politics

Japan urges calm after China severs contacts

114 Comments

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

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

114 Comments
Login to comment

"China’s decision to cut high-level contacts appears to reflect a worry about losing face in front of the Chinese public, which might trigger a nationalistic backlash against the government if it appears weak or unable to protect the country’s sovereignty."

And Japan's decision to hold the fisherman against all logic and sanity is likely for the same reason. Two peas in a pod, these governments are.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This has been Japanese territory since the 1800s, and China only claimed it in 1971 after resources were discovered in 1969. The vessel was operating illegally in Japanese territory. End of story, if not for a Chinese government that loves to get its people angry at Japan to keep them from revolting domestically.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why the hell doesn't Japan just whip him through the courts and end this? Calling for calm will only serve to enrage the sleeping dragon even more.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

shugotokumaru :

This has been Japanese territory since the 1800s, and China only claimed it in 1971 after resources were discovered in 1969. The vessel was operating illegally in Japanese territory. End of story

True. ...except China is increasingly demonstrating its true nature : BIG BULLY of the ORIENT.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Disillusioned

Why the hell doesn't Japan just whip him through the courts and end this? Calling for calm will only serve to enrage the sleeping dragon even more

Because in true demoncracies with a constitutional justise system there is such a thing called "due process". . . Something China's government - steeped in the history of mercurial machinations of dictorial whim - does NOT UNDERSTAND !!!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Provocate first and then ask for calm, usual Japanese style in dealing with foreign elements. By the way, measures taken so far by China seem diplomatic and as such 'calm' - anything missing here?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This dispute might be a blessing in disguise. It will provide a good case in point where the two governments must assess their new reality and adjust their foreign policy accordingly. Japan must realize and recognize the powerful dragon next door and learn how to live with it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Aside of calling for calm, and dispatching more troop to defense southern islands, can Japanese government talk through the issues with Chinese and promise not to crush fishing boats with patrol boats again?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The Japanese, although correct in arresting a trawler captain for hitting 2 coast guard boats, need to do themselves a diplomatic favour and deport the fisherman now. Holding the guy for a further 10 days without charging and deporting him is pretty stubborn.

How the Chinese can sever diplomatic ties over a (possibly rogue) fisherman, is just ridiculous.

In a normal world, a Chinese diplomat should have been invited to observe the due process of the Japanese police interviewing and charging the trawler captain. The diplomat could then have taken the fisherman home once he was deported.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I can only say, Japanese politician has no wise. NOW, this incident should be considered at political level instead of insisting on technical level.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It seems like that Japan keeps very clam about the incident and China is bitching like old woman. China can't be a future leader of Asia.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"BIG BULLY" I hope so. The Japanese have held that post for so long we, the world, need a change.

Seeing the United Nations not not given Japan sovereignty over the islands is a big deal. Until they do, Japan is playing a dangerous game that frankly they can't win. The US is not going to defend Japan over problems created by Japanese politics. Why would we. China owns more of the US that the US does.

Wouldn't it be nice if China announced all the staff at IBM Japan were fired immediately. That would be nice hit.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And Japan's decision to hold the fisherman against all logic and sanity is likely for the same reason. Two peas in a pod, these governments are.

Er, if the man deliberately rammed another ship at sea, where is the logic and sanity in releasing him, despite Chinas whining about territoriality etc?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The US government recognized that US returned Okinawa, Senkaku islands,,, to Japan in 1973. The US would have to defend Japan over it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Did any of you see the damage the little innocent Chinese captin did to the Japanese Ship?

Visiting the Yasukuni and not visiting it, would that ever change what was lost then?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I predict the Self Defense Forces will bolster their Forces prefetory to morphing the "Forces" into a Imperial Army - there-by destroying Japan's No War Constitution - which Japan has wanted to do all along. Japan, don't ypu realize China ia already a "Super-power".........

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It seems like that Japan keeps very clam about the incident

That is the best way to deal with a maritime incident such as this. Keep Clam, don't Prawn strategy for diplomacy, and this story will Shrimp into a much smaller one...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I thinking Japan is asking for trouble here with China!!!even japen put this fishboat captin into japenses jail under japanese law, will China admit the small island belong to Japan? hell no!!!!! so why go through such provoking process with China,and just making chinese people hate japenses more and more?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Noborito - you do a nice line in irony. Saying Japan is the big bully, while probably ignoring the fact that your own country has long held that title.

Anyway, China is just not used to people standing up to them. It is so used to getting what it wants that it doesn't have a rationale or method to deal with things when they don't go as they want or forsee. China expect other people not to meddle in their internal affairs (Tibet, human rights, freedom of speech etc) but they think it is ok to try and meddle in the judicial process of another sovereign state? Sorry China, turn down the rhetoric and maybe show a little co-operation and things might work out for the best.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Reason for Chinese not 'calm':

Japan refuses to talk about the disputed island.

Chinese can not back off while the fisher man is still jailed, and no promise from Japan not to crash their fishing boat yet.

Reason for Japan only want 'calm':

Japan do not want to talk, otherwise it has to admit 'dispute' first.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

It's good to see the second and third largest economies in the world are bickering like kindergarten idiots.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Keep calm everybody.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

so much trouble for some stupid islands which interests only some near pensioned politicians.

Are we dealing with kids here?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"I thinking Japan is asking for trouble here with China!!!"

The thing is Japan WILL HAVE trouble with the Chinese dictators, no matter what they do or don't. Such affairs occur whenever there is an anniversary of war events of 70 to 1500 years ago, it's as regular as the Kim Jong Il sending one of his toy rockets. OTOH, China still wants the Japanese ODA, the business opportunities, etc.

