Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Radar

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Abe cites Thatcher reflections on Falklands war

(Reuters) - Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, whose country is embroiled in a row with China over tiny islands, on Thursday quoted former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's reflections on the 1982 Falklands war with Argentina to stress the importance of the rule of law at sea.

"Our national interests have been immutable. They lie in making the seas, which are the foundation of our nation's existence, completely open, free and peaceful," Abe said in a wide-ranging policy speech to parliament in which he also urged Japan to seek to become "No.1" as an economic power.

Abe went on to quote a remark from Thatcher's memoirs, reflecting on the Falklands war, in which she said Britain was defending the fundamental principle that international law should prevail over the use of force.

The war over the remote South Atlantic archipelago began when Argentine troops landed on the Falkland islands on April 2, 1982, and ended 74 days later with their surrender. The conflict killed about 650 Argentine and 255 British troops.

Continuing in his own words, Abe said: "The rule of law at sea. I want to appeal to international society that in modern times changes to the status quo by the use of force will justify nothing."

Tokyo's ties with Beijing chilled sharply after the Japanese government last September bought the rocky islands in the East China Sea, which are controlled by Japan but also claimed by China, from a private owner, sparking violent protests in China.

A flare-up in tensions in the territorial row has raised fears of an unintended military incident near the islands, known as the Senkaku in Japan and the Diaoyu in China.

The United States says the islets fall under a U.S.-Japan security pact, but Washington is keen to avoid a clash in the economically vital region.

Japanese fighter jets scrambled again on Thursday after a Chinese twin-engine turboprop Y-12 aircraft came within about 100 km (62 miles) of what Tokyo considers its airspace over the islands, the defense ministry said. Three Chinese patrol ships briefly entered the disputed waters, the Japan Coast Guard said.

The hawkish Abe, who took office in December after his conservative party's big election win, reiterated in his speech that the islands are Japanese territory, and urged Beijing not to escalate tensions.

He added, however, that Sino-Japanese relations were vital for Japan and said his door was always open to dialogue.

China hit back, saying Beijing did not want to see a maritime incident but accused Japanese leaders of making provocative remarks "from time to time" and playing up the China threat to provoke a military confrontation.

"At the moment, Japan should regulate its own words and deeds, stop issuing erroneous statements, properly handle the Diaoyu islands and other issues, and take practical measures to create conditions for the improvement of bilateral relations," Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng told a news conference.

Abe stressed the importance of the U.S.-Japan security alliance days after his summit with President Barack Obama.

Calling the U.S. alliance the axis of Japan's diplomacy and security policies, Abe said: "It is only logical that, in the open oceans, the United States, which is the world's largest marine state, and Japan, Asia's largest maritime democracy, form a partnership, and to fortify this constantly is necessary."

Classic he said/she said piece (mostly just what Abe said) which parrots rhetoric but provides no context whatsoever as to what is happening, nor a clear picture of what is actually happening for that matter.
 

joshuatree

Captain
Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

Japanese fighter jets scrambled again on Thursday after a Chinese twin-engine turboprop Y-12 aircraft came within about 100 km (62 miles) of what Tokyo considers its airspace over the islands, the defense ministry said.

100 km (62 miles) from what Tokyo considers its airspace? 100 km (62 miles) away from Diaoyu puts it closer to China's or Taiwan's area. So now Chinese can't fly without Japan tripping? I think Chinese should start flying giant tin foil kites 100 km (62 miles) out. :p
 

vesicles

Colonel
Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

Yes, because that's exactly why they set up military bases at "doorsteps" of other countries, right? because they want NO involvement whatsoever in any regional conflicts.

As for the "american interest". I think you would have to define the term a little better. If by "american interest" you mean the interest of american people, then I totally agree that there is no such interest in provoking the conflict. But there was also no interest for american people in the Iraq War, in War in Afganistan, or any wars that US manage to involve itself in after WW2. So I am not sure the interest of american people is a good indication of whether US would start a war or not.

