politics

China IMF boycott a sign of things to come, say analysts

66 Comments

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

© 2012 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

66 Comments
Login to comment

Funny how the Chinese govt now spurns its international responsibilities because of its economic strength, when 10 - 15 years ago it courted developed economies & was given loads of investment capital, assets & infrastructure to acquire that strength. Its like the little kid n the school yard who gets sick & is helped by those around him only to later return as a big, fat kid who then bullies everyone.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

yawn

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Western governments are wearying of China's self-assigned PRIMA DONNA posturing . ...........................Globalization works 2 ways ..................... and CHINA"S TRUST factor has been seriously damaged. ...................... The world does not need China as much as China needs other countries ....................... It will be a rough ride for China as well. ( internally and internationally) ..................................I noted in Canadian news that the Canadian Govt is taking a very strong position in blocking China's investments in Canada .......................

3 ( +6 / -3 )

China actually has a point. a. If you look at its international trade history for the last 20 yrs, China has been working hard to save money for rough times like today. It is about discipline and strong money management, instead of spend-now-and-worry-later methods used by the US and EU countries. NOTE: those western countries's and japan's profits from their enterprises in China are quite high, whereas the Chinese workers do not make much money.

b. China has been investing a lot FDI into many foreign countries, incl. the US and Europe. Read this interesting article: "Under Chinese, a Greek Port Thrives" http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/11/business/global/chinese-company-sets-new-rhythm-in-port-of-piraeus.html?pagewanted=all

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Mano2012 thank's for that link. It was a good article....

0 ( +1 / -1 )

..I noted in Canadian news that the Canadian Govt is taking a very strong position in blocking China's investments in Canada .......................

You meant about the CNOOC-Nexen deal, right? Well, according to a recent article, Canada needs over $600 (6 Hundreds) billions investment in its natural resources industries for the next couple of decades! So tell me how is that gonna help Canada by blocking the $15 billions take over of Nexen by CNOOC when actually Nexen's properties are mostly located overseas (over 70%). Canada will approve that deal.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

As the PRCs economy slows down, the housing bubble will begin.

It's only a matter of time before the PRC is forced to do business the civilized way before it all falls apart at the seams.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Mano2012 thank's for that link. It was a good article....

You are welcome. As you know from my postings, Im pro-China but at the same time Im also trying to inform other posters about the behind-the-scenes interconnections between various countries and industries by looking at them objectively ;)

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

As the PRCs economy slows down, the housing bubble will begin.

Not really, the housing industries are just about 10% of China's economy! "..but residential and nonresidential real estate, combined, accounts for only 15-20% of that – no more than 10% of the overall economy." http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/why-india-is-riskier-than-china

It's only a matter of time before the PRC is forced to do business the civilized way before it all falls apart at the seams.

Sorry, it's not gonna happen any time soon. Why? China has yet to jump start its defense industries. If you look at the US developments: post-ww2 its economy boomed big time due to its huge defense industries, and Reagan did the 2nd phase by further accelerate those industries. Remember, for 1 job in the Big 3 auto industries in the US, there are about 5 other jobs that are connected to Big 3 due to parts and services required to supply those Big 3. Logically, for each 1 job in the Big 3 DEFENSE industries (Boeing, LM..) there are at least 5 jobs that are connected to them as well. China is pushing its auto industries, but the Big Defense industries are yet to come.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

If you really care about IMF, you would find lots of important issues were going on there deserved to be analyzed instead of what level of China representatives to attend. Pls provide some meaningful news here, for example:

**"France's (Finance Minister Pierre) Moscovici expressed gratitude for Japan's purchase of EFSF (European Financial Stability Facility) bonds, as this has contributed to financial stability in Europe. "

"If downside risks subside, including the instability of the financial market and global economic slowdown due to the European sovereign debt crisis, we expect that Japan's GDP will grow about 2 percent in fiscal 2012."

"the contagion risk that would entail an exit of Greece from the euro zone. "

"On potential Spanish aid request:This is a sovereign decision ... Europe, if the moment comes, would be in a position to answer to a Spanish aid request. "................**

1 ( +1 / -0 )

“Uncertainties related to fiscal sustainability weigh on sentiment and confidence, negatively affecting consumption, investment, and hiring decisions,” Yi said.

“The slow recovery in these major advanced economies poses costly spillover effects to the rest of the world,” he added.

Those are two brief and to the point statements.

The West is not doing a very good job of cleaning up the mess created by the corrupt finance sector and their proxy politicos.

"China loses out". That's silly. Why not simply wait and see what the West is going to do to get its fiscal house in order.

Granted, Americans were bamboozled into paying for the invasion of Iraq orchestrated by the oil industry robber barons with GW as their front man, so i is necessary to exercise discretion when laying blame.

On the other hand, the two succinct statements by the officials from China are absolutely right.

The West needs to do more than provide lip service.

