U.S and japan wargames near china

Finn McCool

Captain
Registered Member
Well the US has to conduct wargames with Japan for obvious reasons, and Japan happens to be near China. However if the exercises are, as utelore said "simulating an attack possibly against islands owned by china if there ever is a war" then these exercises would be very provocative. It just isn't good politics on the part of the US and Japan. They could do the exercises somewhere else, maybe the Ryukus. That would make all parties concerned happy. :)
 
D

Deleted member 675

Guest
However if the exercises are, as utelore said "simulating an attack possibly against islands owned by china if there ever is a war" then these exercises would be very provocative.

I'm not sure whether utelore was referring to the Senkakus - maybe he referred to them when he said "owned" by China. But China doesn't own them, it merely has a claim - it doesn't even have control of them. And it was the Senkakus the drills were in reference to, not Chinese islands. So this scenario could only be played out if China tried to take control of them first - in which case it couldn't honestly complain if Japan (and maybe the US) launched an operation to retake them.

Of course one can imagine they were about taking islands controlled by China, but then again you can take any military operation as being personally directed towards you if you want to.
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
South Korea and the US conduct excercises near the DMZ all the time. Yet when North Korea conducts excercises... guess who complains? China conducts exercises with Russia in the last year and it was played in the US media as a formation of military alliance against the US. Not surprising with the notorious double standard.
 

Finn McCool

Captain
Registered Member
South Korea and the US conduct excercises near the DMZ all the time. Yet when North Korea conducts excercises... guess who complains? China conducts exercises with Russia in the last year and it was played in the US media as a formation of military alliance against the US. Not surprising with the notorious double standard.

Well guess what North Korea does complain when the South and the US hold exercises and China is complaining now that the US and Japan are holding exercises, so the exercise blame game goes both ways.
 
D

Deleted member 675

Guest
Well guess what North Korea does complain when the South and the US hold exercises and China is complaining now that the US and Japan are holding exercises, so the exercise blame game goes both ways.

Exactly - both sides are hypocritical when it comes to describing each other's military exercises. Which is why I said it's best not to make too much of a fuss out of them.
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Everyone else doesn't conduct as many exercises. It's quite clear the US doesn't care. Why should anyone else? It's like when the US complains about China increasing military spending. The US has long spent more the rest of the world combined. But because China builds without permission of the US, it justifies the US spending more than the rest of the world?

It's sort of like in Iraq when the US certainly kills more insurgents than they kill US soldiers yet there's complaining about insurgent tactics. The fact is any successful tactic used by the insurgents will be labeled unfair. I remember a US congressman charged that China was selling missiles (within MTCR rules) with HE warheads on the international market and accused China of selling weapons of mass destruction. The US sells missiles with explosive warheads.
 
Last edited:

renmin

Junior Member
It goes both ways. Each side feel threatened when there old enemies are conducting military excersises. America does it with Japan, China has a disliking of Japan. China is threatened by the action. China operates wargames with russian, Russia has been a long term enemy of America. Either way, both countries are goin to think that the other is planning something to go against the other. I dont know the purpose of the US-japan exercise but I know that the purpose of the Peace mission 2005 was to improve Sino russia relations. The US would not think of this intention and would asume that China nad russia are going against US.
 

David2007

Just Hatched
Registered Member
Hey, the US navy can go anywhere, even in China's backyard. But if China wants to do that in the caribbean sometime in the future? No worries, the US has a "Monroe Doctrine". Maybe China need s "Wong Doctrine"?
 

Roger604

Senior Member
^
That's exactly what China's strategic purpose is. It has to assert control around its periphery. The US has a much easier job because it faces no strong nations around it. At the very least, exercises putatively directed toward disputed islands must be expected to be provocative. The islands are claimed by China, and it will [properly] view these exercises as enforcement of Japan's claim over China's claim.

I wonder how many Chinese subs were lurking around to gather intelligent. Quite an opportunity, I think.
 

