politics

China warns Japan against provocation around disputed islands

50 Comments

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2016.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

50 Comments
Login to comment

Just who is taking "provocative action" here? To China...Pot-kettle-black!

17 ( +20 / -3 )

Yubaru JAN. 14, 2016 - 06:51AM JST Just who is taking "provocative action" here?

I don't think this issue is as clear cut. Many of Imperial Japan's territory were taken by Japan under force, and under questionable pretenses. In the early 70s, the U.S. returned many of those territories back to Japan, perhaps to keep Japan as a buffer state against Communist China. For instance, there was a real movement to make Okinawa an independent state. The US choose to not allow that. Similarly, the U.S. gave the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands to Japan, with both China and Taiwan protesting. The UN was never involved. There wasn't a reexamination of the facts - U.S. just unilaterally made the decision. It's not unreasonable to reopen the case and settle at the ICJ.

-14 ( +5 / -19 )

Typical Chinese logic. We can send naval vessels to the area, but if you do the same as a response to us, that's provocation. There is no "dispute" other than an excuse for China to pursue its expansionist agenda. That Chinese maps from the 1950s and 60s is evidence. That all changed in the early 70s. The Chinese "ours since ancient times" argument, which they are also using in the South China Sea is an absurd concept that flies in the face of International laws and protocols. The only evidende of human habitation on the Senkakus is a Japanese bonito factory. China looks like it is a country that needs to get ot;s nose bloodied before it learns to get along with all it's neighbors.

16 ( +23 / -7 )

For instance, there was a real movement to make Okinawa an independent state.

First off no there wasn't, it was small and insignificant.

Second...

Before 1971, neither China nor Taiwan made any claims to “territorial sovereignty” over the Senkaku Islands. For 76 years, neither government expressed any objection to Japanese sovereignty over the islands.

They only started complaining when it was found that there are potentially huge oil reserves in the area.

http://thediplomat.com/2013/11/getting-senkaku-history-right/

Similarly, the U.S. gave the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands to Japan,

Like saying they "gave" Okinawa to Japan. The US returned them to Japanese control, semantics yes, but very important difference, as they were Japanese controlled and annexed in 1895 or so.

11 ( +15 / -4 )

OssanAmerica JAN. 14, 2016 - 07:11AM JST There is no "dispute" other than an excuse for China to pursue its expansionist agenda.

And Japan claim as "terra nullius"? This is the truth from Japan stating that China didn't know about this island, that Japan discovered 1895? No dispute? No wonder U.S. gave Japan only "administrative rights".

-11 ( +3 / -14 )

Administrative rights =/= Ownership. Some are under the mistaken notion to the contrary.

China will not allow that perception to stand, and rightly so.

-12 ( +3 / -15 )

It seems the old Japan that solves problems with threats and aggression is still alive and well. Obviously, they didn't learn anything from their obliteration in the first half of last century.

-12 ( +3 / -15 )

to get ot;s nose bloodied

It has gotten its nose bloodied. A lot. That is part of the problem...

4 ( +4 / -0 )

US gave Japan just the adminstrative rights but not territorial rights of the dispute islands to make sure Japan and China will always be adversaries and fight for them eternally. That's quite a cunning approach to divide the two countries.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

But it's o.k. for THEM to do that.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

When you look at a large map its not so clear but close up these are fairly close to ishigaki, and close to equal distance between there and Taiwan. In this case I feel its pretty clear its Japans as they administer.. the other island with Korea.. I say let them have it, Japan and Korea really need to get together to make sure China doesn't decide to claim this entire part of the world.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

sfjp330Jan. 14, 2016 - 07:29AM JST OssanAmerica JAN. 14, 2016 - 07:11AM JST There is no "dispute" other than an excuse for China to pursue its expansionist agenda. And Japan claim as "terra nullius"? This is the truth from Japan stating that China didn't know about this island, that Japan discovered 1895? No dispute?

That is correct. The procedure that Japan followed in determining the Terra Nullius status and subsequent incorporation followed established international protocol and therefore raised no objection from any country.

No wonder U.S. gave Japan only "administrative rights".

The only reason the U.S. did so was because of Taiwan's claim. Not "China's" which did not even exist.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

“We advise Japan against taking provocative acts or doing anything to raise tensions, otherwise it will have to accept responsibility for everything that happens,”

Why are the chinese "advising" this? They should know that with their ships, in close proximity to Japanese, around he Senkakus will NOT be provoked. Japan's rules of engagement are a joke.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

I agree with OssanAmerica the "ours since ancient times" argue is so weak, it's like saying the world belongs to Africa because that is where man came from.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

China warns Japan against provocation around disputed islands

Right because china never do that. China are such hypocrites.

It seems the old Japan that solves problems with threats and aggression is still alive and well. Obviously, they didn't learn anything from their obliteration in the first half of last century.

Its called defense and Japan has every right to so just as any other country. If you think Japan learned nothing from the war then you need to get your head out of the sand

6 ( +7 / -1 )

the ancient times thing is always amusing.. funny it always seems to only go as far back as suits the claimant.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

This should be settled peacefully, without the use of patrols and warships. Its just a huge pissing match. If these islands were important, then people would be living on them already. They are not important, and certainly not important enough to start a war. If China and Japan cannot settle this issue among themselves, then let the UN decide.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

gogogoJAN. 14, 2016 - 09:23AM JST I agree with OssanJapan the "ours since ancient times" argue is so weak, it's like saying the world belongs to Africa because that is where man came from.

If that is the case, In 1978, there was signing of a treaty between China and Japan for Senkaku/Diaoyu islands dispute. At the time, PM Fukuda and China's Deng Xiaoping accepted that "the dispute shall be postponed" "and for future generation to solve". If you own it like you said, why did J-government agreed to postpone the dispute? We know today, Japan government states "there is no dispute". Why did Japan agree to postpone and for future generation to solve?

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

China's economy is tanking so expect them to become increasingly aggressive to divert attention to Japan. "It's all their fault".

8 ( +10 / -2 )

OssanAmerica JAN. 14, 2016 - 08:56AM JST The procedure that Japan followed in determining the Terra Nullius status and subsequent incorporation followed established international protocol and therefore raised no objection from any country.

There were many Meiji period government documents from 1885-95 and these documents demonstrate that the Meiji government acknowledged Chinese ownership.

In 1885, the Japanese foreign minister wrote, "Chinese newspapers have been reporting rumors of our intention of occupying islands belonging to China located next to Taiwan.… At this time, if we were to publicly place national markers, this must necessarily invite China's suspicion.…" He then ordered that the matter should "await a more appropriate time" and "should not be made public."

In 1892, the Okinawa governor wrote, "the opportunity to survey the islands again has not yet arrived," thereby requesting the Navy to dispatch navy ship Kaimon." However, miscommunication and bad weather prevented the survey.

In 1894, the Home Ministry wrote, "Ever since the islands were investigated by persons dispatched by police agencies of Okinawa back in 1885, there have been no subsequent field surveys conducted." This was the final relevant correspondence prior to the Sino-Japanese War on Aug. 1894.

In December 1894, after China had suffered some devastating defeats in the war, a secret document from Japan's Home Ministry stated, "the situation today has changed significantly since back then." The Meiji government accordingly incorporated the islands based on a Cabinet decision on Jan. 1895, while the war was still underway. This was never made public and remained unknown to China.

In 1896, Koga Tatsushiro became the first Japanese native to lease the islands. In his biography, he attributed Japan's possession of the islands to "the gallant military victory of our Imperial forces."

These documents clearly show that the islands were Chinese territory obtained as spoils of war. The Chinese do not dispute that the islands, along with Taiwan, were part of Japan from 1895 to 1945. But with the conclusion of World War II, the islands should have been restored to their pre-1895 legal status.

Source: www.wikipedia.org

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

The Chinese communist thugs already abuse their own peoples, and having no problem in bullying others. The world court should decide all territorial disputes, and not that shameless Chinese bilateral push for Chinese sake alone. They play nationalism card for maintain total control over the mass of Chinese. Watch out what you are wishing for, since Chinese model is unwanted by rest of the world. Chinese never cease to open their nonsense cheaply big mouth. Japan must be strong and prepared in dealing with this bully.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

Apparently China can't tell the difference between provocation and self-defence, so let me spell it out for them: sending naval vessels into close proximity to disputed islands that you are aggressively claiming ownership of = provocation. Sending naval vessels to intercept potentially hostile vessels encroaching in your country's territorial boundaries = self-defence. Japan's not going to provoke, because it can't afford to. Any conflict would be costly and have severe ramifications, but if Japan are seen as the aggressor, they're not going to be supported in defence. That's why they won't provoke China. They'll defend themselves as they are well within their right to, and wait for China to make the first move, a move that will see much of the world turning against it and dishing out a harsh punishment.

It really is tedious seeing China harp on about the Senkakus every few seconds. They could easily bring this dispute to an end. If they become an ICJ signatory and recognise the ICJ's authority, they can take their case up with them. The problem is, the ICJ is pretty much guaranteed to vote in Japan's favour, and that's why China won't ever do it. This is why Japan is saying "there is no dispute". They don't dispute China's claims, because they're confident of their own. China meanwhile disputes Japan's claims, and yet won't make any efforts to resolve the dispute. Hence "there is no dispute". Just China being stupid.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

The incorporation of the Senkakus by Japan was completed in January1885, prior to which Japan followed all internationally accepted protocol for incorporation of an uninhabited unclaimed territory. Japan and China, or more accurately the Ching Dynasty fought the Sino-Japanese war of 1884, and with China's defeat, they were forced to cede territory to Japan which included Taiwan and the Spratlys at the Treaty of Shimonoseki in April of 1885, This begs the question of IF Japan thought for a moment that the Senkakus were Chinese territory, why would they bother to carry out the surveys and procedures for an incorporation? All they had to do was add it to the list of Chinese territory to be ceded to Japan. It is clear that neither Japan nor China considered the Senkakus to be Chinese territory. China's claim, is a product of China's greed for resources and the PLA Navy's agenda to take over the East China Sea and break the First Island.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

China know they have no decent claim on these islands - if they did they would have pursued this far more aggressively long before now. They are just testing the waters, stirring trouble, antagonizing. The last time they tried to seriously flex their muscles was by declaring that all foreign aircraft in the area had to report their flight details to China, and the US responded by flying a dirty big B52 right down main street there and completely ignoring them.

China are clearly the protagonists - not the other way around. Anyone who thinks so needs to do more reading.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Really really need to stop propping up and enabling China with worldwide manufacturing and start restoring and rebuilding our own in our respective countries.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

China is all just big mouth on this. If wish for war go for it so that you can see what reality will incur in you foolish games. China have never won even a single battle against Jspan in history. The only reason Japan lost during the WWII that includes China's release from Japanese occupation is because the US were on their side then. Albeit the surrender, it was not due to China but to the US. Now that you do not US on your side, better act and talk wisely before all hell breaks loose. Japan is not alone going against you, it will be almost all of the SEA nations plus allies like US and so forth. Wait and see when Japan finalizes its constitutional revision coming summer, you will gat a very different reaction from Japan that's for sure!

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Because of growing populations that need to feed more stomach, they need to grab lands, sea's & islands, drain all resources until it runs out, then grab another lands, sea's & islands so on and so fort.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

This is not the only point of contention, it is within japan's right to build something on the island. Keeping in mind that china can also invoke history as a support to their bellicose behavior, and senkaku seems to exist between those extremes.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Didn't China tell Tibet the same thing before storming in, many yrs later they have done the same thing to other countries in lands that shouldn't even be disputed with Vietnam, the Spratley Isands, in the Philippines, Thailand, Tawain, the list gets longer, In the 90's many countries around the world were rushing in to help China and welcome it into the 21st century moving forward as a business partner. What does China do? It challenges and bullies the world with the manipulating the yuan currency, stealing technology and massively building its military capabilities. Japan is rightful in pushing ahead and let the chips fall where they may. IT is about time Japan stands up and tests what my yen has been paying the American alliance and put it to work. Let China be the test sight if they continue their provocative stand against Japan. Like my American allies like to say "Bring It" Japan is Japan and the land is Japan's.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Pretending to steal land from Japan is not provocation?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

bjohnson and axle

Calm down lads, there won't be any war over this, full stop. Firstly, China has absolutely no international support for a claim over these rocks. As other posters have pointed out, if they took a legal route it would go no-where. Secondly, war with Japan, which is stacked to the gills with high tech military hardware, also means war with the US, as the US has said very clearly that they fully back Japanese sovereignty. It would also have huge economic and political ramifications for China and whilst they no doubt would absolutely LOVE to have those rocks to scratch a nationalist itch and give themselves an ego boost, the big question is: Are they really worth going to war over?

The answer is no.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The last time they tried to seriously flex their muscles was by declaring that all foreign aircraft in the area had to report their flight details to China, and the US responded by flying a dirty big B52 right down main street there and completely ignoring them.

It should have been Japan making that statement by flying military aircraft "right down main street." Not the US. The US doesn't give two-bits about those tiny rocky Senkaku Islands.

It is up to the Japanese, and only the Japanese, to keep them or lose them.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

If you look at the history, the real problem is how U.S. handle the peace treaty after the WWII. PRC's Zhou Enlai supported the Soviet proposal that all states that participated with their armed forces against Japan should prepare the treaty. Instead, the U.S. had monopolized the task to exclude China. Why did the U.S. wanted to exclude China in 1951 SF Treaty? On the surface of course the Communist Party was now in power and U.S. and Chinese troops were fighting each other in Korea. But Britain also had troops in Korea and yet was prepared to invite the PRC to the conference. It was actually the Soviet Union that was behind the North Korean attack on the south, yet the U.S. permitted the Soviet Union actively to participate in the conference. China suffered the longest and the deepest from Japanese aggression. The SF Treaty divided China with numerous other territorial disputes that the U.S. used in justifying its continuing presence in the region.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The US doesn't give two-bits about those tiny rocky Senkaku Islands. It is up to the Japanese, and only the Japanese, to keep them or lose them.