That said, I can't get how Japanese diplomacy could go be more incompetent than these days. They know they can't reach any progress on the matter with the Chinese government (as long as that regime will rule). And China cannot get a more negative image in the world, nobody think they are democratic, pacifist, altruits, or anything positive, they are accepted because they are a big cattle of cheap factory workers and cheap good buyers. But Japan needs its good reputation, and it can be damaged. And that's happening. They could use PR advice, don't they ?

@NorthLondon

You said :

"In a normal world, a Chinese diplomat should have been invited"

I don't think the Japanese refused access to the Chinese diplomats when they show up to assist any arrested Chinese national. Well, in a case like this, the Chinese ambassador should have boarded on the boat of their activists in the first place, with their own reporters to film it all. You know the degree of freedom of a Chinese citizen, don't you ? You are naive if you imagine a Chinese captain could go there on his decision like a group of Australian hippies go to bump into whale hunting boats.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Disillusioned: "Why the hell doesn't Japan just whip him through the courts and end this? Calling for calm will only serve to enrage the sleeping dragon even more."

They're waiting for him to sign the 'I am guilty' confession form so they can slap a suspended sentence on him and give him the boot. If they actually have to go through the due process without it... well, it would be tougher.

Molenir: "Er, if the man deliberately rammed another ship at sea, where is the logic and sanity in releasing him, despite Chinas whining about territoriality etc?"

Oh, I'm not saying what they are doing is incorrect -- Japan is totally in the right on this one (aside from taking him in disputed waters) -- but being stubborn just to save face when the consequences are quite grave is, well, just stupid. And no, in case anyone wonders, I most certainly do NOT think the acts of the Chinese (fisherman and government) are sane.

kwatt: "It seems like that Japan keeps very clam about the incident and China is bitching like old woman. China can't be a future leader of Asia."

I'd say they're acting more like a spoiled child than an old woman, but I guess it's all subjective. Regardless, China CAN be the future leader of Asia; they just won't be a very good one if they act on muscle alone.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is nonsense and kindergarten stuff... but in a way typical for both countries. Time to solve the real problems, people... God help the world, that China will not grown more...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan really did not have any other option. It had to do what it did. China is really blowing this out of proportion.

I think we will see more of this as China continues to flex its muscles on its neighbors int he future.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Chinese come and get him!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cos,

I have been defending Japan's ownership of the islands and blasting the Chinese over-reaction all week. But the recent news about the Japanese holding the fisherman for even longer and not charging him with any crime means that the Japanese deserve criticism as well for dragging their heels over a very nervy issue and for making the situation worse.

Japan, by inviting Chinese diplomats to observe the process, would have come across with more maturity and respect and diffused the situation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

NationalistRE: "Chinese come and get him!"

Ummm... you don't want that... really. Japan wouldn't have a chance. And anyway, they'd send IBMs to 'pick him up'.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smithinjapan at 08:41 PM JST - 20th September

Ummm... you don't want that... really. Japan wouldn't have a chance. And anyway, they'd send IBMs to 'pick him up'.

IBM's? You mean Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles? How someone can pick up someone by destroying cities? Is not more logic ask their client state North Korean to send an infiltration team? If they fail, China can say that it was an independent move not sanctioned by their government.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It seems for China to be a little late to claim the islands from 1969. China should strongly have claimed the islands after the defeat of Japan in 1945, The US was controlling these islands for a while and then returned them to Japan. it seems that Japan does not want to lose these islands even if diplomatic relation between Japan and China is gone. I think some organizations would need to make proper decision about it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China can't be a future leader of Asia.

China is already the leader of Asia.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mareo2: "IBM's? You mean Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles? How someone can pick up someone by destroying cities?"

Geez... can you not differentiate between sarcasm and the literal? Did you not notice how I put 'pick him up' in quotation marks? It means that if any sort of hostilities began, China wouldn't send its troops in to pick the guy up (and my response was to the 'Come and get 'em' above), they would fire missiles (and I'm sure not care too much about the fisherman). Come on, dude.

kwatt: "It seems for China to be a little late to claim the islands from 1969. China should strongly have claimed the islands after the defeat of Japan in 1945"

It wouldn't matter, as you can see by the example of Dokdo, which the Koreans have claimed ownership over since ownership could be claimed, and Japan only claim is in receiving them from the US after the war. China could have claimed the islands way earlier and Japan would still fight for them. Neither side is going to budge, regardless of WHEN they started laying claims.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan do not want to talk, otherwise it has to admit 'dispute' first.

Why does China refuse to take the issue to the International Court of Justice?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Communist can't be the leader. Most major countries are democratic.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is a mistake on China's part.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

New_Age_Hippie

China is already the leader of Asia.

Oh like Russia is the leader of the west ???? Pssssshaw . . you haven't got a clue ! China is the most poplous dictatorship; but it is very very poor - that is why it has 'undeveloped nation' status . . . . It might be the military bully of the East - but that does NOT a leader make .

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Both countries are childish and really need to grow up and get that giant chip off their shoulders! Seriously! Japan already has a tarnished reputation for doing things bureaucratically slow, stubborn and China feels that on every level that they are totally unstoppable and NOT accountable for anything o anyone at anytime. Either get a beer, sit down and talk about it or do it the old fashioned way, have a "dual" the one that gets shot and killed would evidently be the loser.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The skipper reminds me of the US soldier detained by Iran and the US journalists arrested by NKorea. Japanese GOV. premediated the whole things.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smithinjapan at 04:42 PM JST - 20th September And Japan's decision to hold the fisherman against all logic and sanity >is likely for the same reason. Two peas in a pod, these governments are.

