politics

Ishihara says Tokyo plans to buy disputed Senkaku islands

137 Comments

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

© 2012 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

137 Comments
Login to comment

What an idiot. This will make a bad situation worse and give well-intentioned negotiators on both sides less room to manuver. I guess he forgot that Kasumigaseki, not the Metropolitan Govt. makes national security decisions for Japan. Remember way back when in his first run for Govenor when he campaigned on a promise to "make the U.S. Army give back" land and an airfield in Western Tokyo? Still there. Let's hope the Chinese take a page from the U.S. playbook and ignore him.

15 ( +18 / -4 )

with all the problems japan is facing today, japanese dwells on senkaku. the only difference between 1930s and now is that china and korea is ready for japan. if not, earthquake should finish japan off...

-6 ( +10 / -16 )

Good news for private owners, let BOJ work overtime and let national deficit climb to new heights !

1 ( +2 / -1 )

What is there to negotiate? The islands are part of Okinawa which is part of Japan.

1 ( +12 / -12 )

The Japanese family that "owns" the islands should have built an upscale resort there a long time ago. They look spectacular from the air. If Japanese people were working and living there (as in the Falklands), it would make China and Taiwan's positions less tenable.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

China needs to accept that those pseudo-islands were stolen by Japan fair and square over 100 years ago, much the same as the Russians stole the Kurils over 60 years ago.

However, I would approve of Japan buying the islands from China to end the dispute, just as the Russians should at least buy the houses and private lands it stole in the Kurils, if not also buy them from the Japanese government.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

I think the main reason for trying to acquire these nothing islands is to secure the maritime borders so that China can't get too close to Japan land borders. Although I don't agree with Ishihara on 99% of the issues, this one is a bit sound...imo

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Um, that should solve the dispute...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Macho Ishihara is a known nationalist. He is popular among people who are not happy with weak knee Japanese diplomacy. I think it is true the occupation policy of America after the war intended to make Japan weak. A democratic nation without a strong military is miserable.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Now look what happens when you let old men play with missiles for a week.

Silly old goat's got so excited his hair's turned black.

0 ( +12 / -12 )

i have news for you guys. NOBODY - not china, not korea, nobody - wants japan. why would anybody want a giant rock that's being constantly shaken by earthquakes and tsunami? on the other hand, chinese and koreans are wary of japanese territorial ambitions and history gives certain credibility to such worries. (remember Manchuku? remember colonial korea?) if you feel that chinese and koreans overreact anything that touches the territorial issues, it's because of the history that goes way back. history repeats, yes. but the outcome tends to alternate...

-5 ( +6 / -10 )

Don't think money will work in this case and this guy wants the Olympics....

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Any guess as to what the islands will be used for?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I always thought ownership of the islands was disputed or does one family own the Senkakus and another own the Daikokus, which. of course, are one and the same?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

If they buy the islands A: from a Japanese family, they don't solve the problem with china as the money stays in Japan B: they admit that they don't belong to Japan otherwise why buy something which already belongs to you, why not just sell or lease it out to china. Shorten Japans depth and make money which you would nob be able to earn by fishing there.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Do the islands' owners have deeds? I bet the Chinese would like to see those deeds.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I think he wants to open a pachinko parlor for tourist from China coming on a fishing boat.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Yes, Ishihara's logic here is lacking as usual. So if this transaction occurs China will give up it's claim? Right.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Idiot!

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Whats perhaps more interesting than all this is WHO in the US this idiot was meeting with?

Who in the US is giving him an audiance? Or was he just there to see the cherry blossoms.................

The US shud be very care with this particular puppet!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

And what is he going to pay with? Irradiated rubble? Because if or when the Olympics (bidding and actual games) gets started, there won't be a yen left. Oh, that's right, the tax payers will foot the bill for a few rocks - another one of the half-baked schemes of an old man still living in the 1940's.

As for those rocks being part of Okinawa. Yeah sure. But whatever happened to the independent kingdom of Ryukyu?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

A democratic nation without a strong military is miserable.

Japan is not a democratic nation. Regarding Ishihara, I don't like to speak ill of the dead or worse wish death for the living, but sometimes, sometimes...

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Hey here's an idea! How about the government of Okinawa trade the islands for Tokyo, since the islands are a part of the prefecture of Okinawa, and then put the old goat Ishihara out to pasture?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

"Whats perhaps more interesting than all this is WHO in the US this idiot was meeting with? Who in the US is giving him an audiance?"

GW: The Heritage Foundation is a right-wing think tank, so Ishihara is among people who have the same mentality as him.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Ah yes, if it comes out of the racist Ishihara, old wind bag, full of hot air, never surprises me! Why in the HELL should TOKYO pay any $$$$ for some crappy rocks sticking out of the water?? Better idea, let the $$$$ come out of this old fool Ishihara's pockets and send him off to retire out on those crappy islands!

