politics

Treaty with Japan covers disputed islands: U.S. official

72 Comments

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2012.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

72 Comments
Login to comment

i think it is best to go to the international court,and let the two countries to show all the prooves ,and to show evidence this island origianl belongs to which country . both china and japan should behavior this is better,it is good.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

gregoryharukoSep. 22, 2012 - 01:38PM JST

The best solution for the Japanese government is to drop its alliance (and its post WWII constitution) with the USA, and built an East-Asian Union with its neighbours ........................................................

This is what China wants and propagating through all kinds of medias and forums. They want all Asians should be servants of them and submit to them all the land and resources.. And even worship them as the leader of Asia and then promote them to the leader of the World...... I would say that this kind of childish techniques may work in China as they read only spoon feedings of their masters. People living in the well. Dear paid writers of China your tactics will never work in the free world...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

AriesKJJSep. 22, 2012 - 04:30PM JST Indeed there will be a difference; as far as seeing you will see a bright flash, close your eyes then see nothing more. You will feel a difference too, that will be the burning sensation as your skin tears off, and you will hear a difference, that will be the secreams of those you love or anyone around you that flee in horror then disapear into a gust of nuclear winfd. In the end you will have changed so much you will be a spirt as your body is long gone....................................**

Then better you go to China and say this discovery... And advice them to dismantle all the 3000 nukes they are having...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How much land would China have to give up? How many millions of square km would they lose if we say "They took that back then, they should give it back!" What are you people thinking? If we start talking about how a country took something that belonged to someone else, EVERY COUNTRY will be in trouble. Give it up and let it rest.

The difference is that Japan did surrender and sign the Cairo & Potsdam Declaration, renouncing the territories they annexed from their neighbours, and limiting their sovereignty to the islands stipulated in those documents. Unless the Cairo & Potsdam Declarations are overturned by an international consensus, they remain legally valid.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Attack the man, Kristof, not the facts. Way to go!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Since you like to cire US news sources, how do you explain the 1960s PRC Map that shows the Senkakus as Japanese territory

You mean the lie that the Diaoyu islands were shown as Japanese territory in the following map?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Atlas_1960_Senkaku.jpg

Point 1: This is clearly a lie as no Japanese territory was in fact shown in the map. There were only two territories, one administered by the Chinese and the other administered by the Americans under the UN trusteeship according to Article 3 of the San Francisco Peace Treaty.

The fact is no country in the world recognized Diaoyu islands and Ryukyu islands as Japanese territory between 1945 to 1971. Not ROC, not PRC, not USA and not even Japan itself. That is the reason why Japanese who visited Ryukyu must have their Japanese passport stamped at the Ryukyu immigration between 1945 to 1971. Older generations of Japanese who lived through that period such as chamkun can testify to this fact.

Point 2: According to the Washington Times, the map passed to it by the government of Japan is just an unofficial map meant for internal use and was never published to the public. The separator line as shown in the map is self-evident that this is not an official world atlas as claimed by the government of Japan.

Point 3: I don't see anything wrong with that map. The separator that separated Taiwan from the Miyako and Yaeyama islands just shows that the two territories were administered by two different countries, one by the Chinese and the other by the Americans under the UN trusteeship according to the San Francisco Peace Treaty.

By the way, by revealing only a small part of the map, the government of Japan conveniently left out one important information from the map’s colophon: "certain national boundaries are based on maps compiled prior to the Second Sino-Japanese War(1937-1945)." Another evidence that this so called world atlas is unofficial and not intending to be used by the public.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

the Washington Post publicized in 2010 as a response to China's claim to have owned the island for centuries.

OssanAmerica, as a self-proclaimed American, I thought you would know the difference between Washington Post and Washington Times but apparently you don't.

The Washington Times which showed the unofficial map is a newspaper of the Unification Church which was founded by Sun Myung Moon and it has got nothing to do with the Washington Post.

Traditionally, the Unification Church is known to be very closed to the yakuza linked Japanese government.

http://gallery.itexpertti.se/02_Finland/H%FCbinette.pdf

"With her royal highness, princess Christina as chairman for Sweden, the Sasakawa foundation distributes substantial financial resources to the country's Japanologists in spite of the fact that European Association for Japanese Studies and many Western universities openly dissociate themselves from the foundation. However, this is not the case for the Japanologist professor Bruno Gollnisch at the University of Lyon, ideologist and strongman of Fascist Front National and its leader Le Pen’s closest aide who openly accepts money from Sasakawa Foundation.

Sasakawa was Japanese Fascism’s éminence grise and grand old man together with his right-hand man the Yakuza boss Yoshio Kodama. In 1931, he founded Kokusai Taishuto whose members wore black shirts, and he personally met with Mussolini during a visit to Rome, according to Sasakawa “the most perfect Fascist”. After the defeat, Sasakawa was classified as a class A war criminal by the Americans, and he was put into Sugamo jail for three years with the becoming prime minister Kishi Nobosuke as his cellmate. In post-war Japan, Sasakawa together with many of similar doubtful backgrounds became a part of the leading political and economic elite of the country in the name of anti-Communism.

In 1959, he received the monopoly of betting for racers from the above mentioned prime minister Nobosuke, which made Sasakawa an astronomically rich man. "I am the world's richest Fascist", Sasakawa used to boast as he at the same time was the leader of Neo-Fascist Zenai Kaigi, the Unification Church in Japan and the chairman of the Japanese branch of World Anti-Communist League."

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@Guru29 - Mr. Kristof hasn't gathered much evidence of anything. The writer he quotes can't even spell the name of the previous owner (it's Tatsuhiro, not Tatsushiro, Koga)

In other words, besides the trivial spelling errors, you found nothing wrong with the numerous evidence that proved your claim of "terra nullius" to be nothing more than a lie?

So the Chinese signed a treaty -- an international, binding treaty -- without knowing what some names of islands referred to?

What treaty are you talking about? Don't tell lies.

in which interval reports of natural resources began to surface? And only then did they start insisting that the islands are somehow theirs?

So Japan's claim of sovereignty over the Ryukyu islands and Diaoyu islands in 1972 is only because of the potential natural resources underground?

Do you know this is a serious violation of the Japanese Instrument of Surrender and the Potsdam Agreement which says:

"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 (China, Russia, UK and US) determine."