"Against all logic", what complete nonsense. The capt rammed not 1 but 2 JCG vessels in an area under Japanese jurisdiction and is being prosecuted accordingly for it as you would expect from any deveoped cilivlized country, the same as if a Japanese boat capt did the same thing. China's behavior and ridiculous demand to "unconditionally release" him is what defies all logic.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith - Regarding Dokdo/Takeshima islands, in 1960s. SKorea knew that most countries did not care about Dokdo/Takashima, so SKorea invaded Takeshima with military forces. Today China can't easily invade Senkaku islands because all major countries are watching the dispute over these islands everyday. It seems that China can't send navy fleet to Senkaku islands although they want. Because whole world is watching this.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japanese goverment is so naive and thinks that challenging China by this way can occupy DIAOYU island as soon as possible,but Japan does not know what country China is now,the action taken by Japan only make they lose DIAOYU island as soon as possible.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

windhoss, the islands are occupied by Japan and are called the SENKAKU islands. SENKAKU, not diaoyu.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

To OssanAmerica: you need to think from both side...you can't just say that it's an area under Japanese jurisdiction based on Japan's claim! it's the same to China that a Chinese capt's been illegally arrested by Japanese government!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tian4670 at 05:29 PM JST - 20th September Aside of calling for calm, and dispatching more troop to defense >southern islands, can Japanese government talk through the issues with >Chinese and promise not to crush fishing boats with patrol boats again?

If you bothered to see the video of he damage to to he JCG vessels you'd have seen that it would have been impossible for them to have "rammed: anyone. Unless you think ships can chase down others going backwards at an angle. The Chinese capt is guilty of ramming them and he is being prosecuted as he would by any other developed civilized country.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

you can't just say that it's an area under Japanese jurisdiction based on Japan's claim!

So under the same way of thinking you can't just say that Hong Kong is an area under Chinese jurisdiction based on China's claim ?

a Chinese capt's been illegally arrested by Japanese government!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

a Chinese capt's been illegally arrested by Japanese government!

Try bumping into 2 Chinese coast guard boats and see what happens to you !

0 ( +0 / -0 )

zhengzcr at 10:20 PM JST - 20th September To OssanAmerica: you need to think from both side...you can't just say >that it's an area under Japanese jurisdiction based on Japan's claim! >it's the same to China that a Chinese capt's been illegally arrested by >Japanese government!

The Senkaku Islands were Japanese propert since 1985. They wree not won in the Sino-Japanese war, which is why they remained in Japanese control after WWII. The US controlled them as part of Okinawa and returned them to Japan in 1972. China did not even think about these islands until the 1970s when ther possibility of natural gas deposits in he area became evident. Simply put it's China just acting like it's greedy selfcentered self to grab natural resources. This whole fishing boat escapade was a Chinese ploy to grab the gas fields aggressively.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If China thinks the sovereign of the islands is in China, it already would have sent military forces on the islands to show its sovereign, but they actually could not do that, because China knows that Japan has been occupying the islands for century until today.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

windhoss at 09:49 PM JST - 20th September The skipper reminds me of the US soldier detained by Iran and the US >journalists arrested by NKorea. Japanese GOV. premediated the whole >things.

Yea right, the Japanese govt instructed the Chinese fishing boat capt to ram 2 coast guard ships. The only one who could do that is the Chinese govt. China's behavior really hows the rest of he world howe much they are really just like North Korea.

windhoss at 10:07 PM JST - 20th September Japanese goverment is so naive and thinks that challenging China by this >way can occupy DIAOYU island as soon as possible,but Japan does not know >what country China is now,the action taken by Japan only make they lose >DIAOYU island as soon as possible.

The Senkaku Islands are already controlled by Japan and have been since 1895. What's naive is the Chinese govt thinking they can "bully" Japan into handing them, and the east china sea gas fields over to them by sheer hostility.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The_Marion at 06:22 PM JST - 20th September I predict the Self Defense Forces will bolster their Forces prefetory to >morphing the "Forces" into a Imperial Army - there-by destroying Japan's >No War Constitution - which Japan has wanted to do all along. Japan, >don't ypu realize China ia already a "Super-power".........

Your prediction is about as useful as expired meds. It also has lost complete touch with reality. The JSDF functions practically as a part of US Forces in terms of Japan's defense. Your riduculous support for the Chinese dictatorship is offensive to the souls of the Marines who gave their lives at Chosun Reservoir. Semper Fi!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

noborito at 05:56 PM JST - 20th September Seeing the United Nations not not given Japan sovereignty over the >islands is a big deal. Until they do, Japan is playing a dangerous game >that frankly they can't win. The US is not going to defend Japan over >problems created by Japanese politics. Why would we. China owns more of >the US that the US does.

Nonsense. The US gave Senkaku Islands back to Japan asd part of Okinawa prefecture. Any military advance by China on these islands would trigger the US-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty and China will be drawing the US into a fight, something China doesn't dare do.

Wouldn't it be nice if China announced all the staff at IBM Japan were >fired immediately. That would be nice hit.

China owns IBM's PC division, that's all. Comments like this where Chinese advocate ecoinomic and trade actions to support their governments militant expansionist policies serve to alert the rest of tghe world to the dangers of doing business with any Chinese companies. You're doing a great disservice to China by even suggesting it.

noborito at 05:56 PM JST - 20th September Seeing the United Nations not not given Japan sovereignty over the >islands is a big deal.