That's true. However, whether or not to enter a conflict will have to be passed in Congress. Do you think it's possible for the elected officials to tell their voters that their sons, fathers and husbands will be sent to war over a little uninhabited island in Asia? Iraq War and War in Afganistan could be justified because of terrorism and WMDs that had huge implications for American people. It's hard to spin anything out of a little uninhabited island in Asia that has absolutely nothing to do with Americans. This kind of war will have absolutely no chance of passing through Congress. Nor does the American govn't intend to do any spinning on the importance of Diaoyu island to itself. Every US politician questioned mentions that this is a matter between China and Japan. This is in stark contrast to the Iraq War, where the US drummed up the threat from day one. Thus, it is easy to conclude that the US does not intend to get involved. It's not even trying to gain domestic support for even a possibility of a conflict.
 

kwaigonegin

Colonel
Re: Abe cites Thatcher reflections on Falklands war

(Reuters) - Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, whose country is embroiled in a row with China over tiny islands, on Thursday quoted former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's reflections on the 1982 Falklands war with Argentina to stress the importance of the rule of law at sea.

"Our national interests have been immutable. They lie in making the seas, which are the foundation of our nation's existence, completely open, free and peaceful," Abe said in a wide-ranging policy speech to parliament in which he also urged Japan to seek to become "No.1" as an economic power.

Abe went on to quote a remark from Thatcher's memoirs, reflecting on the Falklands war, in which she said Britain was defending the fundamental principle that international law should prevail over the use of force.

The war over the remote South Atlantic archipelago began when Argentine troops landed on the Falkland islands on April 2, 1982, and ended 74 days later with their surrender. The conflict killed about 650 Argentine and 255 British troops.

Continuing in his own words, Abe said: "The rule of law at sea. I want to appeal to international society that in modern times changes to the status quo by the use of force will justify nothing."

Tokyo's ties with Beijing chilled sharply after the Japanese government last September bought the rocky islands in the East China Sea, which are controlled by Japan but also claimed by China, from a private owner, sparking violent protests in China.

A flare-up in tensions in the territorial row has raised fears of an unintended military incident near the islands, known as the Senkaku in Japan and the Diaoyu in China.

The United States says the islets fall under a U.S.-Japan security pact, but Washington is keen to avoid a clash in the economically vital region.

Japanese fighter jets scrambled again on Thursday after a Chinese twin-engine turboprop Y-12 aircraft came within about 100 km (62 miles) of what Tokyo considers its airspace over the islands, the defense ministry said. Three Chinese patrol ships briefly entered the disputed waters, the Japan Coast Guard said.

The hawkish Abe, who took office in December after his conservative party's big election win, reiterated in his speech that the islands are Japanese territory, and urged Beijing not to escalate tensions.

He added, however, that Sino-Japanese relations were vital for Japan and said his door was always open to dialogue.

China hit back, saying Beijing did not want to see a maritime incident but accused Japanese leaders of making provocative remarks "from time to time" and playing up the China threat to provoke a military confrontation.

"At the moment, Japan should regulate its own words and deeds, stop issuing erroneous statements, properly handle the Diaoyu islands and other issues, and take practical measures to create conditions for the improvement of bilateral relations," Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng told a news conference.

Abe stressed the importance of the U.S.-Japan security alliance days after his summit with President Barack Obama.

Calling the U.S. alliance the axis of Japan's diplomacy and security policies, Abe said: "It is only logical that, in the open oceans, the United States, which is the world's largest marine state, and Japan, Asia's largest maritime democracy, form a partnership, and to fortify this constantly is necessary."

I'm impartial to both sides but even I think comparing the Diaoyus to the Falklands is very ignorant of Abe. Biggest reason being there are actually a functioning population living in the Falklands who ARE British citizens and have been living there hundreds of years.

Last I check I don't believe there are thousands of Japanese citizens who has been living in the Diaoyu for hundreds of years.
 

solarz

Brigadier
Re: Abe cites Thatcher reflections on Falklands war

I'm impartial to both sides but even I think comparing the Diaoyus to the Falklands is very ignorant of Abe. Biggest reason being there are actually a functioning population living in the Falklands who ARE British citizens and have been living there hundreds of years.

Last I check I don't believe there are thousands of Japanese citizens who has been living in the Diaoyu for hundreds of years.

Actually, I suspect that Abe is making the comparison to imply that Japan would win against China in a military conflict over DYT. This is yet another signal (the other being the radar lock accusation) that Abe is actively trying to start a fight.