David2007

Just Hatched
Registered Member
Anyhoo, as I said, I can't see these exercises as being provocative, given the point of them was to defend Japanese-held territory - rather than take control of land under Chinese control.

So control/possession is 90% of the law?

The International Herald Tribune

2 rocks in hard place for Japan and China
By Norimitsu Onishi The New York Times
MONDAY, JULY 11, 2005

TOKYO The smaller of the two islets is roughly the size of a twin bed and pokes 7.4 centimeters out of the ocean. The larger, as big as a small bedroom, rises about twice as high.

The Japanese government has already spent $600 million to keep the two barren islets in the western Pacific above water. Collectively called Okinotori and situated 1,740 kilometers, or about 1,080 miles, south of Tokyo, the islets have long allowed Japan to assert exclusive economic control over an ocean area larger than all of the country.

But a threat, potentially bigger than damage that could be caused by typhoons or global warming, emerged last year when China challenged Japan's exclusive rights to the waters, describing Okinotori as just a rock. The waters in the area are considered important economically and militarily.

Okinotori lies in a coral reef of 7.8 square kilometers, or 3 square miles, most of which is submerged even at low tide. A few decades ago, the area was dotted with half a dozen islets, but by 1989, only two were visible. To protect its claim, the government in Tokyo encased the tiny protrusions - some 1,280 meters, or 1,400 yards, apart - in concrete that is 25 meters, or 82 feet, thick, at a cost of $280 million.

Workers then covered the smaller islet with a $50 million titanium net to shield it from debris thrown up by the waves. Finally, slits were made across the concrete, so it would comply with the United Nations law that an island be surrounded by water.

As with some of Japan's other territorial disputes, a patriotic organization with rightist roots has taken the lead in rebutting the Chinese challenge to Okinotori's status. The organization, the Nippon Foundation, has drawn plans to build a lighthouse and later to increase the size of the islets by breeding microorganisms known as foraminifera.

The government last month installed radar, repaired a heliport and placed an official address plaque, "1 Okinotori Island, Ogasawara Village, Tokyo."

Shintaro Ishihara, the tough-talking governor of Tokyo, under whose jurisdiction the islets fall, took reporters to Okinotori recently and raised the Japanese flag on it. "That's an island," he said later. "A tiny island. Territory."


"Got a problem with that?" he said with a grin.

The Chinese do. In a meeting with Japanese officials last year, they said Okinotori could not be regarded as an island under the UN Law of the Sea.

According to the law, an "island is a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide." Furthermore, it adds, "rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone."

Okinotori lies at a militarily strategic point, midway between Taiwan and Guam, where American forces are based. Chinese vessels, whose increasing forays into this disputed exclusive economic zone have been drawing Japanese protests, were believed to be mapping the sea bottom over which American warships might pass on their way to Taiwan.

Washington supports Tokyo on the issue of whether Okinotori represents an island or a rock.

No one has ever lived on Okinotori, and the islets do not have any sign of economic life. Workers visit twice a year to repair the casing atop Okinotori, and this year, after China declared the area a rock, the Ministry of Land increased the budget for it to $5.6 million from $2 million.

Last fall, fearing that inaction would mean losing out to China, the Nippon Foundation focused its considerable resources on the issue.

"If someone doesn't do it, this country would drag its feet and nothing would be decided," said Yoshihiko Yamada, who oversees the Okinotori project for the foundation. It wants to build a $1 million lighthouse, which would constitute economic activity by guiding ships.

In another territorial dispute with China, over the Senkaku Islands, Japan's largest rightist group, Nihon Seinen-sha, built a lighthouse there 27 years ago and traveled to it regularly for repairs.

After the government and Nihon Seinen-sha engaged in negotiations last year, the government finally took over control of the lighthouse early this year.





IHT Copyright © 2005 The International Herald Tribune |
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top