QuoteJapan infuriates China by agreeing to buy disputed isles
(Reuters) - Japan has agreed to buy a group of islands disputed with China from their private owners, a government official said on Monday, prompting an angry rebuke from China a day after Chinese President Hu Jintao warned against such an "illegal" move.
Japan aimed to nationalize the uninhabited islands in the East China Sea as soon as possible to control them in a peaceful and stable manner, Chief Cabinet Secretary Osamu Fujimura said.
The islands, called Senkaku in Japan and Diaoyu in China, are near rich fishing grounds and potentially huge maritime gas fields and have been at the heart of long-running territorial disputes between the world's second and third-largest economies.
Tension flared anew last month when Japan detained a group of Chinese activists who landed on the islands. But the row may now be having an economic impact, intensifying from merely an exchange of rhetoric, with a Chinese official saying Japanese car sales may have been hit in the world's biggest auto market.
"This is just the ownership of land, which is part of Japan's territory, moving from one (private) owner to the state, and should not cause any problem with other countries," Fujimura said.
"Having said that, we don't want the Senkaku issue to affect overall Sino-Japanese relations. Because it is important to avoid misunderstanding and unforeseen development, we have been closely communicating with China through diplomatic channels to this day."
But China was firm in its opposition to what it saw as a "political trend".
"This is a serious infringement of China's sovereignty and has seriously hurt the feelings of 1.3 billion Chinese..." the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. "The Chinese government and people express their resolute opposition and protest strongly."
Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi called in Japanese Ambassador Uichiro Niwa to lodge a strong protest, while state-run Xinhua news agency cited Premier Wen Jiabao as saying China would "never yield an inch" of territory.
JAPANESE CAR SALES HIT
Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda initially floated the idea of nationalizing the islands in July to fend off the Governor of Tokyo, Shintaro Ishihara, a harsh critic of China, and his own plan to buy the islands which could have had even more severe diplomatic repercussion.
Fujimura did not disclose the purchase price, but Japanese media said last week the government was set to pay 2.05 billion yen ($26.26 million).
Relations between the Asian powers, plagued by Japan's wartime occupation of parts of China and present rivalry over regional clout, have been difficult for years. But economic ties are stronger than ever and both countries are believed to want to keep the feud from spiraling out of control.
However the islands row appears to have hit sales of Japanese cars.
Dong Yang, secretary general of the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers, said Japanese car sales in China had slowed in August and he believes it was related to the dispute.
Nissan's chief operating officer, Toshiyuki Shiga, said last week that the row was having "some impact" on sales of Japanese cars as manufacturers were having difficulty in holding big, outdoor sales promotion campaigns.
President Hu warned Japan against buying the islands on Sunday.
"It is illegal and invalid for Japan to buy the islands via any means. China firmly opposes it," China's CCTV quoted Hu as telling saying Noda on the sidelines of an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Vladivostok.
"China will unswervingly safeguard its sovereignty. Japan must realize the severity of the situation and not make a wrong decision." ($1 = 78 yen)
China has a lot of island disputes with different countries (and so does Japan with its neighbours), but the dispute with Japan is on a totally different level with the rest. The Chinese population doesn't give too much attention to South China Sea. I dare say that the majority will have no problem using whatever means necessary in the quarrel with Japan, however. Beijing actually tries its best to play the whole thing down, but I am afraid that their hands will be forced, otherwise it will lose whatever credibility it has left in the eyes of the population.
Beijing isn't playing it down by sending two warships. That's not playing it down. Hope they fucking run into each other, and the JMSDF has to fish their punk asses out of the drink.
The Japanese just stuck it to your totalitarian student-killing overlords with a dose of their own medicine: money.
Quote from: Monoriu on September 13, 2012, 06:24:19 AM
otherwise it will lose whatever credibility it has left in the eyes of the population.
:huh:
Seems the PRC would have more credibility with their population than just about any other government in the world, between the massive economic growth and growth in international prestige and the firm establishment of order at home.