1 ( +3 / -2 )

As I understand it, the main question is whether or not the Pottsdam declaration ceded control of the islands back to China. It's a matter of interpretation, so there's a dispute. Still, it has been under Japanese, not Chinese, control for at least 150 years or more, so I think the Japanese have a reasonably strong position legally. Whether they can physically enforce ownership if China starts moving ships in is another story.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Watched this unfold on the TV news last night. First, Ishihara made this announcement in Washington D.C. - No idea why, TBH. Second, he used the word "baka" when referring to the Japanese government (though we all feel his pain, that is not a very diplomatic expression to use, no?) and third, he is inserting himself into the international stage - as governor of Tokyo. Shocking! As usual Mrs. Godan could have cared less, but the more Ishihara spoke, the more she got upset. No surprise there, though. And lastly, they interviewed the "man on the street" and people actually support this. They are "impressed" with the decisiveness of Ishihara. Too bad this kind of decisiveness is always used for the wrong project/goal.

PS And evidently this whole plan was kept secret and even though any budget request over 200,000,000 yen requires the approval of the Tokyo city council, they are already found a way around that. Evidently, they have people willing to donate to a fund to make the purchase. Just gets weirder and weirder.

4 ( +6 / -3 )

On the news last night one woman that was interviewed about this newest gaff by Ishihara commented that if Tokyo has so much money that it can afford to purchase the islands she remarked that the money would be better used to assist those in Tohoku and keep the money around for when Tokyo will eventually get hit with it's own earthquake.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

she remarked that the money would be better used to assist those in Tohoku and keep the money around for when Tokyo will eventually get hit with it's own earthquake.

My better-half also said the same thing. Ishihara sure has a knack for wasting money that isn't his. :-(

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Ishihara is not an intelligent, even senile man! Joint exploitations of the Senkaku islands and its surrounding seas by Japan, Taiwan/China and perhaps other countries is the win-win scenario! Perhaps also joint military coorporation between Japan and Taiwan/China and even Korea, would make these islands an example of East-Asian integration (like the European Union between Germany, France and GB...)! Or are East-Asians still that stupid that they are stuck in a old post-WW II or Cold War mentality?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@Yubaru, sorry I did not see your comment, but I think we are on the same wave lengths, send the old goat Ishihara out to them islands and let him spew his racist rants out in every direction but from the middle of no where, maybe put some secret cameras and microphones with Korean and Chinese subtitles so as to amuse Japan's Asian neighbors. What the heck, put some English subtitles too and keep us all amused too!

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I normally don't agree with Gov Ishihara but in this instance I support this purchase completely. Perhaps in time when the prevailing J-govt grow a pair they might want to buy them from Tokyo. These islands are already defended by the Unied States and China can take their silly pathetic claim from 1970 and poorly disguised agenda of controlling the Eat and South China Seas elsewhere.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

if japan has a claim to them, and offers to buy them doesn't that give the impression that Japan doesn't have a claim to them?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Farmboy astutely pointed out that this issue has arisen from vagueness in the Pottsdam Declaration and that the disputed islands have been under Japanese control for many decades. Part of Okinawa(or Ryukyu). Regarding Ishihara, no need to beat a dead horse. But, stupid people elect stupid people. Does he read from a teleprompter, too?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

This isn't Ishihara's decision, given that with China disputing the islands the issue also falls under the lines of national security. And anyway, it won't make a difference since China won't care -- it's just Ishihara throwing more of Japan's money down the toilet.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Ishihara's comments about the disputed islands is politically motivated to discredit weak J-government. The whole Senkaku incident raised worries about how potentially volatile relations are between China and Japan and how poor communication is between the two countries, how small players like boat captains and nationalist can shape events and how few checks there are preventing things from getting out of control. The relations must be improved because, after all, China is a very important neighbor. But at the same time, that was a wake-up call, that Japan shouldn't count too much on one country in economic matters. China has misplayed its hand and that has forced the J-goverment to get more realistic about regional security issues. China’s response to Senkaku incident is further evidence that their economic superpower isn’t prepared to assume the responsibilities that go with that status. Major economic powers, realizing that they have an important stake in the international system, are normally very hesitant about resorting to economic warfare, even in the face of severe provocation. China showed no hesitation at all about using its trade muscle to get its way in a political dispute. What you have is a rogue economic superpower, unwilling to play by the rules. And the question is Japan going to do about it.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Would be interesting if China outbid Japan.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

It seems that the Kurihara family have been owning the islands for many decades before China claimed them after 1970. But still belong to Japan. No difference if Tokyo buys them or not.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The Senkakus are unihabited, are'nt they?

If they aren't, anyone living there have better clear out before Ishihara seals the deal!!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@sfjp330 and @OssanAmerica

Get the USA out of the area! USA has no claim whatsoever on these islands (including Okinawa) and should play its geopolitical games in America!

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Ishihara should keep to himself... he is a loose cannon that will bring war to Japan with his stupid outspoken statements, he doesn't seem to care about anyone.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@gregoryharuko

... Joint exploitations of the Senkaku islands and its surrounding seas by Japan, Taiwan/China and perhaps other countries is the win-win scenario! Perhaps also joint military coorporation between Japan and Taiwan/China and even Korea, would make these islands an example of East-Asian integration ...

