East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Those who wants a war tomorrow to solve all of their perceived problems.

I.E. Tisk tisk.. Hawks don't have a party affiliation other then to the war party. Plenty of leftist liberals have started wars. Really ugly ones to.

 

[i.e.]

And yet port some of the same could be said about china, with Xi spouting Maoist rhetoric, and the growing military. ECT... ECT... Really it gets us nowhere. The argument to try and warn of the evil of Japan is subjective, and in this case off topic.

Xi is not spouting Maoist Rhetoric. not by a long stretch. he is one of the most economic liberal that occupies that seat in Zhongnanhai.

Japan and Japanese is not evil. it is just their entire system disallow foresight to see through the issue at hand, (the rocks vs future relation with China, the urge to contain China vs manage its future relation with it.) and and flexibility to act up on it.

Its system will do things even its individual actors in it knows that it is going to be bad later.

China on the other hand, although its system is nominally authoritarian in nature, does allow dissent with in the system to present a different view and alter the prevailing group think. It simple has a cultural tradition for dissent...

 

[i.e.]

I.E. Tisk tisk.. Hawks don't have a party affiliation other then to the war party. Plenty of leftist liberals have started wars. Really ugly ones to.

I am aware of the liberal-hawks, I put them in the same bin.

 

[i.e.]

Going back to the ADIZ, so far I don't think China's quite lost anything that it couldn't avoid losing with the announcement of the ADIZ. It's obviously annoyed South Korea because it covers Ieodo/Suyan, but IMO had it covered Diaoyu/Senkaku but not Ieodo/Suyan, that would have implicitly given up their claim on Ieodo/Suyan.

A submerged rock does not have air rights.

and as far as conflicting ADIZ goes,
China apparently informed SK couple of days before the public ADIZ announcement. and said to SK that the overlapping can be solved via cordial negotiations and SK said the same back.

Looking at the tiny sliver of overlapping between KADIZ and CADIZ I suspect that that tiny overlap is done on purpose... there is really no need for that overlap. it is a red herring thrown to Japan, to serve these purposes 1) show that SK is nominally on the same side as US-Japan Alliance 2) SK wants to take a lead and show that there is a way to negotiate with China over ADIZ, which makes Japan look like it is acting like a unreasonable and hysterical fool, which it is.

 

[Blackstone]

US is not the peace maker in this case.

if it were really a peacemaker, first it would gone back and public and say that it made a mistake in transferring the administration of rocks back to Japan. Second. would not encourage japan by saying US-Japan Alliance covers a territory Japan has clearly has a dispute on, while at same time saying that it is neutral in this dispute. If you lend your buddy the a gun and promise to come to his aid if he is in trouble, while same time saying you are not in his argument with his neighbor, is, by all stretch of common sense, a bald face lie. And it should called so, and subsequently lose all of its moral high ground in this case.

US performed great statecraft to 1) look good for domestic US audience, 2) reassure Japan so they don't overreact, and 3) signal to China that both great powers need to keep tight control over the situation so it doesn't explode. The US was successful in all three items (our government may be incompetent at times, but our State Department is first rate).

As for US apologizing over transfer of admin to Japan, GET REAL! No great power would do that.

Apeace maker does not mean to intimate one side while give the other side a blank check grantee. a good peacemaker would absolve itself of all interest in the dispute (in which clearly US in this case is not the case because preserving a strong japan vs a weak china is clearly in US interest, hence all the bullshchit about Preserving the Status Quo, which a code word for the current absolute Supreme dominance of Western Pacfic air and sea space by the US-Japan Military Alliance ), a TRUE peace maker would go back to the merit of the issue, and judge and act base on the merit and merit alone not politics. Clearly US is not in the condition to do so. Simply the echos of NSC-68 and Dean G. Acheson's famous speech at the National Press Club on 12 January 1950, which was seen as putting Taiwan and South Korea outside of US defensive parameter, would prohibited US from even a slightest waiver in its position less it is seen as analogous to the historic "Appeasement"... So sadly, Chinese aspirations would suffer instead, and merely a delaying of inevitable would ensure. simply put it, US-Japan is writing checks its grandkids would not be able to cash...