You know, the Chinese would have more credibility if they lay claim to every fucking island in the South China Sea. I'm surprised they've had the restraint not to claim the Philippines.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 13, 2012, 06:54:59 AM
You know, the Chinese would have more credibility if they lay claim to every fucking island in the South China Sea. I'm surprised they've had the restraint not to claim the Philippines.
Give them time. Give them time. Since the PRC's hackocracy seems intent on claiming every piece of dirt where a Chinese person rented a hotel room I'm sure they'll get around to it.
Quote from: Monoriu on September 13, 2012, 06:24:19 AM
China has a lot of island disputes with different countries (and so does Japan with its neighbours), but the dispute with Japan is on a totally different level with the rest. The Chinese population doesn't give too much attention to South China Sea. I dare say that the majority will have no problem using whatever means necessary in the quarrel with Japan, however. Beijing actually tries its best to play the whole thing down, but I am afraid that their hands will be forced, otherwise it will lose whatever credibility it has left in the eyes of the population.
Beijing is losing credibility in the eyes of the population? Why? You make them sound like some Latin American tin pot dictator invading the Falklands.
Quote from: Valmy on September 13, 2012, 08:02:51 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on September 13, 2012, 06:24:19 AM
China has a lot of island disputes with different countries (and so does Japan with its neighbours), but the dispute with Japan is on a totally different level with the rest. The Chinese population doesn't give too much attention to South China Sea. I dare say that the majority will have no problem using whatever means necessary in the quarrel with Japan, however. Beijing actually tries its best to play the whole thing down, but I am afraid that their hands will be forced, otherwise it will lose whatever credibility it has left in the eyes of the population.
Beijing is losing credibility in the eyes of the population? Why? You make them sound like some Latin American tin pot dictator invading the Falklands.
I think that's an apt comparison, actually. Certainly they have as much democratic legitimacy as Galtieri did.
I can't see buying the islands as affecting sovereignty at all. If the Canadian government buys territory in Alaska from its current private owners, it does not thereby become part of Canada unless the current sovereign says it does.
The Chinese get all butthurt over everything and anything the Japanese do.
Especially right now, when it makes a convenient outlet for popular rage.
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on September 13, 2012, 10:44:40 AM
The Chinese get all butthurt over everything and anything the Japanese do.
Especially right now, when it makes a convenient outlet for popular rage.
They need to storm some consulates.
If China does decide to enforce claims militarily, the US will be treaty-bound to intervene on Japan's behalf.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 13, 2012, 02:04:48 PM
If China does decide to enforce claims militarily, the US will be treaty-bound to intervene on Japan's behalf.
I hope they all do what they can to avoid that.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 13, 2012, 02:04:48 PM
If China does decide to enforce claims militarily, the US will be treaty-bound to intervene on Japan's behalf.
So WWIII will start over some uninhabited Islands? Well I suppose that is as good of a reason as a dead Habsburg.
Quote from: Valmy on September 13, 2012, 04:33:12 PM
Well I suppose that is as good of a reason as a dead Habsburg.
Amen.
It really is ridiculous the way China gets away with its screaming "MINE!" and claiming every random rock near itself.
In this case it is especially suspect that they started their moaning shortly after it was discovered that there may be oil reserves in the area. :hmm:
Props to Japan for taking the high road and not getting as ridiculous about it as the Koreans have with the liancourts....but then unlike Korea the Japanese aren't dealing with someone as reasonable as the Japanese....
Did the Chinamen ever get the Taiwan issue settled?
Quote from: Valmy on September 13, 2012, 04:33:12 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 13, 2012, 02:04:48 PM
If China does decide to enforce claims militarily, the US will be treaty-bound to intervene on Japan's behalf.
So WWIII will start over some uninhabited Islands? Well I suppose that is as good of a reason as a dead Habsburg.
Habsy is dead!?! :o
He meant Habbaku.
Quote from: Tyr on September 13, 2012, 06:54:13 PM
It really is ridiculous the way China gets away with its screaming "MINE!" and claiming every random rock near itself.
In this case it is especially suspect that they started their moaning shortly after it was discovered that there may be oil reserves in the area. :hmm:
Props to Japan for taking the high road and not getting as ridiculous about it as the Koreans have with the liancourts....but then unlike Korea the Japanese aren't dealing with someone as reasonable as the Japanese....
