Japanese ships disrupted Chinese naval exercises

Re: Japanese ships dusrupted chinese naval exercicies

Seems to me that Japan's strategy is to provoke small local war with China while they still can - i.e. while they still have some naval superiority and while they hopefully could get some help from US .

Japan's government is painfully aware of their economic and demographic problems , and that in 10-15 years China would overwhelm them in every way . So , they would want to provoke war now and beat back China so they would not have to worry about them for next 20-30 years .

China would need to proceed carefully , trying to avoid war but at the same time not to appear weak . Best strategy to counter Japan's aggressiveness would be to form alliances with like-minded countries like Russia and even South Korea , so that even if worst comes to worst they do not stand alone .

Re: Japanese ships dusrupted chinese naval exercicies

SamuraiBlue said:

As I said there is no claim made by PRC towards the International Court of Justice so, Japan's position is the only one that is acknowledged.

Click to expand...

Sorry to say, but the International Court of Justice isn't the right place to handle this case.

There are the Cairo Declaration from November 1943, the Potsdam Declaration from July 1945 and the the Japanese Instrument of Surrender from September 1945. That's enough evidence.

If the view of Japan is correct, why didn't the US - Government give full sovereignty over islands to the Japanese Government, but only the Right of Administration.

Why China today has these problems in ESS and SCS is due to the fact of the Civilwar in China and the split China in 1949.

Re: Japanese ships dusrupted chinese naval exercicies

duncanidaho said:

Sorry to say, but the International Court of Justice isn't the right place to handle this case.

There are the Cairo Declaration from November 1943, the Potsdam Declaration from July 1945 and the the Japanese Instrument of Surrender from September 1945. That's enough evidence.

If the view of Japan is correct, why didn't the US - Government give full sovereignty over islands to the Japanese Government, but only the Right of Administration.

Why China today has these problems in ESS and SCS is due to the fact of the Civilwar in China and the split China in 1949.

Click to expand...

I think you are forgetting the San Fransisco peace treaty which amalgamated the two claim which had no legal basis into a FORMAL TREATY?

==Edit==

One more thing, "Sovereignty" is not something that is given but can only be declared by a claimant. The USA can only confirm it which she did when they returned administration rights to Japan.

Re: Japanese ships dusrupted chinese naval exercicies

SamuraiBlue said:

What right does PLAN think they have in dictating another country's affair in international waters?

Click to expand...

Of course everybody has the right cruise in international waters, it's like to pitch up a tent on a campground in a National Park, but if somebody always pitch up his tent next to yours in a few squaremiles big area, where only a handfull people pitch up their tents, follow you and repeat this procedure on every campground in the National Park, then it's a clear sign of Provokation.

Re: Japanese ships dusrupted chinese naval exercicies

thunderchief said:

Seems to me that Japan's strategy is to provoke small local war with China while they still can - i.e. while they still have some naval superiority and while they hopefully could get some help from US .

Click to expand...

Your ability to read in other peoples, government's etc minds is so awesome that you should apply for a work somewhere about this matter. Who need intelligence etc when they can gather the infos on simple forum from some random guy.

thunderchief said:

Japan's government is painfully aware of their economic and demographic problems , and that in 10-15 years China would overwhelm them in every way . So , they would want to provoke war now and beat back China so they would not have to worry about them for next 20-30 years .

Click to expand...

Japan already had a war with China and the memories aren't too good on their side. And they had much more upper hand at the time than right now Though it was sole men effort on Japanese side with a strong opposition at the time. But that's history... and it probably isn't your strongest side.

thunderchief said:

China would need to proceed carefully , trying to avoid war but at the same time not to appear weak . Best strategy to counter Japan's aggressiveness would be to form alliances with like-minded countries like Russia and even South Korea , so that even if worst comes to worst they do not stand alone .

Click to expand...

... dunno how to even response to that... maybe you should read fantasy stories you wrote before hitting 'Submit' button. Just calm down. It was pretty easy to predict how this discussion will go.