Yes they did. Specfically, ownership was not taken away at the end of WWII because it was not taken by war.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“We call for calm and prudent action by China in order not to further escalate the situation,”

Here we go again...

60+ years ago, Japan goes on a "Blitzkrieg" across Asia, literally no country within a 6000 mile radius escaped Japan's War Machine...

But then after they're finally forced to surrender, here they are...

Japan's playing their games again...

They want their cake, and they want to eat it too...

Japan needs to just shut it's damn mouth.. Not to mention, you have a country full of people, that have no clue the kind of damage and hell you perpetrated on the rest of Asia...

You guys are living on borrowed time... But you're so blind, you think you're in the right.... What a country...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Perhaps it's about priorities. China didn't really think about much in 1969, other than getting its collective crap together.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

2 silly countries having another argument that the rst of the world hardly notices. Storm in a tea cup but we have the resident pro Chinese and the worlds biggest Japanophile getting very excited.

Get a grip, no fights, no war, no one else cares.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Not to mention, you have a country full of people, that have no clue the kind of damage and hell you perpetrated on the rest of Asia...

mindovermatter, so who exactly is 'you' if the country is full of people who are unaware of what happened ? I guess that 'you' is the ghost of 70 years ago, which is exactly where you are living.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan needs to just shut it's damn mouth

That's funny, I thought it was the Chinese government who started crying and babbling over spilt oil ?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Walk softly and forget to carry the big stick.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mindovermatter at 10:54 PM JST - 20th September

60+ years ago, Japan goes on a "Blitzkrieg" across Asia, literally no >country within a 6000 mile radius escaped Japan's War Machine... But then after they're finally forced to surrender, here they are...

Since then they've become a peaceful democracy. And China a militant dictatorship that doesb't think twice about starting wars or threatening all her neigbors.

Japan's playing their games again...

Hardly. Japan is behaving like any civilized democratoc country. China is bahving like the immature militant dictatorship that it is.

They want their cake, and they want to eat it too...

China wants all of Asia to itself.

Japan needs to just shut it's damn mouth.. Not to mention, you have a >country full of people, that have no clue the kind of damage and hell >you perpetrated on the rest of Asia...

China needs to shut it's mouth, which it will once they push it to the point of bringing the US into it. All of China's Asian neighbors are wathing China's bullying tactics now. So much for Chinese "leadership" in Asia.

You guys are living on borrowed time... But you're so blind, you think >you're in the right.... What a country...

Japan actually IS in the right. That pro-China posters support the dictatorship and it's militant ways really is a disgrace to the Chinese people.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smithinjapan at 09:19 PM JST - 20th September

Geez... can you not differentiate between sarcasm and the literal? Did you not notice how I put 'pick him up' in quotation marks? It means that if any sort of hostilities began, China wouldn't send its troops in to pick the guy up (and my response was to the 'Come and get 'em' above), they would fire missiles (and I'm sure not care too much about the fisherman). Come on, dude.

Sorry I was half-joking. I forgot to use quotation marks, my bad. We all know that captain Zhan is not wort a war, much less nuking people or even asking North Korea to send an infiltration team. I try to be more clear next time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well like 1938 in Europe it looks like history is repeating itself again. Either the Americans will support Japan in their upcoming conflict or not. If Japan gives in China will soon ask for the rest of the Okinawa Prefecture. I say any conflict with China will turn into a "turkey shoot" for America and Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well like 1938 in Europe it looks like history is repeating itself again. Either the Americans will support Japan in their upcoming conflict or not. If Japan gives in China will soon ask for the rest of the Okinawa Prefecture.

But this is not 1938. One would hope that we have all grown up since then. China needs to forget about it's 70 year old complex with Japan and it's personal complex with the US and the Japanese need to stop playing silly buggers and deport the fisherman as soon as possible.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Really doubt there will be military confrontation over this issue; the louder they bark, the more likely they would have a peaceful resolution. Well, what does U.S get to lose? Probably a Big Win situation for U.S, or at the very least, a big opportunity for us!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Perhaps it is more like 1914 awaiting for a spark to ignite the next war. The incident by itself was not the cause but the trigger. Something is very wrong that allows something so minor as this to "damage" relations so quickly.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

windhoss, the islands are occupied by Japan and are called the SENKAKU islands. SENKAKU, not diaoyu.

Windhoss is doubly wrong -- if the islands were part of Taiwan (which they aren't), they would be spelled "Tiaoyu" in Wade-Giles, not in Mainland Pinyin.

But they're not part of Taiwan, and certainly not part of Mainland China. Just look at a map -- Chinese territory is supposed to somehow extend northesat (but not due east) from Taiwan, hook over Yonaguni and the huge Ishigaki island, and encompass some little islands north of Ishigaki? Get serious, China.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It isn't strange at all that Japan has detained the captain of the ship for supposedly ramming a Japanese vessel. Seem to recall China has done the same thing before with ships and even with US aircraft. China is embarrassing herself by using this currently minor incident as an excuse to pull out of other talks that are totally unrelated. Typical.

I read this interesting quote today:

"When the leaders express condemnation, it means that you're allowed to express condemnation," wrote Han Han, perhaps the world's most popular blogger, in a post that was mostly deleted from the internet. "When the leaders express regret, it means your time for expressing condemnation is over."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It all comes down to a country's over all strength (military and economy). Why don't we have any issues like this with Canada or Mexico, or if we do, I don't see they would dare to detain the captain of one of our ships LOlz....well....they can try I guess.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Quite clear to everybody that it's a power play. China wants in and wants to push Japan out of the way in this particular neck of the woods.