Incidentally, he government of China did state that it will support he EU's efforts at fiscal recovery, if they can ever agree on a concrete plan.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

mano2012Oct. 14, 2012 - 05:02PM JST Not really, the housing industries are just about 10% of China's economy!

So your contension is that the PRC economy is fine and the housing industry is not going to be effected if it continues to slow down?

mano2012Oct. 14, 2012 - 05:02PM JST Sorry, it's not gonna happen any time soon. Why? China has yet to jump start its defense industries. If you look at the US developments: post-ww2 its economy boomed big time due to its huge defense industries, and Reagan did the 2nd phase by further accelerate those industries.

But that same defense spending during the Reagan years nearly bankrupted the nation. Defense spending is never a boom for a nation it's an expense.

You are right about one thing, the PRC is going to rev-up it's defense spending, but all that will do is cause more of a strain on it's economy than it can handle. Remember, the Soviet Union was larger than the PRC is right now. But when it began to spend on it's military that's when it's bubble caved in.

mano2012Oct. 14, 2012 - 05:02PM JST Remember, for 1 job in the Big 3 auto industries in the US, there are about 5 other jobs that are connected to Big 3 due to parts and services required to supply those Big 3. Logically, for each 1 job in the Big 3 DEFENSE industries (Boeing, LM..) there are at least 5 jobs that are connected to them as well. China is pushing its auto industries, but the Big Defense industries are yet to come.

Again, to rev-up it's defense industry will take lots of training, man hours and money. Pushing money into a burning pit is a waste. But if the PRC thinks it has moeny to burn well then by all means have at it.

If the PRC actually wanted to do something more productive it would expand it's nation infrastructure and train it's people better. But doing that would take away from it's true ambitions and that is where the problem lies.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

So your contension is that the PRC economy is fine and the housing industry is not going to be effected if it continues to slow down?

No. But it won't make China crash.

But that same defense spending during the Reagan years nearly bankrupted the nation. Defense spending is never a boom for a nation it's an expense.

You are right about one thing, the PRC is going to rev-up it's defense spending, but all that will do is cause more of a strain on it's economy than it can handle. Remember, the Soviet Union was larger than the PRC is right now. But when it began to spend on it's military that's when it's bubble caved in.

It won't bankcrupt China due to: a. China's defense budget is still small in terms of % of its GDP. b. China still needs a lot of modernization in its Navy and airforce.

Again, to rev-up it's defense industry will take lots of training, man hours and money. Pushing money into a burning pit is a waste. But if the PRC thinks it has moeny to burn well then by all means have at it. If the PRC actually wanted to do something more productive it would expand it's nation infrastructure and train it's people better. But doing that would take away from it's true ambitions and that is where the problem lies.

You are right about infrastructure. Actually the US's success in the 2nd half of the 20th century were due to: a. First, Its huge spending in building the infrastructure b. Big defense industries

China is already doing its infrastructure and continuing to spend more on these, and the next big one is the Defense industries.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

But that same defense spending during the Reagan years nearly bankrupted the nation. Defense spending is never a boom for a nation it's an expense. You are right about one thing, the PRC is going to rev-up it's defense spending, but all that will do is cause more of a strain on it's economy than it can handle. Remember, the Soviet Union was larger than the PRC is right now. But when it began to spend on it's military that's when it's bubble caved in.

It won't bankcrupt China due to:

a. China's defense budget is still small in terms of % of its GDP.

b. China still needs a lot of modernization in its Navy and airforce.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The dangerous thing about China is that it is a country with a vendatta - against Japan and the West. It still hasn't forgotten the Boxer Rebellion and what unfolded subsequently. I think it is a country that needs healing.

But Japan is only pouring salt into its wounds.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Meanwhile the environment survives a little longer.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China is a communist country. So expect this things to happen.

Mikemiro has a point.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

mano2012Oct. 14, 2012 - 05:52PM JST You are right about infrastructure. Actually the US's success in the 2nd half of the 20th century were due to: a. First, Its huge spending in building the infrastructure

Correct but that building took place over a 30 year period, fromt the 1930's until the 1960's. The PRC by contrast as a whole is still living in the 1920's. So the PRC will not be up to par until around 2050.

Now if the PRC goes into overdrive and spends everything they can building up they could cut that timefrmae by about 10 years. But if it out builds what it's nation can handle then it will be in trouble.

mano2012Oct. 14, 2012 - 05:52PM JST b. Big defense industries China is already doing its infrastructure and continuing to spend more on these, and the next big one is the Defense industries.

That is the biggest mistake it can do at this time. The PRC does not have any true threats in the region. Russia, Korea, Japan and the United States do not wish a war with them they need the PRC's cheap labor.

So to spend good money on bad investments is truely shortsighted. The no plane carrier is a perfect example of this.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

The West fed & made China what it is today. Yeah sure China did some too but if the west never let Chinese study at Uni's all over the world since the 80s, nurtured connections, invested heavily in China, allowed China to steal & copy & milk technology since the 80s, etc etc..............

