national

Chinese ships again seen in disputed waters

28 Comments

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

© 2012 AFP

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

28 Comments
Login to comment

but the row erupted earlier this year after the nationalist governor of Tokyo said he wanted to buy them for the city

There goes AFP again. It actually didn't start by that, that actually came after. First part was actually in Nov. of last year when Japan stated all South China Sea disputes be taken up at UN and china instead wanted "bilateral" discussions where they could pressure other countries with economic and military intimidation. The governor of tokyo didn't formally get involved until AFTER a group of chinese citizens tried to illegally land on the island.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

One of the Five Islands that make up the Senkakus has always been owned by the Japanese government. In fact they let the United States use it for live bombing excercises. That never bothered China before. China is simply using the J-govt's purchase of the three islands as an excuse to push their territorial ckaims.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

in related news...

Japanese ships again seen in disputed waters

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Yeah, thanks to JapanToday for keping on top of the news and all but...

Well, most of us are kind of assuming the Chinese patrol ships are going to be staying there till everyone has forgotten about the situation and they can leave without anyone noticing.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Well, the Squirt Guns were not very effective on the dirty little Commies, so I guess Japan is going to have to use the Secret Weapons: The Wet Ear Willie reinforced by the Headlock Noogie...!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is going to be like gokiburi hunting for Japan. These pests will keep cropping up, and after just a a day of inattention, Japan will be faced with a chinese presence on one of these rocks. Mark my words.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

OssanAmerica, China didn't say anything doesn't mean that the islands belong to Japan. You know that China was in no position to say anything then. You also know that the dispute existed long before the purchase of the islands, only that this time Japan pulled the issue out of the shelf instead of letting it lie. So, Japan started it all.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

flowersNov. 22, 2012 - 03:58AM JST China didn't say anything doesn't mean that the islands belong to Japan. You know that China was in no position to say anything then. You also know that the dispute existed long before the purchase of the islands, only that this time Japan pulled the issue out of the shelf instead of letting it lie. So, Japan started it all.

Until the early 1970's, neither China nor Taiwan expressed objections until the findings of potential oil around Senkaku/Daioyu islands. In the Chinese World Atlas published under Mao Zedong in 1960, the Senkaku/Daioyu Islands were treated as part of Okinawa. Why would the Communist China in 1960 make map like this if they knew it was theirs?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It's important to remember that: Silent doesn't mean consent.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

sfjp330, that was only another chain of events. Let’s say if there was no finding of potential oil in the area, would China still claim those islands to be theirs? I bet China still would claim them because in early 1970’s China was coming out of the shell and a lot of issues were still unsettled. I don’t know about the map you mentioned (is it the one that made in Japan?) but China has shown a lot of maps that show those islands belong to China. I tend to believe China more because of the facts they presented to the world, but Japan’s facts are very weak, such as Japan claimed to discover the islands, or why China waited for so long to say something or until the finding of the potential oil, or those islands were not part of the Acts that required the return of those islands after the war. No wonder Japan wants to possess some nukes so that the Japanese government would be viewed as strong and reverts back to its war-like nature.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Flowers, On the time factor, under the customary international law, “a state that fails to contest other states’ assertions of sovereignty over its territory can lose its rights for failure to insist upon them." However, the law isn’t clear as to how much time must pass in order for the invader to claim sovereignty. China’s repeated public assertions that they didn’t recognize Japanese sovereignty would of course cut against this claim, but if in fact they didn’t protest until the 1970s, then perhaps they waited too long? In any case, it looks like Japan is setting up an argument for their sovereignty on several, perhaps cloudy grounds of international law, should this dispute end up in an ICJ.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

flowersNov. 22, 2012 - 03:58AM JST OssanAmerica, China didn't say anything doesn't mean that the islands belong to Japan. You know that China was >in no position to say anything then. You also know that the dispute existed long before the purchase of the islands, >only that this time Japan pulled the issue out of the shelf instead of letting it lie. So, Japan started it all.