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

To all you history buffs and researchers who keep saying "Japan took this" and "Japan didn't check that" so they should let go of the islands, how about if we apply that logic everywhere, just to be fair. We'll revert all ownership of all lands to the way they were in 1894. How does that grab you? I don't think anyone would like it. No one would even think of it as a legitimate idea. How much land would China have to give up? How many millions of square km would they lose if we say "They took that back then, they should give it back!" What are you people thinking? If we start talking about how a country took something that belonged to someone else, EVERY COUNTRY will be in trouble. Give it up and let it rest. Or, do the thousands of hours of research and let's start seeing where borders should be redrawn for everyone to match 1894.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Guru29 - Mr. Kristof hasn't gathered much evidence of anything. The writer he quotes can't even spell the name of the previous owner (it's Tatsuhiro, not Tatsushiro, Koga) and the NYT couldn't be bothered to fact-check this.

Han-Yi Shaw's article seems to claim that because government surveys to the islands were incomplete, a private claim to ownership is somehow illegitimate. If anything, the lack of government/military surveys would bolster the idea that the islands were terra nullius and thus that Mr. Koga was free to acquire them.

He also ignores pre-1895 visits by non-government explorers, such as Sasamori Gisuke (笹森 儀助), who recorded the islands as uninhabited in 1893. (And he had no problem visiting them on a boat directly from Ishigaki; how could he do that if the islands were a foreign country? This was before Japan took Taiwan, BTW.)

Moreover, the Japanese name “Senkaku Islands” itself was first introduced in 1900 by academic Kuroiwa Hisashi and adopted by the Japanese government thereafter. Half a century later when Japan returned Taiwan to China, both sides adopted the 1945 administrative arrangement of Taiwan, with the Chinese unaware that the uninhabited “Senkaku Islands” were in fact the former Diaoyu Islands.

So the Chinese signed a treaty -- an international, binding treaty -- without knowing what some names of islands referred to?

And it took them a quarter of a century to figure it out, in which interval (very conveniently) reports of natural resources began to surface? And only then did they start insisting that (despite never having built a settlement on them, or even planting a flag) the islands are somehow theirs?

@Ossan - Not only is he a known China supporter; his wife is Chinese!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The article also commits the allies to report “any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof” to the U.N. Security Council and to halt those actions once the Security Council takes steps to restore peace and security..............................

with China and Russia being permanent member of said Council, seriously, you think anything will be done in Japan's favor ? Joint development is the way to go ( after all the elections are done and cooler heads prevail ).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ryu-1inOHSep. 22, 2012 - 01:24PM JST

Note the paragraph that says that while the US is trying to convince other countries not to use nuclear power, the reason it cannot be achieved with China is in the asymmetry of the arsenals. France has more nuclear war heads than China. The reason why numbers matter is that if it should ever come to using them, that very usage should be decisive i.e. it's about how many targets you can hit in as short a time as possible. China will definitely be wiped off the face of the Earth.

It is another extreme biased post. It is true US will think not only twice may be one dozen time for thinking conflicting with Nuke armed nation. If Irag really has WMD, US will not risk for getting conflict. France has more war heads it does not mean they have efficient delivery system. New generation war heads are fitted each other like capsule. Instead of firing multiple missiles, multiple independent reentry vehicles(MIRV) are more efficient. When it was launched the Rocket into the orbit, Satellite will be separated from rocket. Then principle war head will be separated from Satellite. Then smaller and smaller war heads will be separated from principle one. Multiple smaller war heads will orbit alone each other they reach the final destination. Then there will be Big Band theory.

It is more precise than launching multiple war heads from different launchers because all of them are closely follow each other direction. In case, if one is failed, other will fulfill their mission. There will be no decisive winner as you mentioned. Heat , Toxic and Radiation will be spread in the air. It will badly effect the environment, live stock and drinking water. Winner will not last long unless they move to another planet!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Ossan

My apology for Quote error. Pls let me correct second paragraph as following!

As for "propaganda" amd "hatre" that's pretty rich comming from anyone who supports China.

If you read all my posts, I did not mention any nation will be wiped out from world map. It is so cruel, violent and unjustified. I do not like Communist Chinese Government . It does not means I have to destroy all of the residents from their land. When US nuked Japan in 1945, they tried their best to find less populace area for minimizing casualty. You logic is contrast to the wisdom of the commander in chief of US from WWII.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmericaSep. 22, 2012 - 11:35PM JST

What you have conveniently left out is the fact that while China has stated that they will use nuclear weapons in defense, they have also stated that they would never be the firat party to use nuclear weapons.

Ossan! What the officials stated diplomatically has stated that was different from real life. Many nations happily signed non nuclear proliferation treaty. Do they honor the rules of treaty! According Zenpun post, US transfered her nuclear tech to Israel. Russian transfered to Iran! In the real world, many non nuclear nations has secretly developed nuke weapons. Signing treaty does not mean they will commit the obligation as reinforced concrete.If you ask Naive American, Mexico and Spain, they have signed many treaties with US. However those treaties were evaporated like steam now. Treaties are changed according the national interest in history.

As for "propaganda" amd "hatre" that's pretty rich comming from anyone who supports China. If you read all my posts, I did not mention any nation will be wiped out from world map. It is so cruel, violent and unjustified. I do not like Communist Chinese Government . It does not means I have to destroy all of the residents from their land. When US nuked Japan in 1945, they tried their best to find less populace area for minimizing casualty. You logic is contrast to the wisdom of the commander in chief of US from WWII.

It is a dangerous thing to picture all Chinese people as a collective race. In truth there are plenty of individual opinions, many against the authoritarian one party CCP dicatorship. When Chinese outside of China demonstrate in other countries in support of the Chinese regime it gives the image that no war with China could ever be concluded without the elimination of all the people. This is inherently wrong as evidenced by gthe history of modern wars. I think it;s foolish for you to even argue this point.

According your logic, Many oversea Chinese will happily move on after China was wiped off from world map. You may come from another planet. In my knowledge, many middle eastern origin people adopted the residents of many western nations. The sad truth is their loyalty is belong to their heritage, religion and their homeland. Many western born and educated people become extremist or terrorist. Oversea Chinese may be not like them. It is questionable what will they become their ancestor land was vanished. Hatred promote hatred !It TAKES TWO TO DANCE THE TANGO!

Ensuring that China does not "take over" all of the East and South CHina Seas and control the waters through which the lifeline of Asian maritime transportation not only in the national interests of the United States, but ofall the Asian countries and the entire world as well. We are not so stupid as to fall for China's attempt to paint the Sebkakus as an isoated one-on-one issue with Japan, the world can see the whole big picture.