The dispute over few islets is caused by the interpetations difference between two countries on the things like continental shelf (Okinawa Through), rights to gas fields, EEZ etc, not who owned them before (and took it without any military effort, that's only used for PR to say - 'You see what we're talking about?' for public opinion).

Re: Japanese ships dusrupted chinese naval exercicies

Rutim said:

Your ability to read in other peoples, government's etc minds is so awesome that you should apply for a work somewhere about this matter. Who need intelligence etc when they can gather the infos on simple forum from some random guy.

Click to expand...

Purpose of internet forums is exchange of opinions . I have mine , you have yours . I said what I have said on this matter , if you don't like it criticize it or simply ignore it - but don't try to tell me to stop thinking and speaking . Best of luck to you .

Re: Japanese ships dusrupted chinese naval exercicies

thunderchief said:

Purpose of internet forums is exchange of opinions . I have mine , you have yours . I said what I have said on this matter , if you don't like it criticize it or simply ignore it - but don't try to tell me to stop thinking and speaking . Best of luck to you .

Click to expand...

Sorry. You're right.

Re: Japanese ships dusrupted chinese naval exercicies

SamuraiBlue said:

I think you are forgetting the San Fransisco peace treaty which amalgamated the two claim which had no legal basis into a FORMAL TREATY?

==Edit==

One more thing, "Sovereignty" is not something that is given but can only be declared by a claimant. The USA can only confirm it which she did when they returned administration rights to Japan.

Click to expand...

The San Francisco Treaty did not consult either Chinas before unilaterally declaring what China can and cannot have. If there is a concrete definition of 'bullshit' in this world, then it is the SFT. It would be like Russia and China signing a treaty to give Kuril Islands to China, without heeding any protests from the Japanese side. In such a case, Japan would view the Kurils as not Russia's to give away. Likewise, the Diaoyu Islands were not the United State's to give away; who they "think" they gave the islands to is irrelevant as they had no authority, except the pseudo-authority granted to them by military force, to give those islands away to anyone but the original owners, the ROC. The attitude with which the US supposedly "gave" the islands away is the perfect embodiment of the idiom; 'might is right'. But the balance of 'might' in Asia-Pacific is changing; it is obvious which country will be the new 'right' in the near future. We only have to wait till then to see who eventually owns Diaoyu Islands.

Re: Japanese ships dusrupted chinese naval exercicies

jobjed said:

The San Francisco Treaty did not consult either Chinas before unilaterally declaring what China can and cannot have. If there is a concrete definition of 'bullshit' in this world, then it is the SFT. It would be like Russia and China signing a treaty to give Kuril Islands to China, without heeding any protests from the Japanese side. In such a case, Japan would view the Kurils as not Russia's to give away. Likewise, the Diaoyu Islands were not the United State's to give away; who they "think" they gave the islands to is irrelevant as they had no authority, except the pseudo-authority granted to them by military force, to give those islands away to anyone but the original owners, the ROC. The attitude with which the US supposedly "gave" the islands away is the perfect embodiment of the idiom; 'might is right'. But the balance of 'might' in Asia-Pacific is changing; it is obvious which country will be the new 'right' in the near future. We only have to wait till then to see who eventually owns Diaoyu Islands.

Click to expand...

Never the less it is still an international treaty that had been signed and recognized by 40 nations around the world. How many nations recognize PRC's claim?

End of story.

Re: Japanese ships dusrupted chinese naval exercicies

SamuraiBlue said:

Never the less it is still an international treaty that had been signed and recognized by 40 nations around the world. How many nations recognize PRC's claim?

End of story.

Click to expand...

I don't give a damn if my entire street "recognise" that my neighbour owns my TV, it's my TV, they can suck it up. Likewise, I don't care if all 191 other countries "recognise" Japan's claim to Chinese territory, it's Chinese territory, end of story.