East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
While there is a vague description of "issues" and a need to talk, i.e.'s position is that just even agreeing to a meet between the two leaders is giving Abe too many political points. Talk is a worthy endeavor, but Abe and company painted themselves into this situation and can't honestly expect all goes away just because he now wants to talk. I'm afraid the damage is done and won't have any real chance of a reboot till Abe is gone.
Sorry I cannot agree.

If an individual who heretofore has said there is no "issue," now turns around and says that there are issues and the two sides need to talk...you take him up on it and of then watch very closely what is said, and then forthrightly hold a statement aferwards and indicate whether substance was brought forward or not.

To ignore it, or even worse, to say, "Aha! we know you are not sincere so we will have nothing to do with you," insures that nothing will happen while that individual is in office, and then paints the national response from the Japanese people with a brush that their next leader may also be hard pressed to overcome.

The Japanese have made a statment that basically conedes that there are issues. The PRC cannot have it both ways and say on one side, "Look, the Japanese do not even recognize that there is an issue and will not meet with us to discuss it," and then turn around, when they do admit it, and say, "Not good enough, we do not think you sincere so we will not meet with you anyway."

Luckily, I believe that Xi is wise and will take the Japanese PM up on it...and then hold his feet to the fire and make sure there is negotiations on both sides in good faith.

i.e. said:
It is little bit, but not entirely.
It is off topic, i.e. You say so yourself. "A little bit," is immaterial.

Sort of like a woman is either pregnant or she is not. She cannot be "a little bit," pregnant. Saying she is a "little bit," means that she is. Saying it is a "little bit off topic" means it is off topic. Particularly on this thread, as we have already seen, that is not a good idea.

i.e. said:
and how is posting a reuters report on LDP proposed Constitutional changes (which amongst other things, changing of the defense relatived Article 9 of the constitution) and commenting on the motivation of the main characters involved... Inflammatory?
Because you are pulling up off topic material to help influence your point regarding the discussions with the Japanese PM to "prove," that in your opinion, it is a waist of time.

Your comments on his motivations are your opinions. So your opinion about a man's motivations regarindg issues that are off topic, are being used on this highly charged thread, to support your second opinion that these tallks are a waist of time.

The fact is, where there was no hope for any negotiations, Now there is. That's a good thing. Japan has admitted there are issues regarding this subject which they had not admitted before. That is actually an opening for Xi and can place him and the PRC in the driver's seat.

That opportunity may help things there in that area of the world most importantly of all...but they also can help here on the forum, to ease tensions and keep this thread, which is about the Chinese ADIZ (and not about the Japanese Consitution) open, and discussions regarding specificlly the ADIZ alive. In this higly charged thread that has already been closed once, we simply do not want to go there, otherwise it could easily get closed permanently.

So, again:

Do not post Off Topic material that is provocative, or inflaming.
 
Last edited:

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
It's good that Abe is willing to publicly speak that he is willing to discuss issues, however as ie and others have said, china will probably only hold a real summit if they receive back door diplomatic overtures that Abe is sincere.

Even if we ignore everything from war revisionism, yakasuki shrine visits, etc (which all have negative effects on hue he sino-Japanese relationship), the simple fat of the matter is that Japan should be willing to acknowledge there is a dispute until china is willing to make concessions.


I've read state media articles from china again and again repeating that it has made diplomatic overtures to Japan seeking to discuss China's position on the islands dispute, but were rebuffed, probably because Japan had no reason to acknowledge the chinese demand that the islands be recognized as disputed. Things have changed a little with the ADIZ, which I said a while ago that it gave china a bargaining chip and demonstrated its seriousness to both Japan and more importantly America, regarding the islands. The question is whether Abe is actually willing to recognize the sovereign ambiguity of the islands. If yes, then tensions could rapidly de escalate. If not, then I doubt we will even see a meeting, because if nothing is agreed then the media will just paint it as china being unreasonable in the meeting or whatever.

Abe has invested too much political capital into the position he currently holds, and I think we are a little too far gone for him to back down now.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Abe has invested too much political capital into the position he currently holds, and I think we are a little too far gone for him to back down now.
Except he did offer to meet and discuss the "issues," that both China and Japan have regarding this.

That's more than he has done before...and I bet there was diplomacy at work behind the scenes to get that statement made.

As I said, the PRC is in a GREAT position to be in the driver's seat.

If they meet and there is any meanigful discussion...great, it is a step forward.

If they meet and there is none, and there is stonewalling, then the PRC has an excellent opportunity to state that and dial up the pressure diplomatically further isolating Japan's adminstration.

Japan knows this...so I bet at least something will be discussed.

That is the type of thing that should happen IMHO. If the PRC flatly refuses, then it will look no better than Japan did to the international community, when it flatly refused to talk.
 
Last edited:

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Except he did offer to meet and discuss the "issues," that both China and Japan have regarding this.

That's more than he has done before...and I bet there was diplomacy at work behind the scenes to get that statement made.

As I said, the PRC is in a GREAT position to be in the driver's seat.

If they meet and there is any meanigful discussion...great, it is a step forward.

If they meet and there is none, and there is stonewalling, then the PRC has an excellent opportunity to state that and dial up the pressure diplomatically further isolating Japan's adminstration.

