politics

Asia tensions simmer as Obama set to arrive in Tokyo

16 Comments
By Linda Sieg

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2014.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

16 Comments
Login to comment

Some pragmatism among the nations could soothe relations and defuse one of the world's hottest tinderboxes.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Good article

1 ( +1 / -0 )

NeoJamalApr. 23, 2014 - 06:58AM JST It's ironic because there is no visible anti-American sentiment in Japan despite no apologies for dropping 2 atomic >bombs.

No it's normal for intelligent civilized peoples to put past conflict behind them and move on. You think Vietnam hates the United Sates?

sfjp330Apr. 23, 2014 - 07:07AM JST It is also important to remember that this was a war being fought against one of the most brutal, racist and destructive >war machines of modern times. No apology is necessary.

For incinerating schoolchildren and civilians? The Japanese Empire was brutal but no more so than the other enemy we were fighting. Or even how the Soviets treated them both. Your comment is disgusting.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

It's certainly important that President Obama's state visit is talked about and reported on in a good light because of the influence the two countries have in the area. Bringing up the use of nuclear arms by the US isn't necessarily bad however it's important to focus on the fact that Japan and the US have moved passed it and are focusing on today's issues instead of complaining about the past. I hope that's something both Abe and Obama keep in mind during the next few days.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I heard something on the oedo line this morning... About due to the american president coming that the train wouldnt stop in certain places.... Whats that all about?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But what would the actual death toll have been had the U.S. made a land invasian in Japan?

Stop perpetrating that lie. The Japanese government was ready to surrender (just not unconditionally, they wanted to save the Emperor which ended up happening, anyway) even before the A-bombs were dropped. The US Air War (which was absolutely a war crime even before the A-bombs) pounded Japan into submission. Invasion was not necessary.

...the delicate task of assuring Japan and other regional allies of America’s commitment to their defense without hurting Washington’s vital ties with a rising China.

And that is the issue, right there. America wants its bases in Japan, but doesn't really want to protect it from China. Japan is starting to realize this, too, hence the frustration on both sides.

'Bout time Japan started to slowly get rid of the US military presence and re-arm itself because there is not way America is going to handicap its own economy to protect Japan from China.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

MGiganteApr. 23, 2014 - 08:46AM JST Stop perpetrating that lie. The Japanese government was ready to surrender

War really is hell. Japan showed little to no mercy towards her enemies and showed no signs of giving up. To the U.S. leadership and to anybody confronted with the reality of possibly invading Japan the bomb would have appeared very attractive because it would mean fewer allied casualties. As to those who argued the question, "what would make the lives of Allied soldiers more valuable than the lives of the Japanese?" My response is as follows... the lives of the Japanese were in universal terms no less valuable than any other, but when at war each side disregarded the value of their enemies' lives. If Japan had possession of the bomb before the Americans I am sure that the Emperor would have been more than happy to use it against his enemies.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

A joint statement to be issued at the summit will state that the two allies will not tolerate any attempt to change the status quo by force - a phrase that implicitly targets China - but not mention the islands by name, Japanese media reported.

To set the record straight, Japan did unequivocally request Whitehouse to put Senkaku Islands on the Obama and Abe’s joint-statement which is issued after their summit on Thur, but the insistence was rejected by the American side. Washington reassured Japan with the defense treaty clause, instead.

For the US, in a region embroiled in territorial disputes, Obama’s Asia trip will have to perform the balancing acts on both areas: to bolster Allies’ faith in American commitments to their security concerns and to protect the economic ties with China. It’s a definitely a difficulty job, but someone has to do it.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

In terms of business, both the US and Japan are both very close to China so let`s what becomes of this. I highly doubt that China will give two squats about what these two discuss politically.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The Chinese government only gets angry over Yasukuni to distract its people from their domestic problems. Abe should stop helping them.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

To set the record straight, Japan did unequivocally request Whitehouse to put Senkaku Islands on the Obama and Abe’s joint-statement which is issued after their summit on Thur, but the insistence was rejected by the American side. Washington reassured Japan with the defense treaty clause, instead.

Not exactly.

But then again, why not ask the man himself?

“The policy of the United States is clear—the Senkaku Islands are administered by Japan and therefore fall within the scope of Article 5 of the U.S.-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security. And we oppose any unilateral attempts to undermine Japan’s administration of these islands,” the U.S leader stated ahead of his visit to Japan starting Wednesday.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Okay so now some of you are going to start arguing about the the events of 1945 again? If a few commentators on a news website can't agree, it's not really likely that whole nations will come to agreement.

So why not just forget about it? It's unsolvable! So, let's concentrate on the future.

The belligerent nations are China and North Korea. If those two countries stop threatening everyone, we'll be okay.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

nigelboy, You just proved my point. :)

Again, before Obama's trip, Japan did unequivocally request Whitehouse to put Senkaku Islands on the Obama and Abe’s joint-statement, but the notion was rejected.

Make no mistake, Japan is American long-term ally, the US has responsibility to protect Japan. But, on the other hand, to be dragged into an armed conflict with China would harm American national interest at this jucture.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Again, before Obama's trip, Japan did unequivocally request Whitehouse to put Senkaku Islands on the Obama and Abe’s joint-statement, but the notion was rejected.

Well, it doesn't sound like a big deal if Obama answered it directly, does it? Just for the sake of argument that such joint statement would be issued in the near future, will you stop with your overestimation of China? It's bad enough that many of the elite Naval power completely embarrassed the Chinese with their refusal to send their hardware to the ceremony.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Japan was vicious and could be again without US sitting on it.

Simply ridiculous.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Again, before Obama's trip, Japan did unequivocally request Whitehouse to put Senkaku Islands on the Obama and Abe’s joint-statement, but the notion was rejected.

EthanWilber,

Not to say it's a big deal but come again?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

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