This would only work if all sides are willing to compromise. however, if you look at the actions of China:

-China vs Philippines last week http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17741644

-China vs Korea - fisherman killed a coastguard captain http://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/12/world/asia/south-korea-china-stabbing/index.html

-China vs Japan - Chinese vessel rammed Japanese coast guard vessel http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lv031K_lV4I

-China vs Vietnam http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13723443 , etc. )

and the reaction of the Chinese government in all these instances means that such a fantasy will not ever happen.

China will continue to claim Taiwan, the whole of the south china sea (despite the contrary claim by the rest of the world), and whatever it can of the east china sea. If ever it succeeds it'll probably start claiming the rest of Asia due to 'historical reasons'. And since it's slowly building up its military might, this big bully will never agree to 'military coorporation'

6 ( +6 / -0 )

"Or are East-Asians still that stupid that they are stuck in a old post-WW II or Cold War mentality?"

I'm not going to say it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OK point 1: Since when did regional Governors make national Lebensraum policy decisions? Surely this must be a Constitutional matter. If you don't like what the government's doing, you can just make up your own policy and bring it into effect in a private deal? First I've heard.

Point 2: This purchase will, doubtless, be made with tax revenue. How much will be spent on this delirious old foll's dreams of a new Empire? "Not too expensive" is not sufficient transparency. That is OUR money he's throwing around with such cavalier abandon. We are entitled to know how much he's appropriated for his whim.

Point 3: What the blue blazes was this gimp doing in Washington DC? Where is the information on his expenses?

I'm furious at this news. He really does seem to be above the law. What a feudal kharzi this burg is.

-1 ( +11 / -11 )

Democratic dictatorship...under attack. First, the Bo Xilai scandal, now this...it's fate has been decided, like it happened with the Soviet Union on Christmas Night of 1991

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Or are East-Asians still that stupid that they are stuck in a old post-WW II or Cold War mentality?"

Or could it be that whomever posted this is unaware of the "history" between these nations that goes back prior to WWII?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

If Japan is serious about keeping the Senkaku islands it must station troops there and defend them, otherwise they will be lost to China. Ishihara seems to be trying to force the issue since the Japanese government does nothing.

If the sale does go through we can expect some Japanese businessmen to be arrested in China on trumped-up charges and various other childish actions.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

It is OK if he can generate some kind of revenue from the islands. If not, what is the point?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I think that the old boy has finally, truly lost his marbles.

I can't believe that it's within his remit as Governor of Tokyo to propose using taxpayers' money to shake a stick at China over some islands that are 2,000 km away. This is a national issue of sovereignty, absolutely nothing to do with the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, nor Ishihara and his publicity-seeking delusions of grandeur.

They're either Japanese islands or not. This is a matter of sovereignty and a bit of paper that costs Tokyo taxpayers billions of yen will make no difference whatsoever. Plus, isn't talking about buying something rather like admitting you don't own it ?

Please, please good voters of Tokyo, I urge you next time to put this loony out to pasture once and for all

B2V

1 ( +4 / -2 )

ill sell it for 1 trillion$ either to china or japan if i were the kuriharas

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Ridiculous. China clealry doesn't think the current family owners have good title. typical Ishihara stuff. no logic, loud voice, no result.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Wow, I never thought Ishihara had a pair until now,

Even better/more interesting that apparently he didn't tell the central Government.

Sounds a very clever plan: deflect flak away from the central Government (& thus not overly affect inter-country relations) while still taking concrete steps to get the prize.

Very, very clever.

Good on him.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

Scrote - "Ishihara seems to be trying to force the issue since the Japanese government does nothing."

That's very likely precisely the point.

Ishihara is no doubt aware China is flexing its military muscles.

Better late than never to make a solid claim on these islands.

Very clever move.

However, it's only a matter of hours if not minutes before the Chinese government goes ballistic and starts shoots off propaganda-based nonsense.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Troops are not needed, a civilian population would serve as well. Perhaps we can get some volunteers from the 右翼団体. (right wing groups) They can life on those islands and secure Japans claim. If China takes them by force Japan would be at war with China. Along with it the United States. Leaving it open invites to Chinese to put some troops on the islands and say these islands are Chinese. Tokyo would have to be the "aggressor". Yes some willing population and some police and military.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Wow, continuously raising the bar of idiocy to new heights, Ladies and Gentlemen -- Shintaro Ishihara!

4 ( +6 / -3 )

@Yuri

I seriously doubt that the US would go to war with China to defend Japan in this situation. They've got Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan and Russia to worry about. Sure, they may have promised to defend us if we're attacked, but I doubt that promise would extend to a case like this.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

lucabrasiApr. 18, 2012 - 11:51AM JST

I seriously doubt that the US would go to war with China to defend Japan in this situation.

The US has already stated (Clinton Nov 2011) that the territorial dispute between China and Japan is not covered in the US-Japan treaty. So as long as China doesn't attack Japan directly and China has enough of a deep sea fleet to defend any control of the Senkaku, the US is not gonna use its own naval forces in any Japan-Chinese naval conflict out of Japan's territorial waters proper.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I'm happy with this news! Finally someone is doing something favorable to Japan.Go,Go Ichihara-san!