Well in this case, as I understand it, the issue wasn't causing any tension - being basically ignored - until the mayor of Tokyo (a right wing nationalist) decided to publicly collect money to "buy" the island from whom he said was the private owner, saying that would settle the ownership of the island as being clearly Japanese; then the federal government of Japan stepped in and decided that they would buy the island and proclaim it Japanese.
I'm not sure how that can be construed as taking the high road - but I suppose you're in Japan, so the news are reported differently there. What's the version of events you're hearing?
Quote from: 11B4V on September 13, 2012, 08:46:09 PM
Did the Chinamen ever get the Taiwan issue settled?
The Taiwanese have been sending boats to the area as well, to reinforce
their claim to the islands against the Japanese if I'm not mistaken.
A lot of HK people want to go to the disputed islands to reinforce China's claim. The HK government (presumably under orders from Beijing) have been using different excuses and bureaucratic red tape to stop them.
Quote from: Jacob on September 14, 2012, 12:02:44 AM
Well in this case, as I understand it, the issue wasn't causing any tension - being basically ignored - until the mayor of Tokyo (a right wing nationalist) decided to publicly collect money to "buy" the island from whom he said was the private owner, saying that would settle the ownership of the island as being clearly Japanese; then the federal government of Japan stepped in and decided that they would buy the island and proclaim it Japanese.
I'm not sure how that can be construed as taking the high road - but I suppose you're in Japan, so the news are reported differently there. What's the version of events you're hearing?
What started it was the Chinese have been increasingly aggravating about the islands in recent years. IIRC it was the incident with the fishing boat ramming the coast guard ship which really made this a major issue.
That then pushed the nationalist Tokyo leader to propose his plan to develop the islands, talk about that was going on for a long while, it was only quite recently though that the federal government stepped in to buy them, preserve the status quo and leave them fallow so as not to piss off the Chicoms.
Japan is taking the high road in trying to talk about things peacefully, not doing anything with the islands; in fact actively stopping anyone from developing them, not landing soldiers there, not making a big deal of the issue domestically, etc...
Contrast with Korea and the Liancourt Rocks which they've concreted over and hyper developed well beyond what such small rocks rationally deserve and they love making a huge nationalist deal about them being beautiful and inherantly Korean islands. Plus they completely refuse to send the issue to the international court to settle.
And there's no "Buy" about it. The private owner was the private owner. His family have owned them since the 40s iirc. The government has actually been renting them off him for some years
Quote
The Taiwanese have been sending boats to the area as well, to reinforce their claim to the islands against the Japanese if I'm not mistaken.
Taiwan though I think is just doing it because it has to. Were their situation one of a normal country I think they'd be willing to talk about it.
The PRC claims the islands as part of Taiwan so Taiwan has to moan about them a little or else the PRCs claim to Taiwan becomes a bit stronger.
Personally I am all for international arbitration in cases of uninhabited islands. Let an impartial expert committee look at the evidence from both sides, make a ruling, and be done with it. But it is not going to happen. I am not sure if a genuine "impartial" committee can be set up without political influence or vote-buying. An even bigger problem is that whichever side currently controls the island won't agree. S. Korea controls the disputed islands and they won't agree to Japan's proposal to send the case to an international court. Japan controls the islands in the dispute with China and it won't agree to do the same.
Those kinds of commissions worked in the 19th century, pretty sad if people have regressed to the point that they can't work now.
LOL Has nothing to do with the islands, but funny nonetheless.
QuoteChina: Romney's rich because of us
Xinhua is not happy with Mitt Romney.
The official Chinese news agency, in an English-language commentary, attacked the GOP presidential nominee for his proposal to label China a currency manipulator.
"If these mud-slinging tactics were to become U.S. government policies, a trade war would be very likely to break out between the world's top two economies, which would be catastrophic enough to both sides and the already groaning global economy," Xinhua's Liu Chang writes. "For generations, China-bashing has been a cancer in U.S. electoral politics, seriously plaguing the relations between the two countries."
The commentary also takes a shot at Romney's wealth, declaring it "rather ironic that a considerable portion of this China-battering politician's wealth was actually obtained by doing business with Chinese companies before he entered politics."
China insists the exchange rate for the yuan is set by market forces, while the Treasury Department has consistently said the yuan is undervalued. A weaker yuan makes Chinese goods cheaper in the United States, contributing to the American trade deficit with China. Labeling China a currency manipulator could potentially lead to trade sanctions against the world's second-largest economy.
Rather than attacking China, Xinhua suggests the United States "[t]o cure its economic ailments, the United States needs to put its own fiscal house back in order, substantially slash its tremendous military expenditure, and optimize its economic structure."
QuoteS. Korea controls the disputed islands and they won't agree to Japan's proposal to send the case to an international court. Japan controls the islands in the dispute with China and it won't agree to do the same.
I'm pretty sure Japan would agree with the Senkakus if it came right down to it. They know they're in the right. China however knows its just making a land grab so probally wouldn't. It would also set a prescedent for their even crazier South China sea claims.
Certainly Britain tried many times to get the Falklands issue sorted out by the UN but Argentina refused.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 14, 2012, 06:30:21 AM
LOL Has nothing to do with the islands, but funny nonetheless.
QuoteChina: Romney's rich because of us
Xinhua is not happy with Mitt Romney.
The official Chinese news agency, in an English-language commentary, attacked the GOP presidential nominee for his proposal to label China a currency manipulator.
"If these mud-slinging tactics were to become U.S. government policies, a trade war would be very likely to break out between the world's top two economies, which would be catastrophic enough to both sides and the already groaning global economy," Xinhua's Liu Chang writes. "For generations, China-bashing has been a cancer in U.S. electoral politics, seriously plaguing the relations between the two countries."
The commentary also takes a shot at Romney's wealth, declaring it "rather ironic that a considerable portion of this China-battering politician's wealth was actually obtained by doing business with Chinese companies before he entered politics."
China insists the exchange rate for the yuan is set by market forces, while the Treasury Department has consistently said the yuan is undervalued. A weaker yuan makes Chinese goods cheaper in the United States, contributing to the American trade deficit with China. Labeling China a currency manipulator could potentially lead to trade sanctions against the world's second-largest economy.
Rather than attacking China, Xinhua suggests the United States "[t]o cure its economic ailments, the United States needs to put its own fiscal house back in order, substantially slash its tremendous military expenditure, and optimize its economic structure."
:lol: As threadjacks go, that's golden. Good luck disavowing that one, Mittens. ;)
I bet China would indeed like it if we slashed our military expenditure.
Quote from: garbon on September 14, 2012, 11:59:40 AM
I bet China would indeed like it if we slashed our military expenditure.
No kidding. [chicomjedi]THESE ARENT THE AIRCRAFT CARRIERS YOU WANT TO BUILD /chicomjedi]
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/china-japan-heading-towards-war-says-us-defence-secretary-leon-panetta/story-e6frg6so-1226475484583
Panetta's comments here were very lukewarm and unreassuring- he acts as if it isn't clear who is doing the provocations and warmongering, and as if one was not our firm all in the region and the other our strategic enemy. This sort of behaviour strikes me as being encouraging to China.
1,000 Chinese fishing boats are heading for the islands, daring the Japanese to arrest them.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20120917x1.html (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20120917x1.html)
They should arrest them.
Quote from: Lettow77 on September 17, 2012, 08:57:56 AM
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/china-japan-heading-towards-war-says-us-defence-secretary-leon-panetta/story-e6frg6so-1226475484583
Panetta's comments here were very lukewarm and unreassuring- he acts as if it isn't clear who is doing the provocations and warmongering, and as if one was not our firm all in the region and the other our strategic enemy. This sort of behaviour strikes me as being encouraging to China.
What's this "our" stuff all of a sudden?
Quote from: Valmy on September 13, 2012, 04:33:12 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 13, 2012, 02:04:48 PM
If China does decide to enforce claims militarily, the US will be treaty-bound to intervene on Japan's behalf.
So WWIII will start over some uninhabited Islands? Well I suppose that is as good of a reason as a dead Habsburg.