If that didnt happen China wud be no where near where it is today, to be sure China & its people worked hard but the west GAVE/ALLOWED China an aweful lot............. & here we are.

Its starting to look like while the west's rich are making out like thieves wrt to all this & have devastated a lot of industry in the west & now even white collar jobs there, we may have created a real monster in China.

Hopefully China will be smarter & not stir the pot so much, BUT if it does, the west(while messed up financially) can still take the monster down if need be......... hopefully it wont come to that but it cud!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Correct but that building took place over a 30 year period, fromt the 1930's until the 1960's. The PRC by contrast as a whole is still living in the 1920's. So the PRC will not be up to par until around 2050. Now if the PRC goes into overdrive and spends everything they can building up they could cut that timefrmae by about 10 years. But if it out builds what it's nation can handle then it will be in trouble.

You cannot really compare China and the US by using linear methods because both have different demographic, political and economic growth/plans.

That is the biggest mistake it can do at this time. The PRC does not have any true threats in the region. Russia, Korea, Japan and the United States do not wish a war with them they need the PRC's cheap labor. So to spend good money on bad investments is truely shortsighted. The no plane carrier is a perfect example of this.

then I have 2 news for you! http://csis.org/publication/military-balance-asia-1990-2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2Vjn7RkrJU&feature=related -- watch the top left guy talking about the US

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The West fed & made China what it is today. Yeah sure China did some too but if the west never let Chinese study at Uni's all over the world since the 80s, nurtured connections, invested heavily in China, allowed China to steal & copy & milk technology since the 80s, etc etc.............. If that didnt happen China wud be no where near where it is today, to be sure China & its people worked hard but the west GAVE/ALLOWED China an aweful lot............. & here we are.

Many many centuries ago, the center of knowledge was in China, India, and the Middle-east, and eventually several centuries ago it then moved to France, then Germany, then UK, and finally to the US. Now, it is shifting back to the east: China, and eventually India will join back in.

Its starting to look like while the west's rich are making out like thieves wrt to all this & have devastated a lot of industry in the west & now even white collar jobs there, we may have created a real monster in China. Hopefully China will be smarter & not stir the pot so much, BUT if it does, the west(while messed up financially) can still take the monster down if need be......... hopefully it wont come to that but it cud!

Not really. Again, it's all coming back in circle. Read about the Silk Road etc. China had been trading with many countries centuries and centuries ago. China had a bad century, basically from around mid 1800s to mid 1900s.

It's like saying the West allowing Germany to become a manufacturing Giant. Thats nonsense. The fact is: China having population over 10 times that of Germany will surely have a bigger impact!

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Funny how the Chinese govt now spurns its international responsibilities because of its economic strength

Funny it is indeed because the economic strength isn't going to last for much longer. Why? One reason is that the people - the masses - are becoming aware of the fact they are being screwed. They want their piece of the pie. It won't take them long to realize their anger and hatred should not be directed at Japan but at their own government for not allowing them a reasonable income, proper housing, an end to corruption, confiscation of property, freedom of information and speech, and I'm sure one can come up with a couple more issues.

The China economic boom is winding down - quickly, like the one that occurred in Japan in the 70s and 80s. The big difference is the political climate. The blend of communism, quasi communism, (quasi?) capitalism creates a volatile mix, the surprises it may create, worries the Chinese leaders, hence their anxiousness to come up with diversions.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Dealing Communist Chinese Government is always to be like marred with crazy woman. Japanese Government must change its monetary strategy because Japanese Yen was created overvalue by its rival countries. They can't compete quality with Japanese products. Japan must do something for devalue Yen otherwise Japanese Companies will lose most of their market to Korean, Taiwan and Communist china. Also, struggling Hi Tech farms and Tool makers can be attracting by country like Communist China, to selling their secrete Hi Tech information in black market

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Sir_EdgarOct. 14, 2012 - 06:31PM JST The dangerous thing about China is that it is a country with a vendatta - against Japan and the West. It still hasn't >forgotten the Boxer Rebellion and what unfolded subsequently. I think it is a country that needs healing. But Japan is only pouring salt into its wounds.

Japan apologized for and settled all WWII issues directly with Mao Tse Tung and Chou En Lai in 1972 with both nations signing the Sino-Japanese Treaty of Friendship, reaffirmed again in 1978. Japan as the first "western" (as in democratic) nation to invest in China and suppport it's modernizxation. Japan pre-empted Ishiharab from provoking China by buying he islands. Yet, China chose to escalate the issue and act like a 5 year old. By mixing politics with economics China has gained zero support in this world, only criticism.Japan is hardly "pouring salt into it's wounds". China is an aggressor nation that is threateing all of it;s Asian neighbors and is unfit for any leadership role in the world as this article indicates.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Japan apologized for and settled all WWII issues directly with Mao Tse Tung and Chou En Lai in 1972 with both nations signing the Sino-Japanese Treaty of Friendship, reaffirmed again in 1978. Japan as the first "western" (as in democratic) nation to invest in China and suppport it's modernizxation. Japan pre-empted Ishiharab from provoking China by buying he islands. Yet, China chose to escalate the issue and act like a 5 year old. By mixing politics with economics China has gained zero support in this world, only criticism.Japan is hardly "pouring salt into it's wounds". China is an aggressor nation that is threateing all of it;s Asian neighbors and is unfit for any leadership role in the world as this article indicates.

