Chinese General news resource thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

solarz

Brigadier
Was Abe PM when Japan began defending there claim? No he was not the Japanese government has been enforcing there claim for far longer then the current PM.
the Chinese joint venture always comes with the Price that one has to recognize Chinese sovereignty.
as to being to small to be garrisoned, the Chinese have proved nothing is to small to be garrisoned.

Abe is part of a group of Japanese politicians whose father or grandfather were in power during WW2. Abe is certainly not alone in his outlook, but it is him that has now revised the Japanese pacifist constitution.

I would remind you that it is Japan who nationalized those islands. Before that, China was willing to maintain status quo. Even after the Japanese coast guard arrested that Chinese fisherman in violation of an informal agreement between the two countries, China did not began its Diaoyu patrols until Japan made the nationalization move. I would further remind you that Japan's official position is that there isn't even a dispute.

China has resolved many of its border disputes since 1949. None of it came with the prerequisite that the other party must first recognize Chinese sovereignty over the disputed areas. In fact, when China proposed joint exploration to Japan, China's position was to set aside questions of sovereignty. Those who hype up the "Chinese threat" tend to forget inconvenient historical facts such as these.

Finally, what would be the purpose of garrisoning the Diaoyu Islands for China? It is far away from the Mainland, and any supply route to the islands would be under threat of naval attacks. The only way to ensure the safety of a military garrison there is to ensure naval dominance in the region, but if one could ensure naval dominance, then one doesn't need a military garrison on those islands.
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
Abe is part of a group of Japanese politicians whose father or grandfather were in power during WW2. Abe is certainly not alone in his outlook, but it is him that has now revised the Japanese pacifist constitution.

I would remind you that it is Japan who nationalized those islands. Before that, China was willing to maintain status quo. Even after the Japanese coast guard arrested that Chinese fisherman in violation of an informal agreement between the two countries, China did not began its Diaoyu patrols until Japan made the nationalization move. I would further remind you that Japan's official position is that there isn't even a dispute.

China has resolved many of its border disputes since 1949. None of it came with the prerequisite that the other party must first recognize Chinese sovereignty over the disputed areas. In fact, when China proposed joint exploration to Japan, China's position was to set aside questions of sovereignty. Those who hype up the "Chinese threat" tend to forget inconvenient historical facts such as these.

Finally, what would be the purpose of garrisoning the Diaoyu Islands for China? It is far away from the Mainland, and any supply route to the islands would be under threat of naval attacks. The only way to ensure the safety of a military garrison there is to ensure naval dominance in the region, but if one could ensure naval dominance, then one doesn't need a military garrison on those islands.

Again flame baiting I see.
Japan nationally owned the smaller islands long before former PM Noda nationalized the remaining islands.
Sorry selective memory really does not work when talking about history.
 

Janiz

Senior Member
Abe is part of a group of Japanese politicians whose father or grandfather were in power during WW2. Abe is certainly not alone in his outlook, but it is him that has now revised the Japanese pacifist constitution.
I remember reading that his grandfather, Kan Abe was trying to oust pro-Tojo majority from the Japanese diet during the war and put the war to stop even though the government made it's best to keep people like him quiet (he won the elections as independent candidate during the war which means that not entire Japanese society of that period was so agressive and expansional as it may seem). But maybe I'm reading wrong pages of the history books and Internet...

btw, I'm not taking part in the discussion, just adding my two cents to clear some points here ;)
 
Last edited:

Equation

Lieutenant General
Here's an interesting article from the NY Times about China expanding into Siberia Russia one day. I believe it was written as to drive a wedge between Russian and China because of the gas signing deal AND to showcase Putin why his way of annexing Crimea could hurt him one day when another larger super power could do the same back to him.

map-articleLarge.png


“A land without people for a people without land.” At the turn of the 20th century, that slogan promoted Jewish migration to Palestine. It could be recycled today, justifying a Chinese takeover of Siberia. Of course, Russia's Asian hinterland isn't really empty (and neither was Palestine). But Siberia is as resource-rich and people-poor as China is the opposite. The weight of that logic scares the Kremlin.

Moscow recently restored the Imperial Arch in the Far Eastern frontier town of Blagoveshchensk, declaring: “The earth along the Amur was, is and always will be Russian.” But Russia's title to all of the land is only about 150 years old. And the sprawl of highrises in Heihe, the Chinese boomtown on the south bank of the Amur, right across from Blagoveshchensk, casts doubt on the “always will be” part of the old czarist slogan.

Siberia – the Asian part of Russia, east of the Ural Mountains – is immense. It takes up three-quarters of Russia's land mass, the equivalent of the entire U.S. and India put together. It's hard to imagine such a vast area changing hands. But like love, a border is real only if both sides believe in it. And on both sides of the Sino-Russian border, that belief is wavering.

The border, all 2,738 miles of it, is the legacy of the Convention of Peking of 1860 and other unequal pacts between a strong, expanding Russia and a weakened China after the Second Opium War. (Other European powers similarly encroached upon China, but from the south. Hence the former British foothold in Hong Kong, for example.)

The 1.35 billion Chinese people south of the border outnumber Russia's 144 million almost 10 to 1. The discrepancy is even starker for Siberia on its own, home to barely 38 million people, and especially the border area, where only 6 million Russians face over 90 million Chinese. With intermarriage, trade and investment across that border, Siberians have realized that, for better or for worse, Beijing is a lot closer than Moscow.

