politics

Japan envoy delivers letter to Chinese gov't to defuse tensions

60 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.

60 Comments
Login to comment

I guess if they deliver it by hand it can't be rejected. Or at least it's harder.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Kind of like a subpoena.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

He declined to elaborate on the contents, but said it was a good opportunity to address ties hurt by the island dispute.

Without knowing the contents, we can only guess. Maybe it said:

- The Senkakus are ours!

Or - Please don't hurt us!

Or - We have an island fo sale, if you like.

Or - You will be assimilated!

2 ( +5 / -3 )

What does China have to gain from this?? Getting their people a bit of pride in their own messed up country?? Some bragging rights? While the rest of the world wants to know how to keep China in place and not allow it to try and bully it's smaller neighbors, like Japan, Korea, the Philippines, Tibet, Vietnam, etc...time for China to grow up and stop behaving like a spoiled child or it will have to learn many life lessons from the international community in a very, very hard way. IMHO

2 ( +3 / -1 )

"A spokesman for China’s Ministry of Defense on Thursday also repeated Beijing’s claim to the islands and said the military was capable of “safeguarding” the country’s territory. "

That sounded a little passive aggressive.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Is this how Japan diffuse tension with China? By Japan sending more SDF warships loaded with offensive weapons near disputed islands? Japan's SDF has a plan to substantially increase their presence in southwest island chain near Senkaku/Diaoyu islands. Japan is moving away from basic defence concept, by introducing more assertive concept. This new concept to Japan is clearly intended to counter China’s maritime challenge.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

With China's rising economic power and its already existing military strength it's no wonder the Japanese government is rushing to try and quell the storm it helped create. I believe that of all the Japanese claims to many islands, the Senkakus are actually pretty much Japanese territory, but the problem is that if China wants them, they'll take them, and there's nothing Japan can do, even hiding behind the US.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

sfjp330Sep. 01, 2012 - 08:46AM JST Is this how Japan diffuse tension with China? By Japan sending more SDF warships loaded with offensive >weapons near disputed islands? Japan's SDF has a plan to substantially increase their presence in southwest >island chain near Senkaku/Diaoyu islands. Japan is moving away from basic defence concept, by introducing more >assertive concept. This new concept to Japan is clearly intended to counter China’s maritime challenge.

What article did you read? Because it sure isn;t the one above that this thread ios about.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

smithinjapanSep. 01, 2012 - 09:10AM JST With China's rising economic power and its already existing military strength it's no wonder the Japanese >government is rushing to try and quell the storm it helped create. I believe that of all the Japanese claims to many >islands, the Senkakus are actually pretty much Japanese territory, but the problem is that if China wants them, >they'll take them, and there's nothing Japan can do, even hiding behind the US.

Total nonsense as usual. Ther United States has already stated that the Senkakus fall within US defense Parameters as dictated by the US-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

ric KalmusSep. 01, 2012 - 09:54AM JST Didn't Japan lose these islands after WW2 ?? If they are allowed to ask for them back then next the USA will need to >return California, Texas, and Hawaii... wait perhaps the USA should just go back to the UK?

No it didn't. Japan lost territories that were gained by greed or war. The Senkakus were not taken from anybody as they were uninhabited and unclaimed. Hence the US returned it to Japan as part of Okinawa.

to the winners go the spoils of war. Get over it japan - you lost. Walk away with some dignity. Eng your Borg like ways.

Best to learn some facts and history first before posting.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Just curious but which language is the letter written in, in these circumstances?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Japan wake up. Wake up so you will realized that Dioayu belong to China and China Diaoyu is not for sale. Wake up, so you will realized by revising history, you gain nothing. Wake up, apologize to all Asian victims that you committed atrocities against them and stopped performing those ceremonies, prayers, or other religious forms to those Class B-C-A war criminals by which this love is expressed and dedicated to those A-B-C war criminals who committed crimes and atrocities against humanities. Get REAL Japan.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Using korean logic, the senkakus are Japanese territory therefore no despute exist.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Ossan: "Total nonsense as usual. Ther United States has already stated that the Senkakus fall within US defense Parameters as dictated by the US-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty."