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Mr. Ishihara makes some salient points. The Japanese government is stupid, and this why he is taking front and center and showing real leadership where there's no leadership. The Japanese government are just a bunch of apologist to the West. The issue surrounding Senkaku is very important and should be dealt with immediately, not later. Mr. Ishihara has every right to assert his intentions. After all, he is Japanese, and this is Japan.

-13 ( +3 / -16 )

In any international court, regarding laws of ownership, this is totally a non-starter. International law concerning the transfer of ownership are based on the 19th Century case of ownership of an expensive pen, The more qualified of you can elaborate. The case basically was about a conman who bought an expensive pen with a cheque. The cheque bounced and when the conman was caught he had already sold the pen to a secondhand shop and spent that money. The original owner of the pen and the the secondhand shop owner went to court to get a verdict on the ownership of the pen, since they both had lost money.

The ruling, which is one used by nearly all courts, both national and international was the 'A Duke Cannot Annoint A King' ruling which was basically that just as a person cannot sell something that they do, the buyer cannot buy something which is not owned by the seller. The ownership of the pen reverted back to the original owner of the pen, since any contract between the conman and the secondhand shopkeeper was invalid.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@Patrick - nah. Chinese don't want nuclear waste in their territory

@Nippon whatever - truth hurts, huh?

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

This guy! Tokyo has no business attempting to buy the islands and the Government should step in to ensure that no such thing takes place. Ishihara is a provocative fool. The islands are already legally owned by Japan and China has no genuine hostorical claim to them. China has already been diplomatically clumsy and were stepped neatly by Japan on this issue recently - to the point where Japan's rather powerful allies, the US, stepped forward and publicly and unequivocally supported Japan's claim over the islands. Japan simply does not need to behave provocatively in regards to these islands. Ishihara should be kept well away from such matters.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Every day that passes I admire more,this man. Shintaro Ichihara for prime minister of Japan,it is the right man to do the cleaning in Japanese politics.

-10 ( +3 / -13 )

TamaramaApr. 18, 2012 - 12:17PM JST

The islands are already legally owned by Japan and China has no genuine hostorical claim to them.

Even the Tokyo high court (Ishigaki ruling 1942) ruled that the islands fell under the jurisdiction of Formosa/Taiwan, therefore your statement is on totally shakey ground, even by Japanese law.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Mr. Ishihara has every right to assert his intentions.

Perhaps so. Does he also have the right to use Tokyo taxpayers' money to finance his megalomaniac ego-trip and wipe his backside on the national Constitution?

-1 ( +10 / -12 )

To Nippon Nation;

Mr. Ishihara makes some salient points. The Japanese government is stupid, and this why he is taking front and center and showing real leadership where there's no leadership. The Japanese government are just a bunch of apologist to the West. The issue surrounding Senkaku is very important and should be dealt with immediately, not later. Mr. Ishihara has every right to assert his intentions. After all, he is Japanese, and this is Japan.

I agree 100% with you !

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

“Tokyo has decided to buy them. Tokyo will defend the Senkaku islands,” he told the conservative Heritage Foundation in Washington on Monday.

When did Tokyo become an independent country from Japan?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Nippon Nation,

Few people here would dispute that the Japanese government is inept - 'stupid' - in many respects, however this doesn't change the fact that the Governor of Tokyo has no business getting involved in international territorial disputes. If he simply criticised and demanded action from the foreign ministry, then I might agree that he has a point, but to plan to use taxpayers' money to buy the islands is simply ludicrous. Ishihara seems to have deluded himself that he's President of Japan or something. He isn't, and very fortunately for Japan, he never will be.

His job is to run Tokyo's affairs and that's what he should stick to.

FnC

3 ( +5 / -2 )

One thing's for certain. Someone's gonna come out of this super stinking rich.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

at least ishihara has a backbone unlike all the other spineless politicians in japan. and the only reason china and taiwan starting saying "hey, actually that island's ours" almost a century after japan claimed it is because they found a huge amount of potential gas and oil reserves near there.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

I think a point has been taken wrongly here by the comments. Some Japanese person holds title to the islands. The government buying the land from its own citizens is not admitting they don't own it. This happens all the time when the government or some company wants to build a highway, pipeline, etc. through was what some individual's property.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Also, the islands themselves are of little value. What is sought here is the water rights and what's under that water - i.e. natural gas. And maybe national pride too.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

he is Japanese, and this is Japan.

Well that just wins the argument right there and then doesn't it....

3 ( +3 / -0 )

"This is Japan", works when explaining to someone that you should take your shoes off entering a house, but as justification for nationalistic, provocative and unilateral actions by someone with some controversial and radical views, I get shivers running down my spine.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

@frontandcente>>> Tokyo has many islands within in its territories. Senkaku isn't one of them, but if you recall Mr. Ishihara flew to Okinawa to speak with the Governor there, in private. That was recently.... They were probably negotiating a money deal to back the legitimate purchase of the islands through garnering a national consensus using the media. So while it appears that Mr. Ishihara is over asserting himself, he's actually doing the governor of Okinawa a favor, even though these islands may not fall under Tokyo's territory.

