national

China criticizes Japan over "dangerous" jet scramble

39 Comments

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

© REUTERS

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

39 Comments
Login to comment

China is the biggest threat that humanity has ever faced. We should aim to overthrow the government and break the country up into manageable pieces.

6 ( +19 / -13 )

M3M3M3 China is the biggest threat that humanity has ever faced. We should aim to overthrow the government and break the country up into manageable pieces.

As you broke up countries in the middle east and the other parts of the World and the magnificient results the break brought on the citizens of those countries that were forcefully broken up or their boundaries redrawn. Seems the supremacist mentality runs in the genes.

0 ( +13 / -13 )

As you broke up countries in the middle east and the other parts of the World

You need a better reading of history my friend. The problems in middle east did not come from breaking up countries but from creating countries with artificial borders. China has been extending its borders and assimilating minorities into an artificial nation for the entirety of its history. It continues today in places like Tibet and Urumqi. The instability and nationalism that this brings is why China is a repressive powder keg that could explode in our lifetime. It wouldn't be the first time within living memory.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

It seems that China faked it up and criticized. That is China's favorite trick.

19 ( +22 / -3 )

Should put a SDF/Coast Guard base on Senkaku Islands.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

Possibly it was a exercise of control but accidents do happen. So Don't start another war as in wars there no real winners.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Should put a SDF/Coast Guard base on Senkaku Islands.

If China is controlling Senkakus, it would have already put many military bases there. But it seems Japan will not. What Japan can do is they put SDF bases on near other original islands.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

China criticizes Japan over "dangerous" jet scramble

It's getting quite tiresome listening to each side accuse each other of actions they are BOTH guilty of. I'm sure that one country might have scrambled jets more than the other but I'll bet the numbers are close. If each side continues this dangerous, repetitive practice, there WILL eventually be an accident!

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Good old China Bla Bla Bla.....

2 ( +4 / -2 )

"The Japanese planes used fire-control radar to “light up” the Chinese aircraft, the statement added"

Japan engaging in aerial mischief just like what she did in late Jan 2013 deliberately sailing her destroyer about 3 km from a Chinese frigate passing near Diaoyu/Senkaku and after framing the Chinese, tell the world the Chinese engage in dangerous radar lock incident. Japan have a habit of using home turf advantage with close backup military assets to frame the Chinese.

Japan act brave only because she have numerical advantage on the scene.Chinese pilots should dare Japan to make the first shot and China will then have the license to hit back with overwhelming force. J pilots will not dare to make another radar lock if China send half a dozen fighter jets there to scare them off.

"According to the Chinese officials, the frigate and the Japanese destroyer were three km apart on the morning of Jan. 30 and situated around 110 to 130 km north of the Senkaku Islands." http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/03/18/national/politics-diplomacy/chinese-officials-admit-to-msdf-radar-lock-allegations

-11 ( +3 / -14 )

Move a japanese warshrines to the Senkakku's that should take tention out of the area..

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Go to wikipedia. It's a collection of rocks at best. Only two islands are of any useful size, one at 4.32 km^2 and another over 1 km^2. Resources are a canard, it would be too expensive.

Meanwhile Canada and Denmark have Hans island in the dead centre of a straight, a rock 1.2 km^2. Danish schnapps or Canadian whisky is traded back and forth on the island for the next visitor over many years now. It's been proposed to build a shared condo on it so that no one feels that they lost. Who knows though, the talks continue.

Thing is for the Senkakus Japan won't even admit there's a problem so it'll never be resolved. Both Japan and China ignore their history until it's needed then ignore it again. In a similar case Japan also wonders why Russia won't relinquish the northern islands either?

The concept of irony was never properly translated into Japanese. I'm often struck by how many never get the joke about actions, the epiphony, that irony teaches.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

First China provokes Japan and then later blames Japan for dangerous acts. What a funny joke!

12 ( +14 / -2 )

"I can invade your house, but if you respond you are dangerous".

It's a pity that 5,000 years of history wasn't enough to try understand what is wrong with this logic.

6 ( +10 / -4 )

While Japan is still reeling from a terrorist atrocity in Bangladesh, the sneaky Chinese use the distraction to invent an incident from a month ago. Ancient Chinese traditions and culture

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Two two-year olds in a sandbox.

The Drama!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Such provocation regardless who is very dangerous. I say 'stop' nonsense.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Yes, finally standing up to the China threat.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Go home China your drunk.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Actually, this time, the Chinese would seem to have a legitimate case: http://blogos.com/article/181553/ http://www.sankei.com/politics/news/160630/plt1606300020-n1.html

Here are two Japanese articles covering what seems to be the same incident.

