Chinese Geopolitics

Status
Not open for further replies.

joshuatree

Captain
The San Francisco peace treaty wound back treaties before the Portsmouth Treaty settling the Russo-Japanese War.
On the other hand the sovereignty of Northern territories was defined in 1855 Treaty of Shimoda which both nations agreed on peacefully which is now the basis in territory boundaries.
That is the very reason why the Soviet Union acknowledged that there is a dispute in which present Russia inherited and why they are will to negotiate.
Past treaties are inherited by the newly governing regime to maintain legacy to obtain acceptance by fellow nations.

The SF Treaty does not undo the Portsmouth Treaty and then set things at the 1855 demarcation. No such language written in there. The SF Treaty undid the Portsmouth Treaty and set the demarcation at 1945 where Japan renounces all of the Kurils, those are the specific words of Article 2(c) in black and white. That's written evidence right there. It does not matter if Japan claims the islands do not belong to Russia because the treaty did not state so, Japan renounced any claims to the Kurils and that's that. Past treaties are superseded by newer ones so article 2(c) overrides 1855. Just like 1978 Treaty between China and Japan supersedes any argument about SF Treaty on matters between China and Japan. To argue about an older treaty overriding a newer treaty is putting the cart in front of the horse. Every international treaty out there is annulled and useless if things were done that way.
 

Janiz

Senior Member
The SF Treaty does not undo the Portsmouth Treaty and then set things at the 1855 demarcation. No such language written in there.
Don't know what's the point of this lenghty try to catch your own tail but if two parties sign an agreement the same agreement could be as well undone if both parties agree. Both Japan AND Russia agree on that matter saying that there are issues which should be adressed in the future.
 

joshuatree

Captain
Don't know what's the point of this lenghty try to catch your own tail but if two parties sign an agreement the same agreement could be as well undone if both parties agree. Both Japan AND Russia agree on that matter saying that there are issues which should be adressed in the future.

Many points were clearly made

- there is no such thing as selectively applying treaties out of chronological order

- it's hypocritical to infer non-listed favorable conditions from treaties for one side and then accuse another other side of no evidence for their claims (case in point, Japan argues SF Treaty does not apply to Kurils because Soviet Union did not sign, well can't argue SF Treaty applies to China-Japan issues because neither Chinas signed either, can't have cake and eat it too)

- Japan and Russia agree on addressing issues provided a peace treaty is concluded

- Japan agrees to Article 8 of Potsdam in treaty with China in 1978, this is very specific to single out an article number, it agrees to return all territory taken through violence and greed
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
The SF Treaty does not undo the Portsmouth Treaty and then set things at the 1855 demarcation. No such language written in there. The SF Treaty undid the Portsmouth Treaty and set the demarcation at 1945 where Japan renounces all of the Kurils, those are the specific words of Article 2(c) in black and white. That's written evidence right there. It does not matter if Japan claims the islands do not belong to Russia because the treaty did not state so, Japan renounced any claims to the Kurils and that's that. Past treaties are superseded by newer ones so article 2(c) overrides 1855. Just like 1978 Treaty between China and Japan supersedes any argument about SF Treaty on matters between China and Japan. To argue about an older treaty overriding a newer treaty is putting the cart in front of the horse. Every international treaty out there is annulled and useless if things were done that way.

The territorial boundaries specified were drawn to revert Japan before expansion. As a result Taiwan from the Shimonoseki treaty, Korean peninsula, Southern part of Sakhalin island, Northern Kuril isles and middle Kuril isles from Portmouth treaty were all excluded from the for mentioned boundaries. On the other hand Takeshima, Ogasawara isles, Southern four islands of Kuril isles and Ryuku isles including Senkaku were included since the US saw those regions were Japan's territories before Imperial Japan started expansion.
SF treaty does not mention any of the treaties mentioned above but there was a clear intention by the people who drew the treaty to revert back Japan to it's original territorial grounds.
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
Many points were clearly made

- there is no such thing as selectively applying treaties out of chronological order

- it's hypocritical to infer non-listed favorable conditions from treaties for one side and then accuse another other side of no evidence for their claims (case in point, Japan argues SF Treaty does not apply to Kurils because Soviet Union did not sign, well can't argue SF Treaty applies to China-Japan issues because neither Chinas signed either, can't have cake and eat it too)

- Japan and Russia agree on addressing issues provided a peace treaty is concluded

- Japan agrees to Article 8 of Potsdam in treaty with China in 1978, this is very specific to single out an article number, it agrees to return all territory taken through violence and greed

It doesn't matter when Japan robbed others of their land, because terms of its unconditional surrender forced it to return all stolen territory. That's why Japan must return Diaoyu to China and admit Dokdo belongs to Korea.
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
Looks like Tony Abbott is leading his country to bad relations with China, and it's hard to see how relations could improve for years to come.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China's official news agency has slammed Prime Minister Tony Abbott for praising Japan's World War II military prowess in his welcome to Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

Xinhua believes Mr Abbott's admiration of Japanese war skills was appalling and "insensible" (sic) to victim countries.