Would that qualify as a world war, though, or would you expect other countries to join in too?
Quote from: Lettow77 on September 17, 2012, 08:57:56 AMPanetta's comments here were very lukewarm and unreassuring- he acts as if it isn't clear who is doing the provocations and warmongering, and as if one was not our firm allnazi-loving competitor in the region and the other our strategic enemybiggest creditor. This sort of behaviour strikes me as being encouraging to China.
FYPFY.
Quote from: Martinus on September 17, 2012, 09:31:52 AM
Quote from: Valmy on September 13, 2012, 04:33:12 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 13, 2012, 02:04:48 PM
If China does decide to enforce claims militarily, the US will be treaty-bound to intervene on Japan's behalf.
So WWIII will start over some uninhabited Islands? Well I suppose that is as good of a reason as a dead Habsburg.
Would that qualify as a world war, though, or would you expect other countries to join in too?
If it goes Japan - USA then it goes USA - NATO in a matter of seconds really.
Quote from: Grey Fox on September 17, 2012, 09:33:47 AM
Quote from: Martinus on September 17, 2012, 09:31:52 AM
Quote from: Valmy on September 13, 2012, 04:33:12 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 13, 2012, 02:04:48 PM
If China does decide to enforce claims militarily, the US will be treaty-bound to intervene on Japan's behalf.
So WWIII will start over some uninhabited Islands? Well I suppose that is as good of a reason as a dead Habsburg.
Would that qualify as a world war, though, or would you expect other countries to join in too?
If it goes Japan - USA then it goes USA - NATO in a matter of seconds really.
How come? A conflict in the Pacific wouldn't constitute a casus foederis for NATO and I find it hard to believe Europeans would jump so eagerly on a prospect of a war with one of their biggest trading partners.
Quote from: Martinus on September 17, 2012, 09:31:52 AM
Would that qualify as a world war, though, or would you expect other countries to join in too?
It is almost a zen question you pose...Only a few countries enter a war, but the nuclear exchanges irradiate everyone and humanity is destroyed. Should that be considered a world war?
Quote from: Martinus on September 17, 2012, 09:31:52 AM
Quote from: Valmy on September 13, 2012, 04:33:12 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on September 13, 2012, 02:04:48 PM
If China does decide to enforce claims militarily, the US will be treaty-bound to intervene on Japan's behalf.
So WWIII will start over some uninhabited Islands? Well I suppose that is as good of a reason as a dead Habsburg.
Would that qualify as a world war, though, or would you expect other countries to join in too?
US & Japan vs. China (at minimum) would have the world's three largest economies fighting it out. By themselves I don't think it would qualify as a world war, but it could easily spread.
Quote from: Martinus on September 17, 2012, 09:35:05 AM
How come? A conflict in the Pacific wouldn't constitute a casus foederis for NATO and I find it hard to believe Europeans would jump so eagerly on a prospect of a war with one of their biggest trading partners.
I don't think the US would be so keen on such a war either.
Quote from: Martinus on September 17, 2012, 09:33:26 AM
Quote from: Lettow77 on September 17, 2012, 08:57:56 AMPanetta's comments here were very lukewarm and unreassuring- he acts as if it isn't clear who is doing the provocations and warmongering, and as if one was not our firm allnazi-loving competitor in the region and the other our strategic enemybiggest creditor. This sort of behaviour strikes me as being encouraging to China.
FYPFY.
Incorrect. China is not the US' biggest creditor.
Quote from: Grey Fox on September 17, 2012, 09:33:47 AM
If it goes Japan - USA then it goes USA - NATO in a matter of seconds really.
Nah. NATO not necessary. The defense pact is between the US and Japan. Euroweenies have no dog in the fight.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 17, 2012, 09:50:52 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on September 17, 2012, 09:33:47 AM
If it goes Japan - USA then it goes USA - NATO in a matter of seconds really.
Nah. NATO not necessary. The defense pact is between the US and Japan. Euroweenies have no dog in the fight.
Nor a fighting spirit or military.
All that's good until a run away balloon bombs US Soil. You won't use Clause #5 then?