It's a political move to solidify his new Tachiagare Party. All the right things are happening, you just need to censure the foreign press from the lies and smear. This is Japan.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Ok going to play dumb and ask WHY????

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I thought I heard on the news last night that the government currently rents the islands from the owner for 24 million Yen per year. Correct me if I'm wrong please.

If Ishihara is so keen then let him rent them himself with his own money. I think that he has been motivated to do this by his equally likeable son to try and embarrass the government. After the fiascos of the failed bank and the Olympic bid I really hope that the Tokyo voters put him out to grass next time round. Tokyo needs a businessman to run it, not a right wing nut.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

When did Tokyo become an independent country from Japan?

In Ishihara's brain

1 ( +2 / -1 )

In Ishihara's brain That's where.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is a great move by Ishihara. Huge possible economic upside, plus it will help to cheer up the people of Japan in the wake of the triple disaster in Tohoku.

I will happily pay double my taxes to proudly fund this project.

-8 ( +0 / -7 )

At first I thought he had gone senile, but his mission is accomplished. The wounds are open and attention drawn to his cause.

Can I charge the government rent for my land btw?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

if japanese wanna go out buy some lands, and in itself not a bad thing, might even be a prudent thing considering..., then at least buy land that's habitable. few rocks in the middle of ocean won't save japan from you-know-what...

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

few rocks in the middle of ocean won't save japan from you-know-what...

I give up....What?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Maybe, since Ishihara is moving the Tokyo metropolitan government into the real estate industry, he can buy Kunashiri, Etorofu and the other 2 northern territory islands while he's on a buying spree with my taxes

I have a bridge in Brooklyn New York that I want to to sell him

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Purchasing the land is one thing, it's the water around it that's more important. Mr. Ishihara isn't interested in those rocks, and neither is China, per se. It's natural resources and marine life, so hopefully Mr. Ishihara doesn't get caught up in a Catch 22 deal where he buys the island, and forgets to include the territorial waters around it, which matter most. He should be focusing on that just as fervently.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Ishihara is a total goose and anyone who has been in tokyo longer than 30 seconds will know that.

This old coot should get better meds for his senility, the ones he been taking aint working too good.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

A smart move from someone not perceived by some as prone to making smart moves.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Can someone change the needle? This broken record is becoming particularly boring. Perhaps when the village idiot of Tokyo has bought the islands he p*** off there and never be heard from again!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

his old coot should get better meds for his senility, the ones he been taking aint working too good.

lol - spot on Bro!

In Ishihara's brain

I don't think this senile old age pensioner has a brain - that's the problem.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I never understood why this old (but thats not the point) crazy guy was elected again and again. But what could I say, here in Austria someone like Jörg Haider (passed away) or Strache (kind of right wings with a potential of comedians, when you have a sarcastic humour) were elected too. And the U.S.A., just remembering some of the remarks during the last weeks and I thought Sarah Palin couldnt be topped.

Perhaps @that korean guy ment everything that will happen after Fukushima (radiation, cancer etc. etc.).I

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@lilith12 - i completely agree. every nation has its share of nut jobs. but that this guy is the elected official of one of the densest metropolis on this planet tells not about this nutjob but about the people that elected him...

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Perhaps one of the reasons is that this guys offer "simple solutions" to difficult questions and one can put the blame on somebody else. But Tokyo still functions in a way as well as perhaps Italy, even during horny old Berlussconi`s regime.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Even the Tokyo high court (Ishigaki ruling 1942) ruled that the islands fell under the jurisdiction of Formosa/Taiwan bogus claim. there is no record that such a ruling was handed out.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

One of my theories is that Japan is playing into the hands of China - this is what China wants - to force Japan to spend spend spend into bankruptcy. Anyone who wants to see Japan fall deeper into the gutters would actually be hoping that Ishihara goes ahead with this.

Issa - those who don't like Japan would also like to see Ishihara become PM. But not for the same reasons as your naive friends. Either that, or you're an anti-Japan troll.

It's funny how, when the islands are controlled by Japan, there's no dispute. Put the shoe on the other foot, and when another country is holding the aces, it's a dispute with poor Japan the victim (again). If Japan insists on owning these rocks, then fine. But shut up about the Southern Kuriles and Dokdo. You can't have your cake AND eat it!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I fail to see what the right-wingers here see Ishihara as so brave. First, it's not his money that he's using. Secondly, he won't be going there to fight himself.

He's brave with other peoples money and other peoples military. From what I understand Okinawa has the best claim to these islands, and as long as Okinawa is part of Japan, then they are Japanese.

I just wish Ishihara etc wouldn't come across as if they relish angering China. Better for Japanese AND Chinese to learn how to get on better.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

So if they are already "Japanese" islands, why on earth does Ishihara want them?