Your logic is the same as that of Noda's, it's called Insanity! How could one say he owns something in the first place, and then later buys it to confirm what he said!

Here's a recent article from China though: http://www.chinadailyapac.com/article/facing-war-history-and-facts

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

mano2012Oct. 15, 2012 - 12:31AM JST Your logic is the same as that of Noda's, it's called Insanity! How could one say he owns something in the first place, and then later buys it to confirm what he said!

There is nothing wrong with OssanAmerica's logic, as well as Noda's. Don't twist the words. The notion is commonly known as private property, also in China. The land, which constitutes certain country and lies within the country's borders does often belong to private individuals, and not to the government of the said country. By buying the land from those individuals, the government did not make the land more or less Japanese, as Chinese are trying to speculate, but it did remove the islands from being the object and the tool of future extremist deeds, press and public speculations and shows by Japanese nationalists.

Now, when the islands are out of reach by Japanese extremists, the Chinese decided to pick up Ishihara's job. Do you realize, mano2012, that now there is no need to have Ishihara at all to make things worse? Noda did a very wise move by buying those islands for the sake of Japan AND China. Unfortunately, he could not predict that he should deal with both Ishihara and China united in their intentions.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The conflicts between China and Japan will without a doubt hurt the Chinese and Japanese economically, but the question is who will be hurt the most? China's growth is slowing down and Japan isn't exactly in a comfortable position due to it's rising yen and the tsunami last year. If one side doesn't back down from that stupid island dispute it's going to pass the point of no return. Japan cannot hope to use its economy to "punish" China anymore and China can't really risk it.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@mano2012: just FYI, how China is wasting people's money: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19049254 http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1975397,00.html http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/bizarre-chinas-eerie-ghost-cities-arise/

To keep the growth high, they spent and spent and spent on constructions. In a earlier post you said that it's a 30-year plan by the PRC gov, really? No idiots would build a highrise to let it be empty for 3 decades, roads that no cars run on.

It's demand that leads to supply, while supply doesn't mean demand will arise.

Not to mention, most of these constructions are low quality due to corruption, they won't last that long.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

What is coming out of Communist China sounds very much like the crud that came out of 1930's Japan. It is delusional paranoid rantings of a country that has serious internal problems. So Communist China is resorting to Nationalist crud to keep peoples minds off of their true problems.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Why throw a hissy fit when a nation of no value and little importance doesn't show up at such a meeting? Can we have some consistency please.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The China govt is getting a bit sloppy with thier scrooge mcduck style riches in a comunist country. This is a perfect smokescreen to distract the masses.

I know they watch the news and with the population of china a revoution would undoubtably be short and quick for the Marie Antonette style members of parliament. Best way to avoid a revolution is to create an enemy. In this case it was an easy one; Japan.

The arab nations have been blaming everything on Israel since the sixties and the strategy has worked well until recent. People have had enough dispite the propaganda being shoved down thier throats since birth. Same will happen in miserable China

0 ( +1 / -1 )

This simply reflects China's pivot away from Japan and the IMF. No more, no less.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

It's unfortunate China refuses to help, but I do have to agree with some folk who believe the West got themselves in a mess. If the west stopped spending trillions of dollars losing wars they might be able to rebuild their country and have enough skilled workers to build their high tech and cheap products. If America can't win the war in Iraq they should stop fighting wars. Seriously when was the last time America won a war after ww2?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

To keep the growth high, they spent and spent and spent on constructions. In a earlier post you said that it's a 30-year plan by the PRC gov, really? No idiots would build a highrise to let it be empty for 3 decades, roads that no cars run on.

It's demand that leads to supply, while supply doesn't mean demand will arise.

Not to mention, most of these constructions are low quality due to corruption, they won't last that long.

We shall see.. Im not an urban planner or even in any related field, however, just by reading this report alone, it would not be difficult to arrive at a conclusion that the gov has calculated their tasks.

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/urban-trends-and-policy-in-china_225205036417

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

mano2012Oct. 15, 2012 - 12:31AM JST Your logic is the same as that of Noda's, it's called Insanity! How could one say he owns something in the first >place, and then later buys it to confirm what he said!

No, private ownership of property and what country that property is part of are two different isses. But I won't bother explaining this basic concept to you as another poster has already done so. It's far from "insanity" as you call it, it's common sense, When the Japanese government pre-empted Ishihara from developing the islands, i.e; "provoking China" if you want to call it, they acted to maintain the status quo. From a practical point of view the Japanese government's purchase made no difference to China whatsoever, the Senkakus still were under Japanese administration, and China still has a claim. Situation unchanged. The Chinese government could have accepted this solution, but instead they chose to use the purchase by the Japanese government as an excuse to escalate the issue into a political amd economic crisis, destroying the Sino-Japanese goodwill that has been in place for 40 years and now isolating itself from not just Japan but the rest or the world. Good luck to them because they've proven to the world that they are far from leadership materiel.