How on earth you got the static that China is controlling maritime transportation. Malacca strait of major sea lane of world trade is not in Japan or China. It is between Malaysia and Singapore. It can be called as Suez of Asia. China is importing refined oil from Singapore. If there is some interruption, their industries will be run out of fuel. Truth is China has over reacted for that issue. It does not mean we have to wiped off China from world map. Even nations who has dispute with China also concern that is an extreme reaction. It is inflammable and lacking mercy too.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

USA and Japan. Perfect together.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Guru29Sep. 23, 2012 - 06:13AM JST "The islands did not belong to China before 1895 and their acquisition by the Koga family has nothing to do with the Sino-Japanese War." Well, Nicholas D. Kristof, a columnist for The New York Times has gathered plenty of evidence to prove you wrong.

Kristof is a known Japan-basher who has been at it when everyone in China was still wearing Mao suits, His word is is worthless. Since you like to cire US news sources, how do you explain the 1960s PRC Map that shows the Senkakus as Japanese territory and on the "Japan side" of the border line, which the Washington Post publicized in 2010 as a response to China's claim to have owned the island for centuries.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

The islands did not belong to China before 1895 and their acquisition by the Koga family has nothing to do with the Sino-Japanese War.

More evidence from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of China to prove you wrong.

http://www.mofa.gov.tw/official/Home/Detail/4ad52054-ebc7-452c-a6c1-d182b25c8001?arfid=2b7802ba-d5e8-4538-9ec2-4eb818179015&opno=027ffe58-09dd-4b7c-a554-99def06b00a1

"Japan’s claim of sovereignty over the Diaoyutai Islands by virtue of “discovery-occupation” under international law was in fact invalid ab initio (from the onset), as such claims can only be made to terra nullius (land without owner).

(1) As explained earlier,the Diaoyutai Islands were not terra nullius, but instead have been Chinese territory and part of Taiwan for centuries before 1895. Therefore, Japan’s current claim of sovereignty over the Diaoyutai Islands is invalid under international law.

Japan’s annexation of the Diaoyutai Islands was not by virtue of “discovery-occupation”, but instead a direct consequence of the First Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. In 1879, Japan annexed the Ryukyu Islands and embarked on a path to further expand its territory at the expense of neighboring China and Korea. According to official Meiji documents, the Japanese government’s territorial ambitions around the Diaoyutai Islands began in 1885. That year, Japanese Home Minister Yamagata Aritomo 山縣有朋ordered Okinawa Governor Nishimura Sutezo 西村捨三to survey the Diaoyutai Islands and planned to set up a national landmark on the islands afterwards. However, Nishimura reported in his survey that these islands had long been discovered, named and recorded in official documents by China, and that the plan was inappropriate at that time since “this matter is not unrelated to China”. Yamagata subsequently consulted with Foreign Minister Inoue Kaoru 井上馨. Inoue advised that the plan should “await a more appropriate time” since two months earlier the Shanghai-based The Shanghai Mercury 申報 issued a warning that Japan planned to seize Chinese islands near Taiwan. Inoue therefore advised the Home Ministerthat the plan should be postponed and further instructed that the matter must not be made public through official gazettes and newspapers to avoid “inviting China’s suspicion”.

In July 1894, the First Sino-Japanese War broke out. By October, Japan had gained decisive victories both on land and at sea. Recognizing the balance of power had shifted, the Meiji government instructed Okinawa Prefecture to establish a national marker on the Diaoyutai Islands during a cabinet meeting on January 14, 1895. However,this cabinet decision was conducted in secrecy and never made public. It was not until after World War II that this cabinet decision was revealed in declassified government records included in The Japanese Diplomatic Records in 1953. Furthermore, the national marker was also not erected until 1968.

Since the 1970’s, the Japanese government has claimed,“From 1885 on, surveys of the Senkaku Islands (the Diaoyutai Islands) had been repeatedly made by the Government of Japan through the agencies of Okinawa Prefecture and by way of other methods. Through these surveys, it was confirmed that the Senkaku Islands had been uninhabited and showed no trace of having been under the control of the Ch’ing Dynasty of China.” However, this statement is historically inaccurate and can be refuted based on official Meiji documents from 1885 to 1895 stored in the various national archives of Japan, including the Diplomatic Record Office of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, National Archives of Japan, and the National Institute for Defense Studies Library of the Ministry of Defense. The first crucial piece of evidence isa letter dated January 27, 1892, written by Okinawa Governor Maruoka Kanji 丸岡莞薾to Navy Minister Kabayama Sukenori 樺山資紀, requesting that the Navy Ministry dispatch the Kaimon 海門艦to survey the Diaoyutai Islands given that these islands were “not sufficiently investigated” in the earlier 1885 survey. However, the Navy Ministry declined the request due to “perilous seasonal weather”. The second crucial evidence was the letter Okinawa Governor Narahara Shigeru 奈良原繁wrote to the Home Minster on March 12, 1894, which stated, “…as no field surveys have been conducted since the investigation by the police of this prefecture in the 18th year of the Meiji Period (1885), it is difficult to provide any specific reports on them.”

These historical documents not only serve to refute the statement by Japan’s current government “[From 1885]…surveys of the Senkaku Islands had been thoroughly made…” but also demonstrate that the Japanese government annexed the Diaoyutai Islands during the First Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895.

(2) The Diaoyutai Islands should have been restored to the Republic of China along with Taiwan after the Second World War.

As the first Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895 was underway, in January 1895, Japan seized the opportunity to annex the Diaoyutai Islands, which were an inherent part of Taiwan. In April 1895, Japan and China signed the Treaty of Shimonoseki, which stipulated that China cedes to Japan “the island of Formosa [Taiwan], together with all the islands appertaining or belonging to the said Island of Formosa [Taiwan]”. For the next fifty years, the Diaoyutai Islands and Taiwan remained under Japanese rule until the tides turned again.

On December 8, 1941, the day after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the Republic of China declared war against Japan and repudiated all of its treaties, agreements and contracts with Japan.

On November 26, 1943, the Republic of China, the United States and the United Kingdom promulgated the Cairo Declaration, stipulating that “all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa, and the Pescadores (Penghu), shall be restored to the Republic of China. Japan will also be expelled from all other territories which she has taken by violence and greed.” On July 26, 1945, countries of the Allies, namely, the Republic of China, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, issued the Potsdam Proclamation, stating that“the terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out.” Further on September 2, 1945, following the Japanese Emperor’s announcement of unconditional surrender, Japan signed the instrument of surrender in the presence of the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied forces, thereby showing acceptance of the Potsdam Proclamation. Moreover, the Potsdam Proclamation declares, “Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and such minor islands as we determine.”

Additional, both the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty and the 1952 Peace Treaty between the Republic of China and Japan stipulate that “Japan has renounced all right, title and claim to Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores).” In addition, Article 4 of the 1952 Peace Treaty between the Republic of China and Japan further indicates, “All treaties, conventions, and agreements concluded before 9 December 1941 between Japan and China have become null and void as a consequence of the war.” Therefore the Diaoyutai Islands should be restored as the territory of the Republic of China.

After the disputes of sovereignty over the Diaoyutai Islands occurred in 1971, Japan claimed that, “From the 28th year of the Meiji Period (1895) till now (1971), no objection from foreign powers had been made to Japan’s use of these islands”. Based on the historical circumstances, this claim is both invalid and misleading. During the period between 1895 and 1945, not only the Diaoyutai Islands, but also the entire island of Taiwan, were subject to Japanese occupation. Given that the Treaty of Shimonoseki of 1895 stipulated that China cedes to Japan “the island of Formosa [Taiwan], together with all the islands appertaining or belonging to the said Island of Formosa [Taiwan]”, China accordingly did not challenge Japanese use of either Taiwan or the Diaoyutai Islands.

Between 1945 and 1972, while the Ryukyu Islands were put under the trusteeship of the United States government, the Diaoyutai Islands were merely subject to US administrative control, which conferred no sovereignty over them. After the war, the people of Taiwan, particularly fishermen, continued to use these islands as in the past without interference. As the Diaoyutai Islands were placed under a system of trusteeship administrated by a temporary Administering Authority, rather than being effectively controlled in the name of a sovereign State, there is no issue concerning explicitly or tacitly recognizing any claim of sovereignty by another state (none existed) over the disputed islands between 1945-1972.

Regarding the reversion of the Diaoyutai Islands to Japan along with the Ryukyu Islands, the US government sent an official note to the Republic of China on May 26, 1971, stating that Washington’s transferring of administrative rights over these islands does not affect the ROC’s claim of sovereignty over the Diaoyutai Islands. On November 9, 1971, US Secretary of State William P. Rogers stated that the US took no position on the sovereignty issue over the Diaoyutai Islands and that the dispute should be resolved through negotiations between the ROC and Japan. The US Senate Foreign Relations Committee further stated “the United States action in transferring its rights of administration to Japan does not constitute a transfer of underlying sovereignty nor can it affect the underlying claims of the disputants”. Washington has maintained this position in all its relevant diplomatic documents ever since."

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The islands did not belong to China before 1895 and their acquisition by the Koga family has nothing to do with the Sino-Japanese War.

Well, Nicholas D. Kristof, a columnist for The New York Times has gathered plenty of evidence to prove you wrong.

http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/the-inconvenient-truth-behind-the-diaoyusenkaku-islands/

"Specifically, the Japanese government asserts, “From 1885 on, our government conducted on-site surveys time and again, which confirmed that the islands were uninhabited and there were no signs of control by the Qing Empire.”

My research of over 40 official Meiji period documents unearthed from the Japanese National Archives, Diplomatic Records Office, and National Institute for Defense Studies Library clearly demonstrates that the Meiji government acknowledged Chinese ownership of the islands back in 1885.

Following the first on-site survey, in 1885, the Japanese foreign minister wrote, “Chinese newspapers have been reporting rumors of our intention of occupying islands belonging to China located next to Taiwan.… At this time, if we were to publicly place national markers, this must necessarily invite China’s suspicion.…”

In November 1885, the Okinawa governor confirmed “since this matter is not unrelated to China, if problems do arise I would be in grave repentance for my responsibility”.

“Surveys of the islands are incomplete” wrote the new Okinawa governor in January of 1892. He requested that a naval ship Kaimon be sent to survey the islands, but ultimately a combination of miscommunication and bad weather made it impossible for the survey to take place.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/09/19/opinion/global/diaoyu-3/diaoyu-3-blog480.jpg

Japan Diplomatic Records Office. Letter dated May 12, 1894 affirming that the Meiji government did not repeatedly investigate the disputed islands.

“Ever since the islands were investigated by Okinawa police agencies back in 1885, there have been no subsequent field surveys conducted,” the Okinawa governor wrote in 1894.

After a number of Chinese defeats in the Sino-Japanese War, a report from Japan’s Home Ministry said “this matter involved negotiations with China… but the situation today is greatly different from back then.” The Meiji government, following a cabinet decision in early 1895, promptly incorporated the islands.

Negotiations with China never took place and this decision was passed during the Sino-Japanese War. It was never made public.

In his biography Koga Tatsushiro, the first Japanese citizen to lease the islands from the Meiji government, attributed Japan’s possession of the islands to “the gallant military victory of our Imperial forces.”

Collectively, these official documents leave no doubt that the Meiji government did not base its occupation of the islands following “on-site surveys time and again,” but instead annexed them as booty of war. This is the inconvenient truth that the Japanese government has conveniently evaded.

Japan asserts that neither Beijing nor Taipei objected to U.S. administration after WWII. That’s true, but what Japan does not mention is that neither Beijing nor Taipei were invited as signatories of the San Francisco Peace Treaty in 1951, from which the U.S. derived administrative rights.

When Japan annexed the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands in 1895, it detached them from Taiwan and placed them under Okinawa Prefecture. Moreover, the Japanese name “Senkaku Islands” itself was first introduced in 1900 by academic Kuroiwa Hisashi and adopted by the Japanese government thereafter. Half a century later when Japan returned Taiwan to China, both sides adopted the 1945 administrative arrangement of Taiwan, with the Chinese unaware that the uninhabited “Senkaku Islands” were in fact the former Diaoyu Islands. This explains the belated protest from Taipei and Beijing over U.S. administration of the islands after the war.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/09/19/opinion/global/diaoyu-islands/diaoyu-islands-blog480.jpg

Report dated August 12, 1892 from navy commander affirming the islands were not fully investigated. Source: Library of The National Institute for Defense Studies.

The Japanese government frequently cites two documents as evidence that China did not consider the islands to be Chinese. The first is an official letter from a Chinese consul in Nagasaki dated May 20, 1920 that listed the islands as Japanese territory.

Neither Beijing nor Taipei dispute that the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands — along with the entire island of Taiwan — were formally under Japanese occupation at the time. However, per post-WW II arrangements, Japan was required to surrender territories obtained from aggression and revert them to their pre-1895 legal status.

The second piece evidence is a Chinese map from 1958 that excludes the Senkaku Islands from Chinese territory. But the Japanese government’s partial unveiling leaves out important information from the map’s colophon: “certain national boundaries are based on maps compiled prior to the Second Sino-Japanese War(1937-1945).”

Qing period (1644-1911) records substantiate Chinese ownership of the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands prior to 1895. Envoy documents indicate that the islands reside inside the “border that separates Chinese and foreign lands.” And according to Taiwan gazetteers, “Diaoyu Island accommodates ten or more large ships” under the jurisdiction of Kavalan, Taiwan.

The right to know is the bedrock of every democracy. The Japanese public deserves to know the other side of the story. It is the politicians who flame public sentiments under the name of national interests who pose the greatest risk, not the islands themselves."

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

And how did a private owner get a hold of an island two big countries are fighting over? Especially if that person is Japanese and the Chinese stated that they have had that island since ever?

@Tawnchan - The two big countries weren't fighting over it back when Mr. Koga acquired it. Back then no one doubted that the islands were either Japan's, or terra nullius.

before 1895,this island is belongs to china,but china is defeated by japan ,and it comes to japan hand, acctually who is the owner?????????????

@Peaceful World - The islands did not belong to China before 1895 and their acquisition by the Koga family has nothing to do with the Sino-Japanese War.

Pro-PRC people keep wanting to lump these islands in with the various forcible acquisitions of inhabited lands by Japan in the decades spanning 1890 and 1945. They're wrong. No one lived on these islands or built structures on them before the Koga family did early in the last century. Okinawans have been fishing in their vicinity for centuries. While I see them as fundamentally Okinawan, as part of the chain that stretches through Miyako, Yaeyama, and Yonaguni, I have sympathy with the idea of them being terra nullius and being jointly developed by Japan and Taiwan. But the PRC has no business at all in this issue -- it's between the Republic of China (Taiwan) and Japan.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The US should just park an Aircraft Carrier in the region.

It could be sunk by China's DF21 missile if it is parked there. And if most of the US Aircraft Carriers are sunk there, Iran will certainly go nuclear in the shortest time possible. And so will Japan and many others.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

US Secretary of Defense Panetta and Kurt Campbell are sending two conflicting messages.

This is what Panetta said exactly in Beijing during his recent visit as shown in http://www.defense.gov/

"SEC. PANETTA: Thank you for that question. Before I came to China, I visited Japan. And I made very clear to the Japanese leaders that I met with that they have a responsibility to exercise leadership to assure that these issues are resolved peacefully.

The United States does not take a position with regards to these territorial disputes. But we are concerned that these -- these kinds of disputes could lead to greater conflicts and to greater violence. And, therefore, it is incumbent on both China and Japan to find ways to hopefully resolve these issues peacefully.

I understand the history here. I understand the deep wounds that China suffered during World War II. Nobody understands those wounds better than the United States, because the United States also suffered deep wounds during World War II.

But at the same time, we cannot live in the past. We have to live in the future, the present and the future. And for that reason, the United States, China, Japan have developed relationships that extend on the diplomatic front, the economic front, and, indeed, on the military front. And my hope is that, in order to preserve that prosperity and security that we need in the Asia-Pacific region, that countries will work together to find ways to resolve these issues.

As I said, I understand the history. I understand the pain. I understand the depth of the wounds. I understand how there are those who, because of their particular ideology, can play these issues up in one country or the other. But responsible leadership in both countries has a duty to both countries to assure that we find ways to resolve these differences. And I am confident, after my discussions with both the Japanese leadership, and particularly with the Chinese leadership, that both are concerned about finding ways to be able to resolve these issues."

1 ( +2 / -1 )

AthletesSep. 22, 2012 - 01:01PM JST Ossan! Do you know US Joint Chief of Staff visited China in 2004. He did not go to China for picnic. What he wanted >was military dialogue for convincing China for not using Nuke if there is military conflict rise between two nations. >He said he had no luck and China have already announced that China will nuke any nation for defending their >interest. That announcement was made in 2004. This year is 2012. So far US has not nuked to China yet! Therefore >your logic is just propaganda come from extreme hatred!

What you have conveniently left out is the fact that while China has stated that they will use nuclear weapons in defense, they have also stated that they would never be the firat party to use nuclear weapons.

As for "propaganda" amd "hatre" that's pretty rich comming from anyone who supports China.

It is true China may be disappeared from world map! How about Chinese race? In term of population, they have 1.3 >billions in China. I doubt that Nuke can destroy all of them. Even they disappeared, there are oversea Chinese are >everywhere. Even in Sanfransisco and East Coast. US has 300 millions people. IF China lost 300 millions people, >they still have 1 billions people. IF US lost 400 millions population, US will become Jurassic park of Dinosaur play ground.

It is a dangerous thing to picture all Chinese people as a collective race. In truth there are plenty of individual opinions, many against the authoritarian one party CCP dicatorship. When Chinese outside of China demonstrate in other countries in support of the Chinese regime it gives the image that no war with China could ever be concluded without the elimination of all the people. This is inherently wrong as evidenced by gthe history of modern wars. I think it;s foolish for you to even argue this point.

It is not worth for paying heavy price for that small rocky islands. It is not a national interest of US.

Ensuring that China does not "take over" all of the East and South CHina Seas and control the waters through which the lifeline of Asian maritime transportation not only in the national interests of the United States, but ofall the Asian countries and the entire world as well. We are not so stupid as to fall for China's attempt to paint the Sebkakus as an isoated one-on-one issue with Japan, the world can see the whole big picture.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Well, if that wasn't clear, now it is.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

GWSep. 22, 2012 - 11:14AM JST Folks it is patently obvious that the Senkaku islands fall under the US/Jpn joint defense.

Yes it is.

It is EQUALLY obvious that the US WILL NOT LIKE to have to go down there & finish something ishihara & like >minded idiots might start with China! Thats it in a nut shell

So can you provide evidence that Vietnam, Phillipines and Malaysia are blaming Ishihara for China's aggression towards their islands as well?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

This on the day Ospreys are finally allowed to start flying here. Hmmmm....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

so ! we have no chance to see china to test its idiot weapon , china has been advertising its new weapon so much recently , its is frightening , threatening , bullying too much to its surrounding smaller neighbors , thus what is it going to to with its weapon , lol . except , china put aside its chicken liver then it might dare to go for war . we vietnam confront china in lot of war , we experienced china is no good at war , none experienced , its skill is to waist its troop for the victory , therefore even though it wins the war but its troops always die 3, 5 , or 10 times more than its loser . i laugh and spit on its face because its chicken attitude

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

GW: I do believe again that this article will provide you with some perspective in addition to JT's http://nation.time.com/2012/07/15/the-south-china-sea-from-bad-to-worse/

Ryu-1,

I am aware of China's insane claims in the Far East & SE Asia, if China keeps it up it will have to be PUT DOWN by all its neighbours, the US, Japan etc. It will be nasty & I hope it doesnt come to that but its not in my hands.

But if China does try to take over the area of ocean/seas it thinks is their there will be hell to pay for sure if they actually try to do it, hopefully common sense will prevail.

Truth is it wud be easy for the rest of the world set China on itself, we have witnessed the idiocy of many in China wrt Japan & its warped sense of "right" but if many companies decided to shut down factories etc in China, pull out China's army etc wud be too busy fighting their own to even worry about the rest of the world.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

High-rank J-ministers kept publicizing self reassurance of the 'coverage', US lower rank officials kept delivering 'yes' -- according to how many 'yes' Japan responding to their issues : buy F-35s, deploying MV 22s, buy Boeing 787... It does not cost much for the US counterparts to repeat the same 'yes' again if Japan keeps agreeing on what they asking for.. The list is becoming longer & longer.. More importantly, their actual acts but not lip-services ?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ryu-1inOHSep. 22, 2012 - 01:24PM JST

Note the paragraph that says that while the US is trying to convince other countries not to use nuclear power, the reason it cannot be achieved with China is in the asymmetry of the arsenals.

There is non- proliferation treaty of nuclear states! However treaty is not concrete as Athletes mentioned. Signing nations broke their commitment! For example not spreading Nuke technology to non nuclear states. What Athletes was mentioning that No nation will oblique any treaties. US transfered her tech to Israel and China transfered her tech to North Korea. Russia transfered to Iran. Therefore no one will win nuke war without paying some heavy price. There is also no obligation who will nuke first or who will nuke later. In the real war, there will be no rules.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The best solution for the Japanese government is to drop its alliance (and its post WWII constitution) with the USA, and built an East-Asian Union with its neighbours

Good luck with that, you'll need it.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The best solution for the Japanese government is to drop its alliance (and its post WWII constitution) with the USA, and built an East-Asian Union with its neighbours like Germany did built the European Union.

And it is not working...........

0 ( +1 / -1 )

before 1895,this island is belongs to china,but china is defeated by japan ,and it comes to japan hand, acctually who is the owner?????????????

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

If China attack Japanes Island or invade then JAPAN SHOULD GO NUCLEAR to protect the lands...... You will see the difference then.

Indeed there will be a difference; as far as seeing you will see a bright flash, close your eyes then see nothing more. You will feel a difference too, that will be the burning sensation as your skin tears off, and you will hear a difference, that will be the secreams of those you love or anyone around you that flee in horror then disapear into a gust of nuclear winfd. In the end you will have changed so much you will be a spirt as your body is long gone.

This sitiuation needs outside help, maybe a jury of diverse members of the UN ... anyone who could be respected and trusted enough by both sides tocreate a binding agreement. It's seems difficult now but the world is going fast.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Some remarkable posts in this thread :) well i suppose it is good for people to air their fears and concerns.

Japan is acting as a mature and careful modern nation, China is acting like a 19th century imperialist. I think the tides of history have moved on and we are now in the 21st century thank goodness. It is not needed for either Japan or the US to impress or explain to anyone what any reasonable country or person can understand about the existing treaties and obligations that are built on decades of shared trust and respect between two soverign nations, who work for and care about the modern world and respectful statesmanship. I guess this is one way for China to learn "manners" and proper international exchange.

I think the message may finally be getting thru to them that they dont own the Pacific Rim, nor will they be able to grab it by playacting and threats.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@AriesKJJ

Natural scientifically the concept "race" has no meaning, it is in fact a social construction. Race is something which in fact is defined by yourself and your environment. In Hawaii, you can choose your race... But this a long way off on the subject that the Japanese government should leave its alliance with the US government (not the US people) and build an East-Asian Union between the East-Asian governments to create common peace, stability and prosperity in the whole of East-Asia !

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

If China attack Japanes Island or invade then JAPAN SHOULD GO NUCLEAR

Good thinking realmind, because it's not like China will fire one or one thousand missles back or anything. Likely every Korean will die, but then was part of your strategy anyway right?, from the nuclear fall out and probably ninety percent of Japanese too, but ... in ten thousand years the mutated Japanese that survived will be able to just sail over and take over.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I know that many American people think that Asian people are like children with lesser intelligence

That kind of insecutity will keep you fearfull and angry. We have huge populations of asian people in every city in North America. There is no stereo type that asians are childlike. Exactly the opposite, asians are thought to be naturally smart especially with mathamatics. We are not racists or prejudice toward you ... how about you?

The US control in Japan had to do with that whole crazy "trying to take over the world" thing, which is probably a good thing to remember. Lets just hope it does not come to conflict though because not one good thing will result for Japan.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

And to all those people commenting about this country being able to blast that country or vise versa... seriously.. Your train of thought.. suCks and you are all living in the darkness because if you were living in the light, you'd be thinking of positive solutions and not putting bets in the ww3 pool.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I know that many American people think that Asian people are like children with lesser intelligence than the average 'white American'... But you may be surprised ? There is a big difference between governments and people though ! Asian governments have been played like puppets after WWII by US politicians, but it is time that the Asian people themselves decide on their own security and prosperity, instead those of the USA.

You would think that it's the governments' fault, the governments are dumb, but actually it's the people who are dumb. Yes it took me a while to get this but it's true. There are just too many crazy nationalists with huge egos in East Asia.

If the US didn't intervene or had the US lost WW2, then Japan would surely have destroyed Asia, just as the Nazis would have destroyed Europe.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Athletes

You may come from another planet!

With the way some people carry on on this planet, sometimes I wish I did. But, alas, I am a mere Earthling. Like you.

I extremely doubted US will sacrifice millions people for Japanese national pride.

Doubtful.

I am sure you are right. All of those US military bases in Japan are not there for the Japanese security, they are strategically located to counter the threat of countries like China and North Korea. If the US gets involved in a war there, it will only be for the ultimate good of the US. That is all.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Regarding U.S. Presence in the area patrolling the area to intimidate the Chinese... here's an interesting article a couple of years ago.

"China sub stalked U.S. fleet" http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/nov/13/20061113-121539-3317r/?page=all

I am not aligned with any particular nationalistic view, though I did serve onboard the USS Kitty Hawk from 2001 - 2005, I just wanted to put up some information for everyone to think about.

Regarding this island dispute issue... I believe the only person coming out on top is the private owner who sold it. If anything, I am pretty sure that dood is... SET.

I would suggest a co-op of the area. Everyone is soooo greedy and so quick to push a button.

If I was the private owner.. I might have leased it out to different countries in 100 year increments or something (think Hong Kong) and limit the amount of resources that can be used/dug up during that time.

But of course... who am I?

And how did a private owner get a hold of an island two big countries are fighting over? Especially if that person is Japanese and the Chinese stated that they have had that island since ever? Makes me want to set sail on the Black Pearl.

If WW3 breaks out.. I might just set sail to an island somewhere.. hideout for the duration and claim it for myself afterwards. Think about it.

We don't need to be fighting.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I know that many American people think that Asian people are like children with lesser intelligence than the average 'white American'... But you may be surprised ? There is a big difference between governments and people though ! Asian governments have been played like puppets after WWII by US politicians, but it is time that the Asian people themselves decide on their own security and prosperity, instead those of the USA.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

The best solution for the Japanese government is to drop its alliance (and its post WWII constitution) with the USA, and built an East-Asian Union with its neighbours like Germany did built the European Union. An East-Union will not only give peace and stability, but also prosperity in the whole of East-Asia! USA is probably more warmongering than the Chinese/Taiwanese and Korean people, looking at their 50000+ soldiers in Okinawa... but also in South-Korea... It is time for a 21st century mindsetting and leave the Post-WWII/Cold War mentality behind !

Knowing East Asia that would never happen and if it weren't for the US then East Asia would probably have destroyed each other already.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

@realmind

The Japanese government already went nuclear on their own people in Fukushima !

The best solution for the Japanese government is to drop its alliance (and its post WWII constitution) with the USA, and built an East-Asian Union with its neighbours like Germany did built the European Union. An East-Union will not only give peace and stability, but also prosperity in the whole of East-Asia! USA is probably more warmongering than the Chinese/Taiwanese and Korean people, looking at their 50000+ soldiers in Okinawa... but also in South-Korea... It is time for a 21st century mindsetting and leave the Post-WWII/Cold War mentality behind !

0 ( +4 / -4 )

If China attack Japanes Island or invade then JAPAN SHOULD GO NUCLEAR to protect the lands...... You will see the difference then.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Article 5 says “Each Party recognizes that an armed attack against either Party in the territories under the administration of Japan would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional provisions and processes.”

Which is a mealymouthed way of saying the US is obligated to defend Japan but not vice versa.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

While it just occurred to me that the party's minions who crawl the web to deliver regurgitate their propaganda might not have access to any kind of information source other than that approved by that same party, I'll still attempt to refer you to further reading to put things in context.

http://www.cfr.org/proliferation/us-nuclear-weapons-policy/p19226

Note the paragraph that says that while the US is trying to convince other countries not to use nuclear power, the reason it cannot be achieved with China is in the asymmetry of the arsenals. France has more nuclear war heads than China. The reason why numbers matter is that if it should ever come to using them, that very usage should be decisive i.e. it's about how many targets you can hit in as short a time as possible. China will definitely be wiped off the face of the Earth.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

TamaramaSep. 22, 2012 - 11:19AM JST

Talk of nuclear weapon use is rather premature,

US Joint Chief of staff and Secretary of Defense went to China not for playing Ping Pong! They made military dialogue with China authority. In the worst case scenario, they want to find the solution for avoiding extreme casualty. The stakes are high not because China and Japan are desperate about getting that Isles. Both side are displaying national pride for domestic audience. For non resident, it is so ugly and unconvincing.

I also believe there is a difference between the US not getting involved in territorial disputes between sovereign nations and honouring treaties.

You may come from another planet! US history is less than 250 years. US has already dumped many treaties. After signing them for a few years, it has changed her mind many times. Pls ask Native Americans, Mexico and Spain. I extremely doubted US will sacrifice millions people for Japanese national pride.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmericaSep. 22, 2012 - 10:38AM JST

If China made such an announcement on Monday, the would be no China on Tuesday. While China struggles to build a blue waer navy, US submarines with nuclear capability are all over the world unde the oceans that merely need launch orders, and China has no idea where they are. Therefore, China would never even "think" about a nuclear exchange with the United States.

Ossan! Do you know US Joint Chief of Staff visited China in 2004. He did not go to China for picnic. What he wanted was military dialogue for convincing China for not using Nuke if there is military conflict rise between two nations. He said he had no luck and China have already announced that China will nuke any nation for defending their interest. That announcement was made in 2004. This year is 2012. So far US has not nuked to China yet! Therefore your logic is just propaganda come from extreme hatred!

Current Secretary of Defense is in China for sight seeing. He is also on duty for dealing with China for not going too far. He said he has no luck either and China has already showed their anger! He admitted he does not want to get nuke war with China.For conventional war, it is acceptable!

It is true China may be disappeared from world map! How about Chinese race? In term of population, they have 1.3 billions in China. I doubt that Nuke can destroy all of them. Even they disappeared, there are oversea Chinese are everywhere. Even in Sanfransisco and East Coast. US has 300 millions people. IF China lost 300 millions people, they still have 1 billions people. IF US lost 400 millions population, US will become Jurassic park of Dinosaur play ground.

It is not worth for paying heavy price for that small rocky islands. It is not a national interest of US.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The records of the US soldiers in the Okinawan archipelago: during the Battle of Okinawa between March and July 1945 US soldiers killed 200000 Okinawan civilians; after WWII they raped Okinawan girls and caused so much trouble on the Okinawan archipelago, that a large majority of Okinawans (including their governor) wants the Yankees to go home ! Now, must the Japanese expect that these same US soldiers defend those southernmost islands (= Senkaku islands) on the Okinawan archipelago in a possible armed conflict with China/Taiwan ??? The Japanese Post WWII government is indeed a US puppet government... but not all Japanese are that stupid... The Japanese people surely should have the right to defend themselves and the right to wage war (article 9 of the Post WWII Japanese constitution should be abolished) !

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

I wonder whether US soldiers will defend the Senkaku Islands like the Imperial defended Iwo Jima until the last man ?! In a military conflict between US and China on the Senkaku islands, China will win. Article 9 of the Post-WWII constitution should be abolished, because it is a natural basic right for all animals(including Homo sapiens)/plants to defend themselves !