"China has 1 POINT 3 BILLION people!" Jackie Chan

In other words, wha-cha-gonna do?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Chinese have a really big chip on their shoulder and they are just daring anybody to knock it off. In the meantime they help out thugs in NK, Burma and Zimbabwe to further their own nationalistic goals at the expense of the people and world peace. They justify this by the treatment the Chinese received at the hands of the French, Brits, US, and, later, Japan. But that was years ago. Time for the Chinese leadership to understand that to be a world power you have to behave like one - not just toss your weight around.

Maybe it's time to give Japan a seat on the Security Council. That would frost China's knickers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nah, Japanese hope for Security Council is already dead (China and Russia will block the vote definitely). They just need to disolve U.N, and let countries solve their own problems (at least it is better for us anyway). Again, i still believe China and Japan are just barking, not really going to be a serious issue.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

For those of you who think there is going to be a war, think about what happened after Chinese fighter jet collided with the U.S surveillance plane.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Maybe it's time to give Japan a seat on the Security Council. That would frost China's knickers.

Not in your or my lifetime, buddy! Anyway, I doubt a "pacifist nation" with (theoretically) no Army and no permission under their own Constitution to engage in war outside of their own borders could really be effective in such a role.

Anyway, this is an interesting little footnote in China-Japan relations. Only a matter of time before Japan backs down - I don't see them pressing charges and/or imprisoning this Captain for allegedly ramming the Japanese patrol boat. Those fat-cat, priviliged elites who control so called "Modern China" will toast themselves with vintage French Champagne when this happens - whilst thousands of dissidents for democracy rot in their prisons.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@BurakuminDes,

"Whilst thousands of dissidents for democracy rot in their prisons" hehehe, that was what our country's elites did after "9-11"'s patriot bill was passed....oh I forgot....we don't have elites....we have neo-con!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Maybe it's time to give Japan a seat on the Security Council. That would frost China's knickers.

Right you are, it will certainly frost China's knickers, and precisely why China's veto would never let it happen.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I can't wait until we get out of Japan and let them handle their own affairs. It's just a waste of money for nothing in return. They're not dumb, they'll build up their military and take care of themselves if we leave - the only difference is who pays for it and the constant whining.

It's sad, but this is just inevitable. China has the power to do whatever they want even when they're wrong. Kinda like Japan oh snap!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

calicat, they are behaving like a world power lol. You think the USSR, USA didn't pull stunts like that? They literally make China look like amateurs. China has great respect for the clout their rivals held and are only emulating their predecessors.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Kindergarten diplomacy from China and Japan. I'm sure Korea will weigh in too so that it doesn't feel left out. No wonder the US has to stand guard in the area.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China's leaders clamp down on most forms of political expression, but in the past few years they have given anti-Japanese rabble rousers a relatively long leash. The Chinese government believes that Japan needs China more economically than vice versa. That makes it easier for China to take a more aggressive stance against Japan than it does with U.S.

In East China Sea, geopolitical competition between China, Japan and U.S. is in full speed in the region with the main regional countries rapidly reconfiguring their policy responses towards China. In a short time, U.S. will be more active and will decide to change its posture to reassure its allies in the region that China's growing regional dominance would not go unchallenged. The dispute in South China Sea is not merely about resources, it is also central to China's ambitions for a China's expanding Navy able to operate away from its shores. If U.S. has more direct involvement and conflict with China in the East China Sea, there will be significant change in the political stance from China. China does not want to have direct confrontation with U.S.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is a harbinger of the US-Japan axis trying to contain a rising China. The US, unfortunately, and embarrassingly for those of us hailing from America and residing here in Japan, fancies itself a hegemon in this region, and that is an absurd, imperialistic notion. As for the disputed islands, both the historical information and the geological information would seem to indicate that they should be considered to be a contiguous part of Taiwan. The fact that the Japanese government recognized a light house erected there by right-wingers is cause for alarm, as far as I'm concerned.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ubikwit at 03:17 AM JST - 21st September This is a harbinger of the US-Japan axis trying to contain a rising >China. The US, unfortunately, and embarrassingly for those of us hailing >from America and residing here in Japan, fancies itself a hegemon in >this region, and that is an absurd, imperialistic notion

I find it embarassing that any American should be so misinformed as to think even for a moment that Post-WWII Japanese policy has in any way suggested that they think itself a hegemon in the region. To the contrary the only nation since WWII that has held such aspirations is China and only in the last 15 years or so have they attained the economic clout to attempt to implement it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@ubikwit

After reading this...

...At the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional Forum meeting in July, Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi's jaw-dropping lecture to Asian ministers -- and the U.S. secretary of state -- that other countries were obstreperous to contest China's unilateral claim to international waters and island chains in the South China Sea still rankles with leaders who were present. Particularly galling, according to the foreign minister of one major power at the meeting, was Foreign Minister Yang's reminder that Southeast Asian states were "small countries" who depended on trade with China for their prosperity, while China was a "large country." There was therefore little chance of equality in their relations, Yang suggested. China's neighbors simply would have to take that asymmetry -- and, he added pointedly, their economic dependence on the China market -- into account before "internationalizing" their dispute with Beijing over competing maritime claims...

http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/09/20/chinas_maritime_aggression_should_be_wake_up_call_to_japan

I got the impression that asian countries with territorial disputes with China suspect that the country that "fancies itself a hegemon in this region" is China and they are going to feel more sympathy for Japan. Because China seems to use similar arguments with other territorial claims: "We discovered an old map that say that a long time ago this belonged to us."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

true that...jpn will never get security council seat so long as china and russia are around...and these 2 countries, unfortunately, jpn will never be able to buy like their whale partners...

however, never say never, but it'll cost them very dearly

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Are we forgeting ROC's claim over this island too? What if (not possible in reality) ROC and Japan got into a military conflict over this island, I wonder whom would U.S defense. U.S has treaties with both ROC and Japan FYI.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

U.S has treaties with both ROC and Japan FYI.

