History repeating itself

When 14 Chinese landed in Diaoyutai, a Chinese island, they were arrested by the Japanese coast guards. And Japan retaliated by allowing 14 Japanese to land at the island to plant the Japanese flags. And China is as helpless as before, like in the19th and early 20th centuries when Japan violated China proper. And what could China do? The old China govt protested vehemently. So did the old Chinese of yesteryears. That did not stop the Japanese from encroaching and seizing more and more concessions and land from China, including war damages.

The Chinese govt and the Chinese people today are protesting like their past govt and past Chinese over this recent incident. And the Japanese continue to violate Chinese territories and refused to return the islands they conquered from China. History is repeating itself all over again. Would the ending be the same, with the Chinese rubbing their backside and walk away, humiliated by the Little Japan?

Protests have broken up in many Chinese cities to boycott Japanese goods. No protest from Taiwan and the Chinese diaspora yet. It is acceptable for Sinkie Chinese not to join the PRC Chinese as the forefathers of Sinkie Chinese did not come from China, probably from the USA or UK. But how could Taiwan step aside and pretend that it has nothing to do with it? Didn’t it claimed to be the govt of China once, and didn’t it claim to own Diaoyu and the surrounding islands?

It would be quite different if Taiwan and the Chinese across the world boycotted Japanese products like they did during the Second World War. It would be better if the Koreans also join in the boycott. The result this time would then be very different. Though China is good enough to deal the Japanese a bloody nose, it is restraining itself for the time being. If the Japanese continue their foolishness, this time China should exact a replica of the 21 Demands from the Japanese, plus interests.
Would there be a worldwide boycott of Japanese goods by Chinese around the world? No need to count on Sinkieland.

Another way to deal with the Japanese farce is to let 40 fishing boats from China and Taiwan to sail to Diaoyu. China and Taiwan would then send a fleet of coast guard ships to prevent those in the fishing boats to land on Diaoyu, but land they would with the coast guard boats doing a big wayang. But they must approach fully armed and ready for battle with the Japanese coast guards.


Anonymous said...

China should just land troops on the island like the way they kicked out the Vietnamese

agongkia said...

Can I visit you to see whether you possess any Anonae product at home or are you driving a Made in China car?

Matilah_Singapura said...

Like I said. Talk is cheap. Please, will someone start shooting soon? I am waiting for the show to begin.

Got big HDTV?

Anonymous said...

The trick, buy everything from them till they are so comfortable, they produce more to sell and depend on them for their good life.

Then stop buying. Goods cannot sell, inventory built up, cannot pay workers, workers no jobs, cannot pay bills, good life suddenly stop.

US doing same to China. Keeps printing money. One day greenbacks worth nothing. China works for nothing but with a lot of worthless papers.

Anonymous said...

Washington tries to leverage island conflicts for 'balance'
Global Times | August 20, 2012 20:15
By Shen Dingli
Share on twitter Share on facebook Share on sinaweibo Share on google_plusone
More Sharing Services 0
E-mail [Click to print] Print

China's official claims to the islands in the South China Sea date from last century. In 1947, China promoted the 11 dashed lines of the South China Sea, later reduced to nine dashed lines.

There are several meanings of the dashed lines. First, they were not equal to the boundary of the territorial sea. According to international law at the time when the initial claim was made, a state's territorial sea extended up to 3 nautical miles from its baseline. The 11 dashed line means that all islands and islets on our side belong to China.

China has sovereignty over the territorial sea of the islands in the South China Sea. But the Chinese government didn't claim the ownership of other oceanic areas and materials on the seabed then.

In 1958, international law shifted to stating that a state's territorial sea extends up to 12 nautical miles from its coast. The Chinese government defined that China's territorial sea is delimited according to the baseline surrounding the Chinese mainland, Taiwan, Penghu, Jinmen, Mazu, and the islands of the South China Sea.

China signed the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1982. China thus has special and unprecedented rights and interests in the Chinese continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone.

At the same time, the waters which have been enclosed by the nine dashed line in the South China Sea overlap with other countries' continental shelf and exclusive economic zone. And conflicts inevitably rise due to competition around resources in this region.

But surrounding countries like Vietnam and the Philippines know clearly that all relevant neighboring countries have accepted or not objected to China's claim of sovereignty over all islands and islets in the South China Sea.

As a super power, the US should not pursue a biased position in the name of "taking no position." The right position is to ask Vietnam and the Philippines to go back to their traditional stances of not having any claim to the Nansha and Xisha islands, as well as Huangyan Island.

The US should also ask Vietnam to return to admitting China's sovereignty over these islands. Then the disputes over the South China Sea will soon disappear.

The US has shifted from its previous position, which didn't challenge China's claim, to the current demand for a multilateral and peaceful settlement of the disputes.

This is really intended to deprive China of the right to protect its island territories by any means necessary, after Vietnam failed to honor its commitments and used force to occupy some Chinese islands.

Nowadays, the Chinese government has clearly claimed sovereignty over the whole South China Sea. Our rights and interests of the South China Sea should include the territorial sea, continental shelf, exclusive economic zone, islands and islets in the South China Sea and surrounding waters.

The US is not a party to this dispute. The freedom of navigation to which the US attaches great attention touches on China's important national interest.

US investigations in China's exclusive economic zone have obviously damaged our national security. This is an illegitimate action which shows the selfishness of the US.

The author is director of the Center for American Studies in Fudan University. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn


Anonymous said...

'FIRM' principle needed

Chen I-Hsin, professor of the Graduate Institute of the Americas, Tamkong University
Chen Yixin
Chen I-Hsin

As a Taiwanese, I want to point out that both the Chinese mainland and Taiwan need to be guided by a principle of "FIRM" over the Diaoyu Islands issue.

"F" here represents flexibility, meaning that it requires great flexibility to defend the Diaoyu Islands. The mainland, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan can all have their own ways to defend the Diaoyu Islands.

"I" stands for the international environment. The US is behind the Japanese, so that our target is not solely Japan. Although China's navy is relatively strong, it is still incomparable to the US navy and cannot even guarantee a victory over Japan.

"R" calls for resolution. Since taking back the Diaoyu Islands will be a prolonged process, we will need to have long-term resolution, putting efforts in education, cultural and economic development.

The last "M" represents military strength, which is built upon a strong economy.

Each aspect of the "FIRM" principle should be ensured if we want to effectively defend the Diaoyu Islands. Consistent actions are needed, although there won't be a result soon.

In-depth studies priority

Li Jie, a researcher at the Naval Research Institute in the PLA navy
Li Jie
Li Jie

The Diaoyu Islands issue is very complicated. It is easy to roar with anger, but we should take a long view.

Only through in-depth study of the Diaoyu Islands issue can we effectively resolve the problem.

Under an overall strategy, we should know about concrete issues at every facet, including historical, legal, cultural and even military issues. Only through more thorough, meticulous and objective studies, can we better promote the addressing of the dispute.

Besides in-depth research, what we also need is to make concrete strategic plans and establish corresponding institutions. There are plural levels of the Diaoyu Islands issue. And we need specific organizations to deal with each of these levels.

Preparations from all dimensions are needed. In the long term, different government departments should enhance collaboration.

At present, the use of maritime force in law enforcement is increasing. We should strengthen the legal framework for this.

Government action can be the next step to resolve the Diaoyu Islands issue.

Eagles Eye

Anonymous said...

Experts' Views

Xu Sen'an, a senior researcher at the State Oceanic Administration

Some propose to separate economic issues from political ones when we view the Sino-Japanese relationship. I don't agree.

Economics serves politics. Facing Japan's provocation, we should exert pressure on it economically.

Under certain circumstances, we should bring up some historical issues again, such as Okinawa, originally the Ryukyu Islands that were affiliated with China historically and later occupied by Japan. Originally most of the indigenous people were Chinese, specifically the Gaoshan minority group from Taiwan.

Peng Guangqian, a military strategist at the PLA Academy of Military Sciences

The Diaoyu Islands issue, in its essence, is a wrangle between China and the US. The tensions over the islands are closely related to the US military and strategic pivot to Asia, which has been taken advantage of by some Japanese politicians, including Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara.

The Diaoyu Islands issue is also a strategic test by Washington of China.

In the future, will Japan focus more on dealing peacefully with Asia, or will it be a pawn for the US in this region? Japan is still hesitating about its self-positioning and future strategy.

Tang Chunfeng, a Japan expert and former official at the Chinese embassy in Tokyo

The Chinese media should play a bigger role. In order to mobilize Japanese public to support the government's move over the Diaoyu Islands, the Japanese media have started a propaganda campaign in a systematic, designed way.

In comparison, our media has done far from enough.

Li Wei, director of the Institute of Japanese Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

The publication work of our historical evidence over the Diaoyu Islands lags behind. According to my observations, neither researchers with the State Oceanic Administration nor scholars of modern history have published adequate related articles.

The Japanese have claimed the islands as their inherent territory, but they don't have enough evidence, and some of them oppose the claim. China has all the evidence, but we still have lots to do in exploring and using historical documents.


Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

It is so sad to read the views of these academics and so called experts. What defending Diaoyu? The islands have been taken from China and under Japanese ruled and occupation. It is about recovering them and administer them under China. You cannot defend an island that is already taken away from you.

The reality today is whether China is strong enough to take on the Chinese in a military confrontation, with the involvement of the Americans. One thing for sure, Japan can no longer run wild in China. The other military concern is whether China's anti ship missiles are effective enough to deny the American fleet from sailing into the East China Sea to engage in conflict. If China is capable of keeping them at 3000km aways, that the US factor is diminished and taking on Japan is a non issue, and with Korea, Taiwan and perhaps the Russians in the background, Japan is as good as cooked.

They may think they too have nuclear arsenal to respond to China, but this is a no win option. Any conventional conflict or military tension will sink the Japanese economy.

Anonymous said...

2:57AM Wednesday Aug 22, 2012

US war strategy 'targets China'

Former US Director of National Intelligence Admiral Dennis Blair has confirmed that China is a principal target of a major US war plan.

Former US Director of National Intelligence Admiral Dennis Blair has confirmed that China is a principal target of a major US war plan. Photo: JASON REED

THE American government might like to deny it, but Barack Obama's former intelligence chief has confirmed China is a principal target of a major US war plan.

Most worryingly the plan - known in Washington as Air-Sea Battle - is one that regional defence expert Professor Hugh White says is strategically flawed and risks escalating a US-China struggle to the level of nuclear strikes.

It is also a plan that is known to anger the Chinese military, and the confirmation will likely be viewed with displeasure in Beijing.

The confirmation was provided by Admiral Dennis Blair, an Asia expert who until 2010 was Mr Obama's director of national intelligence. Prior to that he commanded the US Pacific Command, which represents about a fifth of the US military machine. His answers were in response to questions posed by The Age about Air-Sea Battle, a Pentagon strategy designed to knock out an enemy's long-range surveillance radar and precision missiles, followed by a blistering air and sea assault.

When asked directly about Air-Sea Battle and whether it directly relates to China, Admiral Blair said: ''I'm not in the Pentagon any more, so I can't say [what] that [is] in particular, but it doesn't take any classified piece of information to let you know that countries like Iran and China … have taken advantage of technology in terms of submarines and missiles to be able to keep US maritime and air forces at distance.''

As a result, he said, it was the job of US military commanders to ''figure out ways that we can send our forces to conduct military operations despite these sorts of threats''.

It is widely understood that Iran would pose very little threat to a full-scale US military campaign, and Air-Sea Battle is unofficially acknowledged in Washington as the central tenet of US plans to deal with an aggressive and heavily armed China. ''I don't doubt for a moment … that the real target of the Air-Sea Battle is China,'' said Professor White, the author of a book on the US-China relationship, The China Choice.

Professor White is also a strong critic of Air-Sea Battle, which he says has three fundamental problems. ''Firstly, I don't think it will work; second, even it it does work operationally it won't achieve its strategic aims; and thirdly it runs a very strong sense of escalating to a nuclear war.''

Professor White believes the concept is also a 20th-century concept that is being repackaged for a 21st-century enemy.

''The US has always done sea control in the Pacific, but what's changed? The enemy has changed. And he has a boat, as they say,'' Professor White said.

Admiral Blair also believes it is an old plan repackaged.

'The concept is nothing new, in typical American fashion we often pour the old wine into new bottles with fancy new labels,'' he told The Age.

''But the navy and air force co-operating to be able to get to our allies that are within range of Chinese missiles is nothing new, and most Americans expect that to be their job.''


Anonymous said...

Report from Globaltimes.

US Moves in E. Aisa

1.Japan, US conduct joint drills near Diaoyu Islands
Japan and the US have decided to intensify military and defense cooperation at a very sensitive time for the region. The decision was first reported on in the Japanese newspaper Sankei Shimbun. The news comes as relations between China and Japan have been severely strained due to the territory dispute over Diaoyu Islands.

2.S. Korea, US launch joint military drill
South Korean and US militaries have begun an annual joint exercise to test defenses against potential security threats.

3. Private deals between US, Japan concerning Diaoyu Islands "invalid": Chinese FM
According to Japan's Kyodo News Agency, a senior US State Department official said on July 9 that the Diaoyu Islands (referred to as the Senkaku Islands in Japan) fall within the scope of Article 5 of the US-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security, as the Senkaku Islands have been under the administrative control of the government of Japan since they were returned as part of the reversion of Okinawa in 1972.

4. US-Japanese strategies put region at risk
At the end of April, the US and Japan reached a new agreement on the joint use of the US military bases in the Pacific region. According to media reports, the Japanese Self-Defense Forces are expected to station forces alongside US troops in the Philippines. Once Manila approves, Japan, the US and the Philippines will conduct specific military training together in Philippine bases.

5. Japan’s tough Diaoyu position aimed at US
In December 2011, Japan and the US jointly held a military drill. Such military drills have been practiced for more than two decades, but this time the scale was unprecedented.

The reason was exactly the incident that happened in September. Japan and the US assumed that the waters near the Diaoyu Islands might be threatened by Chinese military forces, although in ordinary people's eyes a fishing boat barely represents a nation.