While I'm not very sympathetic to China's Senkaku claims, based on the Japanese version of the incident, and cutting out their self-serving attestations of innocent intent on their side and imputations on the opponent, the Chinese are guilty of no more than asserting their territorial claim, and it is the Japanese that made the first active attempt to expel the opponent. Japanese readers can skim the two articles above and see if they agree.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Can't sympathize with China in general, and Japan isn't helping its cause by antagonizing them either. FUBAR

At least we actually get something, Danish schnapps, in our kerfuffle. But we're smaller nations, our diplomacy differs

0 ( +1 / -1 )

What this article failed to mention is that the Chinese Embassy Spokesperson made an announcement denied the whole event when the retired JASDF made his claim in June.

So which is it?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

PM Abe is instructing Japanese fighter pilots to be more daring since such news would make presence of American bases in Okinawa more reasonable.

Besides with Uncle Sam watchin a few feet away it's almost certain China would not dare retaliate just like when Billy the Kid ordered the missile strike at the Chinese embassy in the then Yugoslavia

0 ( +1 / -1 )

And the world criticises China over.....well where to begin. A list would be outrageously long. Funny how China always plays the victim when it comes to international issues and relations.

I am pretty sure China is milking this story. I reckon some Japanese planes were scrambled, China didn't like it so said they were locked on, passing the blame and who the aggressors were.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

There is a major difference between "lighting up" and "locking on". Turning on the fire control radar and pointing it in the direction of the "target" is lighting up the target. Using the reflected return energy to resolve the fire control missle/gun/laser intercept parameters and allowing the radar to maintain that information to keep the radar on the target is locking on. This technique has been going on for more years than many of you have been alive and is used to let the other side know that my side is here, we see you and we can make your day very bad if we want to. The trick is to never lock on because THAT would be an act of aggression.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

a pair of Chinese fighter jets that were carrying out patrols in the East China Sea

I think that should be "a pair of Chinese fighter jets that were LOST while flying over the East China Sea"

As i said in previous articles of Chinese pilots entering others air space, the Chinese pilots need to learn how to navigate so they avoid entering others air space.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Gary Beckwith

The AAM could be IR tracking in which case I don't think you'll need the firing control radar in the first place.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China is the biggest threat that humanity has ever faced.

Any evidence? Middle east, Russia, and now China? haha

Who is the good guy then? Who is the glorious contributor to the humanity?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@Triring JUL. 05, 2016 - 03:35PM JST

So which is it?

To be fair, this can be interpreted as a sign they had no plans to make a big fuss about it. In essence, as a claimant on those islands, China wanted to establish it had as much right to send a fighter over that island when they feel like it as the Japanese. That's a change from the status quo (something the Japanese harped on), but the status quo included a lot of time when the PLA simply can't, and as the PLAAF got better, something like this had to happen.

The Japanese were used to Chinese sheep, and so they went about their usual intercept format, moving to the Chinese' aft. This time, the Chinese weren't having it so they maneuvered to maintain the parity position (something which surprised the Japanese). Eventually, they dogfought for a bit, and if you read between the lines of the Japanese account, the Chinese probably won the "stick"-waving contest and in any case the Japanese fighter retreated.

Most likely, the Chinese pilot decided that was pretty routine (you aggro me, I fight back, I win, nobody gets hurt, cased closed in another day of brinksmanshi) and nobody even bothered to place any significance on the report. What they did not expect was how some Japanese bawled.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Japan have a habit of using home turf advantage with close backup military assets to frame the Chinese.

Uh.. if it's Japan's "home turf" then they can't be framing the Chinese, can they? What are Chinese military aircraft doing in Japan's home turf?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

China called on Japan to cease all provocative action, the statement added.

Its just amazes me that these people can't see the irony in that statement. Are they taking the p***?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

JSDF ROE is a non aggression one based on exclusive defense posture unless the enemy shoots first and the only way to protect themselves is to shot back, shooting of the enemy endangers Japanese citizens or they are given a direct order by the supreme commander which is the PM. Without one out of the three JSDF will not engage in any engagement with the aggressors and will fall back to a safe location so there is no way a JASDF fighter would engage in a dog fight at this point.

On the other hand PLAAF clearly changed their ROE since in the past they headed back once they reached a certain latitude but now they are crossing that line and coming down further south.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Triring JUL. 05, 2016 - 09:36PM JST

On the other hand PLAAF clearly changed their ROE since in the past they headed back once they reached a certain latitude but now they are crossing that line and coming down further south.

The Japanese are harping on this point, but IMO this is not a particular wrong on China's part. To say one side to a dispute can send fighters over the disputed island and the other cannot would seem to be a bit uneven of a status quo, and as the PLAAF gets stronger, for them to go for equal rights is a matter of time. Change is not always unjustified.

Without one out of the three JSDF will not engage in any engagement with the aggressors and will fall back to a safe location so there is no way a JASDF fighter would engage in a dog fight at this point.