I have to wonder what the national government thinks of this clown. Do they sit together after work and think "FFS! Shut up old man! Why do the idiots of Tokyo continue to elect him?" or do they think "Damn, why didn't we think of that??" The way the government goes here, I really haven't a clue which it is!

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

tmarie - "Shut up old man! Why do the idiots of Tokyo continue to elect him?" or do they think "Damn, why didn't we think of that??""

First off, that's not a very well considered statement, just putting it mildly.

Most Japanese voters in Tokyo do not view Ishihara through the same prism of racial prejudice that foreigners do. I think your misconception regarding this point is clouding the vision of yourself and many others wrt Ishihara's capabilities.

Why does Ishihara want the islands?

The same reason the central govt. does - the maritime boundary those islands creates will mean larger areas for Japanese fisheries and energy exploration.

No disrespect, but that much should be very obvious by now

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Sushi, if you speak to young people of Tokyo, many don't like him. Not enough to get off their butts and vote though. Ishihara's crap causes problems for the national government when it comes to international issues. Surely they have an opinion on him - and I'm wondering what it is.

Indeed, the country wants those islands but IF the islands are already Japanese, why on earth does Ishihara want them for Tokyo? Surely, the question wasn't that difficult to understand.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

the uninhabited island chain, which is owned by a Japanese family and leased to the Japanese government

I'm curious.. who are these owners? How did they get to own the islands? Why did they want to own them? How much did they pay for them? How much does the J govt. pay to lease them? How much is Blinkyman gonna pay for them (out of his own pocket I assume)?

Apologies if this info is buried in all these comments somewhere

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Ishihara is a thoroughly unpleasant man,whose sanity really must be questioned. If Boris Johnson (Mayor of London) said he was going to buy the Falkland Islands he would be out of office before the ink dried on his press release.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

lucabrasi and Dog, if America will not defend this part of Japan, then the entire agreement is trash. There is no need for the Marines on Okinawa, any of them. However she said the following "Clinton added that for the government she represents “the Senkakus fall within the scope of Article 5 of the 1960 U.S.-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security." Enough said? So if America does not defend these islands then the treaty is finished.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

While I think this is an innovative way to approach the idea, he should have sealed the deal before he opened his big mouth. I look forward to him leaving politics.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Patrick SmashApr. 18, 2012 - 10:37PM JST

SushiSake3,.......

Excellent post, one of the best on JT ever and really sums up the Ishihara situation, The japanese might like the idea of living in the passive, in this way they leave responsibility to others, but although not a healthy democracy, Japan is a liberal democaracy and you get the politicians you vote or don't vote for, in a liberal democracy. Not voting in itself is a political statement in a liberal democracy.

In my younger days, 40 years ago, I never met one of the Weimar generation who absolved themselves of responsibility for the Nazi era by saying they weren't one of the 33% who voted for the National Socialists in the 1933 elections.

Not voting for Ishihara doesn''t mean you're against Ishihara and as much as the Japanese would like to say otherwise, their poliitical elite is what it is, because of the Japanese, not something different from the japanese.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

butakunApr. 18, 2012 - 08:26PM JST

. there is no record that such a ruling was handed out.

I recommend you read ‘The Diaoyu / Senkaku Islands Dispute by Martin Lohmeyer (pge 70-71) and although the documents clarifying the Tokyo ruling were destroyed in the great August burn of 1945, it's amazing that the Ishigaki local government desisted, as did their fisherman, from seeking any rights or jurisdiction in the Senkaku waters from 1942 to 1945, after the Tokyo high court ruling.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Save some money to do real things like to help homeless people in Fukushima!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I already know the feeling that exist on the Japanese front, BUT I all goes back to what is recognized as the Cairo Accords of `1943. "ALL LANDS TAKEN BY VIOLENCE OR GREED. WILL BE RETURNED TO THE RIGHTFUL OWNERS." T HE RETURN NEVER TOOK PLACE TO THE kINGDOM OF THE RYUKYU ISLANDS,

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Given that he is going to try to waste my money like this anyway, I'll at least give the old guy credit for deciding to buy the Senkakus rather than Takeshima...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Why pay for something that's already yours? Is it just a bribe so the Chinese will shut up?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I recommend you read ‘The Diaoyu / Senkaku Islands Dispute by Martin Lohmeyer (pge 70-71) and although the documents clarifying the Tokyo ruling were destroyed in the great August burn of 1945, it's amazing that the Ishigaki local government desisted, as did their fisherman, from seeking any rights or jurisdiction in the Senkaku waters from 1942 to 1945, after the Tokyo high court ruling.

We went over this Dog.

Your Lohmeyer cites the following.

"The Court’s decision is neither known nor does the Court’s procedure have a solid legal value. Children of former witnesses reported about the Court procedure. The Court procedure, which has only allegedly taken place, lacks reliable sources. But it cannot be proven that the procedures took place or that a ruling was given."

Thanks for nothing again.

The BS is explained as follows.

