The tension help Japanese united around Abe, and Chinese united around communist play...somebody are play fire...
1 ( +1 / -0 )
I live in Sydney. I met a lot of people from Africa and Middle East. They all praise China for what has been done for their countries.
-2 ( +1 / -3 )
Fascist China needs to stop living in a dream of taking over all of Asia. Territorial expansion is not worth risking a war with the entire free world.
China is not fascist. And Japan does not represent the whole free world.
A message from OZ.
-3 ( +2 / -5 )
Japan wants to refer Dokto dispute to ICJ, but refuses to even talk of Senkaku/Diaoyu dispute. This is clearly an application of double standard. A responsible country will not behave like that on international stage.
-2 ( +5 / -7 )
If so why doesn't China file a claim at the ICJ? Why does it resort to "putting pressure" on Japan?
OssanAmerica, both nations must agree to let ICJ to handle the issue, before ICJ can do anything. Japan still refuse this route.
-2 ( +3 / -5 )
I knew his true color.
-2 ( +7 / -9 )
The US and China oppose each other on North Korea, Iran, Syria, Taiwan, etc etc What common interest do we share?
Economic tie so big that they can live without each other, just have a look at Apple, IBM etc.
In Afghanistan, Islamic extremists are common enemies of US and China.
While US is dominating in world stage, China only want some power sharing. Even US want China to take on more 'responsibility'. China is reluctant, it just wants to make 'more money'. Is it clear enough that China is not there to challenge US leadership?China is not opposing US on N Korea. It is popping up N Korea so that it has a buffer zone with US. Though this is a very bad idea.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
N Korea has never been Chinese security thread.
Japan has always been, and it makes itself a greater thread now by increasing defense spending aiming at China.
From 'national interest', there is little prospect that Japan and China can work together.
US and China can, because they share a lot more common interest, though they compete in many area.
-2 ( +3 / -5 )
At least the Chinese and Koreans got some kind of apology. Almost 70 years and the British POWs of the Far East are still waiting for their apology. All they got was a bit of compensation.
Yeah, better than nothing.
One day apology, next day pay tribute to war criminals in the temple, then modify history book to deny massacre.
It is like stabbing you in the back, then offering some band-aid, then rubbing some salt in your wound.
2 ( +5 / -3 )
Please open google map or apple map, and count how many neighbors China has.
"Why did they change their position from what they took 30 years prior?"
If you mean Senkaku/Diaoyu, then you are plain wrong. The then Chinese leader Deng Xiao Ping only admit dispute, and he was willing to leave the dispute to later generation. As Japanese is getting harder on the dispute, current generation leaders in China are no longer willing to 'leave the dispute to later generation'. Otherwise they will be labelled 'coward'.
Just to borrow the words Japanese leader thrown to Korean: If you are so confidence about your sovereignty over the islands, why aren't you willing to refer the matter to international court of justice?
Maybe, Japanese are not confident at all.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
There is nothing new about Chinese assertion over territory. Its own claim has not changed in last 40 years, at least. It has not occupied any new territory. On the other hand, when I was there, it had settled many disputes through negotiation, won some and lost some. Chinese took winning and losing gracefully.
On the other hand, the closest neighbor without sovereignty dispute with Japan is at least 1,000 miles away.
It is absolute absurd to label China more expansionist than Japan.
In South China sea, Chinese fishery department boats engage in dangerous ship bumping. They learned this trick from Japanese in Senkaku/Diaoyu dispute. Chinese government wants to take problem in its own hand, whilst smaller countries ask help from bigger players. Chinese is no more aggressive than Japanese in handling disputes.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
I am Australian. My government has already clarified the pact only effective if US is attached, not that US is on offensive side.
The PLAN themselves said that their goal was to break the First Island Chain, which is why they are fixated on the Senkakus.
First Island Chain is US led containment of China. Nobody wants to be 'contained'. So trying to 'breakout' should NOT be viewed as aggressive or on expansion.
I've been to US before, which is a great country that highly value 'Freedom'. US people does not want to lose freedom. Neither Chinese wants to.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Have a careful check of terms and conditions of US, Australia alliance. Australia is only required to fight when American is attacked. This does NOT extend to third party, let alone third party woven in bitter territory dispute with every single neighbor.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
But Russians never demonstrated such wild and hysterical behavior like, say Chinese did during last dispute over Senkaku islands.
Riots in China was not welcomed by many Chinese. They were extremely unfortunate events.
However, if you think those are wild and hysterical behavior, how are you going to describe highly dangerous and costly ship bumping in open sea?
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
You are only telling half true.
When I was in China during 1980s, Chinese settled several disputes with smaller countries. With each of those smaller countries, they won some disputes and lost some. If you don't believe, you can go and check, they are all public record.
Senkaku/Diaoyu has been Chinese (including Taiwanese) fishing region. Sovereignty was not an issue many care about, until after the islands were handover by American to Japan. Japanese government promptly sent coast guard boats into the region to drive Chinese and Taiwanese fishing boats away, by highly dangerous and costly 'ship bumping' exercise. Of course ordinary Japanese would not have a problem. It was huge one for Chinese and Taiwanese fishermen. Traditionally more Japanese friendly Taiwanese government did not want to do anything to anger Japanese. That left Taiwanese fishermen in cold alone for years. CCP saw a good chance to show every Chinese and Taiwanese people that it was the only party willing to and able to protect its own people from foreign aggression. That is why it takes tougher and tougher stance against Japan every year.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
In the same way, US recognized northern islands as Japanese territories, above which administration rights were lost the Russian.
That is why US-Japan defense pack is NOT applicable to northern islands, even those US think they are Japanese territory.
US-Japan defense pack is applicable to Senkaku/Diaoyu according to US government because administration right was transferred to Japan (by US), even though US is neutral at this stage.
That is why Japanese government is very vocal on Senkaku/Diaoyu, while quiet on northern islands.
-2 ( +1 / -3 )
Are you saying that the US simply allowed Taiwanese fishing boats to freely enter US administered Japanese territory from 1945 to 1972?
US has never, ever recognized the disputed islands as Japanese territory.
Have a check for yourself, US position today is that Japan administrate the islands, NOT that Japan owns those islands.
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
Yes they did. The moment they decided to suddenly make a claim in 1971 they started the mess. And what aggression?
Chinese (both mainland and Taiwan) did not pay much attention to sovereignty issue until 1972. Taiwanese fishermen were happily fishing in the region. Nobody said a word. Then US transferred administration to Japan. Japanese coast guard boats kept bumping into Taiwanese fishing boats. That was when Chinese realized they had a big, big problem.
How come their traditional fishing ground becomes Japanese?
That is the aggression. There can't be a opportunity for CCP. If you hate CCP (I did and I do), check out newspapers from Taiwan (with a traditionally more Japan friendly government), please.
-3 ( +1 / -4 )
Typical of China. The two are entirely different. That the USSR "stole" the northern islands is supported by the fact that the U.S. amd U.K. consider them "stolen" by USSR and kept by Russia. NOBODY buys China's lame argument that the Senkakus were "stolen".
This NOBODY should be qualified as 'In Japan'
-4 ( +1 / -5 )
It is only a temporary measure (each side takes a step back) to allow both sides to claim victory, and start a more serious negotiation.
Doesn't matter you like it or not, Chinese view Senkaku/Diaoyu the same way as Japanese view Northern Islands.
CCP didn't create the mess, but seize the opportunity to demonstrate that it is the only party with spine to protect its own people from foreign aggression.
-8 ( +6 / -14 )
Posted in: New book reignites British royal race row