The only nonsense comes from those ignoring the facts, which you fall into. The US would never stand up to China over the Senkakus... never. They have too much to lose, and full scale world war over a few rocks is not on the agenda, which is part of the reason why Clinton is going to Asia to try and diffuse tensions. There may be a military pact with Japan over the islands, but if push came to shove I guarantee the US would simply say it's a domestic matter. Japan would moan and groan and cry, and they know it and hence are suddenly trying to undo the tension they have in part created -- they KNOW there is nothing they could do if China took action.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Ossan: "No it didn't. Japan lost territories that were gained by greed or war. The Senkakus were not taken from anybody as they were uninhabited and unclaimed."

Ill-informed and jumping to conclusions, as usual. They were taken from China by force during the Japan-Sino war in the 1800s. Stop reading those white-washed textbooks and do some actual research.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

smithinjapan, these islands were part of the Ryukyu Kingdom which is now part of Japan. China was not innocent in the war of 1895. Things are not as clear as Japan bad and China good.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

like my 3 yr old telling my 6 yr old, 'we can share.'

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I see China as pre-WWII Japan, but not looking for equality (what Japan was looking for) but for race dominance.

I see bad times coming in that part of the world:

http://www.japanprobe.com/2012/07/21/poll-90-of-chinese-support-military-action-over-senkaku-islands/

http://jsw.newpacificinstitute.org/?p=3020

And Koreas are just going to follow them to their end.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

This stupid crap is still going on, unbelievable.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I see China as pre-WWII Japan, but not looking for equality (what Japan was looking for) but for race dominance.

Are you seriously suggesting that pre-WWII Japan was looking for equality?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

latienda

Japan wake up. Wake up so you will realized that Dioayu belong to China and China Diaoyu is not for sale. Wake up, so you will realized by revising history, you gain nothing. Wake up, apologize to all Asian victims that you committed atrocities against them and stopped performing those ceremonies, prayers, or other religious forms to those Class B-C-A war criminals by which this love is expressed and dedicated to those A-B-C war criminals who committed crimes and atrocities against humanities. Get REAL Japan.

Very selective, isn't it? Now let's see...

China wake up. Wake up so you will realize that Tibet belongs to Tibet and Tibet is not for sale. Wake up, so you will realize by flooding Tibet with Han Chinese you gain nothing. Wake up, apologize to all Tibetans and monks that you committed atrocities against, and stopped them performing their religious ceremonies, prayers, and showing their love for their religion. Get REAL China.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Thomas . Are you seriously suggesting that pre-WWII Japan was looking for equality?

Pre-WWII Japan was looking for equality.....but equality with anglo-saxons NOT with China.....

0 ( +4 / -4 )

YuriOtani: "China was not innocent in the war of 1895. Things are not as clear as Japan bad and China good."

Where have I ever said China was 'good' in that war or anywhere else for that matter, while Japan is only 'bad'? I'd like to see your proof, please. What I said was, the lands were seized from China during that war, and that's it.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

OssanAmerica

Total nonsense as usual. Ther United States has already stated that the Senkakus fall within US defense Parameters as dictated by the US-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty.

US defence Parameter ?? It's Far East!

US always looking for troubles ?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

hatsoff

China wake up. Wake up so you will realize that Tibet belongs to Tibet and Tibet is not for sale

.

It is big difference between contemporary China and Japan....

China is an independent state with strong army and growing economy....UN Security Concil memeber.....

Whats this - modern Japan ?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

smithinjapan, there were no Chinese on those islands ever! If anyone took anything by force it was the communists. The war just made China sign over them. Did you know China wanted Korea?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Olegek

It is big difference between contemporary China and Japan....

China is an independent state with strong army and growing economy....UN Security Concil memeber.....

Whats this - modern Japan ?