これはおそらく那覇在住の中国人陳哲雄氏あたりからの情報のように思えるが、だいだい尖閣列島の領海内は、 戦前戦後を問わず漁業権の設定されているような水域ではなかったことである。このようなところで漁業権をめぐる争 いが法的におきる余地はない。またある記事は一九四四年といったり、陳氏は大正年間といい、常氏は年代をいわ ず、他方陳氏は大審院、常民は最高裁といった具合に、年代も一致せず、事件の内容もあきらりかでなく、具体性が まったくない。戦前の大審院と戦後の最高裁が、あたかも同一のものであるかのように扱われている。最高裁にせよ 大審院にせよ、最終審であるから、その前に事件か下級審で審理されたはずである。しかしこれらのことにはまった く触れていない。

To summarize, prior to the Pacific war, Japan did not set/stipulate fishing zones within domestic prefectures/territories. One article states that this so-called hearing took place during 1944, while another person claims it was done during the Taisho era, and another doesn't even state the year such hearing happened. In addition, one claims this took place at (大審院) which is the highest court before the end of the war while the other claim this happed in high court 最高裁 which is post war. In either case, if such hearing happened in those highest courts, there must of been a decision made by the lower courts prior to submitting this case to the higher courts.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

The Chinese government is a dangerous entity that needs to be stood up to. I`m usually all for dialogue but any dialogue with China at the moment is tantamount to appeasement of a disgusting regime. Their future goals are clear...complete territorial and economic dominance of the region. The best other countries in this part of the world can hope for is democratic change within China that ousts the present gang of dictators.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Technically, the U.S. would be obliged to help Japan if there were a fight over the Senkakus. The U.S. doesn’t take a position on who owns the islands, but the Japan-U.S. security treaty specifies that the U.S. will help defend areas that Japan administers. And in 1972, when the U.S. handed Okinawa back to Japan, it agreed that Japan should administer the Senkakus. So U.S. is in a position of being committed to help Japan fight a war over islands, even though many don’t agree that they are necessarily Japanese. In reality, of course, there is zero chance that the U.S. will honor its treaty obligation over a few barren rocks. U.S. is not going to risk a nuclear confrontation with China over some islands that may well be China’s. But if U.S. don’t help, the future security relationship with Japan will be much more difficult.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Hey, Ishihara, when your done with this deal, I got this bridge in San Francisco I'll sell ya!~

1 ( +1 / -0 )

It's time for Tokyo to petition a recall election!!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

i find it amusing that all the "way to go ishihara" comments are getting down voted. you may not agree with ishihara's way of thinking or his actions but i'll say this again, at least he's got a pair. the national government hasn't done anything but complain since that Chinese fishing boat incident last year, either that or try and pass the blame onto some other person or ministry. so what does ishihara do? he says screw that, if you aren't going to do anything, i will. now the national government is like "oh, well, we were considering buying the islands too" (yeah right). right wing, nut job, blinky, whatever, at least he got all the politicians to get off their lazy asses and the public to pay more attention to what's actually going on in the world rather than their cell phones.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

sfip330, if America does not honor the Defense treaty it would be gone. Japan would try to defend the islands. If China does well in the fight thousands of Japanese will be killed. Many SDF ships and aircraft sunk. Japan would after the war would close ALL of the American bases. So my friend if America breaks the treaty there will be NO security arrangement with America. Japan would have to do away with the 9th article of the Constitution and as horrible as it sounds develop and deploy a atomic deterrent force. The sum of our fears...

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

at least he's got a pair.

Politics isn't about dick swinging contests. Having a pair doesn't mean you win.

-3 ( +8 / -11 )

tmarie, no it doesn't. never said it did. so you'd rather have some spineless, yes-men in power who don't really give a damn about anything except their next paycheck and whether they can keep office by doing the least amount of work possible, or making it look like they're doing something? the majority of politicians in japan are like that and look at the state japan is in now. whether you agree with him or not there's got to be some reason why he's been mayor for so long.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Perhaps he could move there???!!

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Queen, who said I like the spineless? I would much prefer someone with balls who has a clue. Just having balls doesn't make you good. How you can't see that is beyond me.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

. Just having balls doesn't make you good

No, but it gives you more of a chance of being strong when necessary (like when Churchill took over from Chamberlain and he stopped appeasing the Nazis). China could have much better relations with its neighbors if it wanted to. But it doesnt. China could control the situation in its satellite state, North Korea. But it doesnt want to. Theres a reason why it doesnt want these things and its called domination. If China doesnt change from within, it`s eventually going to take some country in the region to try to stand up to them and put them under pressure for a change.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

The Kurihara family rented out the islands to the US and they used it for bombing practice. Why didn't China complain about it then?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I congratulate Ishihara's decision for this one. He and I are in the same camp.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

A comparison of Churchill and Ishihara. Oh god wept.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

During the 15th century during the Sho dynastiy of the Ryukyu kingdom these Senkaku islands were a bridge to the different empires (Shimadzu and Tokugawa shogunates in Nihon, Ming/Qing empires in China, Korean and South East Asian kingdoms like Majahpahit!). Let the Senkaku islands become a symbol again of harmony and prosperity in the whole of East Asia! Get rid of these American Gaijin neo-colonialists!

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

What an idiot, way to waste even more taxpayer's money.