Here's a recent article from China though: http://www.chinadailyapac.com/article/facing-war-history-and-facts

No point in quoting Chinese state controlled propaganda to support any discussion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There is nothing wrong with OssanAmerica's logic, as well as Noda's. Don't twist the words. The notion is commonly known as private property, also in China. The land, which constitutes certain country and lies within the country's borders does often belong to private individuals, and not to the government of the said country. By buying the land from those individuals, the government did not make the land more or less Japanese, as Chinese are trying to speculate, but it did remove the islands from being the object and the tool of future extremist deeds, press and public speculations and shows by Japanese nationalists.

and

No, private ownership of property and what country that property is part of are two different isses. But I won't bother explaining this basic concept to you as another poster has already done so. It's far from "insanity" as you call it, it's common sense, When the Japanese government pre-empted Ishihara from developing the islands, i.e; "provoking China" if you want to call it, they acted to maintain the status quo. From a practical point of view the Japanese government's purchase made no difference to China whatsoever, the Senkakus still were under Japanese administration, and China still has a claim. Situation unchanged. The Chinese government could have accepted this solution, but instead they chose to use the purchase by the Japanese government as an excuse to escalate the issue into a political amd economic crisis, destroying the Sino-Japanese goodwill that has been in place for 40 years and now isolating itself from not just Japan but the rest or the world. Good luck to them because they've proven to the world that they are far from leadership materiel.

huh. accept that solution? lol. what planet r u from? The fact is: Noda went to the UN and said in front of all countries that the islands belong to japan! If his intention was genuine in the first place, he would have Let ishihara do his deeds and then the japan gov would take care of the situation with a strong hammer for Ishihara! But instead, Noda/gov just ignored the Diplomatic agreement btw Deng & Tanaka that the issue should be Shelved until further notice, forever if necessary.

No point in quoting Chinese state controlled propaganda to support any discussion.

No. I have posted countless of other links: here are 2 from Japanese professors!

http://www.skycitygallery.com/japan/diaohist.html http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-china-japan-islands-20120925,0,216163.story

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Noda was in a dilemma: nationalise the islands to prevent Ishihara - if Ishihara got control of those islands, Japanese people, right wing or not, would be dragged into war so fast they wouldn't even have time to think why; on the other hand, Noda's move broke the status quo which was: we have dispute over the "ownership" but for the sake to build our two countries' peaceful relationship, we set it aside. His move actually forced China to claim ownership despite his intension was probably to prevent the issue from getting out of control in right wingers' hands./ Give us 3 reasons why China should aid Myanmar, whether that meeting was chaired by Japanese or not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Beijing may be deft at steering its economy and has all the right to lecture on the financial mismanagement by the West but she does not seem to realize what it means for some insurance firms to stop insuring against riots in China. Social infrastructure is not only roads and bridges and power lines. Frequent occurrence of labor disputes and the large populace not civilized with democracy and diversity of values are also a risk to the world economy. It may not be a mere coincidence that Lenovo decided to transfer PC production to Japan.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Not really. Again, it's all coming back in circle. Read about the Silk Road etc. China had been trading with many countries centuries and centuries ago. China had a bad century, basically from around mid 1800s to mid 1900s

Mano,

As China wud say that was from ANCIENT TIMES! We are talking about present/recent history now, two very different times. China is doing well for itself but like I have said many many times its totaly unsustainable, the govt is TERRIFIED of its own people! China is making a monstrous bubble right now, it IS going to burst & we have seen how Chinese can react, the govt WONT be able to control their own or they will kill many thousands of their own, either way it spells DOOM for China as it is seen today!

There is NO WAY to keep going at this pace, China will either explode, implode or do both pretty much back to back, only question is when, the fire cracker has been lite already, now we just wait.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Noda was in a dilemma: nationalise the islands to prevent Ishihara

That's not how the Chinese all over the world view it. There are other administrative ways to ban the sale initiated by Ishihara - it looks like good cop-bad cop Kabuki to bring about the nationalization of the islands. In many ways, even Tokyo buying the islands is a lesser evil than nationalization in legal terms, as it still remains in the domain of "private" hands, and can be interpreted as illegal occupation by a private party. The conflict can still be contained by some sort of agreement.

I am sorry to say, it looks likely Japan-China relations will not recover from this for the crucial next few years, as the US proxies are firmly in the driving seat of Japan's FP.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

what it means for some insurance firms to stop insuring against riots in China.