I agree, there's a BIG difference in manners and sophistication for a start. And the Japanese government is less oppressive to its own people than the Chinese government, and doesn't orchestrate protests for its own benefits, and doesn't claim basically the whole of the China Seas....etc etc

2 ( +2 / -0 )

No one in America cares about these damned islands! The Japanese are on their own.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Get over it... Japan easily annexed the islands In the 1800s... No one cared. USA forced Japan's surrender in WW2, no one cared. It's written that Japan was forced to give up its islands except the main areas... And the senkaku islands was in the air... China could have got it... But basically said "we don't need just wocks (rocks)." they were only really focused on getting reparations from getting beat up by Japan so much. Cool. It wasn't until the oil reserves were discovered that Taiwan and China started crying for the islands....

You snooze you lose. :)

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Back on topic please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Putting the historical references aside. Japan has much more to lose economically if there is no reconciliation with China than Korea. Pragmatically speaking, that's most likely the reason to defuse tensions with China and take a hard stance with Korea. China has a larger potential consumer export base and production capacity than Korea. Therefore its vital to stabilize relations China for future business ventures.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Reality check, folks. US , as Smithinjapan mentioned, will not go to war with China over these rocks/islands. Unless McCain becomes the next POTUS that is, then all bets are off.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hatsoff

Whats this - modern Japan ? I agree, there's a BIG difference in manners and sophistication for a start.

No from my point of view - and I'm not Japanese or Chinese- it's no difference.

And the Japanese government is less oppressive to its own people than the Chinese government,

I forgot - Democracy TM !!!

and doesn't orchestrate protests for its own benefits,

may be you forgot all these activity around North Terrirories?

and doesn't claim basically the whole of the China Seas....etc e

..

Ossan. Ther United States has already stated that the Senkakus fall within US defense Parameters

Senkakus are far away from US....

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

smithinjapanSep. 01, 2012 - 11:03AM JST "Ossan: "No it didn't. Japan lost territories that were gained by greed or war. The Senkakus were not taken from anybody as they were uninhabited and unclaimed." Ill-informed and jumping to conclusions, as usual. They were taken from China by force during the Japan-Sino war >in the 1800s. Stop reading those white-washed textbooks and do some actual research.

Copmpletely wrong as always. The Senkakus were incorprated in January 1895. The Sino-Japanese War wasn't concluded and the Treatuy of Shimonoseki ewasn;t signed by bioth countries until April 1885. In the Treaty, the Ching Dynasty (China) gicves up territories to Japan. But the Sevkakus are not included. Why? Because China never considered them theirs in the first place. Why don't YOU do some actual research instead of telling others to while spiouting completely erroneous information?

"2.The islands were neither part of Taiwan nor part of the Pescadores Islands, which were ceded to Japan by the Qing Dynasty of China in Article II of the May 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki,[30] thus were not later renounced by Japan under Article II of the San Francisco Peace Treaty.[31]"

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

"A spokesman for China’s Ministry of Defense on Thursday also repeated Beijing’s claim to the islands and said the military was capable of “safeguarding” the country’s territory. "

Chinese diplomacy aimed at settling disputes with its neighbors in good faith.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Thomas AndersonSep. 01, 2012 - 01:17PM JST No one in America cares about these damned islands! The Japanese are on their own.

As an American I can tell you that the U.S. is very concerned about China's military and territorial expansion agenda throughtout the Eat and South China Seas. And the US Sec of State has openly stated thjat the Senkakus fall with U.S. defense parameters under the US-Japan MUtual Defense Treaty. Please stop posting utter nonse.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

As an American I can tell you that the U.S. is very concerned about China's military and territorial expansion agenda throughtout the Eat and South China Seas. And the US Sec of State has openly stated thjat the Senkakus fall with U.S. defense parameters under the US-Japan MUtual Defense Treaty. Please stop posting utter nonse.

I find that hard to believe, because no one really cares. And US's official stance is and has always been, "neutral".

