Japan Today

Japan's military chief says South China Sea surveillance possible


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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2015.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

The idea posed by China supporters that Japan took the Senkaku Isands from China (Ching Dynasty) is ridiculous. They often refer to the Sino-Japanese War of 1884/85 wherein a defeated China had to hand over territories to Japan at the Treaty of Shimoneski. This included territories as bg as Taiwan. If Japan for a moment actually thought the Senkaus belonged to China all they had to do was demand it at Shmoneski. Just put it on the list. There would have been no reason to waste tie and effort establishing that it was uninhabited and go hrough the incorporation process. Likewise, China never complained about the incrpratuon either, indicating that they didnt consider it theirs either. China's claims are all fabricated after the fact, the fact that possile oil and gas depsits were discovered in the late 1960s. This explains why PRC maps fromthe 1950s/60s show the as Japanese territory.

2 ( +3 / -1 )


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.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

tokyodoumoJul. 18, 2015 - 01:46AM JST Self Defence Force??? Now with Abe's new legislation altering Article 9 it's now MORE LIKE... Self Attack Force of >Japan.

Israel and Australia also have "Defence" forces. And a "Self Attack Force" would be military that attacks itself.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Self Defence Force??? Now with Abe's new legislation altering Article 9 it's now MORE LIKE... Self Attack Force of Japan.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )


Going by the CCPs logic, China actually belongs to Mongolia, not the other way around. Besides, the ROC has more legitimate claims the CCP ever could. Goodbye, and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

-If you go by the CPP's logic, I'm sure they'd based it on more than just the Yuan and Qing Dynasties, if you know what I mean. If you go by with ROC's logic, then Mongolia would literally be in China right now. FYI, the ROC's territorial claims is far bigger than that of the PRC's. So be careful when you say that they "have more legitimate claims".

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The Japanese Admiral made correct analyses of the security implications in the South China Sea & Western Pacific. China is definitely the threat to the security of the region. That's why PM Abe had the foresight to push through changes in the Constitution, to allow Japanese Forces to assist US and other forces in the region where threats exist. Abe knows the Chinese threats to Japan full well, & also knows China & its staunch ally North Korea are aggressive nations. The combined Forces of the US, Japan, Australia, Philippines will ensure the bullying tactics of the Chinese will not in work, as they will have to face a United Military front. War will therfore be avoided.

0 ( +2 / -2 )


I talked not too long ago about the treaty that turned Hong Kong over to China. I said that treaty was null as the Empire of China no longer existed. Further, the Republic of China (Taiwan) would be the successor under standard rules as under international law the people's republic was a coup govt. The US recognized the PRC and some magic was worked to replace the permanent member status on UN Security Council from Taiwan to PRC.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Ah, look another Chinese propaganda promoter. They really think the rest of the world will believe the tripe spouted by the CCP. Ringman Obama said no such thing. Only your government controlled propaganda machine trying to put words in other peoples mouths in an attempt to "legitimize" its own illegitimate claims. Going by the CCPs logic, China actually belongs to Mongolia, not the other way around. Besides, the ROC has more legitimate claims the CCP ever could. Goodbye, and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

5 ( +6 / -1 )


but Kawano said he was confident the Japan Self Defense Forces (JSDF), as the military is known, would win over public opinion.

Kawano must also have in store a plan to implement a military draft. Today's young Japanese who opt for military service look at their jobs as a 9~5 gig; they haven't the will to fight foreign wars. Forced conscription is right down the road, mark my words.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Anyone who supports the Chinese dictatorship's territorial expansion can not "speak objectively". I have yet to see a China supporter address the PRC maps from the1950s/60s which show the Senkakus to be Japanese. They also harp on the US not recognizing Japanese sovereignty as if that's a green light to grab it. It's a meaningless point as TWO US Secretaries of State, TWO US Secretaries of Defense and the POTUS has stated that the Senkakus falls within US Defense parameters. Having recognized that the East China Sea will cost them a collision with the U.S., they now turn towards the South China Sea and the weaker Asian countries.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

If China were peace loving, it would accept arbitration by International Court of Justice.