I assure you many other insurers are waiting at the door for Japanese companies to exit...China has been and will be one of the most stable countries for growth for the foreseeable future. The widespread media play-up of the riots give a distorted view. In terms of riots & protests as a % of population, US-Europe combined, China has been relatively uneventful compared to Europe, not to mention other developing regions.

China's civil protests usually stem from injustice and corruption, and with a relatively free and vocal internet community, such corrupt practices have seen more exposure, which helps to mitigate the circumstances, prevent future abuses, and provide a valve for social unrest. There's such a skewed view of freedom of expression in China by the global media, focusing on the anomalies, and blacking out the positives, it is an unhealthy underestimation of the country. It is only when one actually travels and lives there that a clearer picture emerges, warts and all.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I can see that mono2012 is one of only few rational commentator here and all people against him are commenting with emotional but not facts. mono2012, you do not need to reply everyone who does not have any knowledge about China and world geopolitics because you are playing music to the cow.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

"There's such a skewed view of freedom of expression in China by the global media, focusing on the anomalies, and blacking out the positives, it is an unhealthy underestimation of the country. It is only when one actually travels and lives there that a clearer picture emerges, warts and all." Well pointed, Qwerty2012.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

am i again the only one here who hasnt completely forgotten the past 200 years? I dont really know the beef between china and japan but i know the 'enlightened' (as if) western world has been bashing them for years and years on everything from civil liberties to how they handle things, birth control, death penalties (i hear they at least use the organs of the convicts for transplants for people in need, is that true or not? who knows) Other than that there has been colonization, the opium wars and what not. And now, now the dragon is rising they expect them to behave according to their rules. I live in europe, right, i dont live in china altho if i could have i would have move eastward years ago. Circumstances being what they are for me, some people on top need to make a reality check and maybe start adding pretty please to their words. Thats history boys and girls, not just my opinion

1 ( +1 / -0 )

it is ok people can see clearly the real face of china . china is only barking nicely but all others is dishonest , lying , bullying , cheating , selfish , small minded , and mean it

0 ( +0 / -0 )

it is ok people can see clearly the real face of china . china is only barking nicely but all others is dishonest , lying , bullying , cheating , selfish , small minded , and mean it

btw, you might want to read this academic thesis on Diaoyu issue: http://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/10092/4085/1/thesis_fulltext.pdf

and since we are on the boycott subject, Im wondering what the Sept. data would look like, here is the Aug one:

10/15/2012 12:49 AM ET Japanese industrial production declined 1.6 percent in August from a month ago, bigger than the 1.3 percent drop initially estimated, final data from the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry showed Monday. On a yearly basis, output was down 4.6 percent.

Growth in shipments was revised down to 0.2 percent from 0.4 percent, while inventory fell 1.6 percent, in line with initial estimate. Inventory ratio dropped 2.3 percent compared to the preliminary estimate of 2.9 percent decrease.

Capacity utilization slipped by seasonally adjusted 2.6 percent month-on-month in August, reversing last month's 0.5 percent growth.

http://www.rttnews.com/1982878/japan-aug-industrial-output-falls-more-than-initial-forecast.aspx

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

mano2012Oct. 16, 2012 - 04:24AM JST btw, you might want to read this academic thesis on Diaoyu issue: http://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/10092/4085/1/thesis_fulltext.pdf

What exactly do you propose to read within the 247 pages of the thesis? Please, refer to particular pages and the point, which the thesis supports, or does not support, especially with respect to the statement you quoted or the article, in general.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Qwerty2012Oct. 15, 2012 - 01:19PM JST "Noda was in a dilemma: nationalise the islands to prevent Ishihara" - That's not how the Chinese all over the world view it.

I agree with that. It is wrong.

There are other administrative ways to ban the sale initiated by Ishihara...

Would you, please, elaborate. I seriously would like to know more. Please keep in mind that Japan employs democratic mechanisms, and thus, can not issue directives, give orders to the individuals, elected by people, or simply confiscate the stuff. It is possible to disgrace Ishihara by planting a prostitute or some such, but not sure it will work. What ways do you propose?

In many ways, even Tokyo buying the islands is a lesser evil than nationalization in legal terms, as it still remains in the domain of "private" hands, and can be interpreted as illegal occupation by a private party.

But Japan does not agree, that the islands are illegally occupied by a private party and does not want to maintain a feeling of this interpretation in Chinese government. You just accused J-gov that it does not want to support Chinese feelings that the islands are theirs. You are joking, right? Otherwise, please tell me at least one reason, why having the land in private hands is a lesser evil that in governmental hands. You say "many ways", and thus, you will be able to name at least a few. Please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

michikokadaOct. 15, 2012 - 07:22AM JST Noda was in a dilemma: nationalise the islands to prevent Ishihara - if Ishihara got control of those islands, His move actually forced China to claim ownership despite his intension was probably to prevent the issue from getting out of control in right wingers' hands./ Give us 3 reasons why China should aid Myanmar, whether that meeting was chaired by Japanese or not.