And Japan seems to support him which is why he is re-elected again and again... what is wrong with people?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Thomas Anderson, he gets things done for Tokyo. He has a strong spine unlike the national government.

gregoryharuko, they are part of Okinawa. The Chinese can make the same argument for taking over the entire Prefecture.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

A comparison of Churchill and Ishihara. Oh god wept

No need for weeping. Ive never mentioned Ishihara in any post. Im talking about governments standing up to China, not some wild card ex-actor. By the way, the correct expression is jesus wept.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@YuriOtani

I totally agree that Okinawa-ken (the former Ryukyu kingdom) has the most natural and legitimate claim over the Senkaku islands. Since the entire Sho imperial family was moved to Edo during the Tokugawa Shogunate (winning against the Qing dynasty), "Kimigayo" can make the most legitimate claim over these islands. These also implies that - because there is an absolute majority in Okinawa-ken for the abolishment of US military bases in Nihon and particularly in Okinawa-ken - these warmongering US military soldiers should leave at once and go home !

In the beautifully reconstructed Shuri-jo castle, there hangs a peace bell, constructed during the Sho-dynasty, called "The Bridge to ten thousands nations bell". This became a symbol of peace and prosperity for the whole of East-Asian nations (The shogunates in Honshu and Kyushu, Ming/Qing dynasties, Korean and South East Asian Kingdoms,...). Let's hope that this Okinawa-spirit can bring peace and prosperity again to the whole of East-Asia in the coming centuries (you need a very strong spine for this like the creators of the European Union...) !

0 ( +1 / -1 )

gregoryharukoApr. 18, 2012 - 09:22AM JST @sfjp330 and @OssanAmerica Get the USA out of the area! USA has no claim whatsoever on these islands (including Okinawa) and should play >its geopolitical games in America!

You'e right, the United States has no claim over these islands. It is however bound by treaty to defend Japanese controlled territory and these islands fall into that category. The United States' military presence in Asia is at the request of the free Asian nations, and is even supported by a Socialist one like Vietnam. Without which, the Chines one party dictatorship would hav a free hand to implement their military and territorial expansion agenda without any resistance.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I think they should sink the island with more global warming then no one can have them :p

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Billy, the topic is Ishihara, you indirectly compared Churchill and Ishihara. One comparison that should never, never be made.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Ishihara stole the headlines again.. Purchase what ? He has stirred the controversy with himself placed at the center, again ! Sacred Ishihrara the cunning rabbit !

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

There is of course no need for "negotiators", as the islands have never been Chinese. They were inconspicuous rocks in the middle of the sea until seabed resource deposits were discovered nearby (to answer the question of what they were used for). The Chinese recognized them as Japanese for decades before that 1970 discovery, and the historical documents exist to prove it --- including Chinese maps.

http://ampontan.wordpress.com/2010/09/24/coming-attractions/

More interesting is what Ishihara said during that speech that the English-language media didn't report.

<http://ampontan.wordpress.com/2012/04/21/ichigen-koji-100/>

1 ( +3 / -2 )

"United States ..... is however bound by treaty to defend Japanese controlled territory and these islands fall into that category. "

Convenient isn't it?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Now hear this............. It is confusing, but allow me to tell you this area has already been explored and the place is one large oil and gas area - millions of barrels and remember The answer is staring you in the face that FDR wanted to return the Ryukyu Islands to the Chinese, but he died too soon. China doesnt trust Japan and Japan doesn't like China, but the former government of the Ryukyu Islands and China got along swimmingly. Allow The Government of the Ryukyu Islands to mediate with China and I am sure they would share. No one on Okinawa would ever have to work again (Ala Saudia Arabia )

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Thomas Anderson, he gets things done for Tokyo. He has a strong spine unlike the national government.

Some people mistake being boorish and/or irrational as "having a spine". It's an understandable confusion, but nonetheless incorrect.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

YuriOtaniApr. 19, 2012 - 09:45AM JST sfip330, if America does not honor the Defense treaty it would be gone. Japan would try to defend the islands. If China does well in the fight thousands of Japanese will be killed. Many SDF ships and aircraft sunk. Japan would after the war would close ALL of the American bases. So my friend if America breaks the treaty there will be NO security arrangement with America. Japan would have to do away with the 9th article of the Constitution and as horrible as it sounds develop and deploy a atomic deterrent force. The sum of our fears...

But sfjp330 is right (as almost always, I must say). I hope you felt yourself, when you wrote those words, that it was wishful thinking. The US is Very pragmatic and it sees the conflict between China and Japan in its worst nightmares, because it will either lose military advantage (Japan) or whats left of its economy (China) or both. The US will never intervene against China over territories, which are considered as disputed. It will be much less painful to blame the Japanese government for making stupid decisions (Chinese too), kick them off and reelect a new pro-American government, but with the new status quo. That is what the US will do. Only if mainland Japan is clearly attacked, then..., and even then I am not sure about a full military involvement, because even if the US will fight China, the other countries will not. The disputes over all the Islands in question are 100% Japanese responsibility and burden. One should be very careful.

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