to compete with China in the long term.

    The longer it goes, the wider the gap between China and Japan. China's economy has been growing while Japan is struggling, China's one child policy can be mingled to meet its population growth while Japan still can't solve its aging population and low birthrates. Japan's debt, guess you guys heard enough. If we want to talk about who needs who, these few months after the incident has given us the hints.

    I'm afraid to say China has the upper hand and Abenomics has not ensured a decent growth, heck might even cause more problems and how does the cold war between US and Soviet Union ends? I guess you know the answer.

  • 0

    Sentiments

    Interesting comments on the ideals of the diplomatic genre. I wonder if China has any interest at all to participate in such an effort. It may contradict the already made plans for a regional defense fitting a superpower. On the other hand maybe Japans stubborn attitude has already convinced them that the aggressive strategy doesn't work with Japan so negotiations may be possible after all.

  • -1

    Tony Ew

    José Simón Álvarez-Benavides

    I still cannot understand how two countries like Japan and China are unable to discuss this problem

    I am on a Japanese website here but this is democracy so I speak my mind here. I think way back when everything is quiet China can live with it IF Japan did not drag her feet in joint oil/gas exploration and later on inflame the situation by Ishihara. China of course have no choice but to show she is not a push over and have to respond with a show of sovereignty for domestic consumption. Now of course Japan get upset and tit for tat and getting to this tracer bullet dangerous stage.

    But Japan all along is just not a rightful sovereign owner of the islands which can be seen by zero international recognition of her claim just like the Israeli claim of Jerusalem as their undivided capital is not recognized by any country in the world. So how do you talk in this kind of situation when both sides want to save face?

    Japan in order to save face will have to find a way to paper over this daily news of Chinese 'intrusion' . One way to do it is to start a war, provoke it perhaps with a tracer bullet, so everybody forget about who is right or wrong. That will be left to future historians if Mother Earth is still fit to live with Chernobry/Fukushima l like radiations!

    The other way for both sides to save face is if Abe make a concession to China like not visiting Yasukuni Shrine, restart joint oil/gas exploration and China make a concession by not doing air patrol that cost Japan extra money every time she sent up fighters to intercept a small plane! Japan could also ask China to reduce her maritime 'intrusions' to maybe one a month just to keep domestic population happy about China continuing evidence of proof of sovereignty and Japan not reporting the news like it is a non event. China will never stop patrolling but may agree to lesser frequency.

    OK then, everything back to normal, like the nightmare of the last few months never happen but we really need far sighted and strong leaders to compromise and work for the common good. Kick US out of the arrangement as China always resent external interference just like in the South China Seas disputes as well.

  • 1

    hidingout

    This is getting waaay out of control. Hillary Clinton should be replaced with someone that has the knowledge and experience to be in the position she has.

    Or maybe we could see the entire leadership of communist china replaced with people who know what century we are living in. Now that would be some real progress, for all of china's neighbors and for her citizens as well.

  • 1

    Saul Schimek

    look, it's been a long time since China had any claim to the Islands. it's pretty obvious that they are using it to district the increasingly frustrate new middle class they have at home. Their cinema that has been pretty propaganda heavy over the last few years, and they are generally getting more bellicose. typically not a good sign

  • 0

    OssanAmerica

    Tony EwJan. 23, 2013 - 03:23AM JST "@OssanAmerica Tony Ew, there's nothing more for the U.S. to clarify. We have said who administers the islands and we have said what we will do if anyone tries to unilaterally change it. That makes harping on sovereignty meaningless from the Chinese perspective" Really! You are putting words into US mouth.

    Not at all. I am just reading the news articles here on JT and others and actually understanding their context.

    US keeps repeating the 'take no position' on sovereignty. Being a friend of Japan, US is trying to give you 'face' by not >outright saying the islands are not Japan's sovereignty. This can only be meant to say the islands does NOT belong to >Japan, otherwise why dance around with Administer?

    Firstly, do not address me as "you" as in "Japan" because I'm sitting here on the US East coast. Secondly, please think about what I stated- "sovereignty" means nothing from the Chinese perspective when the United States has stated that China can not take them by force. Continuing to debate sovereignty/administer is academic.

    You say " we have said what we will do if anyone tries to unilaterally change it. " Who is WE? You invent WE to >embed US policy into Japan policy? Did Hillary ever say that? Did Clinton allow you to transform Administer into >Sovereign? It is precisely your attempt to misrepresent the meaning of the words that is sowing the seed for so much >problem for everybody.

    I use the term "We" as in the United States of America. And again, you're missing the point completely and harping on sovereignty/administer as definitions. I can assure you that that PLA Navy admirals tasked with breaking the first island chain are not wasting their time harping on definitions of those words.

    Since Japan is given adminstrative rights and not sovereign rights, Japan should consult and take orders from US to >handle this situation. Did US give Japan the permission to use military planes and also to shoot tracer bullets? I don't >see US Coast Guards acting the way Japan do even in US own territorial sovereign water. No military planes, no navy >ships to chase off intruders. Why is Japan so aggressive?

    No, the country that has Administrative rights usually Administers the territory. Makes sense, no? If you would like to see the USCG in action please send your Chinese government run Maritime Surveillance Agency ships into U.S. waters. We will be happy to show you just how restrained the Japanese are.

  • -1

    Tony Ew

    @House Atreides

    The next step is "Air-Sea Battle." Ishigaki island is 92 nautical miles from the Senkaku islands. Mainland China is 200 nautical miles. The Japanese also have airfields on Shimoji Island and Miyako Island. Japanese airfields are closer and more numerous. Attacks by the Chinese on any of those Okinawan islands would immediately bring the U.S. into the fray. The only prudent course of action would be for the Chinese to back off, revert back to their stance in 1950 and reaffirm that the Senkaku islands are a part of the Yaeyama Islands.

    It's really funny when I read about people writing China attacking Japan. The only islands in disputes are the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands. That is the only place where action can be found if war break out.