The vast expanses of Siberia would provide not just room for China's huddled masses, now squeezed into the coastal half of their country by the mountains and deserts of western China. The land is already providing China, “the factory of the world,” with much of its raw materials, especially oil, gas and timber. Increasingly, Chinese-owned factories in Siberia churn out finished goods, as if the region already were a part of the Middle Kingdom's economy.

One day, China might want the globe to match the reality. In fact, Beijing could use Russia's own strategy: hand out passports to sympathizers in contested areas, then move in militarily to "protect its citizens." The Kremlin has tried that in Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and most recently the Crimea, all formally part of other post-Soviet states, but controlled by Moscow. And if Beijing chose to take Siberia by force, the only way Moscow could stop would be using nuclear weapons.

There is another path: Under Vladimir Putin, Russia is increasingly looking east for its future – building a Eurasian Union even wider than the one inaugurated recently in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan, a staunch Moscow ally. Perhaps two existing blocs – the Eurasian one encompassing Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization – could unite China, Russia and most of the 'stans. Putin's critics fear that this economic integration would reduce Russia, especially Siberia, to a raw materials exporter beholden to Greater China. And as the Chinese learned from the humiliation of 1860, facts on the ground can become lines on the map.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Here's an interesting article from the NY Times about China expanding into Siberia Russia one day. I believe it was written as to drive a wedge between Russian and China because of the gas signing deal AND to showcase Putin why his way of annexing Crimea could hurt him one day when another larger super power could do the same back to him.

map-articleLarge.png


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Well if China can grab large tracts of land from one major Nuclear armed power with impunity, why not another?
I think the map would be balanced very nicely by including Alaska and large amounts of non nuke Canada as well. Maybe add the Dakotas for good measure.

Dumb article and an even dumber editor for thinking it made good copy :confused:
 

solarz

Brigadier
Well if China can grab large tracts of land from one major Nuclear armed power with impunity, why not another?
I think the map would be balanced very nicely by including Alaska and large amounts of non nuke Canada as well. Maybe add the Dakotas for good measure.

Dumb article and an even dumber editor for thinking it made good copy :confused:

Yeah, because Chinese are just dying to go live in a frozen wasteland! :rolleyes:

That was one of the more ridiculous articles I've seen. There's a reason very few people live in Siberia, and it's not because we haven't gotten around to it yet!

Honestly, those kinds of articles simply betray a fundamental ignorance of the population dynamics in China. Despite having the world's largest population, China has vast swathes of empty lands. The problem is, they're empty for a reason. If the Chinese wanted to settle inhospitable lands, they would find the Gobi desert and Inner Mongolian plains far more accessible than Siberia!

Just to put things into perspective:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Taiwan: 1673 people per square mile
South Korea: 1303 people per square mile
India: 982 people per square mile
Japan: 870 people per square mile
United Kingdom: 679 people per square mile
Federated States of Micronesia: 376 people per square mile

China: 367 people per square mile
 
Last edited:

Equation

Lieutenant General
Yeah, because Chinese are just dying to go live in a frozen wasteland! :rolleyes:

That was one of the more ridiculous articles I've seen. There's a reason very few people live in Siberia, and it's not because we haven't gotten around to it yet!

Honestly, those kinds of articles simply betray a fundamental ignorance of the population dynamics in China. Despite having the world's largest population, China has vast swathes of empty lands. The problem is, they're empty for a reason. If the Chinese wanted to settle inhospitable lands, they would find the Gobi desert and Inner Mongolian plains far more accessible than Siberia!

Just to put things into perspective:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Taiwan: 1673 people per square mile
South Korea: 1303 people per square mile
India: 982 people per square mile
Japan: 870 people per square mile
United Kingdom: 679 people per square mile
Federated States of Micronesia: 376 people per square mile

China: 367 people per square mile


Not to mention China can build a number of artificial islands for either use industry, real estate, or farm lands if needed.
 

solarz

Brigadier
I remember reading that his grandfather, Kan Abe was trying to oust pro-Tojo majority from the Japanese diet during the war and put the war to stop even though the government made it's best to keep people like him quiet (he won the elections as independent candidate during the war which means that not entire Japanese society of that period was so agressive and expansional as it may seem). But maybe I'm reading wrong pages of the history books and Internet...

btw, I'm not taking part in the discussion, just adding my two cents to clear some points here ;)

Meanwhile, his other grandfather is
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, who served as a top official in the puppet state of Manchukuo, and venerated war criminals.
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
A little gem in Xi-Park joint statement on Korean Peninsula affairs is this quote from the N.Y. Times:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


In something of a surprise, Mr. Xi said South Korea had agreed to consider joining the Chinese initiative for an Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank that Beijing is organizing as a mechanism for a Chinese-led effort to bankroll more infrastructure projects in underdeveloped Asian nations.

The bank, still in the planning stage, is widely seen as an effort by China to create a financing structure to compete with the Asian Development Bank, which is dominated by Japan and the United States.

It seems China's making some headway in weakening US-ROK-Japan alliance, and the US was either unwilling or unable to keep South Korea from considering membership in the rival Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. My first impression is the former, but upon reflection, I'm having second thoughts.
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
Meanwhile, his other grandfather is
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, who served as a top official in the puppet state of Manchukuo, and venerated war criminals.

So, both of Shinzo Abe's grandpas were convicted Class-A war criminals? No wonder he's so desperate to whitewash Imperial Japan's militaristic history.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top