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The US is currently trying to diffuse the tension, because they don't want to the situation to escalate and get any worse because some idiot nationalists are bickering over some islands. And they are certainly not going to go to war with China just to protect some rocks. The fantasy of the Japanese nationalists that the US will back up Japan over some islands disputes is just that - a fantasy.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

It is more than just the Islands Thomas, it is about the EEZ and gas and oil rights. The thing about conflict is it is not predictable. Someone somewhere makes a mistake and it breaks out. If the Americans do not help Japan then there will be the devil to pay! It will take Japan down a road that is should not venture. China will accept only one outcome, the total control of the sea to within 12 miles of the remaining Okinawa islands. If China can beat Japan it will not only take these islands but the rest of the Ryukyu chain up to Okinawa itself. Then they will demand Okinawa.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Sending or not a letter ( disclosed its content beforehand or not ) it's a show, again ? The PM is expected to send another letter to president Putin of Russia.. So.. .? These days, skillful people understand the power of face-to- face discussions to ego the opposing parties ?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Japan should avoid larger investment in China and South Korea. Especially South Korea because they have too much hatred toward all Japanese. My experienced with Korean is not very good. Both Governments are playing politic with past. Majority of Chinese peoples don't have hard feeling about past but Koreans are too aggressive toward Japanese. Japanese companies should be more investing in Vietnam, Thai and future in Burma instead of China and Korea.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The US is currently trying to diffuse the tension, because they don't want to the situation to escalate and get any worse because some idiot nationalists are bickering over some islands. And they are certainly not going to go to war with China just to protect some rocks. The fantasy of the Japanese nationalists that the US will back up Japan over some islands disputes is just that - a fantasy.

Neither is China. If China wanted to take them, they could of done it a long time ago like they did with islands at South China Sea. The Senkaku as it stands has no military outposts and the JCG vessels are quite a few in numbers there. What China can do is send activists now and then to try to appeal to the masses within their own population.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Diaoyu Islands has been territory of China since hundreds years ago. China failed to exercise sovereignty since Japan occupied Taiwan in 1895 and invaded China in WWII. After WWII, the USA handed over the Islands administration to Japan while China was in fierce civil war and then struggled in the Cultural Revolution, a severe internal disorder. Japan took advantage of these opportunities to control the Islands while China was in chaos. Japan would be so shameless as to take advantage of that to say China didn't claim at that time. ( as shameless as Japan making the sudden attack on Pearl Harbor)

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

these islands were part of the Ryukyu Kingdom which is now part of Japan.

YuriOtani, they were never part of Ryukyu Kingdom. What you said just shows that you don't really know much about Japan's history. If you would like to know more about this dispute, I will recommend you to read the following article written by Koji Taira:

The China-Japan Clash Over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands

http://www.japanfocus.org/-Koji-Taira/2119

0 ( +1 / -1 )

If anyone took anything by force it was the communists.

YuriOtani, Japan wasn't communist but fascist just like the Nazi. And the fascists are so far the biggest plunderer in the world.

The fascists are by nature the biggest enemy of the communists. That is probably the reason why Japan was handpicked by the Americans to become the bulwark against communism. The Americans achieved this by helping the LDP, a political party founded by the fascists, WWII criminals and Yakuza to defeat the leftists and gained control of Japan for many decades after WWII.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Did you know China wanted Korea?

YuriOtani, Korea was a protectorate of China just like current Japan is a protectorate of the US. While Japan can't say "NO" to the US, China was not allowed to station one single soldier in Korea without invitation from the Korean government.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Thomas AndersonSep. 01, 2012 - 10:19PM JST "As an American I can tell you that the U.S. is very concerned about China's military and territorial expansion agenda throughtout the Eat and South China Seas. And the US Sec of State has openly stated thjat the Senkakus fall with U.S. defense parameters under the US-Japan MUtual Defense Treaty. Please stop posting utter nonse."

I find that hard to believe, because no one really cares. And US's official stance is and has always been, "neutral".

Then you are unaware of current events in Asia and the position of the US government, as well as the stategically adbretsarial relationshop between the US Navy and the cHinese PLA Navy. I suppose you are unaware that the US has ordered a shift in naval power from other parts of the world to the Pacific. Seriously, don't take my world for iot. Read about it all over on new sites, It's reality.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Thomas AndersonSep. 01, 2012 - 10:33PM JST The US is currently trying to diffuse the tension, because they don't want to the situation to escalate and get any >worse because some idiot nationalists are bickering over some islands.