The US has no defence treaty with the ROC (Taiwan), just something that says it should provide it with defensive weapons. Not that Japan would need the US' help to deal with Taiwan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Remember when PROC and ROC had military tension back in the 90s, U.S had promised it would defend ROC (Taiwan). Would U.S not do the same if Japan and ROC had a similar situation like PROC and ROC did? Let's say if Japan would not need help from U.S to deal with Taiwan, and U.S would not send help to Taiwan; I think ROC (Taiwan) would then want a unification treat with mainland China to secure its territorial claim.....but that is just an assumption.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Indeed, calm is needed. China's 'peaceful rise' will guarantee economic domination of Asia. Any military conflict with Japan and the U.S. would derail China's rise.

China's on an economic roll. China won't jeopardize it's ascendence, way too much at stake.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China’s decision to cut high-level contacts appears to reflect a worry about losing face in front of the Chinese public, which might trigger a nationalistic backlash against the government if it appears weak or unable to protect the country’s sovereignty.

But postponing the Japanese students vists (about a thousand) to Shanghai Expo who were invited by the Chinese government in the first place? How low can you get. But then again, we're talking about China. Uncivilized, as usual.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@mushroomcloud,

Agree with your statement.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@nigelboy,

Well, I would not let the students to visit Shanghai if I were the "Chinese government" because there are just too many goons and thugs on the street LOlz!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ICBM70 at 05:24 AM JST - 21st September I think ROC (Taiwan) would then want a unification treat with mainland >China to secure its territorial claim.....but that is just an assumption.

A rather silly one at that since there is no way Taiwan would sell itself to Chinese control just for the sake of some uninhabited islands.

mushroomcloud at 06:05 AM JST - 21st September Any military conflict with Japan and the U.S. would derail China's rise.

Agree 100%. China's attitude and behavior so far has hurt them already. It's matter of time before someone high up realizes this and China will fold on this issue. Not worth what's at stake.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@OssanAmerica

I find it embarassing that any American should be so misinformed as to think even for a moment that Post-WWII Japanese policy has in any way suggested that they think itself a hegemon in the region.

Really? You don't think the US presence in Asia has anything to do with hegemony? You really think that the US presence in these countries comes from the goodness of their hearts, and not from beneficial economic splash back, a sense of political control over the region, an ability to closely guard and monitor the growth of China and a promotion of cultural values and practices? A very naive statement I would have thought. The US presence in Asia is classic hegemony and their Post WW2 policy is all about that, be it under the guise of 'stability' or 'sustainable peace' or whatever. Of course, it works very well for countries like South Korea, Japan and Taiwan, who have the tigers at their doorstep, but don't think for a minute that it is anything other than an exertion of power and influence with considerable benefits.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The US is not a hegemon in Asia. It lacks the necessary power to impose it's will on a region with numerous powerful militaries. The US is an offshore balancer whose goal is to keep any other regional power from becoming a regional hegemon. The PRC has to this point played along as the US presence in Japan has kept Japan from rearming, but it seems the PRC in it's new found confidence is getting tired of playing along. It seems that the PRC now feels strong enough to dominate the region on it's own and that it has enough leverage with Washington to send the US military on it's happy way. The US will not cooperate with China as to do so would all but guarantee one of two outcomes unacceptable to the US: a fully rearmed Japan prepared to protect itself from China (and at the same time becoming a potential peer competitor to the US) or a Japan that joins team China, creating a powerful anti-US region that would create a legit security threat to the US west coast. Perhaps a coincidence, but China has really turned up the heat since Ozawa's defeat seems to have at least temporarily derailed the team China possibility.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"China has 1 POINT 3 BILLION people!" Jackie Chan

In other words, wha-cha-gonna do?

Maybe feed them..?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China's attitude and behavior so far has hurt them already.

How so, ossan? Where is China feeling the pain?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@kurumazaka

The US is not a hegemon in Asia. It lacks the necessary power to impose it's will on a region with numerous powerful militaries.

The US is by far and away the world's most powerful and militarized nation. It has exactly the kind of power needed to impose it's will on others, be that through strategic alliances based on protection, or through direct threat.

The PRC has to this point played along as the US presence in Japan has kept Japan from rearming,

Whilst Japan may have a policy of 'non-aggression', that doesn't mean it hasn't been spending a truckload on it's military resources. The Self Defense Force is very well equipped comparatively speaking, with lots of thanks to the US.

or a Japan that joins team China, creating a powerful anti-US region that would create a legit security threat to the US west coast

Good lord, did you actually think this one through before you wrote it!? You actually think a China/Japan military alliance against the US is a possibility? I don't think this shows a very sound understanding of regional history or modern politics. This is absolutely impossible, especially in light of what the original article is about - ie; China CUTTING diplomatic ties with Japan. You will have to do better than that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good lord, did you actually think this one through before you wrote it!? You actually think a China/Japan military alliance against the US is a possibility?

LoL Why would you. And I hope not-- for the sake of the Asian region it's best that Japan maintains a regionalist approach when dealing with the Chinese. (Not necessarily involving a third actor like the United States; but including the ASEAN group to the table)

It's a shame JT doesn't cover Philippine politics that much-- because the latest development in that country, and China's obvious opportunistic meddling should concern even the most sensible of Japan's lawmakers.