Your rants are irrational and doesn't reflect the real world. The US has a defense treaty with our vassal state, Japan, and we'll defend it if any unnamed country or countries attack it without provocation.

The Core of the problem is that, it is trying to preserve its own disproportionate interest vis-a-via a power in Asia by preserving its alliance with a country governed by the most notorious nationalistic government since 1945. by doing so I found it very hard to convince history that It is doing the right thing. It has let go of all but thinnest veils of universal values covering a grotesque body of naked national interest and may be even racial hatred.

Japan was Asia's most notorious and nationalistic nation before 1945, but not after America beat the stuffing out of it. There's some resurgence of nationalism in Japan today, but it pales in comparison to China.

No question Japan is one of the most racist country in the world, worse than even the Russians.

I would find it surprising that all the media lynching of china on this issue lately is not with out an active spin by the US government or interest groups in and around it.

Agreed on various interest groups dong all they could to make China look bad, but not the US government, because the US has nothing to gain by worsening Sino-Japanese relations, and everything to lose.

 

[Engineer]

Re: US incursion in new Chinese ADIZ: no reaction from China

lol, I can't remember Japanese sending their fishing boats to ram Chinese CG ships

Nice try with

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, but whether Japan has used a fishing boat or any other type of ship to ram Chinese vessel is irrelevant to what I have said. Essentially, what I said is that China is copying American and Japanese actions. Since these actions being copied are attempts to shoehorn China from Pacific, Chinese actions naturally look like attempts to shoehorn others from areas considered to be Chinese privilege interests.

And for your information, Japanese vessel rammed unarmed fishing boats from China (and Taiwan), not the other way around.

So far it only becomes more and more isolated on Pacific. There were no firends there and surely won't be in the near future.

No. It is not more and more isolated for China. China was isolated to begin with, and what has been isolated already cannot be isolated further.

US, Japan and Republic of Korea already showed that they don't care whether there is Chinese ADIZ or not.

It is actually the opposite. All those countries you have mentioned are showing that they very much care, given the fact they all sent in aircraft to try out China's new ADIZ. These countries care very much care precisely because China is powerful enough to affect others activities in the ADIZ if China chooses to do so.

Showing off isn't a strategy. It's PR stunt. If ROK will extend it's ADIZ over Ieodo this will mean a 'major victory for South Korea'?

What ROK would do is entirely irrelevant. By creating an ADIZ, China will now be able to feed Japan and US their own medicines. Other countries are welcome to challenge China's ADIZ, as that will give China a justification to challenge theirs. That's the victory China has achieved here.

Yeah, 2000 feet above the sea. Indeed a new, new level!

LMAO! An ADIZ is not limited only to 2000 feet above the sea.

 

[chuck731]

Guys, just leave the sovereignty issue alone. No one is going to "win" the discussion, and I think everyone here has set views that aren't going to be shifted.

Jeff & co have shown a lot of tolerance, so let's get this thread back on topic.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The fact that the US advised its own airlines to follow Chinese ADIZ rules could not be interpreted as tacit acknowledgement of legitimacy of the ADIZ. Rather, it is a necessary step to absolve the US government of any legal or moral complicity and liability in the unlikely even of a commercial airliner being lost or shot down in the said ADIZ with loss of life after failing to follow Chinese rules.

I don't think the US would do anything else with even if she was in the middle of rallying every nearby regional power to fly their military aircraft in defiance Chinese ADIZ tomorrow, which at this moment I am not sure the US is not actually doing.

The fact that Japanese government asked its own civilian airliner not to comply with Chinese ADIZ should be seen as an utterly reprehensible act, totally irresponsible with lives at best, cravenly using flying public as potential human shields at worst, that is in effect holding flying civilians of Japanese and foreign nationality hostage to score political points with Japanese domestic audience and open up maneuvering room for japan in a game of checkers against china.

