The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© Thomson Reuters 2024.China coast guard says it 'drove away' Japanese boats near disputed islands
BEIJING©2025 GPlusMedia Inc.
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© Thomson Reuters 2024.
47 Comments
Login to comment
Calej
It’s only disputed by China. The world knows whose islands these really belong to.
Mr Goodman
The Senkakus are within Taketomi/ishigaki city limits and definitely part of Japanese territory
We urge China to stay out of Japanese territory or face the consequences
Sanjinosebleed
Permanent presence required on the largest island now! Use it or lose it!
Alan Harrison
It’s only disputed by China. The world knows whose islands these really belong to.
I think that most of the world does not really care.
obladi
China and Japan should focus on large areas of mutual interest, like adapting to climate change rather than these tiny little islands, which could provoke a greater conflict.
BeerDeliveryGuy
Yes, and billionaires should start throwing money on the streets, and babies should poop ice cream cones.
Too bad China is determined to create an external bogeyman (men) to quell internal dissatisfaction with the party of Pooh.
kibousha
"Appear like wolf, when you're a rabbit" - Sun Tzu
Kaowaiinekochanknaw
Gonna be interesting to see who wins it.
I guess in this race, the first to land and set-up base will win and own the island for the foreseeable future.
The loser won't be able to do anything about it - unless they want conflict.
The loser won't get any spoils without conflict either.
Make haste either side - and put this BS to bed.
owzer
Just go in with 20-30 boats, including coast guard and supply ships, and start building. Fly in supplies and then put in a station.
Kaowaiinekochanknaw
When Taiwan kicks off, these will be taken by one side or the other - with an excuse to boot.
Alongfortheride
Its not the tiny little islands they want, its whats under them which is not so tiny
OssanAmerica
No, the islands are not up for grabs. If China lands on it they will start a shooting war with the United States.
"Article V of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty states the United States' "ironclad" commitment to defend all of Japan, including the Senkaku Islands and other territories, said Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III."
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3548692/austin-says-us-committed-to-defending-japan-including-senkaku-islands/
DanteKH
To be honest, those islands are way closer to Japanese territory (Miyako-jima islands of Okinawan region), then they are to mainland China. However, they are even closer to Taiwan, so they can also claim those.
In the end, is not about the islands, is about the border of teritorial waters, which those islands can give to a country.
GuruMick
Looking at the photo, I cant see a "shooting war with US " over a Chinese claim/grab.
Look at the topography for one.
Impossible to occupy permanently, probably by either side , which would be required to exercise and claim an "ownership "
Mountain goats yes...Sherpas' maybe...but your stock standard US marine corp ?
Nah.
John
The CCP claims a lot of things not grounded in fact or reality.
Samit Basu
@Calej
Actually Taiwan claims the Diaoyu Islands per terms of Japan's surrender.
Most of Japan's immediate neighbors(Russia, Korea, Taiwan, China) consider them Chinese territory per the text of the Cairo Declaration which Japan accepted. Which "China" is up to the debate, but the terms of Japan's surrender literally says "The Republic of China."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1943_Cairo_Declaration#Text
@Sanjinosebleed
And that will trigger an immediate military invasion from China. This is why Japanese citizens are banned from approaching within 1 nm of the Diaoyu Islands by Japanese government.
@obladi
A country's territorial integrity comes above all else.
@OssanJapan
Well, Ukraine and the Philippines expected the US to do something and all that could offer was the warm words of support.
After all, Ukraine had the US written guarantee of territorial integrity when Putin took over Crimea and the US did nothing, the same with the Philippines Scarborough Shoals and the Philippines had the US mutual defense treaty which again was worthless.
Redemption
China certainly stirring up a lot of trouble.
JJE
Ahh, I see.
If one side asserts there is no territorial dispute then the matter is settled.
How convenient.
Hopefully we can apply this elsewhere.
quercetum
If no one is there, whoever is there can claim it. That was the Japanese thinking in the 19th century, “Hey nobody’s here, it’s ours.”
There also many empty homes unoccupied. Doesn’t mean they're free for robbers. The Senkaku’s belong to whoever claims and stays there. Japan is not occupying the Senkaku's now.
China is giving the Japanese a good taste of their own medicine.
quercetum
They're not decided by proximity to a country. If so, all the Greek islands in the Aegean Sea off the coast the Ottoman Empire would belong to Turkey.
quercetum
So you're saying you believe what China says, that they drove away Japanese boats?
GuruMick
Samit Basu...best comment so far.
Mr Goodman
I strongly disagree and see absolutely not reason why the Senkakus couldn't be permanently occupied
I seem to remember that during the official USA occupation of Okinawa that there was in fact a US military outpost on one of those islands
Anyway it should be a Japanese outpost Anyway and not a USA one !
Mr Goodman
Exactly
And the Republic of formosa Taiwan should have been returned also
OssanAmerica
I'm afraid the official view of the US Dept of Defense outweighs your internet opinion,
Physical occupation has nothing to do with legal ownership, The Senkakus became incorporated as Japanse territory as Terra Nulleas in 1855, meaning nobody was on them or claiming them. The only record and physical evidence of any human presence are the remains of an abandoned Japanese bonito factory.
And for those who think the Cairo Declaration has anything to do with the Senkakus, only territories and islands taken by Japan through war after 1914 were to be taken away, The Senkakus were exempt and the US handed them back to Japan as part of the return of Okinawa.
https://worldjpn.net/documents/texts/docs/19431127.D1E.html
China could easily bring a claim to the ICJ if they so wished. But they refuse to do so. Instead they prefer the schoolyard bullying tactics, just like with the Phillipines.
deanzaZZR
Taiwan and the Penghu Islands say 你好!
OssanAmerica
That is correct and internationally recognized. It's not just "Japanese thinking".
Under British law even today one can claim property that is not recorded and no one claims it., provided there are no objections.
At the time of incorporation in January 1855, no country objected to Japan's incorporation, including China.
deanzaZZR
"It is their purpose that Japan shall be stripped of all the islands in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the first World War in 1914, and that all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa, and The Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1943_Cairo_Declaration#Text
OssanAmerica
In accordance with the Cairo Declaration they were returned to the Republic of China.
Samit Basu
@OssanJapan
ABSOLUTELY NOT. None of Japan's claimed Terra Nulleas were Terra Nulleas, be it the Diaoyu Islands or the Liancourt Rocks. This is easiest to debunk.
Read the text of Cairo Declaration once again. The Chinese clause isn't governed by the 1914 cutoff deadline, but ALL Chinese territories that Imperial Japan took via wars of aggressions including Taiwan and its periphery islands, specifically the Diaoyu Islands. The Diaoyu Islands are covered by the Cairo Declaration and legally have been reverted back to the Republic of China.
It is Japan that's illegally occupying the Diaoyu Islands, and this is why Taiwan challenged Japan to ICJ arbitration but Japan refused claiming Taiwan isn't the Republic of China that ceased to exist in 1948, because it's obvious Japan is guaranteed to lose.
BB
China would have a much better case if it weren't involved in territorial disputes with dozens of countries -- both at sea and on land.
William77
It is frankly preoccupying to have these Chinese vessels invading other sovereign nation’s water and even pretending to be right.
The arrogance and maliciously of the Pekin regime should put to a stop.
I have been criticizing Japan for it’s politics but still it is a democracy unlike China and Japan must protect it’s water reinforcing their patrols in such waters.
quercetum
You seem to have a alarmist view of territorial disputes, as if having one is a criminal record and a criminal offense. Russia and China share a long border. I can assure you there are more than 40,000 cases of territorial disputes between the two countries according to a Chinese diplomat in Azabu. There can be a river bend here or a hill there and each one is documented as territorial disputes. Yet Russia and China are doing fine in relations.
The Senkakus are not going to do anything to Sino-Japanese relations and neither is an old rusty boat going to start war in the Pacific. Maybe try Tibet again. Taiwan? Hong Kong? Xinjiang? China basically says, nope, not gonna happen. The U.S. will need to work much harder and make more effort to see military conflict in Asia. Nice try though.
quercetum
Well, that's what it is. China has to is protecting its rocks and reinforcing their patrols there.
ian
China has a long list of disputes resolved thru bilateral talks.
Here are some examples (under the heading "Resolved disputes" ) to get an idea of how unfavorable the outcomes of these resolutions can be
AngryMango
Interesting thing about these islands. After WWII they were part of the occupation zone that included Okinawa. About the time Okinawa and Ryukyu Islands, including these islands were returned to Japan, it was discovered that the area may hold abundant resources. It was around this time that China started to dispute Japanese sovereignty. Prior to Japan annexing these islands in 1895, it was used by various nations as a navigation point but no one had actually claimed them. After the end of WWII, Japanese, Chinese and U.S. maps all showed these islands as part of Japan.
OssanAmerica
Wrong as always. Rep of China had no documented ownership of the Senkakus at the end of WWII. The Republic of China got back all it's territories taken by Japan regardless of before or after 1914 per the Cairo Declaration.
PRC maps from the 1960s showed them to be part of Okinawa, ie; Japanese.
Mr Kipling
Beer guy....
Fixed it,
Agent_Neo
The answer is simple. I would ask any Chinese person, even Mao Zedong or Zhou Enlai never said that this island is Chinese territory, so why did they suddenly start saying that it is Chinese territory after the resources were discovered in the 1970s?
I repeat, even Mao Zedong never said anything like that.
How would you answer? lol
nandakandamanda
When China actively attempts to change the status quo, you can either give in, or actively defend it.
Previously, Japanese fishing boats mixed happily with Taiwanese boats fishing around there. Then, guess who came along…
China needs to take these islands as part of the encirclement of Taiwan, quite apart from their mineral and geographical territorial value. To this end the CCP has been indoctrinating Chinese young people as part of school education to believe that they belong to the CCP mainland.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Said no one ever. My understanding is Japanese protest at pre-appointed times and places if at all.
GuruMick
Would the costs of occupying this island , topography problems, isolation etc, be less or more than the "not yet determined " value of any surrounding sea bed mineral deposits ?
Possession is 9/10's of the law, so occupation would assist a claim...as disputed above.
I suppose turning the whole area, including seas, into a UNESCO site, or marine park would be impossible.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Especially since you'd have to get China to stop tapping the oil.
voiceofokinawa
If these barren islands really belonged to China, its coast guard ships had every right to chase away intruding Japanese boats.
The catch is: Are the islands bona fide Chinese territory as China claims? China's claim to the islands is partly based on Chen Kwan's documentation of island's names (1534). But Chen Kwan seems to have translated these names from vernacular names upon hearing what Ryukyu seamen aboard the same tributary ship told him. In other words, the islands had had local names long before Chen Kwan recorded them in his travelog.
Can China have right to chase away the Japanese fishing boats from the Senkaku/Diaoyu waters?
blackcat
China can't even provide a single legitimate evidence or documents to claim any disputed territory.
OssanAmerica
That is an adage. Not a legal doctine.
jimmyBB
Hmm... perhaps a new location for the US Marine Air Station?