For the Japanese, assessing China should be best seen in a regionalist context. Rather than bilateral. It's more suited for the Japanese condition, and more suitable for the developing markets of East Asia.

ASEAN members-- step up!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As for the disputed islands, both the historical information and the geological information would seem to indicate that they should be considered to be a contiguous part of Taiwan.

Huh? Did you type "both" when you meant to type "neither"?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan is going to get its come-uppence on this one. Let's see a country of 100,000,000 and dwindling bully one ten times bigger. The Chinese could obliterate this place in an instant.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

jianadaren at 12:44 PM JST - 21st September China's attitude and behavior so far has hurt them already. How so, ossan? Where is China feeling the pain?

The pain is comming. China has shown it's true self to all of her neighors with whom it has "territorial disputes". China will never be the "Leaedr of Asia" because it just can't help showing off what a bully it is.

"At the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional Forum meeting in July, Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi's jaw-dropping lecture to Asian ministers -- and the U.S. secretary of state -- that other countries were obstreperous to contest China's unilateral claim to international waters and island chains in the South China Sea still rankles with leaders who were present. Particularly galling, according to the foreign minister of one major power at the meeting, was Foreign Minister Yang's reminder that Southeast Asian states were "small countries" who depended on trade with China for their prosperity, while China was a "large country." There was therefore little chance of equality in their relations, Yang suggested. China's neighbors simply would have to take that asymmetry -- and, he added pointedly, their economic dependence on the China market -- into account before "internationalizing" their dispute with Beijing over competing maritime claims."

http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/09/20/chinas_maritime_aggression_should_be_wake_up_call_to_japan

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Tamarama at 08:10 AM JST - 21st September @OssanAmerica "I find it embarassing that any American should be so misinformed as to think even for a moment that Post-WWII Japanese policy has in any way suggested that they think itself a hegemon in the region."

Really?

Yes really. Look at Japanse policy since the end of WWII and show me any evidence whatsoever of thinking itself or even aspiring to hegemony.

You don't think the US presence in Asia has anything to do with >hegemony? You really think that the US presence in these countries comes >from the goodness of their hearts, and not from beneficial economic >splash back, a sense of political control over the region, an ability to >closely guard and monitor the growth of China and a promotion of >cultural values and practices? A very naive statement I would have >thought. The US presence in Asia is classic hegemony and their Post WW2 >policy is all about that, be it under the guise of 'stability' >or 'sustainable peace' or whatever. Of course, it works very well for >countries like South Korea, Japan and Taiwan, who have the tigers at >their doorstep, but don't think for a minute that it is anything other >than an exertion of power and influence with considerable benefits.

No, I never even touched on the US position because the OP wasn't talking about US hegomony. I simply pointed out a gross error in a comment as regards Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@OssanAmerica,

An unification treaty can include many forms; for example, they may want to become like EU style of nations. If Japan sucessfully attacked, invaded or defensed (depends how you look at it) that island, and ROC didn't receive any help from the U.S, one option for them to go is to ask for mainland China's military intervension......again, it is an assumption, how is it "rather silly"? FYI, I know Taiwanese who think like that LOlz....but hey, I am not in Asia, I can't say I am an expert.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I really find it interesting how so many here think that China has some sort of power that is invulnerable to standard economical facts.

China has been pushing most foreign industries to disclose their technical information and patents and up to know few have complied, what has actually happened is that many have now started to look for alternative places to move their production facilities.

I think many here are either short sighted or are to young to remember that most if not all these factories were once in places like North America, Europe, Japan, etc... and once things go to expensive or complicated they got moved.

There are plenty of taker in Asia and other parts of the world willing to take anything and everything China has now, just a quick look around Tokyo and you will see many Indian businessmen (no not IT or restaurant workers) and ask yourself why they are all here, they to have a billion people and they offer much less restrictive policies.

I know for a fact that at least one large pharmaceutical company that had been in China for nearly 30 years has now move all it non domestic production out of China leaving only local production ( a cut of 75% of workers) because one China was demanding to much information on newer product research and two they have found it hard to extract their money from China with all its regulations, they have now move it all to India.

There are many more just like this, clothing manufactures to India/Vietnam, IT to Korea/India, etc..

China is not invulnerable to economics and factories can be moved but replacing those jobs is not so easy just ask the people in the countries that once had the jobs that are now in China.

Perhaps China will get their way and the gas but it is looking more and more like Japanese companies are re-thinking their position on Chinese production and looking elsewhere.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yes really. Look at Japanse policy since the end of WWII and show me any evidence whatsoever of thinking itself or even aspiring to hegemony.

Japan has ridden on the coattails of American hegemony since then, with the price of American occupation and protection continuing to be paid today and into the foreseeable future.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Ossanamerica

Oh, come on. The original post you referred to by ubikwit says this;

The US, unfortunately, and embarrassingly for those of us hailing >from America and residing here in Japan, fancies itself a hegemon in >this region, and that is an absurd, imperialistic notion

So you either missed the original point of that post, or you have shifted the goal posts here by saying;

No, I never even touched on the US position because the OP wasn't talking about US hegomony. I simply pointed out a gross error in a comment as regards Japan.

Care to clear that up?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Particularly galling, according to the foreign minister of one major power at the meeting, was Foreign Minister Yang's reminder that Southeast Asian states were "small countries" who depended on trade with China for their prosperity, while China was a "large country."