Japan knows this...so I bet at least something will be discussed.

That is the type of thing that should happen IMHO. If the PRC flatly refuses, then it will look no better than Japan did to the international community, when it flatly refused to talk.


I want to agree with you, however, "summits" are only carrying out discussions on issues both parties would have agreed to consider prior to the meeting, the consideration of those issues will be done through informal diplomatic channels rather than high profile meetings of heads of state.

In terms of public opinion, one could spin it either way to say that the ball is in China or Japan's court or whatever.

The public statement that Abe is willing to discuss issues is a positive step.

However it is only a positive step if the informal diplomatic channels state he is willing to discuss the issues that China have been pressing Japan on, if not, then it is more posturing rather than substance.


that said, China has been angling for a serious negotiation on the matter for a year or so now. Even if Abe is unwilling to concede to China's demands of sovereign ambiguity, I expect China would still be open to some talks if simply to agree on a more stable RoE, and that may pave the first stone in the path to more serious discussions regarding the islands dispute.
 

joshuatree

Captain
Sorry I cannot agree.

If an individual who heretofore has said there is no "issue," now turns around and says that there are issues and the two sides need to talk...you take him up on it and of then watch very closely what is said, and then forthrightly hold a statement aferwards and indicate whether substance was brought forward or not.

To ignore it, or even worse, to say, "Aha! we know you are not sincere so we will have nothing to do with you," insures that nothing will happen while that individual is in office, and then paints the national response from the Japanese people with a brush that their next leader may also be hard pressed to overcome.

The Japanese have made a statment that basically conedes that there are issues. The PRC cannot have it both ways and say on one side, "Look, the Japanese do not even recognize that there is an issue and will not meet with us to discuss it," and then turn around, when they do admit it, and say, "Not good enough, we do not think you sincere so we will not meet with you anyway."

Luckily, I believe that Xi is wise and will take the Japanese PM up on it...and then hold his feet to the fire and make sure there is negotiations on both sides in good faith.

We can agree to disagree. But I never said anything about China should completely ignore Abe's call for talks on issues. I'm just saying he's not going to be rewarded with a state to state meeting right off the bat. You say they can issue a statement after the meet but that always ends up being a "he said, she said" thing. Some meeting on the sidelines is my realistic expectation. Abe wasn't just disagreeing with China in general, he was stirring up every means of giving the proverbial bird so I don't see returning to status quo of a few years ago with him in office. The informal meets will reduce tension but it's a different ball game now.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
I want to agree with you
Good...then do. But as my German friends would say, "nun, jetzt kommt dass Aber."

Bltizo said:
however, "summits" are only carrying out discussions on issues both parties would have agreed to consider prior to the meeting, the consideration of those issues will be done through informal diplomatic channels rather than high profile meetings of heads of state.
No problem here. The comment and offer by the Japanese PM opened the door to all of this, where it was closed before.

joshuatree said:
We can agree to disagree...Some meeting on the sidelines is my realistic expectation.
Ok...I agree with both of those...hehehe.

We will see what comes of it. But at least now we have something that may come of it to see.
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
One of the main news agencies reported on leaked documents from the Japanese cabinet.

To dial back tensions, the Chinese wanted the following to occur:

1. Japan to acknowledge a dispute on the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands
2. The Japanese cabinet to stop making anti-China remarks in public

===

Come to think of it, such leaks are now covered by the state secrecy law which just passed.

Not reported in Japan which would have been a big scandal if it was true.
No since the bill have not been accepted as law and there is a period for the law to come into effect.

PRC can easily make it into a dispute status by filing a complaint to ICJ so why not do it?
 

BigWang

Banned Idiot
ADIZ even if unenforced bothers Japan a lot, a lot.

Japan really really antsy about calling China to repeal it.

So, China doesn't really have to do much. Just let it run its cause and it would be De Facto in times. That's what Japan worry the most.

Japan provoked everything now China made daring moves and Japan Can't deal with it.
 

FarkTypeSoldier

Junior Member
Not reported in Japan which would have been a big scandal if it was true.
No since the bill have not been accepted as law and there is a period for the law to come into effect.

PRC can easily make it into a dispute status by filing a complaint to ICJ so why not do it?

A lot of things which are not in Japan's favour are not reported.

The Cairo Declaration is one example. I recalled a particular Japanese diplomatic officer did not know about the CD until he was working in the Japanese FM office. This officer is by the name of 天木直人, a former diplomatic officer to Lebanon.

His statement is broadcasted here, @ 09:34

[video=youtube;ll_10VPEY2w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ll_10VPEY2w[/video]

If it is true then, the Japanese govt is guilty of hiding the truth from its own people. The Japanese ppl mostly did not know the CD as well from the street interview shown.
 

shen

Senior Member
Not reported in Japan which would have been a big scandal if it was true.
No since the bill have not been accepted as law and there is a period for the law to come into effect.

PRC can easily make it into a dispute status by filing a complaint to ICJ so why not do it?

Because China want to be good neighbor. And good neighbors don't sue each other, good neighbors try to solve the problem one on one privately without involving unnecessary third party. Of course the first step towards a solution is to admit the fact a dispute exists. When that happens, to leaders of the two nations can sit down for a summit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top