Look, I know some forumites scoff at comparisons between current events and WW2 China-Japan relations, but I would point out that institutions often have their own memory.

First, I would note that the current Japanese government is composed in large part by the descendants of those who were in power during WW2. Second, I would note that the current DYT crisis is the lowest point in Sino-Japanese relations since WW2.

I would posit that the current Japanese administration has no idea how to engage an assertive and, to their view, belligerent China. Therefore, they are falling back on "institutional memory", that is, the last time Japan had to engage China as a potential adversary.

And this is why I am starting to find Abe's comments and actions sinister. The radar lock accusation is ominously reminiscent of the "missing soldiers" pretext shortly before the Marco Polo Bridge incident. Add to that the comparison with the Falklands War, and it's starting to become obvious that Japan is trying to intimidate China, much as they had done, with much success, during WW2.

Unfortunately for them, the CCP is a vastly different breed from Chiang's Nationalists, and I think Abe is going to miscalculate very badly.
 
Last edited:

kwaigonegin

Colonel
Re: Abe cites Thatcher reflections on Falklands war

Actually, I suspect that Abe is making the comparison to imply that Japan would win against China in a military conflict over DYT. This is yet another signal (the other being the radar lock accusation) that Abe is actively trying to start a fight.

Look, I know some forumites scoff at comparisons between current events and WW2 China-Japan relations, but I would point out that institutions often have their own memory.

First, I would note that the current Japanese government is composed in large part by the descendants of those who were in power during WW2. Second, I would note that the current DYT crisis is the lowest point in Sino-Japanese relations since WW2.

I would posit that the current Japanese administration has no idea how to engage an assertive and, to their view, belligerent China. Therefore, they are falling back on "institutional memory", that is, the last time Japan had to engage China as a potential adversary.

And this is why I am starting to find Abe's comments and actions sinister. The radar lock accusation is ominously reminiscent of the "missing soldiers" pretext shortly before the Marco Polo Bridge incident. Add to that the comparison with the Falklands War, and it's starting to become obvious that Japan is trying to intimidate China, much as they had done, with much success, during WW2.

Unfortunately for them, the CCP is a vastly different breed from Chiang's Nationalists, and I think Abe is going to miscalculate very badly.

Abe is not as dumb as most people think.. he is doing exactly that not because he thinks Japan can win militarily by itself BUT he knows that if he keeps talking and complaning the world will be on his side. Perception is everything and he knows the perception of the US on China is not very good (independent of this issue). With the recent hacking incident, poisoned goods, jobs etc the average American Joe Public and Joe Politician is not exactly fond of China (I'm not debating right or wrong merely public perception).

I also think that to most of the world (certainly the US/Europe/Australia etc), China would be considered the 'bad' guy if it comes down to having to choose a side and Abe knows this full well and intends to fully exploit that sentiment to Japan's advantage.
 

solarz

Brigadier
Re: Abe cites Thatcher reflections on Falklands war

Abe is not as dumb as most people think.. he is doing exactly that not because he thinks Japan can win militarily by itself BUT he knows that if he keeps talking and complaning the world will be on his side. Perception is everything and he knows the perception of the US on China is not very good (independent of this issue). With the recent hacking incident, poisoned goods, jobs etc the average American Joe Public and Joe Politician is not exactly fond of China (I'm not debating right or wrong merely public perception).

I also think that to most of the world (certainly the US/Europe/Australia etc), China would be considered the 'bad' guy if it comes down to having to choose a side and Abe knows this full well and intends to fully exploit that sentiment to Japan's advantage.

Eh... considering that his solution to Japan's economic woes is to print more money, he doesn't exactly have stellar qualifications.

Frankly, it seems that no matter what China says and what BS Japan spouts, the US media will always twist it to make China look bad. However, as I mentioned before, the US is not the world. The other major players in the region: Russia, NK and SK, all have their own views, and I highly doubt they're sympathetic to Abe.