    However I can see a far far more serious situation if US Air Sea Battle plan means US using F35, F22 and submarines to attack deep inside China mainland military installations. Remember F35 can fire B61 tactical nukes which F22 cannot. If US do that to have a first strike advantage you can bet China is going to fire the first nuke missile, not just conventional missiles, but nukes right at Tokyo! Why? Because Japan is complicit in allowing US to station her planes and carrier groups there to launch the operations. Oh, I guess if China don't launch any nukes at US, there will be no WWIII so Tokyo will suffer first through all of this, not US. America will then just call a truce to prevent China from launching nukes at mainland US and can finally go home! Yes, I am also seriously wondering if there is a 'wink wink, nod nod' between US and China to get rid of the 'Japan Defense Problem'. You don't nuke me, I don't nuke you silent agreement. It is not far fetched. Politics makes strange bedfellows.

    Right now there are a dozen F22 in Okinawa. If US put any F35 on carrier groups within striking distance of China and also on Okinawa you can be assured this is going to be like the Cuban Missile Crisis and everyone in Japan and China will have hell to pay as I said there may well be some MAD Chinamen in the military leadership!

  • 0

    Xeno23

    There seems to be a lot of assumption that a few pot shots will inevitably escalate into full blown war; not necessarily so. There are plenty of historical examples of tempests in a tea cup that involved hostilities, e.g., the 1798 Quasi-War between the USA & France, that eventually settled without brewing up.

    However, this could be seen too, as a dress rehearsal for The Spratlys and others... if China can make its stance clear in this situation then others will have some inkling of what to expect. The Spratlys, etc. are a much bigger deal and far more complicated.

    In order not to show too much weakness, Japan pretty much had to say something like this, if they want to stay in the game and not be totally marginalized. Hopefully they have giant robots hidden in Mt. Fuji to back this up... on second thought, I guess their giant robot is the USA.

  • 0

    Tony Ew

    @OssanAmerica

    Not at all. I am just reading the news articles here on JT and others and actually understanding their context.

    If only it is clear cut we all don't have to go to school and learn advanced English. SO why don't US just SPIT IT OUT IN SIMPLE ENGLISH for simpletons like me and all the rest of the average English speakers to understand? Why don't the scholars in Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Harvard weigh in and present their learned opinions? Please I reallyl want to learn from you. Since you are in the East coast US perhaps near those universities you may know some bright bulbs and perhaps present their findings here? FACTS, NOTHING BUT THE FACTS MA'AM!

    I use the term "We" as in the United States of America. And again, you're missing the point completely and harping on sovereignty/administer as definitions. I can assure you that that PLA Navy admirals tasked with breaking the first island chain are not wasting their time harping on definitions of those words.

    Get real. Are you playing reverse psychology? Are you seriously saying China is planning to INVADE the neighboring countries by breaking out of the First Island Chain? You must be part of the team crafting the Air Sea Battle Plan for Andrew Marshall. This is the devious mentality of Pentagon planners who are actually painting the scenario of using stealthy F22, F35, tactical nukes perhaps and submarines to launch a first strike against China military installations deep inside China. Meanwhile get this: China is only having a MINOR island disputes with Vietnam and Philippines. Does that qualify as an INVASION? China is ALREADY there holding to whatever islands in dispute and NOT interested in anything else. Why mess with your trading partners by INVADING?

    Firstly, do not address me as "you" as in "Japan" because I'm sitting here on the US East coast. Secondly, please think about what I stated- "sovereignty" means nothing from the Chinese perspective when the United States has stated that China can not take them by force. Continuing to debate sovereignty/administer is academic.

    OK my mistake, sorry, 'Japan', not 'you'. Now "Continuing to debate sovereignty/administer is academic. " This is getting FUN NIER! The HEART of the problem is ownership ie sovereignty. Given administrative rights is a temporary right. You look at administrative rights example in Australia over some small islands. Is that permanent? No! Sovereign is permanent so why you keep persisting US give sovereignty to Japan? Frankly in a business world the 'administrator' will be fired for doing a bad job but here US is Japan's friend so it's like giving Japan Perpetual Ownership! Oh, let's just tranform to Sovereignty then because we have park our butt there for so long. Clever! Funny way of slicing and dicing the English word to hookwink the public isn't it? Pretty fancy English footwork for simpletons like many of us but it won't fly for long. I love Abe Lincoln you know what I mean about fooling people quote.

    Now you go into the deep end again! " United States has stated that China can not take them by force" Whither China taking the islands by force? China only want to poke around the peripheral so as to look good for domestic consumption in the evening news. What purpose does it serve China to actually land on the islands? The game all along is the 200 miles EEZ fishing and oil/gas drilling. The islands are of very little value. I seriously suspect a lot of posters here are fanning the warmonger flame for their own evil intentions.

    No, the country that has Administrative rights usually Administers the territory. Makes sense, no? If you would like to see the USCG in action please send your Chinese government run Maritime Surveillance Agency ships into U.S. waters. We will be happy to show you just how restrained the Japanese are.

    Of course you get it all wrong here. A country with administrative rights must have a Rules Of Engagement/Operations Manual in how to administer the land. If Japan find itself as is now dealing with Chinese 'intrusions' Japan must ask US what to do! Shoot or just chase them away? Use civilian or military planes? US is the MASTER in all of this and Japan is the party DELEGATED to do the job. Seek clarity from the master instead of making RECKLESS self authorized decision makings to deal with 'intrusions'. It is very interesting to note that there may well be no more air intrusions and Japan warned by US to NEVER fire tracer bullets after her foreign minister met Clinton a few days ago. Just say both sides Japan and China were warned to Back Off! But China just might fly planes into the air space again if Japan refuse to go back to pre Ishihara days.

    When was the last time you have a US Coast Guard shoo away another vessel with navy ships? When was the last time you have US Coast Guard shoo away an airplane with fighter jets? I will be glad to use ANY US precedent as guidelines. For the record we don't even ever use the military to patrol the Mexican border with hundreds of thousands of illegal crossings, so don't you think the Japanese are particularly aggressive? As for China surveillance ships coming to US UNDISPUTED coastal waters that is an irrelevant question. It won't happen because it is undisputed!