Incorrect, The US istrying to difuse the situation with Takeshima/Dokdo between Japan and South Korea because both are defense alliies of the U.S.

And they are certainly not going to go to war with China just to protect some rocks. The fantasy of the Japanese >nationalists that the US will back up Japan over some islands disputes is just that - a fantasy.

It is no fanatsy. THe US Sec of STate has stated in no unclear terms that the Senkakus fall under U/.S. Defense Parameters under the US-Jaopan Mutul Defense Treaty. This is a fact,

0 ( +1 / -1 )

efisherSep. 02, 2012 - 03:05AM JST Diaoyu Islands has been territory of China since hundreds years ago.

No they only claimed it was theirs in 1970.

China failed to exercise sovereignty since Japan occupied Taiwan in 1895 and invaded China in WWII. After WWII, >the USA handed over the Islands administration to Japan while China was in fierce civil war and then struggled in >the Cultural Revolution, a severe internal disorder. Japan took advantage of these opportunities to control the >Islands while China was in chaos. Japan would be so shameless as to take advantage of that to say China didn't >claim at that time.

China made no claim because it didn't care. There are PRC maps from the 1960s that show the Senbkakus to be Japahnese. What;s shameless is China's 1970 claim AFTER a UN exploration report indicated the possible presence of gas and oil. And what;s shamesless is China's desire to swallow up all of the Eat and South China Seas as it;s own, a position that they have made public.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@OssanAmerica

Your statement contained many factual errors, the disputes arose in 70s because US hand over the administration of Diaoyu Islands to Japan in 1970.

At least, Japanese and Chinese should know well the factual data put forwarded by each other. I found many people here just mistaken factual data and that won't lead to a good discussion as to how to resolve the difference in viewpoint and opinions.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@smithinjapan: if China wants them, they'll take them, and there's nothing Japan can do, even hiding behind the US

And what else does US can do if China 'gripped' it tight! The senkaku dispute is nothing but a little show between The Japanese and America's rightist(Heritage foundation). CHina's ally is North Korea and China 's influences in asia is the backbone to protect North Korea at all cost that US shall never underestimated or ignored! North Korea has done a lot of things with bloods on her hands but she shall never has to pay. From the DMZTree trimming murders 1976, until nuclear blasting and sinking the Cheonan frigate,shelling Yeonping island, flying balllistic missiles etc. all these testing has shown the US armed forces in asia was nothing but paper tiger who shall never risking their lives for her allies! the so called Senkaku disputes falls within the parameter of US Japan mutual treaty was a 'myth'! It never works as propaganda, the last time was the trawler/Japanese coast guard collision 2010! China has tested a new MIRV capable global reaching ICBM 7/24, a signal good enough to echo the conflict escalting not just a martime dispute but their homeland in risk! That was the true definition of 'core interest' as Chinese government always mean!

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

For starters, the Chinese government will not reject the letter because their government is not run by a bunch of two year olds. For all their faults, they are at least people chosen for intelligence, and the great thing about dictatorships is that it fosters leadership with a long term view on these issues.

In the second place, whatever assertions there are in the letter, I'm reasonably certain it is probably started with words to the effect of *Dear Esteemed Future Chinese Overlords".

In the end of the day, the formula here is simple for Japan. While there is no question over Japan's legal sovereignty and control over the Senkakus, their combined value as land, and even with added potential gas reserves, is still dwarfed by the value and economic importance of China to Japan, which with a dwindling overpriced workforce and ageing population, has no choice but to transfer its wealth and knowledge to the Chinese economy for the shared benefit of both countries.

Deng Xiaoping was absolutely right that there is no value to either country in letting the island disagreement overshadow the broader relationship between both countries (I believe Deng even once suggested he'd be happy just to nuke the islands if they ever became a wedge in Sino-Japanese relations).