The JASDF's ROE is secret, though they often complain about Article 84's lack of explicit rights to shoot at enemy aircraft.

And while you may speculate they won't engage in a dogfight, that's not the story being proferred by the Japanese side. In fact, they actively say they circled (周囲を大きく回り込み) the Chinese fighter, trying to go to its side from the rear (後方から真横につけるポジショニングを試みた), which means first it has to get to the Chinese fighter's rear quarter - which is readable as an attack motion. And most stupidly of all, they suggested they'll do "signal-shooting" (信号射撃) - which reads as a threat using the cannon to anyone elsewhere.

It would have gotten very messy if the Japanese finished that proposed manuever. If they hadn't used the cannon, they still have lots of options and can use restraint as an excuse. Once they shoot the cannon for any reason, it is now "In disputed (Chinese-claimed) airspace, Japanese fighter used cannon at Chinese fighter." Ooo ... explosive.

Further, once that happened, having escalated this far and the Chinese fighter ignores it, Japan is left with the choice of either looking like a real idiot or using weapons "for real".

So it might be just as well the Chinese fighter defeated the Japanese intent.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@commanteer "Uh.. if it's Japan's "home turf" then they can't be framing the Chinese, can they? What are Chinese military aircraft doing in Japan's home turf?"

Chinese navy ships, fighter jets merely exercising Freedom of Navigation like the Americans like to highlight her FONOPs in the South China Sea. Anything wrong with that? JSDF should learn from the Chinese and even the Russians. They never light up other aircraft, so it is clear JSDF is acting thuggish. JSDF can only be a spectator, not a participant.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The islands aren't disputed for one thing, it's 300Km away from the mainland coast you don't need to patrol the area when you can see it on radar and make a scramble launch if a plane is heading towards it.

Japan RESPONDED to PLAAF heading towards the island not the other way around. As for the circling it's normal for the intercepting plane to come side from the back. You can see a similar case on Youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdWZTVATHvA

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Tiring: IR tracking is passive and the target would have no way to know it's being tracked. RF is what sets of the alarms in the target cockpit.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@TriringJUL. 05, 2016 - 10:40PM JST

The islands aren't disputed for one thing

Says the Japanese. And I understand their legal logic for it. But the fact is ... they are.

As for the circling it's normal for the intercepting plane to come side from the back.

That is the standard JASDF tactic, but if you turn the angle around, it is also an attack maneuver and is simply the wrong one to use against a fighter in a disputed region. At least they shouldn't act so shocked when the Chinese refuse to take it this time.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@Kazuaki

That is the standard JASDF tactic, but if you turn the angle around, it is also an attack maneuver and is simply the wrong one to use against a fighter in a disputed region.

So, you admit that this is a standard tactic. Good. If the one doing the trespassing knows this, then there should not be a bit to be shocked about. Standard Procedure. Therefore the complaints of dangerous actions by the Japanese, from the Chinese, who are quite infamously known for doing extremely dangerous actions all the time, just ask US fighter pilots, are just hypocritical whining. There have been so many reports of dangerous Chinese pilots in the ned. Don't play the victim card here. Nobody is buying it.

if you turn the angle around, it is also an attack maneuver

Look at that part of the sentence. "IF". That is what China is doing. Turning it around to mean something that it is not. The action of going in to the disputed territory are dangerous in itself. Japan should not have to just sit on her laurels and not rush planes to the area. That is wrong. Would China do such a thing? Not on your life and you know it and so does everyone else.

At least they shouldn't act so shocked when the Chinese refuse to take it this time.

Incorrect. China should not be shocked at all and it is Japan who should refuse to take it this time and every time. Come to the table and talk. Not bully. It amazes me that you somehow think that it is okay to enter disputed islands that have not belonged to China in eons and eons if ever, and are controlled by another country and have your hands in the air when a pilot does such a thing, ignoring the fact that China should not be there in the first place, and have been very aggressive in many incidents. Here is a clear example of what China is capable of doing and how it behaves. I believe there are many more out there.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/08/22/world/asia/us-china-air-encounter/index.html

0 ( +1 / -1 )

We should aim to overthrow the government and break the country up into manageable pieces.

No, that couldn't possibly end badly (rolls eyes).

Japan have a habit of using home turf advantage . . .

Precisely. It's a lot easer to protect your territory when, well, it's yours.

The salient truth that has to stay at the forefront of this discussion is that China never cared a whit about the Senkakus until the possibility of natural resources was suggested in the early 70s.

Then suddenly it was a empassioned defense of the motherland, Chinese sovereignty, and Chinese pride in the face of humiliating during the Sino-Japanese War some 7 decades ago.

China's intentions and recent acts are entirely transparent and self-serving, not to mention outside the norms of international law.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites