Chinese Geopolitics

advill said:

Absolutely correct solarz. China is interested in the resources under the sea not only in East Asia (areas around Senkaku/Diayou Islands), but also in the South China Sea (Paracel and Spratly Islands etc.) NO major problems are envisaged for China in the South China Sea because of its strong PLA-N that can control the area much easier. However, in the East China Sea/Sea of Japan where the disputed islands are, we know that Japan (with its relatively strong Armed Forces) will never tolerate Chinese intrusions into Japanese claimed territorial waters around Senkaku Islands. Let's hope there will be NO "blow-up" as there will be no winners but losers, and the crisis will drag on. This is real let's not fool ourselves.

Click to expand...

the Chinese have been sending their coast guard ships into and around the DYT islands because it is their claimed territorial waters and I don't see any blow ups because the Japanese have been doing the same. its just a tit for tat there is nothing special about it.

Bltizo said:

I think the PRC's claim to the Diaoyu islands are just as much about principle (and China's history with Japan, as well as the manner in which the islands resurfaced as an issue in recent years) as it is only about the resources around the islands.

Click to expand...

If we cut through the media hype and look at the facts, we see the following sequence of events:

1- Japan refuses to acknowledge the dispute with China

2- Japan nationalizes the islands

3- China sends civilian law enforcement vessels to the area near the islands, but by most reports do not actually enter the islands' territorial waters

If China's goal was to simply drive off the Japanese coast guard, why would they refrain from entering the territorial water boundary? This is a clear sign that the Chinese do not want to escalate the conflict. The Chinese law enforcement vessels are there to serve as a refutation of the Japanese position that there isn't even a dispute.

China's goal is to bring Japan to the negotiation table. Japan's goal, on the other hand, is apparently to prepare for a fight.

Very surprising to see an article that's not China bashing or China threat article from a major Western media. The writer actually understand China's perspective.

solarz said:

If we cut through the media hype and look at the facts, we see the following sequence of events:

1- Japan refuses to acknowledge the dispute with China

2- Japan nationalizes the islands

3- China sends civilian law enforcement vessels to the area near the islands, but by most reports do not actually enter the islands' territorial waters

If China's goal was to simply drive off the Japanese coast guard, why would they refrain from entering the territorial water boundary? This is a clear sign that the Chinese do not want to escalate the conflict. The Chinese law enforcement vessels are there to serve as a refutation of the Japanese position that there isn't even a dispute.

China's goal is to bring Japan to the negotiation table. Japan's goal, on the other hand, is apparently to prepare for a fight.

Click to expand...

One point, you and others completely ignore the fact that the Japanese government had owned the several smaller island as national property way before former PM Noda had made the largest island, Uotsuri-Jiama national property.

SamuraiBlue said:

One point, you and others completely ignore the fact that the Japanese government had owned the several smaller island as national property way before former PM Noda had made the largest island, Uotsuri-Jiama national property.

Click to expand...

The problem with opening that door called 'the past' is how far back do you look? Not so long really, before PM Noda, Japan waged a brutal war against China and took this territory now under Japanese administration, by force. Those are just the facts, unpleasant as they may be to some.

The reality is events of WWII and post-war dealings leave us with the regional geopolitical situation we see today. Until all sides (China, Japan & Korea primarily) can reconcile and draft a new mechanism for future relations and security in Asia, the climate between them will remain (to varying degree's) cold.

I could have envisioned Japan's initial nationalisation of the islands as a means to begin such a discussion from a stronger position; ultimately understanding that they would be traded away for other tangibles. But events since have dulled that hope.

Relations between China & Japan will be unable to progress under the Abe administration. Hawks on both sides have seen to that.

SamuraiBlue said:

One point, you and others completely ignore the fact that the Japanese government had owned the several smaller island as national property way before former PM Noda had made the largest island, Uotsuri-Jiama national property.

Click to expand...

You're correct in that there are two sides to the Diaoyu islands argument, and both China and Japan sides sincerely believe they're in the right. If both sides truly wish to resolve the problem, then they must take steps to lower the temperature and get back to the negotiating table. That means Japan need to admit there's a dispute, since previous governments have taken that position. China also need to lower its reactionary provocations to give Abe the political space he needs to admit there's a dispute. Will it happen? I doubt it; Japan's current administration will not admit there's a dispute, and China will continue to provoke and make mockery of Japan's claim.

Sadly, there will be no improvements in Diaoyu standoff until Japan has a new government.

three sides, Japan, Taiwan and The PRC

Blackstone said:

You're correct in that there are two sides to the Diaoyu islands argument, and both China and Japan sides sincerely believe they're in the right. If both sides truly wish to resolve the problem, then they must take steps to lower the temperature and get back to the negotiating table. That means Japan need to admit there's a dispute, since previous governments have taken that position. China also need to lower its reactionary provocations to give Abe the political space he needs to admit there's a dispute. Will it happen? I doubt it; Japan's current administration will not admit there's a dispute, and China will continue to provoke and make mockery of Japan's claim.

Sadly, there will be no improvements in Diaoyu standoff until Japan has a new government.

Click to expand...

Why do you insist on bilateral negotiation as if that is the only option on the table?
PRC can easily force Japan to the table peacefully without any of the present provocation by simply filing a complaint at ICJ in which Japan is a compulsory member. PRC only needs to become one as well.

No PRC can't have cake and eat it as well as long as she take a malevolent and hegemonic attitude.

And yet the only reason Japan is able administer the island is by bilateral agreement between the Japan and the U.S in the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, which neither Taipei or Beijing were invited.

The West has long history of backstabbing China and promoting favoritism of Japan for its own interests of a weak containing China, that most Chinese do not trust them to act as disinterested third-party. To them the West does not want a strong China as a potential threat and that they would much rather promote partition and containment under guise of their "International Community". Much like how that so called "International Community" in the Treaty of Versailles awarded Japan Shandong Province to Japan (instead of restoring Chinese sovereignty), without Chinese approval and despite both sides being allied together on the winning side against Germany in WWI.

For the average Chinese person, the island means much more than simply natural resources, but it is a old wound which Japan is rubbing salt on. Abe continues to downplay Japan's wartime actions during WWII and disrespect Chinese sovereignty, claiming as its own as it did during WWII. At the end of the day the symbolic meaning of the island means so much that China, that I think it is willing to risk war for it, if push comes to shove even if means losing Shanghai or Beijing in nuclear war.

SamuraiBlue said:

Why do you insist on bilateral negotiation as if that is the only option on the table?
PRC can easily force Japan to the table peacefully without any of the present provocation by simply filing a complaint at ICJ in which Japan is a compulsory member. PRC only needs to become one as well.

No PRC can't have cake and eat it as well as long as she take a malevolent and hegemonic attitude.

Click to expand...

uh because this is a dispute between china and japan?

what's so NOT peaceful in china's actions in and around the DYT islands? sending unarmed Coastguard vessels to patrol in and around the islands is very peaceful. japan is doing the same thing so why is china's action non peaceful while Japan's is? I really don't get that.