Japan, China send fighter jets over disputed islands

[jimmy olsen]

The situation continues to escalate.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/50514679/ns/world_news-the_new_york_times/#.UPrDQWeviMo

Japan, China send fighter jets over disputed islands
Dispute comes amid heightened nationalism in both countries

By JANE PERLEZ
updated 1/18/2013 8:48:53 PM ET

BEIJING — The action in the skies over the East China Sea started simply enough.

Last week, the Chinese government sent a civilian surveillance plane, a twin propeller aircraft, to fly near the uninhabited islands at the heart of a growing feud between China and Japan. Tokyo, in response, ordered F-15 fighter jets to take a look at what it considered Chinese meddling. The Chinese then sent their own fighters.

It was the first time that supersonic Chinese and Japanese military fighters were in the air together since the dispute over the islands erupted last year, significantly increasing the risk of a mistake that could lead to armed conflict at a time when both countries, despite their mutual economic interests, are going through a period of heightened nationalism that recalls their longstanding regional rivalry.

The escalation comes amid a blast of belligerent discourse in China and as the Obama administration delayed a visit to Washington requested by Shinzo Abe, the new prime minister of Japan, the United States' main ally in Asia. After the rebuff, Mr. Abe announced that he would embark on a tour of Southeast Asia intended to counter China's influence in the region. On Friday, however, he cut short the trip to return to Tokyo to deal with the crisis in Algeria over the hostage-taking.

What began as a seemingly minor dispute is quickly turning into a gathering storm, military analysts and Western diplomatic officials warn, as each country appears determined to force the other to give ground.

"What is really driving things is raw nationalism and fragmented political systems, both on the Japanese and even more so the Chinese sides, that is preventing smart people from making rational decisions," said Thomas Berger, an associate professor of international relations at Boston University. "No Chinese or Japanese leader wants or can afford to be accused of selling out their country."

The two powers
The backdrop for the dispute is the changing military and economic dynamic in the region. In Japan, which rose from utter defeat in World War II to become a prosperous global economic power, many experts talk of a nation preparing for an "elegant" decline. But Mr. Abe has made clear that he does not subscribe to that idea and hopes to stake out a tough posture on the islands as a way of engineering a Japanese comeback.
Advertise | AdChoices

In contrast, Beijing brims with confidence, reveling in the belief that the 21st century belongs to China — with the return of the islands the Chinese call the Diaoyu and the Japanese refer to as the Senkaku as a starting point.

Though Japan is far richer than China on a per-person basis, its economy has been stagnant for years and contracted once again in the second half of 2012. It was hit hard by a slowdown in exports to China after the island dispute erupted in August; Chinese protesters disrupted Japanese plants in China and boycotted Japanese products during the autumn. The value of Japanese exports to China fell by 17 percent between June and November, the World Bank said this week.

China's fast-growing military still lags behind the Japanese Self-Defense Forces in sophistication of weaponry and training, but Japan's edge is diminishing, according to Dr. Berger, an expert on the Japanese military, and other Western defense analysts.

For now the Chinese military wants to avoid armed conflict over the islands, Dr. Berger said, but its longer-term goal is to pressure Japan to give up its administration of the islands. That would give China a break in what is known in China as the "first island chain," a string of islands, including the Diaoyu, that prevents China's growing ballistic submarine fleet from having unobserved access to the Pacific Ocean. Taiwan is part of the "first island chain," as are smaller islands controlled by Vietnam and the Philippines.

"The Chinese leadership seems to think that the cards are in their favor, and if they push long and hard enough, the Japanese have to cave," Dr. Berger said.

'Imprudent' response by China
A senior American military official said that Washington considered China's decision to send its fighter jets in response to Japan's to be "imprudent" but not a violation of international law. The Chinese jets had entered what is known as Japan's Air Defense Identity Zone, but had not infringed Japan's airspace, the official said.

The United States was watching closely and advising restraint on both sides, because there is no established method of communication — or hot line — between Japan and China that can be used in the event of a confrontation. With jet fighters from both countries aloft last week, "the potential for mistakes that could have broader consequences" was vastly increased, the official said.

The Chinese state-run news media have stepped up their hawkish tone since the episode. On Mr. Abe's trip to Southeast Asia, which the Chinese say is intended to create a pro-Japan alliance, the overseas edition of The People's Daily newspaper said: "Even the United States, the world's sole superpower, acknowledged that it cannot encircle and contain China, so why should Japan?"

Chinese experts express similar views. In an interview, Hu Lingyuan, the deputy director of the Center for Japanese Studies at Fudan University in Shanghai, described Mr. Abe as a Japanese nationalist who was trying to overextend Japan's reach. "The Diaoyu conflict keeps escalating," he said. "A solution is not possible."And as the commentary became harsher, the Chinese media stressed reports of training by the military's East China Sea units. Dozens of J-10 fighter jets participated in a live ammunition drill with the Navy's East China Sea Fleet, Xinhua, the state run news agency, reported Thursday.

Before returning to Japan, Mr. Abe spoke to reporters in Jakarta, Indonesia. He said he opposed "changing the status quo by force," and called on China to behave in a responsible manner.

"The seas is a public asset that should not be governed by force but by rule of law that keeps it freely open to all," he said. "We will work with Asean nations to do our utmost to defend this." Asean refers to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

With a top United States diplomat, Kurt M. Campbell, in Tokyo this week, Washington is urging both sides to open a dialogue.

But the initial signs are not particularly promising. On Thursday, a former Japanese prime minister, Yukio Hatoyama, of the opposition Democratic Party, met in Beijing with Jia Qinglin, the chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference.

The setting looked conciliatory. China, however, used the occasion to make a point that was immediately rejected in Tokyo. Mr. Jia called for talks with Japan over the disputed islands, an idea that Japan has always said was unacceptable. Japanese governments have consistently maintained that the islands rightfully belong to Japan and that there is nothing to discuss.

[Phillip V]

The Economist says that "China and Japan are sliding towards war."

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21569757-armed-clashes-over-trivial-specks-east-china-sea-loom-closer-drums-war

[Neil]

Japan really needs to get their nuclear program going.

[CountDeMoney]

The Economist says that "China and Japan are sliding towards war."

About time the JSDF has the opportunity to finally showcase its badassedness, and punch that PLAN paper tiger in its little pug face.

[Razgovory]

If they fight can we stand aside?

[Admiral Yi]

If they fight can we stand aside?

Sure.  Treaties are just words on paper.

[The Brain]

If they fight can we stand aside?

I think so, but we should definitely have a thread on the war.

[Jacob]

Not very encouraging

[Crazy_Ivan80]

is it this time again?

[Razgovory]

If they fight can we stand aside?

Sure.  Treaties are just words on paper.

Is there treaty that says we must protect Japanese claims on coral reefs in the middle of nowhere?

[Admiral Yi]

Is there treaty that says we must protect Japanese claims on coral reefs in the middle of nowhere?

I expect there is not a treaty with that exact wording.

[Tamas]

What's that shit about Obama saying "plz don't come here okthxbye" to the Japanese PM? Is the US really THAT much in China's pocket?

[Razgovory]

Seems we are dedicated to protecting this uninhabited rock.  Taiwan also claims it, but I guess screw them.

[CountDeMoney]

Not very encouraging

Where's your ZOMG BUT TEH PRC IS REFOMRING now, Dances With Mandarins?

[Razgovory]

Oh it's not like they are going to do anything.  It's just Asiatic dick waving.