But then again, under Prez OBAMA, ASEAN don't even have a US representative (see Sen. Lugar's comment); and considering the bloc is the fourth biggest destination of US import why-the-heck not?!

I'm proud of the solid momentum created by the ASEAN-bloc so far -- in economic affairs (now with an estimated $1.5 trillion GDP), in creating favorable social conditions for the poor, in job creations and in regional security. To its credit, it have been the bedrock of Asian prosperity and development; dwarfed only by the Japanese and the Chinese economies.

China's neighbors simply would have to take that asymmetry -- and, he added pointedly, their economic dependence on the China market -- into account before "internationalizing" their dispute with Beijing over competing maritime claims."

NO, the article completely missed the point. That's a direct sneer towards the Vietnamese' 'internationalizing' the Parcell dispute. You can certainly point out better examples of Chinese opportunism lately. (Which, I suppose, is what you're after)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I really find it interesting how so many here think that China has some sort of power that is invulnerable to standard economical facts.

The Chinese are particularly important in East Asia as a whole (particularly as member of the growing Asian market). No, I don't subscribe to the idea that the Chinese economy/ market is 'invulnerable to basic economical fact'. BUT I think no one could diminish the power of the Chinese market in East Asia, and not even the most hawkish of Asian statesmen can plausibly consider the Asian market without the Chinese.

The Vietnamese in their pursuit to internationalize the Parcell dispute have definitively hedged their economic survival with the United States and a stronger economic condition in Japan. But they're not alone in East Asia-- and as you pointed out, there are many governments in Asia that are now convince that they can match the Chinese as a favorable destination of rich-nations FDI. And that's true in cases like Malaysia, Taiwan and Indonesia.

However, why exactly would you want Asia to be an Us-v-Them? Especially now that countries like Indonesia and Japan have been eagerly pushing for ASEAN+3 to sustain regional trade and growth for years (even generations) to come.

The Chinese, a firm believer of the 'peaceful rise' strategy would certainly hope that regional governments wouldn't want the option of adapting strategies reminiscent of the Cold War in Asia. For the Chinese have much to lose. But, as you cross to the business section of this paper, people should be understanding as well of the genuine concerns of Japanese businesses over the impact (on sales and exports) of this latest row.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Tamarama at 06:39 AM JST - 22nd September @Ossanamerica Oh, come on. The original post you referred to by ubikwit says this; The US, unfortunately, and embarrassingly for those of us hailing >from >America and residing here in Japan, fancies itself a hegemon in >this >region, and that is an absurd, imperialistic notion

Yes, the OP is talking about Japan and hegemony.

So you either missed the original point of that post, or you have >shifted the goal posts here by saying; No, I never even touched on the US position because the OP wasn't >talking about US hegomony. I simply pointed out a gross error in a >comment as regards Japan.

Yes, in response to you interjecting this long diatribe about the United States and hegemony.

"You don't think the US presence in Asia has anything to do with >hegemony? You really think that the US presence in these countries comes >from the goodness of their hearts, and not from beneficial economic >splash back, a sense of political control over the region, an ability to >closely guard and monitor the growth of China and a promotion of >cultural values and practices? A very naive statement I would have >thought. The US presence in Asia is classic hegemony and their Post WW2 >policy is all about that, be it under the guise of 'stability' >or 'sustainable peace' or whatever. Of course, it works very well for >countries like South Korea, Japan and Taiwan, who have the tigers at >their doorstep, but don't think for a minute that it is anything other >than an exertion of power and influence with considerable benefits.

The OP and I were talkig about Japan. You are talking about the U.S. Don't see how much clearer that can get.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ICBM70 at 02:16 AM JST - 22nd September @OssanAmerica, An unification treaty can include many forms; for example, they may want >to become like EU style of nations. If Japan sucessfully attacked, >invaded or defensed (depends how you look at it) that island,

Japan can not attack or invade any country because their constitution does not allow them to do so. So the rest of your speculation is pointless as it is unrealistic.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The US, unfortunately, and embarrassingly for those of us hailing from America and residing here in Japan, fancies itself a hegemon in this region, and that is an absurd, imperialistic notion.

"Those of us" can and will speak for ourselves thank ya very much.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Ossanamerica

in response to you interjecting this long diatribe about the United States and hegemony

I'm not sure why you would think posting on a public forum procludes others from commenting on what you say, or that you are entitled to a private conversation here. But anyway.

If you can't see that ubikwit is talking about the US in that post (which is his only one in this thread, and is what you responded to) then you probably shouldn't post so hastilty. That much couldn't be clearer (wink). It's now clear that you totally missed the point of his post.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Those of us" can and will speak for ourselves thank ya very much.

Were you able to form your own opinion the moment ARMITAGE opened his mouth (over the dispute)? I'm eager to know =/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think the Chinese need to get over the past just as the majority of Americans have gotten over Pearl Harbor. The Japanese alive today didn't participate in those evil acts. Another thing, how do you not see two boats in front of you? You'd have to be blind! Clearly it was done on purpose. If you can't see a freaking boat in front of you, you have no right to be on the water! The man messed up and now he's gonna pay. China is a fine one to talk the little hypocrites.

They've got enough corruption and innocent blood on their hands. Get over the past, stop being so filled with hate while being a bunch of hypocrites and stop being sheep. I love China and love the Chinese a bunch but this is simply calling it out for what it is. You want to progress? It involves getting rid of blind hate and willful ignorance!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just the tip of the old iceberg. JPN-CHN relations are gonna get a lot worse before they get better...and JPN foreign policy has never really been any good.

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