"He probably wasn't aware that the Japanese troops possessed other `skills', skills to loot, to rape, to torture and to kill. All these had been committed under the name of honour almost 70 years ago," Xinhua said in a commentary on its website.

The agency is regarded as reflecting the views of China's government.

This comes amid growing Chinese assertiveness in regional territorial disputes. Japan is also shrugging off the pacifist foreign policy it has had since its defeat in World War II.

More than any other nation, China suffered under Japan's 14-year military occupation with as many as 20 million dead.

In his address to the parliamentary sitting attended by Mr Abe, Mr Abbott cited the bravery of Japanese submariners killed in the 1942 raid on Sydney harbour.

"We admired the skill and the sense of honour that they brought to their task although we disagreed with what they did. Perhaps we grasped, even then, that with a change of heart the fiercest of opponents could be the best of friends," Mr Abbott said.

Xinhua said Mr Abbott showed how "insensible" he is towards people who suffered greatly as a result of the "advanced" war skills of Japanese troops and their sense of honour during their aggression.

"While Japan has earned the reputation of a good international citizen, how much does it owe to its pacifist constitution, of which Abe and his cabinet are trying to change by re-interpreting its key article," it said.

Mr Abbott's gaffe came as the Japanese leader stood on the red dirt of the Pilbara and saw for the first time the iron ore his nation turns into steel.

The iron-rich dirt he saw being dug up on Wednesday could be in Japanese steel mills within a month.

And that steel could be back in Australia soon after in the trucks at the very mine where he stood.

"I've been amazed to be able to actually see this iron ore for myself here today," Mr Abe told Rio Tinto workers via a translator.

Rio Tinto, which operates the West Angelas mine inspected by Mr Abe and Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, is the largest supplier of raw materials to Japan.

The West Australian leg rounds out Mr Abe's three-day tour of Australia, the first visit by a Japanese leader since 2002.

Mr Abe especially asked to visit the Pilbara during his trip.

He said the Rio Tinto mine, a joint partnership with Japanese companies, symbolised the relationship between his country and Australia.

Mr Abbott said the historic collaboration between Australian mining "know-how" and Japanese capital and technology was a long-term one built on trust.

That's what he hopes will always characterise the relationship between Australia and Japan as well as good faith and confidence that "we will do what we say we will do".

The two leaders travelled together on the same plane as they made the five-hour journey across the country from Canberra.

Mr Abe noted the flight was twice as long as a summit meeting the two had at Parliament House on Tuesday.

"But I actually believe that we had a deeper, deeper discussion on the flight," he said.

The pair's obviously warm relationship was emphasised by Mr Abbott's multiples references to "my friend Shinzo Abe".

The last time Mr Abbott visited the Pilbara he eagerly jumped in the driver's seat of an enormous truck.

This time there was no driver's seat - although he and Mr Abe gleefully climbed onto a truck.

Rio Tinto is rolling out driverless trucks and drill rigs - controlled remotely from Perth - across its mines and West Angelas is the program's trial site.

Rio Tinto boss Sam Walsh said the company's iron ore business was born from Japanese investment and the company would never forget that support.
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
It doesn't matter when Japan robbed others of their land, because terms of its unconditional surrender forced it to return all stolen territory. That's why Japan must return Diaoyu to China and admit Dokdo belongs to Korea.

And we are back to square one with no documented evidence to support one's words.
It's getting stale, provide proof that it was taken by force since you can find various documents verifying my point that the Imperial Japanese government had done it's finding that Senkaku isles were Terra nullius and claimed as her sovereign territory and was affirmed again after WW2 with the SF peace treaty.

Any questions?
 

port_08

Junior Member
Looks like Tony Abbott is leading his country to bad relations with China, and it's hard to see how relations could improve for years to come.

You know, how strange, once before Japan attack Australia for their quest for raw materials then a US deputy sheriff, and now can do it legitimately buying up Rio Tinto. Eating dolphins and whales have no issue with Australian as long Tony Abbott likes Abe sushi lol , shark fins are off the menu at the moment...
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
And we are back to square one with no documented evidence to support one's words.
It's getting stale, provide proof that it was taken by force since you can find various documents verifying my point that the Imperial Japanese government had done it's finding that Senkaku isles were Terra nullius and claimed as her sovereign territory and was affirmed again after WW2 with the SF peace treaty.

Any questions?

We've already went round and round over the futility of historical documents from both sides, and if you must have them, Google the topic and you'll have lots of opposing information from both Chinese and Japanese sources. The bottom line is japan attacked China when she was weak and stole Taiwan and Diaoyu through raw aggression. The San Francisco Peace Treaty compels japan to give up the ghost; it already gave up Taiwan, and now China has come to collect Diaoyu.
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
We've already went round and round over the futility of historical documents from both sides, and if you must have them, Google the topic and you'll have lots of opposing information from both Chinese and Japanese sources. The bottom line is japan attacked China when she was weak and stole Taiwan and Diaoyu through raw aggression. The San Francisco Peace Treaty compels japan to give up the ghost; it already gave up Taiwan, and now China has come to collect Diaoyu.

And again back with NO MEAT.LoL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top