No Japan didn't start it all. China started it all AFTER the possibilty of oil/gas became apparent.Chinas never made a claim until the early 1970s. "China was in no position to say say anything" about the Senkakus back then? They could send troops to North Korea to kill UN Soldiers but they were in no position to say anyhting? THey could start a war with India and Vietnam but were in no position to say anything? Anyone with half a brain knows that he J-govt bought thje remaining 3 islands to prevent Ishihara from developing them, ie; to maintain the status quo with China. That the J-govt bought them made absoplutely no material difference to China or their claim, it meerely provided an opportunity to use the "Hate Japan Card" and make the whole country believe that they eere being invaded by Japan at a time when the CCP leadership were once again filling leadships seats despiyr widespread dissatisfaction with govt corruption.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

OssanAmerica, it doesn’t make any sense if China made the claim in early 1970s then waited 40 years to make a big issue out of it now. So, you are saying the government purchased of the islands is the same as the individual purchased, how would that be maintaining the status quo? This is absolutely non-sense. Chinese people decided to do something about it because they are really fed up with Japan; this shows that Chinese people are more united than ever. It is naïve to talk about gov’t corruption when other countries also have their own problems with corruptions including the US.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

flowers, Problem is that after Okinawa was returned to Japan in 1972, in U.S-Japan agreement, Japan agree to adminster Senkaku/Daioyu Islands. To make it clear, Japan does not have sovereignty to Senkaku, but only adminstering rights. If this the case, U.S. needs to define what is "Japan's adminstering rights".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

flowers Nov. 22, 2012 - 08:27AM JST Chinese people decided to do something about it because they are really fed up with Japan; this shows that Chinese people are more united than ever. It is naïve to talk about gov’t corruption when other countries also have their own problems with corruptions including the US.

It becomes quite clear that China does not value long term friendship. It has switched or abandoned its friends when it is convenient or useful to do so. Chinese goverment intentionally damaged many Japanese businesses (approx. over $126 million in damages) that was operating inside China has also awakened the international community of the risk in future investments in China. What this tells you is that the goverment of China will not protect any foreign businesses does not agree with their ideas.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Sfjp330, this is another point. The US would not put something vague like that in writing if it was sure that the islands belong to Japan. “Japan’s administering rights” is totally different from “Japan’s ownership rights”.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Sfjp330, it has nothing to do with long term friendship, but it’s the underlining problem with Japan on not admitting its mistakes from the war. I don’t think there would be an issue with other countries, the business community knows this otherwise there would be a decline of direct investment in China instead of increase.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

It would be more useful if they were Chinese shops. Then you could buy cheap consumer goods from them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China is simply using the J-govt's purchase of the three islands as an excuse to push their territorial claims.

And if the Noda government has took warnings from Chinese leaders 'seriously' such 'embarasment' shall never happened!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

In the past due to the sensitiveness and hostilities between the KMT(nationalist party) and CCP (Chinese communist party) across the strait China was reluctant to send government ships to the Diayoutai?Senkaku isles for the sake to control the conflicts across border and later 1980s the poltical ties mending with Taiwan! It does not mean the PRC has given up those isles! Indeed Chinese ships rarely show up in that area but Japan has misunderstood how Chinese see the soverignity of land and sea! Now the CCP and the KMT under leader Ma YinJeo has made a truce and there they go to get back the lost land! China has never recognizing America under Nixon's dictatorial decision made in 1972 given those isles to japan in the return of Okinawa! And time is right to tell the whole world when US is being a steady decline!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I have said this before and I will say it again. Chinese ship/fishing boats will be there for ever. In some day in the future, you will stop counting but Chinese boats are still there, This is reality and you big mouth (but no action) will realise this.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

comarade_captainNov. 22, 2012 - 04:18PM JST

China is simply using the J-govt's purchase of the three islands as an excuse to push their territorial claims.

They aren't pushing for anything, they are illegally annexing "fishing rights" in an area internationally recognized to be under Japanese control (and therefore Japan controls the rights).