I'm also sure the letter to Korea would have said something similar, if the idiots presently running that country had the good sense to accept the letter, read it and try to think of the bigger picture.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

nigelboy the difference is Japan can hold our own against the Peoples Navy. So I say to the Peeps, you may draw when ready pardner.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

efisherSep. 02, 2012 - 03:21PM JST @OssanAmerica Your statement contained many factual errors, the disputes arose in 70s because US hand over the administration >of Diaoyu Islands to Japan in 1970.

No errors efisher. The dispute arose in the 1970s because a 1960s UN exploration indicated the possibility of oil and gas in thge region. Chinese maps from the 1960s show the Senkakus marked as Japanese territory. The US was correct in returning thge Senkakus to Japan as part of the return of Okinawa because the Senkakus were determined to be Japanese territory at the end of WWII as they were never taken "by force or greed" and not take by war and were not taken away, as Taiwan and the Pescadores were. Bear in mind that the ROC, the sole governmenht of China in 1945 had no problem with this. The CCP government which did not exist and did not participate in the Cairo Accords did not exist until 1949. So it is bewildering to see China supporters citing WWII agreemetnts with regard to these islands.

At least, Japanese and Chinese should know well the factual data put forwarded by each other. I found many >people here just mistaken factual data and that won't lead to a good discussion as to how to resolve the difference >in viewpoint and opinions.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Chinese are far less aware of the facts concrning these islands than the Japanese. Or anyone else on this planet for that matter.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

While there is no question over Japan's legal sovereignty and control over the Senkakus

On the legal aspects, there are plenty of unsettled issues regarding Japan's claim of sovereignty over these islands.

First of all, the US government denies it did handover the sovereignty of these islands in dispute to Japan in 1971 but merely the administration of it. The US government has always said it is neutral about the sovereignty of these islands and it even doesn't recognize those islands as Japanese territory.

The Japanese government on the other hand claims that the US government is telling lies. It claims that the US government did indeed handover the sovereignty of these islands to Japan in 1971. So this issue must first be resolved between the two governments.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

While there is no question over Japan's legal sovereignty and control over the Senkakus

Other legal aspects of the issue will include:

Japan's claim over these islands in dispute is a violation of the Potsdam Agreement which states that:

"The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out and Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and such minor islands as we (United States, China, Great Britain and Soviet Union) determine."

Japan did pledge to comply with the Potsdam Agreement in the Imperial Rescript of Surrender, the Japanese Instrument of Surrender and several other WWII documents. Therefore a violation of the Potsdam Agreement also constitutes a violation of the Japanese Instrument of Surrender which states that:

"We, acting by command of and in behalf of the Emperor of Japan, the Japanese Government and the Japanese imperial General Headquarters, hereby accept the provisions set forth in the declaration issued by the heads of the Governments of the United States, China and Great Britain on 26 July 1945, at Potsdam, and subsequently adhered to by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, which four powers are hereafter referred to as the Allied Powers.

We hereby proclaim the unconditional surrender to the Allied Powers of the Japanese Imperial General Headquarters and of all Japanese armed forces and all armed forces under Japanese control wherever situated."

Japan's claim over these islands in dispute is also a violation of the San Francisco Peace Treaty which says that a transfer of trusteeship (administration) of these islands in dispute as described in the San Francisco Peace Treaty must be submitted to the UN for approval.
0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yep! Lets all gang up on China. Its like a replay of history, the eight nations go plunder China when it was rich and prosperous towards the end of the Qing Dynasty. Unfortunately, now, China has a bigger defence force and plundering will be more costly. The American's know this, hence why they are pushing Japan, Philippines, Viet, Singapore and Taiwan to do it for them. US - Viet alliance, what a joke.....

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

YuriOtani: "nigelboy the difference is Japan can hold our own against the Peoples Navy."

No you couldn't.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Fascinating speculatative scenario. Doesn't even touch on the amount of intelligence the US would be providing on Chinese vessel posiions. Like we did for the UK in the Faulklands war.

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