  • -1

    lachance

    @ Tony Ew.

    With all your spy satellites and so-called advanced information systems, how come you never noticed our F35 with B61 tactical nuke weapons on Okinawa? We know what you have and how to eliminate what you have. How is it that you don't know what we have?

  • 0

    sfjp330

    The problem is that if clashes erupt over the Senkaku islands, China may find itself in a position where it cannot compromise without severe damage to its domestic legitimacy. In these disputes, Chinese nationalism collides with other nationalisms, especially that of Japan, which embodies strong historical resentments. It means that most of China’s neighbors want the U.S. to remain militarily present in the region. Even if the U.S. were to withdraw, it is highly unlikely that these countries like Japan, Vietnam, and Philippines would submit meekly to Chinese hegemony. But if the U.S. were to commit itself to a military alliance with these countries against China, U.S. would risk embroiling America in their territorial disputes. In the event of a military clash between Japan and China, U.S. would be faced with the choice of either holding aloof and seeing its credibility as an ally destroyed, or fighting China.

    Neither the U.S. nor China would “win” the resulting war outright, but they would certainly inflict catastrophic damage on each other and on the world economy. If the conflict escalated into a nuclear exchange, modern civilization would be wrecked. Even a prolonged period of military and strategic rivalry with an economically mighty China will gravely weaken America’s global position.

  • -1

    sfjp330

    In the years from 1894 until 1900, Japan refer to the islands around Taiwan with Chinese names. Why suddenly Diaoyu/Senkaku became terra nullius after 1894 when Japan annexed Taiwan and other islands? Clearly, the exercise was to pre-empt any counterclaims by China or to legalize what they were stealing Japan surveyed the islands for 10 years and determined that they were uninhabited. That being the case, in 1895 it erected a sovereignty marker that formally incorporated the islands into Japanese territory.

    Before Japan defeated China in 1894, Japan went surveying the islands in the East China Sea. the Chinese named since Ming period as the Diaoyu centuries back. Therefore, in 1884 Japan took an interest on Diaoyu ten years before she defeated China in 1894 in the First Sino-Japanese War. China used it as a marker in its route from Fuzhou to Naha, now in present-day Okinawa, and where occasion demands, its fisherman would seek temporary refuge from the raging sea storms, thus its name Diaoyu means “Fishing Platform.”

    It just does not make sense that the Japanese, with nothing to gain, would spend ten years meticulously surveying the islands before 1894. Oil or gas had not been discovered or reported to be around the vicinity for Japan to be interested, at that point of time the need for fossil energy was not critical to Japan. Why would Japan embark on a non-viable survey for ten years to determine without any doubt that Diaoyu was terra nullius? If, as Japan claims, the ten years spent surveying the islands would mean they were likely to encounter Chinese fisherman taking shelter there in a storm and not actually terra nullius, would Japan have accepted that the islands were visited by Chinese fishermen?

    Then why Japan did not lay claim to Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands before 1894 the year Japan vanquished Qing China’s navy? Why wait until 1896 after Japan forced an unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki on China in 1895 to pass an imperial decree to make Diaoyu a Japanese territory? Surely it is obvious that Japan had not surveyed Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands to verify that it is no man’s land or uninhabited, because Japan could not as Japan knew the islands belong to China.

    That accounts why Japan could not claim to discover the islands unless by outright war of conquest, which Japan did in 1894, and issued an imperial decree in 1896 to make Diaoyu a part of the Japanese Empire after the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki. Thus it would appear to me Japan is disingenuous, as Japan well knew long before her 1894 defeat of China, the Senkaku Islands were named as Diaoyu, a fishing platform for Chinese fishermen to take refuge in storms and route markers. To say Japan surveyed ten years the islands she called Senkaku Islands was a pretence Japan did not hear of the name Diaoyu used by China centuries before Japan called it Senkaku Islands.

    The truth is very much lacking from Japan. Now, why terra nullius and not res nullius (a thing that has no owner)? To claim terra nullius is to say no one ever lived there before, and at the point of time, the discovery was made. Thus, having ‘proved’ terra nullius, Japan purported to land in Diaoyu and claims it as a discovery. That was what precisely Japan trying to legitimise their theft and answerable to no one with what is suspiciously a big lie.

  • -2

    Tony Ew

    @lachance

    With all your spy satellites and so-called advanced information systems, how come you never noticed our F35 with B61 tactical nuke weapons on Okinawa? We know what you have and how to eliminate what you have. How is it that you don't know what we have?

    Last time I check http://www.military1.com/all/article/271159-us--to-deploy-f-35-fighters-in-japan it says: US to deploy F-35 fighters in Japan Move is first overseas stationing of the stealth aircraft

    Wednesday, December 19, 2012
    

    Do you have news just off the wire? It does not matter anymore isn't it? I had just thought of spies on the ground already well before F35 or F22 are in Okinawa. Spies from China, anti Japanese local Okinawans, maybe even the mayor of Okinawa and disaffected Okinawan overseas helping to monitor US stealth planes comings and goings 24/7, streaming webcams trained at those two airfields. ESPECIALLY at night which US like to attack enemies in the dark, pretty stealthy right? That is unless you cut off internet access, turn off GPS but then China will interprete this as a cover for attack coming her way and attack first! But unfortunately for your armchair warriors in the Pentagon and you, the eyes right outside the Kadena and Futenma air bases are there spying for China! ANY unusual en mass planes flying off the air bases will immediately cause big suspicion in China AND CHINA MAY JUST AS WELL ATTACK FIRST. In the art of war that is called Nipping The Problem At The Bud! See what I mean? Attack when the shadow is visible, why wait? Bring it on, I say bring it on on behalf of China because you can only be stealthy IF you are hidden away in a carrier ship out at sea with no eyes to detect you. I love to see China play counter terrorist to terrorist a terrorist! Well China will of course monitor your carrier based F35 variant 24/7 and may even trail your carriers from nearby to detect your planes flight patterns. You do understand all these planes have their own heat signature right? So it is EASY for China to figure out what type of planes are coming her way. Good luck trying to launch a sneaky Pearl Harbor on China. I would love to hear back from you!

