world

China says U.S. should 'brush up on' on its South China Sea history

29 Comments

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

29 Comments
Login to comment

I don't think China is the best country to be talking about brushing up on history, given the white-washes and censorship, but Japan is not either, and the US shouldn't blindly follow what they say.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Saw an antique very valuable historical map, it is true it was Chinese. But Israel is stealing Palestine, California was Mexico, so history will always change.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

"Possession is 90% of the law." The Chinese can float its boats anywhere it wants, but stay off the property.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

I'm actually in agreement with China here and feel the US has no right to get involved in a situation that involves islands taken over by the Japanese and returned to China after the war ended.

-10 ( +4 / -14 )

The islands were not given back to China since China did not control them before the war. The islands were forfeited therefore it was on first come first serve basis. As for atolls and rocks they were not in control of Japan even during the war since they had no significant value.

12 ( +13 / -1 )

Ahhhhhh yes, if only China could find that mysterious map that they made (up) all those years ago....

13 ( +15 / -2 )

If the USA has no right to get involved, then Japan needs to increase its expenditure for the so called self defense concept. The USA taxpayers would be happy to not pay the bill, but they understand it is a symbiotic relationship.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Heck, not only the U.S., but the Philippines and Vietnam and Taiwan need to brush up on South China Sea history, lol.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

ppff!! Foreign minster Wang, you should read your history!! Even after the 1943 Cairo Declaration and 1945 Potsdam Declaration, China was calling the Senkaku Islands by their Japanese Name.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/03/17/national/politics-diplomacy/foreign-ministrys-1969-china-map-identifies-senkaku-islands-by-japanese-name/#.WJrE8DjCS1s

5 ( +6 / -1 )

It is unacceptable for China to demand the entire South China sea as its territory. Twelve miles around their islands is all they should get.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

YuriOtani: "Twelve miles around their islands is all they should get."

Is that the same as Japan claims?

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Ahhhhhh yes, if only China could find that mysterious map that they made (up) all those years ago....

They're in my other trousers, with my Bigfoot photos.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Mr Smith the islands are well beyond the 200 mile exclusive economic zone of China. To this date no viable source of fuels has been found. These islands are not worth fighting.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

YuriOtani: you didn't answer my question. Since you're dictating the area China can have, what are you basing that on? The same area Japan claims around its shores? Or does it only apply to China when you make demands?

1 ( +5 / -4 )

People don't know that the origin of the Nine Dash Line is somebody in China just drew the line after WW2.

That's it. No official basis. Just drew a line. No formal claims filed to the international bodies, not even now.

They're fighting over a line that didn't even exist until after WW2 lol

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Is the Chinese government saying that the islands which it is currently building, and which did not exist until recently, were once occupied by Japan? Does that make any sense?

One needs to be careful about going back in history to justify one's actions today. At one time, China was very influential in Okinawa. In the late 19th century, Japan took possession of the islands. Will the Chinese government claim the right to own the Okinawa islands?

Some records indicate that China once tried to establish a colony on the South Island of New Zealand, in the 15th century. Do we need to be worried that China will try to take possession of New Zealand?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Other countries (in addition to the US and Japan) need to chime in: Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei and the Philippines. Their views count too and most if not all do not agree with the Beijing government.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Laughable chinese.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

China claims most of the South China Sea, while Taiwan, Malaysia, Vietnam, the Philippines and Brunei claim parts of the waters that command strategic sea lanes and have rich fishing grounds along with oil and gas deposits.

And so basically, the heck with everyone else, right? Unbelievable!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Reefs and rock are not granted their own EEZ. The limit for territorial sea for artificial land is 400 meters, rocks outside the continental EEZ or an island that cannot sustain humans only gain 12 nautical miles of territorial sea and no EEZ under UNCLOS.

Some people seems to not read the law in accusing other people.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I went ahead and brushed up on my history. No change.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

It's funny that Wang ( giggling while typing "wang" ) decides to cite declarations while ignoring international tribunal rulings.....

0 ( +3 / -3 )

@Imoae

I'm actually in agreement with China here and feel the US has no right to get involved in a situation that involves islands taken over by the Japanese and returned to China after the war ended

This interpretation of history - i.e. the Chinese one - relies on being able to prove that the islands were actually theirs before Japan occupied them. No such proof exists, and Vietnam and others make similar claims with similar lacks of proof.

@smith

YuriOtani is correct about islands which don't have EEZs only being entitled to 12-mile territorial waters, as defined by UNCLOS, and as also clearly ruled in the recent Philippines vs China ruling on the SCS (which actually ruled that some of China's islands don't even get 12-mile waters because they were below water at high tide before China turned them into airbases). And yes the same applies to any Japanese island which doesn't generate an EEZ (I believe the Senkaku fall into this category and Japan does not appear to claim an EEZ from them - although Japan does make the absurd claim of an EEZ from Okinotorishima)

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Lesson One: East Asia and the USA are on opposite sides of the earth.

Can we just say USA does NOT want stability in East Asia - otherwise there'd be no excuse for them to be there. I wonder how they'd feel if Chinese troops were stationed in Canada and Mexico. Not a nice feeling, I'm sure.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

...this have anything to do with Amerika not interfering in another countries bidness?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Yes Mister Smith the 12 miles includes the Senkaku islands but Okinawa extends 200 miles. I really do not think these islands are worth human blood shed. You would think China and Japan could come to a reasonable arrangement.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@YuriOtani, idealism and reality very very rarely coincide. Reality states that as long as the CCP desires control over resources (look at their population) it always leads to conquest and war for expanding territory. That is exactly what China's government is doing. Idealism says, "Oh can't we all just get along?" China started expanding first, so no it's not going to end peacefully unless China stops its nonsensical claims to areas that don't even remotely belong to them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

if the Senkaku islands are given to the Chinese then Okinawa falls under the indirect influence of the Chinese military. this is because of the reach of missile and plane technology. that would get based there.

don't think so? china just built an island- they can modify one too

the fact that anyone thinks china would consider an international ruling is a bit ludicrous at this stage- the real question here should be - who will actually militarize the island first? Japan or China?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If the Chinese got these islands and built military bases, they would be sitting ducks in the case of war. They would be able to get a single strike in before being reduced to rubble. The Americans have a lot of experience at conducting first strikes, so they may not be able to launch a single strike.

I do think Japan should retain ownership of these islands and their biggest resource is fish. China is not short of fuel and their efforts at looking for oil/gas have not yielded results.

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