Japan actually broke the 1978 agreement. If was so clear to you, why would Japan agree to a treaty? In 1978, why didn't Japan say there is no dispute. In 1978, the Senkaku/Daiyou islands issue was put on side, and two leaders agreed to resolve for the future generations. Japan and China clearly understood that there is a dispute that persists today and the goverment islands purchased inflamed the problem. Besides, what is the local Mayor like senile Ishihara involved in interntional affairs? Ishihara should focused on cleaning up his rat infested city like Tokyo.

Senile Ishihara's motives were both designed primarily to advance their domestic political interests, not their people’s. In each case, tolerating Ishihara's interpretation would not immediately resolve these territorial disputes. Blame for the crisis to Ishihara. Noda could have played the role of wise statesman, blocking Tokyo’s provocative purchase of the uninhabited rocks and calling for new rounds of serious negotiations that was put on hold in 1978 with China, and manage the territorial dispute in ways that would preserve and serve both nations’ interests. Instead, fearing LDP charges of bowing to Beijing, Noda bowed to Ishihara, and the DPJ cabinet approve the islands purchase. Time for Noda to step down.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan actually broke the 1978 agreement.

What agreement and what part of the said agreement did they break sfjp330?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I am sure sfjp330 means the Treaty of Peace and Friendship between Japan and the People's Republic of China, 1978, but I am not sure which part of this agreement Japan broke as I do not know all the details of it.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Probably this: "The Japanese Coast Guard has been stationing patrol boats to track Chinese fishing boats around the Senkaku Islands, but it had never captured or arrested a Chinese boat, although it vigorously monitored boats from Taiwan and Hong Kong. In the Senkaku territorial sea, partly because of the agreement with Deng Xiaoping to shelve the territorial dispute between Japan and China, both countries adopted the attitude of avoiding conflict at the governmental level, even if political activists among the people demanded the protection of the Senkaku/Diaoyutai Islands. This time, however, the Japanese authorities captured a Chinese boat and arrested the captain. This is an epoch-making event that signifies a reversal of policies toward China."

From here, by Tanaka Sakai: http://www.japanfocus.org/-tanaka-sakai/3418

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am sure sfjp330 means the Treaty of Peace and Friendship between Japan and the People's Republic of China, 1978, but I am not sure which part of this agreement Japan broke as I do not know all the details of it.

Yes I know. If anything, it's China that's breaking it by interfeing with Japan's internal affairs. Whether China likes it or not, a transaction of a Japanese land between Japanese nationals whether it be government or private individuals are in fact, an internal affair.

Probably this

The fishermen entered the territorial waters (within 12 NM) and subsequenly rammed JCG which made it a "crime" under Japanese law.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

This article, I mentioned, (or somewhere else, I don't remember now) suggests that it could be up side down, where it is JCG did deliberately rammed and captured the captain, and everybody just took the JCG explanation as nobody else was there. Hypothetically, this could also be the case. If it is, it partially shifts responsibility to Japan, as it is what Chinese believe.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

PS. I believe, that the Chinese captain was warned, but did not comply, and thus, was captured. The ramming came later to justify the resulting sh*t storm.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The 1997 China-Japan Fisheries Agreement and other agreements does show, definitively, that the Japanese action marked a striking departure from policies that have been in effect since at least 1978 when China and Japan resumed a diplomatic relation finalized a agreement to defer action on competing claims to the Senkaku/Diaoyutai islands. Why have this agreement if Japan can't honor this agreement?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

nigelboyOct. 16, 2012 - 06:04AM JST Yes I know. If anything, it's China that's breaking it by interfeing with Japan's internal affairs. Whether China likes it or not, a transaction of a Japanese land between Japanese nationals whether it be government or private individuals are in fact, an internal affair.

Problem is Japan is the only country that is saying they have bogus claim of soverignty. All neighboring countries, Russia, NK, SK, China, or Taiwan does not recognize the soverignty, so what does it matter. Tell me any international countries recognize Japan's claim of soverignty for Senkaku/Daiyou?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

KonstaOct. 16, 2012 - 06:19AM JST PS. I believe, that the Chinese captain was warned, but did not comply, and thus, was captured. The ramming came later to justify the resulting sh*t storm.

Has this ever happend after 1997 fishing agreement between Japan and China? This was a first time. Why is there sudden departure from leave these fisherman alone to capture procedure? The Chinese fisherman has done what you describe many decades and JCG left them alone. Now, the 1997 fishing agreement with Japan is worthless. Japan breached the agreement.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mikemiroOct. 14, 2012 - 03:53PM JST

Funny how the Chinese govt now spurns its international responsibilities because of its economic strength, when 10 - 15 years ago it courted developed economies & was given loads of investment capital, assets & infrastructure to acquire that strength. Its like the little kid n the school yard who gets sick & is helped by those around him only to later return as a big, fat kid who then bullies everyone.