Right....like this is the ONLY arbitrator of "peace" in the world.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

ringman2Jul. 17, 2015 - 04:10PM JST

If China were peace loving, it would accept arbitration by International Court of Justice.

All I can read from your post is that China wants wars.

2 ( +9 / -7 )

"Japan’s top military commander, Admiral Katsutoshi Kawano, says he expects China to become increasingly assertive in the South China Sea..."

China's done asserted, dude, they can't be any more than what they are now. They're building islands and bridges in your backyard already. You need better intel.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I would have thought that if China had learned anything in its much-touted 5000 years of "civilization" it would be not to make the exact same stupid mistakes in exactly the same way as other previous human "civilizations". Clearly it has not. If it were really so wise it would now be teaching the world how to live peacefully and harmoniously and we would all be in awe of its clear wisdom. But we are not. Take elements of Imperial Germany, fascism and corporatism, with all its corruption, and you have China. The story does not end well for anyone, not least China itself. How silly.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

This is the reply/post from yesterday (reworded here) regarding same issue. The first part if about the Diayou/Senkaku islands, and followed by the South China Sea issue:

Objectively speaking, the Diayou/Senkaku islands are far from what Japan claims as hers. It can't be denied that it is strange these islands were "given" by USA to Japan, yet the giver cannot say the islands' sovereignty now are Japan's (but only under Japan's administrative control only)? It makes no sense. Moreover, Japan's claims refer to a few decades, but as other media pointed out, China's claims go back further. If China's claims are not clear, then Japan's claims are more dubious (especially as some have said the islands are so close to China). Additionally, last year it was reported that the UK documents showed that indeed China and Japan had agreed to "shelf the islands issue indefinitely" in contradiction to Japan's denials (i.e. Japan breached that agreement, as typical of Japan). And last November, China and Japan agreed on four basic principles (when Xi and Abe met), and these include Japan's admission that there are other valid views/claims (notably China's) and thus China is entitled to her claims and views regarding the said islands (in fact, the agreement says Japan agrees and understands/accepts there are other views, notably China's, regarding the claims to the Diayou/Senkaku islands). So how is the Diayou/Senkaku islands a flashpoint when the two sides have reached this agreement in principle?

Regarding the South China Sea, Obama himself admitted China's claims to the islands in the South China Sea have some merits/legitimacy. Further, any belief that a Hague Tribunal's award (if that happens) to the Philippines regarding her claims to islands (that are claimed also by China) is going to "compel" or "pressure" China to give up her sovereignty claims (by way of military intervention by Japan/USA/Australia/Vietnam/Philippines), then consider that as wishful thinking... really bloated wishful thinking, as some experts have also warned (in fact, the opposite may happen and the Philippines' action could backfire). The Tribunal can't decide sovereignty vs delimitation/demarcation claims and has no real full juridiction, so any judgment is not only invalid but shows the Tribunal has very unclear powers. Further, any award can't be legally enforced as it is not binding, as it is only an "opinion" more or less. Lastly, other countries have ignored Tribunal rulings against them, including the U.S. - even Japan ignored a Tribunal/International judgment against its brutal whaling "scientific" program. Hence, China has the absolute right to reject and ignore any ruling (of which may come five to ten years later), especially one made by a panel with no full or real jurisdiction or one that has contradictory powers. So using this case to support Abe's security bills (and military patrols) is a very unconvincing one (not to mention very risky and Japan's move could spark a response that the Japanese media has speculated could throw the region into turmoil) as Japanese legal experts have indicated so - meaining Japan has no reason taking risks there with its "surveillance" activities (and when such information can already by accessed from a far more "superior" surveillance expert, the U.S.).

These two points above show that Abe's security bills are more than unwarranted because Japan's Coast Guard allows Chinese Coast Guard ships to patrol Diayou/Senkaku islands (and this seems to be the norm now, especially Japan has conceded that China is entitled to her views/claims) and any problems can be handled bilaterally and sufficiently by the current SDF (i.e. no military force needed per these security bills), and because Japan has no business in the South China sea as she is not a claimant there (or, if we go with this Japanese general's and other supporters' reasoning, then China has the right too to support and defend South Korea's claims to Dokdo/Takeshima islands and Russia's claims to the northern islands), objectively speaking.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

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