And if the Noda government has took warnings from Chinese leaders 'seriously' such 'embarasment' shall never happened!

What warning? Intimidation isn't warning, it's threats.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Back in September 2010 the trawler collision incident, the Chinese government has warned Japan the Diayoutai isles does not belongs to japan and demanding the release of the trawler captain, Japanese laws were not recognized in that area! And china has to send government ships to take actions to demonstrate her soverignity at sea! Those were no 'intimidations' as you stated! Political tricks of island purchasing from the so called 'Island owner' carryied out by ishihara shintaro was a political swindle that shall never being recognized by China.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Intimidation isn't warning, it's threats.

Yes it is good to describe Japan flying her P-3 plane to show her soverignity over the Diayoutai isles, an intimidation thats why china mobilized warships to cruise!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The Chinese security ships is just a political statement. I guess they believe in old fashioned retorics. By repeating their claim as a growing power they try to make it look like they are living their claim and they wish to convince international opinion on the righteousness of the claim. Well I guess it means that either they have some intellectual deficits at home or they may think that everyone else in the international community has trouble to put two and two together. Maybe both. China step back, and start negotiating trade deals for the resources rather than act like an inferior bully.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

flowersNov. 22, 2012 - 08:27AM JST OssanAmerica, it doesn’t make any sense if China made the claim in early 1970s then waited 40 years to make a >big issue out of it now.

Yes it does. In the early 70s they were still wearing Mao suits and trying to fuigure out how an economy should run. Only now with a strong economy and a declared intent to take over the East and South China Seas do they have the wherewthall to challenge their neighbors and the U.S. as well.

So, you are saying the government purchased of the islands is the same as the individual purchased, how would that be maintaining the status quo? This is absolutely non-sense.

No it;s not nonsense.It;s fact. All you have to do is follow the news and the events that between Ishiara's declared intentuions in April 2012 right up to the purchase by the Japanes government. Try reading somne news sources other than the state controlled Chinese media, or sources which merely quotre them. And please answer this - if the Japansee government has owned one of the 5 Senkaku Islands all this time, why is a big deal to China if that same government buys another three? How does that change China's claim?

Chinese people decided to do something about it because they are really fed up with Japan; this shows that >Chinese people are more united than ever. It is naïve to talk about gov’t corruption when other countries also have >their own problems with corruptions including the US.

Nope, all it shows is that the decades of anti-Japan forced "Patriotic Education" in the Chinese schools has influenced generations of Chinese who have no idea where the Senkakus are. The only Chinese who do are the fishermen. The Chinese mobs, which do not reflect all of Chinese by the way, are a tool of the CCP who lead all Chinese to imagine that China was being "inavaded" by Japan.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

OssanAmerica, you were right. In the early 70s they were still wearing Mao suits and you were right again when you said China now has a strong economy only after 40 years. It jumped from nothing to the 2nd largest economy in the world and it will be the world largest economy in a few years. Of course from nothing before now with more power, it is the time to take back what should belong to China in the first place. But you were wrong to say that China is challenging the US, the reverse is true if you read “China bashing” news. You didn’t answer what the “status quo” meant, if the J gov’t owned 1 of 5 islands then, and what happened now, 4 of 5? It’s just like changing the main players in any sport games. You are really naïve to say that the Chinese are easily influenced, the Chinese are a lot smarter than you think. I don’t know where you got the idea that the CCP led all Chinese to imagine that China was being “invaded” by Japan, the fact is there are still people living today who lived through the war which Japan had never admitted its wrongs and got reminded every year by the Japanese high-level officials at the Shine. It’s not easy to forgive and forget.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@Sentiments: The Chinese security ships is just a political statement. I guess they believe in old fashioned retorics. By repeating their claim as a growing power they try to make it look like they are living their claim

This is better known as 'beat them(Japan) in the game they used to play'! If Japan has never sending ships to explore the natural resource in Diayoutai that belongs to China from their 'greed' and aggresiveness! Then China shall never has used such measure in reply!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

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