This is the truth and many are shouting this for the last 4 years.... Now this is the time to teach China a lesson. All Asian countries should unite to oppose China and its products to weak their economy. Word of mouth is the best way to spread it... Let Chinese spyies to read it too.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Would you, please, elaborate. I seriously would like to know more. Please keep in mind that Japan employs democratic mechanisms, and thus, can not issue directives, give orders to the individuals, elected by people, or simply confiscate the stuff.

@Konsta,

The Japanese government has the authority to ban or put in place red tape or administrative statutes on its own public servants and agencies from participation of any transactions of the islands. This can all be done within its own internal structure and control system. Of course Ishihara could have bought the islands as a private citizen, but that's fine as it doesn't change the legal status quo.

Not many are familiar with the legal perspective from China's side, but in a detente, there're always two different frames of reference to avoid the question national defense, Japan's and China's. From China's perspective, if you can read kanji, it's probably clearer. The islands were for decades "个人非法占有" "private illegal occupation" by a Japanese family, which is ok, and doesn't require military action to oust the illegal occupants (there are none anyway, no one lives there, just on paper..), now it is "“国有化”"nationalized" = “国家占有" "illegal occupation by country" = "侵略""invasion".

If Tokyo has bought the islands, it's still "公有化" "public occupation", and China can take the matter directly to Tokyo Municipal Govt. “国家占有" is the no go zone, and this is where China has to match the degree of escalation with its own “国家""national" response to protect its territory.

The next step after "nationalization" is the drawing up of the baseline of the islands by Japan, and then claims are staked as to the EEZ and airspace. This is an enormous stretch from Tokyo to the islands, crossing the Okinawa Trough right at China's doorstep. I don't think the Japanese or US media are reporting the steps that the Japanese government has laid out clearly to gradually formalize and increase its control over the islands, and by default of UNCLOS, these huge sea territories right off China to the Japanese or global audience, however, the Chinese media has been paying attention and has reported these announcements.

China could have done all that - sending out Marine Patrols, Coast Guards, etc., prior to this "nationalization", but didn't because of the agreement to not raise the temperature on this islands issue, which first became a huge problem because of UNCLOS in 1970s, allowing tiny specks in the sea to generate huge EEZ areas, thus China-Taiwan would LOSE a substantial area of its sea coast and airspace to Japan. Prior to UNCLOS, the islands didn't matter as much, as the islands were of little consequence, and the maritime territories were more equally attributed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Konsta

You just accused J-gov that it does not want to support Chinese feelings that the islands are theirs.

It is pointless to insist on Japan's frame of reference as the right one, because China sees its own frame of reference as the right one as well - not "terra nullius", illegally annexed in 1895 with Taiwan as part of Taiwan's many islands (since Ryukyus were annexed in 1879), to be returned under Cairo & Postdam Declaration.

The proximity of the islands to China's coast at the point where all maritime traffic to and from China can be controlled means it is unlikely China can afford to give them up. Would Japan cede the coastal seas off Tokyo to China without a fight? NO. So why would China agree for Japan to seize the seas next to Shanghai and Taiwan? For all the talk of aggression from China, the nation held back as long as it could, hoping to reach an agreement. If Japan wants the resources, oil and gas, China has proposed joint-development. It is the geo-strategic territorial issue that cannot be yielded.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@michikokada

I sincerely hope you are a Japanese national, as yours is one of the most enlightened perspective I've come across. In the 1970s, China simply wanted the issue shelved, as it did with the Zhou-Tanaka, when it was raised, because China wanted Tanaka to return to Japan with a victory and not a loss, and it was indeed shelved for the greater good of both nations until these recent years.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The 1997 China-Japan Fisheries Agreement and other agreements does show, definitively, that the Japanese action marked a striking departure from policies that have been in effect since at least 1978 when China and Japan resumed a diplomatic relation finalized a agreement to defer action on competing claims to the Senkaku/Diaoyutai islands. Why have this agreement if Japan can't honor this agreement?

The 1997 China-Japan fisheries agreement does not include policies in regards to "territorial waters".

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Again, China is hurting themselves. They are sending a strong negative message to global economy that they are not willing to play a majority rule of Free and FAIR trade partner. This (anti-china sentiment) will spread like virus among global business communities and the consequence is huge.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Let's see if China will boycott the next G20 meeting. China has been a cry-baby and demanding to be included to G7 members. China is playing a double standard in global market, and they should not be trusted.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If Tokyo has bought the islands, it's still "公有化" "public occupation", and China can take the matter directly to Tokyo Municipal Govt. “国家占有" is the no go zone, and this is where China has to match the degree of escalation with its own “国家""national" response to protect its territory.

Sigh. Why on gods earth do Japanese and the rest of the world have to play China's word games? How about this? Since all Chinese territories under their administration are in fact de facto "国有化” what Japan did was EXACTLY that so stop bitchin!

There was a time when the Japanese Cabinet ministers and ministries would actually "take into consideration" the domestic situation in China as to not incite any conflicts or disturbance among each other as well as within the domestic population. Now, the attitude among the ministries is that they no longer care like they use to.

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