  • -1

    sfjp330

    Tony EwJan. 24, 2013 - 03:08AM JST If US do that to have a first strike advantage you can bet China is going to fire the first nuke missile, not just conventional missiles, but nukes right at Tokyo! Why? Because Japan is complicit in allowing US to station her planes and carrier groups there to launch the operations. Oh, I guess if China don't launch any nukes at US, there will be no WWIII so Tokyo will suffer first through all of this, not US. America will then just call a truce to prevent China from launching nukes at mainland US and can finally go home!

    Of course, the bottom line for those Americans convinced that nuclear weapons safeguard them from a Chinese nuclear attack might be that the U.S. nuclear arsenal is far greater than its Chinese counterpart. Today, it is estimated that the U.S. possesses over 5,000 nuclear warheads, while the Chinese has a total inventory of roughly 300. Moreover, only about 40 of these Chinese nuclear weapons can reach the U.S. Surely the U.S. would "win" any nuclear war with China.

  • 0

    lachance

    @ sfjp330.

    I'm impressed. You have half the facts with half the understanding. Japan surveyed the islands prior to 1894, it's true, because they belonged to Japan. The treaty was simply an acknowledgement by China that the Senkakus belong to Japan. All your facts led simply to this. If a fisherman caught in a storm seeks shelter under the overhang of my roof, it does not give him the right to claim my house as his. The Senkakus belong to Japan.

    Now, look into the future. If China were somehow able to ensure sovereignty over the islands, the world would be war-based for generations, with the Chinese navy then having a blue-water reach to match its imperialistic tendencies. Until Ishihara, everyone acknowledged Japan's administrative control of these islands. However, we needed Japan to have sovereignty of the islands because of the oil and gas which Japan sorely needs, having renounced nuclear energy for the most part. Consequently, we needed Ishihara to raise the issue so that China would respond and, in the process of backing down, acknowledge that Japan has sovereignty over the islands in order to explore and exploit those oil and gas fields (after all, remember where Ishihara was when he first said Tokyo would buy the islands, because that was in Washington DC where we told him what to say and would not let him leave until he said what we needed him to say).

    The US needs to revitalize Japan's economy, which is moribund after two decades of stagnation. Japan cannot afford to import oil and gas at market prices and remain competitive for its products on the world stage. Consequently, we determined that Japan must have access to cheap energy in order to innovate and produce competitive goods. The answer, far ranging from Myanmar oil and gas to American Bakken oil and gas, ultimately settled on Japanese oil and gas...in the Senkaku EEZ.

    Be assured, we intend economic prosperity for the region, not just for China which has been consuming more than its fair share of economic advancement during the last two decades of Japan's interminable recession. That time is over. China will back down on this issue...or we will close China down...back to dung carts and dung stoves.

  • -3

    Tony Ew

    @SuperLib

    China sent ships, then more ships, then planes, and now fighters. It has nothing to do with provocation on Japan's side. Nothing Japan says warrants an obvious trend to send more hardware to the area by China. China is in the process of trying to take the islands over and they're simply progressing to the next step.

    Calm down! There are two kinds of people in this world. One who have a runaway mind, always suspicious, extrapolating. This is basically the 'disease' of our human mind because we are logical thinkers. The other type is a deliberately evil mind who purposely want to fan the flame by telling the world this is how China is going to behave. Baby steps, step 2, step 3 and so you see China is out to get you! China bad bad bad! I hope you are not the latter kind. Bad for everybody.

    The reason I say China is not going beyond whatever small islands in disputes be it with Japan, Philippines or Vietnam is very simple: China simply have NO history of grabing lands overseas. Nada! For this reason I say please don't go overboard and mislead other readers. Besides with US around to make sure China behave why do you think China is planning to invade the neighboring nations someday? This is an American theoretical concoction one in a million chance THEREFORE US have a reason to be there in the China Seas! Just like buying insurance you know, buy it to be safe! Causing tension is good for US so she can sell more weapons! I just hope you are not part of the arms dealer organizations fanning fear.

    IF you see China take the next step and say Island XYZ is also in dispute then you can say China is up to no good. So far none, nada, zilch. China had already draw the nine dash line map, finalized , why do you think she want to add more and look dishonest to the world community?

  • 1

    sfjp330

    Tony Ew....Japan should take firm stance in their position. Japan should negotiate Chinese with their strength, because they have it. Japan has one of most sophisticated militaries and weapons in Asia, and the region’s most respected navy. In comparison, sure China has much much larger military force, but quality of the equipment and the lack of having latest weapons is a problem. Japan's quality versus quantity of Chinese. So OK, let me outline a few of the conditions of the war, otherwise it will be impossible to argue this. China cannot use its nukes for whatever reason. Can't use em'. If it's just a war between China and Japan, no South Korea, North Korea, USA or Russia. If you would like you could just make it that there is a war between China and Japan over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands. So it would be an air and naval battle, China's fleets and aircraft vs modern and sopisticated Japan's air and hi-tech weaponary. No need to involve ground forces in this. Just control of the seas and skies. The goal is just to wipe out the other guys naval and air units, nothing more. Japan has excellent chance with their sophisticated weapons. I wouldn't take Japan lightly. And U.S. will supply all the weapons needed.

  • 0

    lachance

    Yes, sfjp330, you've made a correct assessment.

    As the Pentagon well knows, a war unfolding in the Asia-Pacific region would most likely be fought at sea and in the air, which may not require the US to act since Japan is highly capable in these two areas -- in fact, far more advanced than China which will take another generation to catch up to Japanese capabilities.

    While Japan may want to deal with Chinese aggression on its own, even if only to demonstrate its dominance in such an arena, the US is committed and determined to act with overwhelming force in the protection of the islands of Japan against any invasion.

  • -2

    sfjp330

    achanceJan. 24, 2013 - 07:37AM JST Japan surveyed the islands prior to 1894, it's true, because they belonged to Japan. The treaty was simply an acknowledgement by China that the Senkakus belong to Japan.

    Do you know anything about history? In 1895, here was no such acknowledgement of Senkaku, because it didn't exist. In 1895, when Japanese claimed the island as terra nullis, there was no such name as Senkaku. Even during the treaty, there was no such name as Senkaku. Japan used the Chinese name Daioyu. Japanese changed the name to Senkaku five years later in 1900. Japan already knew the Chinese name of the island when they were surveying the island in 1885.

  • 1

    nigelboy

    Here are several sources from 1885 naming of the islands (including Uotsuri).

    http://www.geocities.jp/tanaka_kunitaka/senkaku/teikokuhanto/1885-09-21ishizawa.html

    The Navy report of 1873 (Taiwan Waterways) also mentions the term "Senkaku" as well as "Uotsuri".

    http://www.geocities.jp/tanaka_kunitaka/senkaku/taiwancoastpilot-1873/

    We've in over this before, sfjp330.

  • -1

    sfjp330

    Nigelboy....you notice you link only to the propanganda Japanese website, Is this the best you can do? Where is your link to English website regarding 1885 Senkaku?

  • 2

    nigelboy

    Sfjp330

    Since when is providing a link that directs to the ORIGINAL REPORT at that time constitutes a propaganda site???

    • Moderator

      Readers, please keep the discussion civil.

  • -2

    Tony Ew

    @flowers

    I’m amazed to see some posters kept mentioning that China should take its claims to the ICJ. Here is a part of an article about the ICJ , “The fact is, NATO wields an enormous power over the selection of the ICJ. There is substantial evidence that the ICJ is pro-America. As Korea Times coins it, there's a Japanese judge in the ICJ and Japan's being a bully. The fact that it Challenges Korea to the ICJ regarding Dokdo and refuses to do so with Russia and China shows that Japan is obviously afraid that Russia and China wield more international power. And Russia and China is obviously afraid that the ICJ leans towards USA.” Has Japan ever issued a statement challenging China to take it to the ICJ? I’ve never seen one. This is an analysis of the fairness of the ICJ http://www.iacenter.org/warcrime/21_just.htm.

    Thank you flowers. We know it is a fact that there is no 100% impartiality in any judgement. Just ask the US. Everytime a new judge is nominated to replace a retiring one there will be a careful vetting of the nominee most likely to vote for your party. If he is against yours you will try very hard to derail his nomination. We remember the Bush v Gore 2000 election with a close 5-4 vote. in favor of Bush.The judges all voted along party lines. My point is any country thinking the cards stacked against her will decline ICJ arbitration. She will probably wait till the court composition favors her before moving forward.

    In Japan's case even with the current cards stacked against China I would say 60/40, Japan is still fearful of ICJ arbitration! Why? Japan understand she have not enough evidence to claim sovereignty and thus dare not challenge China to it. In my imaginary conversation as an ICJ judge I will ask Japan: Why is it you claim sovereignty you do not enforce your 200 miles EEZ aggressively all through the 41 years you have administrative rights? Seems to me you don't really have sovereignty as a sovereign owner will have the full benefits of land, air space, 12 miles coastal seas AND the 200 miles EEZ AND ENFORCE IT.The lack of enforcement is the singular strike against Japan assertion of sovereignty. Too late now for Japan to get tough. The past pattern of poor enforcement is evidence of lack of sovereign jurisdiction. The judge will also ask why is it the Japanese foreign minister went to Europe end of last year and came back empty handed? Why none of the Europeans with so much influence on ICJ decline to support your sovereign claim? As I said, if a claim of sovereignty is FLIMSY just like the Israeli claim all of Jerusalem to be her eternal capital NOBODY will recognize your assertion of sovereignty.

    Perhaps the most damming evidence against Japan's assertion of sovereignty is when the judge ask Japan: Why if it is your sovereignty you were not given so right from the beginning in 1971 by US AT THE SAME TIME YOU GET OKINAWA BACK? I see US is still dancing around 'take no position' on sovereignty, so there is something wrong with your claim!

    So case closed. Japan does not have sovereignty and thus cannot fire at will tracer bullets or use any military assets on any 'intrusion' into the sea or air space.

  • 0

    Redcliff

    @ sfjp330, @ Tong Ew

    I have read all your comments in this forum and both seem to bring in evidences supporting the rightful owner of Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands. The immediate issue is how we could revert the current conflict to minimize the issue getting out of hand. Earlier on I have stated that two countries should get down to resolve this maturely like two responsible adults.

    After reading all both parties historical evidence I have done a bit of reading on this issue and would like to input some of the readings I have made.

    sfjp330 brought up the point of Japan on the survey done of the disputed Islands prior to 1894 is correct but fjpf330 did not review the mission and the eventual outcome of this fact finding and survey and I could also appreciate Tony Ew replied to his. If I may post my reading of the event and outcome regarding the Japanese Survey work carried out prior to 1894.

    In 1884, a Japanese claimed that he first landed in Senkaku/ Diaoyu Islands and found the Island uninhabited. The Japanese Government then dispatched a Fact finding Mission to the Islands. Apparently the action has alerted China and on the 6th Sept. 1885 the Chinese newspaper Shen-Pao( Shanghai News) reported " Recently Japanese flags have been seen on the Islands North East of Taiwan, revealing Japan intention to occupy these Islands. Later Japanese Government did not take further action after the Fact Finding Mission.

    After the Fact finding Mission the Governor of Okinawa Prefacture sent a report to the Minister of Internal Affairs, Yamagata Aritomo, on 22nd Sept. 1885 saying that these uninhabited Islands were, in fact, the same Chinese Diaoyu Tai(Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, HuangweiYu and Chiwe Yu that were recorded in the RECORDS of MESSAGE from the CHONG-SHAN and known well to Imperial title-conferring envoys of the Qing Court on the voyages to Ryukyu Kingdom and he had doubts as to whether or not sovereignty markers should be set up. Yamagata Aritoma then checked with the then Foreign Minister, Inoue Kaoru on 9th October and Kaoru replied was that it is advisable not to go beyond field surveys and detailed reports on the shape of the bays, land and other resources for future development, we will wait for a better time to engage in such activities as putting up sovereignty markers and embarked on the development to publicized the missions on official gazette or newspaper.

    As a result the Japanese Government did not approve of the request of the Okinawa Prefacture to set up sovereignty markers on the Senkaku/Diaoyu Island.

  • 0

    Redcliff

    One point I may also like to add. In my opinion Japan should be careful not to consider taking the dispute of the islands to ICJ. There are readers here who think that ICJ is the way to resolve this conflict. The objective of the ICJ, UNCLOS and ITLOS all advocate the disputed parties should at all time resolve their differences through negotiation. If the issue had to be heard by ICJ then apart from the historical evidences and various treaties and agreements and evidence of inhabitants to the islands it also considered the UNCLOS and EEZ and Continental Shief and it Prolongation.

    Under the EEZ and Continental Shelf Prolongation China would put forward that its Continental Shelf Prolongation would extend to the 2700 miles deep of the OKINAWA TROUGH, under such scenario the Senkaku/ Diaoyu Islands fall within the Continental Shelf Prolongation and if the 2700 miles deep Okinawa Trough is consider the dividing line of country territories then China would have the upper hand. Turning around a second argument both China/Taiwan Claiming of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands as theirs they would put forward the concept of distance closer to the disputed Island as an argument to claim sovereignty. Under this concept of Distance I like to direct you to the ICJ case between Libya and Malta case. The Court concluded that the geological characteristics is immaterial, the relevant factor is the distance. Senkaku/ Diaoyu Islands is 120 Nm from Taiwan(a province of China) and Okinawa is 260 Nm from the disputed Island on top of it the Okinawa Trough is considered the dividing line between two countries. Therefor this is really not an option for Japan.

    It would be better for both parties to sit down and resolve it rather than rattling their sabres.

  • 1

    SamuraiBlue

    Redcliff

    That is only claimed by PRC and does not account reality in which the Senku islands which is not a ROCK under ITLOS clasification is warrented EEZ under UNCLOS therfore a median line is established between mainland china shorelines and the Senkaku isles.

    As for all the rabid PRC/Korean fanboys calling foul against ICJ, really you guys need to take a break here. There is going to be no court that garantees a win to one's side. If one side loses it is not because of a corrupt court but because of incompetent lawers with a weak arguement.

  • -1

    Tony Ew

    Are people too close to the forest to see the trees? I mean everyday in the 41 years since Japan have administration over the islands these days are not sovereign but adminster. So you are inside this cloud everyday day 1 administer day 2 administer day 3 administer and so forth. How come it suddenly transform from administer to sovereign? How can Japan suddenly change lead into gold? You are inside this forest of days and days of administrative duties courtesy of USA and now you take yourself outside of this cloud and suddenly call this whole duration an exercise of sovereignty? Don't think this is going to fly with any judge in the ICJ or the general public.

    Japan cannot say oh, nobody dispute her administration of the islands over all these years, so Japan have rights over it to become sovereign. The fallacy with this argument is that all along there are TWO parties to this situation. US GIVE administrative rights, Japan RECEIVE. It is like a transaction, but it looks like perpetuality. Yet there is NO law to justify sovereignty in this situation, NO PRECEDENT. US itself while getting us all into this mess also DOES NOT say the islands sovereignty belongs to Japan. So in a way I applaud US for being honest for being actually confused about how to handle this even though I tend to think US purposely frame it this way to help Japan. Both elements could be true I think.

    The only situation Japan can say she have sovereignty is in another scenario where there is NO two party setup as noted above. Say Japan found an island like this disputed one and it belongs to China way back but China never protest for many years. Then Japan may have a case here. The difference as I said here is in the Senkaku/Diaoyu case there are two parties involved in a KNOWN activity, one give and one receive. In the latter case, there is ONLY ONE known party ie Japan hanging on to the islands for many years and the general law will favor Japan, so two very different situations.

    Seriously just pick a random sampling of people from all over the world and just ask the way I ask I don't think they will say Japan have the soverignty. I am not saying China have it either. My starting point is the US handover to Japan at end of 1971. That is where this Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands take a life of it's own! Before that it is in deep storage so to speak, locked away by US. Now once it is transferred to Japan for administration it should be viewed as that entity: an administered entity. My point is all the fancy footwork done by both sides to bolster their claims using past histories, past treaties just don't work. It is all intertwined and I think it is going to give ICJ judges a big headache!

    Again I repeat the disputed islands start to take a life of it's own as adminstrated by Japan and it cannot be unilaterally transformed into sovereignty. It is a disingenuous way to exert ownership without proper legal process. If China can proof sovereignty POST 1971 handover, then China will have a better shot at claiming sovereignty. So perhaps with China mapping out the continental sea shelf, China indeed have a better chance at sovereign claim than Japan. No more history, no more treaties to confuse matters. Just take it from Post 1971 as the baseline to make a judgement.

    Now the question may be asked Why use US handover as the starting point and not all treaties and histories before that? The reason is US holds the KEY. US can keep the disputed islands forever and administer herself OR as in this case GIVE BIRTH to ACTIVE Administration by Japan but it is still administration just like if you are born yellow you will be yellow for life, you cannot change to white! If you are not given life by your giver say your parents aka US in this example you have no life! So your frame of reference is Post Birth so to speak Post 1971 not every other events before that which is in storage forever, like you have no memories of your previous life. This discussions/disputes will not have taken place if US just keep the administration to herself but since it was transferred to Japan, 1971 THEN MUST LOGICALLY BE THE BASELINE for all dispute resolutions.

    Notes: courtesy from Redcliff. Under the EEZ and Continental Shelf Prolongation China would put forward that its Continental Shelf Prolongation would extend to the 2700 miles deep of the OKINAWA TROUGH, under such scenario the Senkaku/ Diaoyu Islands fall within the Continental Shelf Prolongation and if the 2700 miles deep Okinawa Trough is consider the dividing line of country territories then China would have the upper hand. Turning around a second argument both China/Taiwan Claiming of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands as theirs they would put forward the concept of distance closer to the disputed Island as an argument to claim sovereignty. Under this concept of Distance I like to direct you to the ICJ case between Libya and Malta case. The Court concluded that the geological characteristics is immaterial, the relevant factor is the distance. Senkaku/ Diaoyu Islands is 120 Nm from Taiwan(a province of China) and Okinawa is 260 Nm from the disputed Island on top of it the Okinawa Trough is considered the dividing line between two countries. Therefor this is really not an option for Japan.

    In the final analysis I think ALL parties should submit to ICJ Japan, Taiwan and China & I think Taiwan will come out the winner.

    GO TAIWAN GO! WHY ARE YOU STILL SLEEPING?

  • 0

    SamuraiBlue

    Read and weep China fan boys;

    http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T130122003523.htm

    Chinese document contradicts Beijing's claim to Senkakus

  • 0

    Redcliff

    @ Samuraiblue

    My earlier comments is to alert parties that with ICJ any thing could be possible based on the interpretation of the relevant International Law.

    When you take a case to ICJ I believe you have to arm yourself with more substantial evidence then what you have just provided. You would come out with more bruises then you think.

  • 0

    anglootaku

    Just blast those rust buckets

  • 1

    flowers

    SamuraiBlue, this is another piece of ambiguous evidence produced by a Japanese to bend the truth. I wonder how many pieces of evidence that Japan has so far, but China has a lot more of them. Here is a part of the statement issued by the Chinese Embassy, “Diaoyu Dao was first discovered, named and exploited by the Chinese people in the 14th century, and had long been under China’s jurisdiction since the early Ming Dynasty (1368-1644). In a number of official maps thereafter, Diaoyu Dao was clearly marked as China's maritime territory. The earliest Japanese document to mention Diaoyu Dao, which was written in 1785, also indicated that Diaoyu Dao was part of China's territory.” So, clearly Japan knew that the islands were not terra nullius as claimed. I believe that now J govt has dropped the claim of terra nullius and has tried to dispute Chinese claims instead. Here are more: -. Japan's claim of its purported "discovery in 1884" of the islands contradicts with the navigation map in its own 1783 historical document Sankoku Tsuran Zusetsu published by prominent Japanese military scholar Hayashi Shihei clearly stating the area a part of China. Japan chooses to cite three Ming Dynasty maps while the Chinese white paper cited around 20 local maps and 5 foreign maps. Japan has failed to respond to nagivational maps marking the islands to be Chinese by Portuguese, French sailors, and more credibly the British Navy in 1877. - over 40 official Meiji period documents unearthed from the Japanese National Archives, Diplomatic Records Office, and National Institute for Defense Studies Library clearly demonstrates that the Meiji government acknowledged Chinese ownership of the islands back in 1885. “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.” - Following the first on-site survey, in 1885, the Japanese foreign minister wrote, “Chinese newspapers have been reporting rumors of our intention of occupying islands belonging to China located next to Taiwan.… At this time, if we were to publicly place national markers, this must necessarily invite China’s suspicion.…” and “In November 1885, the Okinawa governor confirmed “since this matter is not unrelated to China, if problems do arise I would be in grave repentance for my responsibility”. “Surveys of the islands are incomplete” wrote the new Okinawa governor in January of 1892. Japan Diplomatic Records Office Letter dated May 12, 1894 affirming that the Meiji government did not repeatedly investigate the disputed islands. - recorded in the Okinawa Mainichi Shimbun, the Tiaoyu (Diaoyutai) and other islands were regarded as Japanese territory only after Japan had seized Taiwan and other places from Ching through the Japan-Ching war as part of a series of territories wrested from Ching. - according to reports published in the Okinawa Mainichi Shimbun (January 1 to 9, 1910), which lauded the merits of Tatsushiro Koga, the prefectural government did not grant his land leasing application of the island because "it was not clear at the time whether the island belonged to the (Japanese) empire". It took Koga three times to apply, it was only in Septermber of the same year after Taiwan was incorporated into the Japanese empire and the islands were proclaimed Japanese territory that his request was approved. In his biography Koga Tatsushiro attributed Japan’s possession of the islands to “the gallant military victory of our Imperial forces.” - U.S. forces periodically used the island as an aerial bombing target. The U.S. military applied each time to the Chinese (Taiwan) government for authorization. There are numerous more historical documents from the Chinese side that show the islands really belong to China. There are also a lot more of contradictory and weak evidence cited by Japan.

  • -3

    Tony Ew

    @flowers

    U.S. forces periodically used the island as an aerial bombing target. The U.S. military applied each time to the Chinese (Taiwan) government for authorization.

    Thank you flowers. This got to be one of the most damming evidence against Japan proving that Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands really belong to Taiwan! How can it belong to Japan when US ask permission from Taiwan?

    I am waiting for the next move by China Continental Shelf UN Commission report which Japan strenuously object! Japan is fearful this demarcation exposes a weak position for Japan's claim. Besides Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands are much closer to Taiwan than China so taken all together this is going to be a no brainer as a vote for Taiwan! You can see my arguments using the 1971 handover as the CORRECT BASELINE since US is the genesis of this dispute aka administration vs sovereignty, meaning all PRE 1971 evidences are irrelevant! I follow up with whatever arguments the other side throw at me here

    http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/taiwan-activists-head-for-japan-controlled-isles

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/24/us-japan-china-islands-un-idUSBRE90N16Z20130124

  • -3

    lachance

    @ Tony Ew and his suggestion that we need watch out for China's DF-21D offensive capabilities. It's a joke.

    Despite growing concern among China’s neighbors, the DF-21D system utterly fails to reach full combat readiness. Mushrooming costs and technical obstacles play a key role as rivals have rejected its threat to sophisticated Aegis Combat System (AEGIS) equipped escort destroyers. That Chinese system is dying as we speak.

    At the same time, the initial fear of a new, advanced weapon did encourage the United States to quicken the completion of the Japanese coastal early warning radar network. Furthermore, Burke destroyers are now deployed in Japan and South Korea while RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) systems are promoted to Korean and Japanese destroyers thereby providing a full shield. This is what your saber-rattling did, with our sabers swishing very close to your balls so that we'll barely hear the castrated squeak of your claims to the Senkakus.

    In this way, the DF-21D’s unexpected failure changed the balance of force against China, increasing the militarization of the region while ensuring American hegemony for the 21st century.

  • -3

    Tony Ew

    @lachance

    @ Tony Ew and his suggestion that we need watch out for China's DF-21D offensive capabilities. It's a joke. Despite growing concern among China’s neighbors, the DF-21D system utterly fails to reach full combat readiness. Mushrooming costs and technical obstacles play a key role as rivals have rejected its threat to sophisticated Aegis Combat System (AEGIS) equipped escort destroyers. That Chinese system is dying as we speak.

    I don't know, you have access to classified Pentagon intel? Even if DF21D is not as reliable I wouldn't rule out the terror it could inflict to US forces within range. Ever hear about the law of probabiity? China can manufacture say 100 DF21D and if only half works as intended, that is good enough for me! So this bring to mind your powerful F35 and F22 Do you have 100% reliability? You read news of unrealiable components forcing grounding of F35 haven't you? And don't fly that F35 near a thunderstorm, too unreliable! You read about F22 oxygen supply problem haven't you? Yet US field these planes in a hurry to project power isn't it? Same argument for Russian latest subs Yuri.Multiple launch failures, but with only two latest success and revised missiles, it is good to go! Therefore you have to be scared, very very scared. Numbers will kill you simply because the law of probability will make sure a good number of missiles will strike the targets as intended.

  • -1

    lachance

    Despite growing concern among China’s neighbors, who actually believed the stories of the DF-21D system, it has utterly failed to reach full combat readiness. Mushrooming costs and technical obstacles have played a key role as rivals have rejected its threat to sophisticated Aegis Combat System (AEGIS) equipped escort destroyers. That Chinese system is dying as we speak.

    At the same time, the initial fear of a new, advanced weapon did encourage the United States to quicken the completion of the Japanese coastal early warning radar network. Furthermore, Burke destroyers are now deployed in Japan and South Korea while RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) systems are promoted to Korean and Japanese destroyers thereby providing a full shield.

    This is what PLA saber-rattling did, with our sabers swishing very close to your balls so that we'll barely hear the castrated squeak of your claims to the Senkakus.

    In this way, the DF-21D’s unexpected failure changed the balance of force against China, increasing the militarization of the region while ensuring American hegemony for the 21st century. Thank you so much, as we return the Chinese economy to dung carts and dung stoves.

  • -4

    Tony Ew

    @sfjp330Jan. 24, 2013 - 08:49AM JST

    Tony Ew....Japan should take firm stance in their position. Japan should negotiate Chinese with their strength, because they have it. Japan has one of most sophisticated militaries and weapons in Asia, and the region’s most respected navy. In comparison, sure China has much much larger military force, but quality of the equipment and the lack of having latest weapons is a problem. Japan's quality versus quantity of Chinese. So OK, let me outline a few of the conditions of the war, otherwise it will be impossible to argue this. China cannot use its nukes for whatever reason. Can't use em'. If it's just a war between China and Japan, no South Korea, North Korea, USA or Russia. If you would like you could just make it that there is a war between China and Japan over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands. So it would be an air and naval battle, China's fleets and aircraft vs modern and sopisticated Japan's air and hi-tech weaponary.

    Sorry I miss your post earlier. You are probably right in the air sea battle between China and Japan ONLY with uncertain outcome, not necessary a Japanese superior technology with US help. However the longer this drag out the more new Chinese destroyers come online and the more subs play hide and seek underwater. We don't really know for sure but it depends if China lob missiles from the mainland AND Japan attack the bases THERE things will quickly go nuclear IF US gets into the act. WHY should China fight with her hands tied behind her back to be PURELY air sea battle? Hey, if I can hit your destroyers from the shores using MRBM / DF21D, any mix with sufficient range with satellite guidance, why shouldn't I use it? The air element is a 50/50 scenario as the new J31 and J20 stealth planes could be involved. Remember the J20 already two years tweaking out so probably a few are combat ready but China never tell you how many, top secret! Oh, you also forgot the Chinese Wing Loong drones comparable to US predators! Not a walkover by Japan. China do not want to fight a war that can easily spiral out of control. If Japan borrow a few F22 or F35 if it ever show up in Kadena, then Japan will improve air superiority odds but it is unlikely US will let Japan fly them costly birds.

    For the reason of no clear cut ability to take out Japan in an air sea battle around the disputed islands JUST YET, China goes legal first with the Continental Shelf UN Commission submission which Japan strenuously object. China bid her time while she build up more firepower. Remember last year was a massive show of China military breakthroughs. So assuming UN ruling by end of this year, China will have a few more new toys to take on Japan. Think it is easy to beat China?

    Come to think of it, China being poor for so long and so backward technologically until the recent couple of decades while Japan and US advance with help from Europeans as well, I think China is doing very well to narrow the gap and actually it looks like China is being bullied by a 'gang' of democratic governments trying to contain her. Imagine ONE country with little tech help from Russia fighting against a pack of wolves now with indigenous military hardwares. Shame on these governments!

Login to leave a comment

OR
  • 営業/建設機械  

    営業/建設機械  
    MB Japan 株式会社、埼玉県
    給与:給与要相談 歩合制 給与参考例・・・2013年度営業職月給平均 45万円  
  • TOEICインストラクター

    TOEICインストラクター
    Berkeley House Language Center / バークレーハウス語学センター、東京都
    給与:時給 3,000円 相談可
  • TOEFL・IELTSインストラクター

    TOEFL・IELTSインストラクター
    Berkeley House Language Center / バークレーハウス語学センター、東京都
    給与:時給 3,500円 相談可
  • 海外留学担当者

    海外留学担当者
    Berkeley House Language Center / バークレーハウス語学センター、東京都
    給与:月給 25万円 ~ 35万円 相談可
  • PR and Communication Specialist

    PR and Communication Specialist
    Italian Chamber of Commerce in Japan、東京都
    給与:給与についての記載なし

More in Politics

View all

View all