The do, pray tell, explain why the US flew the B52 through that airspace?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Don't think so.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/24/obama-in-japan-backs-status-quo-in-island-dispute-with-china

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I think anyone should take care. The best activity between countries is trade. Besides, anyone would be glad to take over the Chinese industrial activity, which could lead to frozen economy like that in Japan more or less since the 1980-ies. It is not about land and borders these days - it is about business. That can easily be seen, lately in the actions between Russia and the Ukraine - bad for all involved. It would be wise for China not to repeat the Japanese attitude during the first half of last century. The moral is: Aggressive attitudes involve economic feedback for the worse.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

SO as I understand it, these were once privately owned and were then bought by the Japanese government... I don't see any reason for the Japanese to give them up if that's the case.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

"And Japan claim as "terra nullius"? This is the truth from Japan stating that China didn't know about this island, that Japan discovered 1895?"

Your insistence in “discovery” dictates your continuous state of confusion regarding this issue.

Mere "DISCOVERY" means absolutely NOTHING.

The precedent for this type of situations is the Island of Palmas; read and try to understand it.

Japain incorporated the Senkakus according to the rules; China acquiesced with this incorporation for nearly 75 years.

China would lose in Court so badly it isn't funny.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Peeping_Tom JAN. 14, 2016 - 05:26PM JST China would lose in Court so badly it isn't funny.

This will not happen. The litigation would require a reversal of Japan’s longstanding position that there’s “no dispute” to begin with–one cannot simultaneously litigate a claim and deny that there’s anything to litigate and Japan fears that the change will weaken national credibility.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

"The litigation would require a reversal of Japan’s longstanding position that there’s “no dispute” to begin with–one cannot simultaneously litigate a claim and deny that there’s anything to litigate and Japan fears that the change will weaken national credibility."

Wrong again.

All China has to do is submit a case to the Court; Japain MUST then answer.

Japain's stance that there's no dispute is neither here nor there and it's used to stop certain types of conflict resolution.

The Peeping actually knows a thing or two (or three) about legal matters.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Peeping_Tom JAN. 14, 2016 - 06:03PM JSTAll China has to do is submit a case to the Court; Japain MUST then answer.

I'll repeat again. This will not happen. China will not submit to the Court.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

"I'll repeat again. This will not happen. China will not submit to the Court."

Because they know it damn well!

China will more likely than not lose.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Lets look at OLD history... China use to belong to Mongolia :) How about applying that logic??

1 ( +2 / -1 )

bjohnson23: What does China do? It challenges and bullies the world with the manipulating the yuan currency, stealing technology and massively building its military capabilities.

My thoughts exactly, well said sir!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

these islands must be really awesome islands for there to be so much fuss about them.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Wc626Jan. 14, 2016 - 02:45PM JST It should have been Japan making that statement by flying military aircraft "right down main street." Not the US. The US >doesn't give two-bits about those tiny rocky Senkaku Islands. It is up to the Japanese, and only the Japanese, to keep them or lose them

Do you honestly believe that US does not 'give two bits" about another country trying to steal a part of Okinawa Prefecture, which is home to the largest US military presence in Asia and gateway for US strategic operations in the region? The Senkakus are physically just rocks but hold immense significance in terms of China's goal to break the first island chain and challenge the US Navy. To date 2 US Secretaries of State, 2 US Secretaries of Defense, and the POTUS has openly declared that the US will defend the Senkakus if China attempts to take them by force.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

US returned administrative rights only to Japan because US took administrative rights only away from Japan before. The ownership didnot change hands at all since Japan annexed islands. It's just simple as that.

It's not that Japan thought it belonged to China and wasn't terra nullius. Japan judged it was terra nullius but waited for 10years to see if China makes visible , official complaints, but it didn't.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

How many "warnings" has China issued about something or other in the past few years? I lost count.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@OssanAmerica US doesn't gave a damn for the rocks as far as owns it. All US is interested is that they can squeeze financial and political benefits from both China and Japan using the dispute. Don't forget that US always claim it doesn't take sides as to who owns the islands. Whichever side thinks they can land and occupy the islands, they should think twice as the islands may become their graveyards. The islands are not possible to defend.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

China’s Foreign Ministry warned Japan on Wednesday not to take “provocative” action around a group of disputed islets in the East China Sea, saying Tokyo would have to accept the consequences.

In this instance China is right. Japan and China need to sit down and negotiate the status of the islands

0 ( +0 / -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