One does not tell civilians to walk into some place where some one else has declared a weapon free zone, regardless of whether you think the weapon free has any legitimacy at all.

If china wanted to score points with western public opinion, china should have harped on the fact that prime minister of Japan is a loose cannon who would put the lives of westerners flying on Japanese aireline in danger just to make a point to china. But chinese government probably doesn't have the sort of sensitivity to lives and legal obligation needed to detect this opportunity.

In Beijing's place most major western government would have immediately detected the true nature of Abe's misstep in asking civilian airliners to no comply with Chinese rules, and would have capitalized on this mistake to pillory Abe as a loose cannon with a cavalier attitude towards civilian lives.

 

[Blackstone]

Xi is not spouting Maoist Rhetoric. not by a long stretch. he is one of the most economic liberal that occupies that seat in Zhongnanhai.

Good point on Xi Jinping as economic/market reformist.

Japan and Japanese is not evil. it is just their entire system disallow foresight to see through the issue at hand, (the rocks vs future relation with China, the urge to contain China vs manage its future relation with it.) and and flexibility to act up on it.

Its system will do things even its individual actors in it knows that it is going to be bad later.

More good points.

China on the other hand, although its system is nominally authoritarian in nature, does allow dissent with in the system to present a different view and alter the prevailing group think. It simple has a cultural tradition for dissent...

No question personal liberty in China is a fact, but try and voice decent on Tien An Men massacre or on falun gong and see how fast the gestapo throw you in jail. People in China are more free than ever, but there are still things the Red Emperor wouldn't let you say in mass media, and churches you can't join.

 

[FarkTypeSoldier]

This episode of the Newly declared ADIZ is slowly 'unveiling' into a "war of attrition" - for China and Japan. Both sides plus US are scrambling to assert their claims over this airspace are not only showing their strengths but a race to see if all sides have the means to maintain these war assets and a test of economy power. All fighter jets and warships as well as excerises needs $$$ and effort to maintain its presence.

For Japan, Abe is gathering all forms of support internationally for the "griefs"; and trying to portray herself as the innocent party with her soft tactics.

China on the other hand is not bowing down to international pressures from Japan and US and some western countries. Her claims over the East Seas ADIZ is like a test for the Xi's administration in handling an up level and high profile international 'crisis' handling. China is explaining the importance of the ID zone to ensure the safety of the mainland.

US is at a dilemma. Caught in between China and Japan, is testing her resilient in between between "return to Asia" and "checking China's growth" as well as not 'offending' her competitor as well. Towards Japan, her most importance ally in East Asia is facing a "crisis" and is trying to solve the issue without sacrificing their love interests and at the same time not to anger the World's Second largest economy China. It's a love affair at lost for both US and Abe.

 

[Blitzo]

Japan was Asia's most notorious and nationalistic nation before 1945, but not after America beat the stuffing out of it. There's some resurgence of nationalism in Japan today, but it pales in comparison to China.

See, nationalism is interesting. Once we accept various acts as normal we stop seeing the nationalistic semantic behind it.

The US media and film industry and society is one of the most nationalistic in the world. They could be more nationalistic, but they've effectively internalized the idea that they have the right to intervene in every country in the world and spread its values through a variety of means including war, and that they have a right to unfettered all aspect military domination.

Slogans like "go navy" rings of old sounsd like "britannia rule the waves".

Channels like the military channel and discovery constantly broadcast films about US/western military developments, indirectly threatening enemies of the US with such advanced state of the art killing machines.
I used to like watching "weapons of the future" and such like that before realizing how it was effectively glamourizing US interventionism without me even knowing.


All this is off topic of course. I was merely commenting that all countries are relatively nationalistic, and pointing a finger and claiming one is more nationalistic than another is basically trying to paint the other side's arguments or positions as unreasonable, which I think is not conducive to proper discussion of the situation.