To put it bluntly, who cares what Mr. Joe Public thinks?
 

no_name

Colonel
Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

By flaming a Dokdo dispute concurrently with the current Diaoyu incident. I see nothing short of going retards with the current Japanese administration, especially with the current economic woe around the world.
 

ahadicow

Junior Member
Re: Abe cites Thatcher reflections on Falklands war

Eh... considering that his solution to Japan's economic woes is to print more money, he doesn't exactly have stellar qualifications.

Frankly, it seems that no matter what China says and what BS Japan spouts, the US media will always twist it to make China look bad. However, as I mentioned before, the US is not the world. The other major players in the region: Russia, NK and SK, all have their own views, and I highly doubt they're sympathetic to Abe.

To put it bluntly, who cares what Mr. Joe Public thinks?

You have some serious misconception about the power (un)balance vis-a-via american vs world. To put it bluntly after your example, if U.S. was to wage a war against the rest of the humanity, It is very unlikely it would lose. As to military action aginst international consensus, let me stop at "it won't be the first time for the U.S"
 
Re: Abe cites Thatcher reflections on Falklands war

Abe is not as dumb as most people think.. he is doing exactly that not because he thinks Japan can win militarily by itself BUT he knows that if he keeps talking and complaning the world will be on his side. Perception is everything and he knows the perception of the US on China is not very good (independent of this issue). With the recent hacking incident, poisoned goods, jobs etc the average American Joe Public and Joe Politician is not exactly fond of China (I'm not debating right or wrong merely public perception).

I also think that to most of the world (certainly the US/Europe/Australia etc), China would be considered the 'bad' guy if it comes down to having to choose a side and Abe knows this full well and intends to fully exploit that sentiment to Japan's advantage.

i find that very hard to agree to. abe is getting quite known as hawkish already, even as described so by the reuters.the thing about the japanese government is that they arent ever thought of as "innocent" or "good folks", but it's just that they rarely tend to cause much of a problem that people can choose to ignore them until that season's premier is their turn (consider how gaddafi wasnt really given even half a token of thought throughout these years until few years back that suddenly he was given the spotlight). and the western press never liked china, but that doesnt mean they cant add in another "troublemaking politican" to stir-fry this season's story twice as "fresh with an oriental spice in it." the public gotta be very bland to think they're "good guys", and given japan's prominent role in ww2 and pearl harbor, we'll be kidding ourselves if we are to think half the world today is that "unaware"

on the other hand, kgg, i think u're forgetting something very fundamental. all conflicts have 2 major figures to star and direct the theme. cold-war is between US+ NATO vs USSR. if u include china or CIS, we'll all know that PRC and CIS are just side players. for the vietnam war, it's between US and vietnam. any red proxy supports don't make them as key players, and for korean war, NK vs SK are the primary characters, while US, China..are MERELY major SUPPORTING characters. and of course, UN states like canada and communist support like USSR are almost not even a major concern. (hence why china cared so much to be recognized as a major player in ww2 and not "another ally")
with all that being said, coming back here, the same idea goes: major player would be japan vs china, and the themes are also revolved around the primary interests of both. sure, US has a defense treaty with japan, but given the american geopolitical positions and the "amount of stakes" invested in the region, US support and all results will ultimately be more of primary fruits for Japan. this is also why japan is so "dedicated" about this issue, while US isnt as "strong" about this crisis.

having established this recognition, we can now examine washington's attitudes and "devotions" so far.

for the US to buy Japan's story requires the entire congress(iunno why i typed congee the first time) to be twice as retarded as they are currently, and even the hawkish ones know that getting into a frontal fight with china with japan on their side is gonna stir more trouble than good. in case of a chinese defeat and curbing china into "a regional whimper", japanese sentiments might be boosted tremendously, and suddenly we will have a really serious issue with japanese being twice the anchor than before.. except by now they would be more independent oriented. and US support would definitely only end up reinforced something the US doesnt actually want. Japan would take this further establishment to stand independent, and US interests wont be important to japan at all anymore. and let's be honest. does US expect japan to be genuine for american interests? and does japan even look like the type to want to be a proxy?

of all these things, it's all of MacArthur and US fault for not rooting out the entire government in the post-war reconstruction of Japan, and now US is about to deal with a potential sore that can be a lot more dangerous than north korea. reason being? Japan is 20 times lot more skilled and have a much bigger hand in the international community than pyongyang had ever been.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top