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Thats like me telling you that I would like to give you my neighbors car and put it in writing. It is not mine to give. The United states never rightfully owned the islands either, so they should not be able to give them away. Hence the "we think they belong to Japan, but we are not taking sides on the issue" stance the US is taking.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Some of Chinese coast guard ships/ fishing boats might go to the disputed water and Japan also won't do any development there and that's it! Nobody will take risk to confront the US on earth today. If anyone first explode an A-bomb in the future, it would be the US or some terrorist who happened to own one. Chinese military philosophy said: never attack someone at the time who's upmost power, who'll go down by himself sometime later.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

GW: I do believe again that this article will provide you with some perspective in addition to JT's

http://nation.time.com/2012/07/15/the-south-china-sea-from-bad-to-worse/

It's fairly clear that whatever people believe Ishihara started is only a small piece of it. China is simply after resources - and a quite a lot of it - that it projects it will need sooner than later.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Athletes

Talk of nuclear weapon use is rather premature, in my opinion. I'd suggest Sino-American ties are a lot stronger than that. My point really is that China seem to be undertaking a couple of actions that are very useful for clarifying exactly the nature of the US 'support' for places like Japan and Taiwan. It paints a clearer picture of what they are up against in their immediate vacinity and what the lines of demarcation are in regards to potential flashpoints with the US in the region. I also believe there is a difference between the US not getting involved in territorial disputes between sovereign nations and honouring treaties.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Folks it is patently obvious that the Senkaku islands fall under the US/Jpn joint defense.

It is EQUALLY obvious that the US WILL NOT LIKE to have to go down there & finish something ishihara & like minded idiots might start with China!

Thats it in a nut shell

2 ( +2 / -0 )

AthletesSep. 22, 2012 - 09:25AM JST

Truth is China is beatable for US in term of Conventional WAR. However if China announce they will nuke US East >Coast, the commander will make emergency meeting with his senior staff. It is unpredictable about their final >decision. It may be YES or NO!

If China made such an announcement on Monday, the would be no China on Tuesday. While China struggles to build a blue waer navy, US submarines with nuclear capability are all over the world unde the oceans that merely need launch orders, and China has no idea where they are. Therefore, China would never even "think" about a nuclear exchange with the United States.

If Japan can convince China not for using Nuke, US will not think twice for defending Japan.

China does not need any convincing from anyone.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

yubaru: just read this one

http://nation.time.com/2012/07/15/the-south-china-sea-from-bad-to-worse/

This was just a few months ago when China was also claiming the whole of the South China Sea and was in a spat over other islands with Vietnam this time.

The US already have a few carriers in the area.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The US should just park an Aircraft Carrier in the region. Actions speak louder than words. (sarcasm)

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Not only that but you have to consider other fronts. China is a thorn in the side of many western powers when it comes to the Iranian issue. Plus if people really think the US will reconsider because China is waving the threat of nuclear weapons, they should go and check the numbers for nuclear stockpiles.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

When it's all said and done, the US is extremely unlikely to tolerate a significant Chinese military presence so close to the southern flank of its bases in Okinawa. This is military common sense, and is ultimately likely to be the deciding factor in any possible involvement.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

TamaramaSep. 22, 2012 - 09:04AM JST

By pushing Japan, they are also pushing the US. To get them to verbalize things like this makes it quite clear for China in terms of where this kind of conflict might go. Their decisions will be calculated.

US defense secretary is in China and told Chinese officials US will not bias or sideline or dispute. Assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific Affairs has little authority for military affair. At the end, Commander in chief or President of US will decide whether they will go to war or not! US signed native American for territory in history. However US did not oblige the treaty and took more territory from them. Treaty is not Concrete and it can be changed depending on national interest.

Japan has insecurity about whether US will involve for military conflict or not. Truth is China is beatable for US in term of Conventional WAR. However if China announce they will nuke US East Coast, the commander will make emergency meeting with his senior staff. It is unpredictable about their final decision. It may be YES or NO!

If Japan can convince China not for using Nuke, US will not think twice for defending Japan. Like fairy tale Cinderella which has happy ending with Prince Charming.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

They flex their muscles against a country whose constitution renounces war but p*ss in their pants at the mere possibility of someone stronger getting involved. I wonder how you call that...cowardice?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Thanks, Farmboy. Understood, ten-four.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

They are, I think, pretty telling comments. You would assume that the Chinese would have a fair idea of what the US position is, which really makes it all the more intriguing in terms of how far they are trying to push the envelope on this. By pushing Japan, they are also pushing the US. To get them to verbalize things like this makes it quite clear for China in terms of where this kind of conflict might go. Their decisions will be calculated.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I am very skeptical when I read statement like this " a top US diplomat says". Unless I hear this directly from the President or the State Department, I would disregard what has been said. I will not be mislead.

The State Department has stated that:

It takes no position on sovereignty. The Senkakus falls under the treaty with Japan.

Whether you like that position or not is another matter, but it has been stated by both Panetta, Campbell (above), and Nuland. It's true Panetta is adjusting his statement to make it more pleasant for the Chinese to hear, but it's the same position if you listen carefully. The President doesn't usually make these kinds of statements, but is advised by, and is in close communication with, all of the people above. These statements are not occurring without his knowledge. A lot of this stuff is on youtube, so you can listen to it yourself.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

How about the Chicago Tribune relaying Reuters?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-china-japan-usabre88j1hj-20120920,0,6483445.story

2 ( +2 / -0 )

chucky3176Sep. 22, 2012 - 08:29AM JST

That is according to Asahi newspaper.. again, Japanese media.

So how come we never hear this type of stuff, directly from the US official mouths?

@Chucky, Police NEVER tell when he is coming to arrest in advance. Hope you've got my point.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

US 'will not take sides over islands'

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2012Diaoyu/2012-09/18/content_15765373.htm

U.S. says world can't afford crisis in Asian seas

http://www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/us-world-cant-afford-crisis-in-asian-seas

Well, this is my summary of view on the dispute.

US Secretary of Defense Panetta and Kurt Campbell are sending two conflicting messages. US needs to send only ONE message on the dispute. The direct stregiht talk is needed between US and Japan how to deal with China's military aggression.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

That is according to Asahi newspaper.. again, Japanese media.

So how come we never hear this type of stuff, directly from the US official mouths?

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Subcommittee chairman Senator Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat and veteran Asia military expert, urged the Obama administrationt to respond, carefully and fullyto Chinese actions in the East China Sea and the South China Sea, where China has other territorial disputes that have intensified in recent years

I am glad to hear this from Sen. Jim Webb (D), He is one of the Senates who understands complexity of US/Japan Treaty. I am glad he is on your side (Japan).

6 ( +7 / -1 )

The uninhabited islets in the East China Sea at the center of a bitter dispute between China and Japan are LEARLY covered by a 1960 security treaty obliging the United States to come to aid to Japan if attacked, a top U.S. diplomat says.

I am very skeptical when I read statement like this " a top US diplomat says". Unless I hear this directly from the President or the State Department, I would disregard what has been said. I will not be mislead.

Here are some developments on China Daily dated 9/21/12 to understand the stance of China on Senkaku.

Diaoyu Islands belong to China

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2012Diaoyu/node_1089381.htm

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2012-09/21/content_15772310.htm

-10 ( +5 / -15 )

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