USA insists neutrality over Diaoyu Islands

[Fu Lai]

It is happy that the USA is steering clear of this mess which Chinese, including those in the USA care about.

 

Washington claims neutrality over islandsBy Pu Zhendong ( China Daily)

Washington on Wednesday insisted that it maintains a neutral stance on the sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands, following a warning from the Chinese ambassador to the United States over the issue.

Patrick Ventrell, acting deputy spokesman at the US State Department, said the US does not take a position on the sovereignty of the islands.

He called on all parties to manage their differences through peaceful means.

"The point is we urge all parties to avoid actions that could raise tensions or result in miscalculations that would undermine peace, security and economic growth in this vital part of the world, so we say that to both sides," he said.

Cui Tiankai, China's new ambassador to the US, told Washington not to "lift the rock off Japan only to let it drop on its own feet" on Tuesday.

Cui criticized the assurance given by US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel to visiting Japanese Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera that the islands are under the administration of Japan and fall under US security treaty obligations.

Hagel said the US "opposes any unilateral or coercive action that seeks to undermine Japan's administrative control" over the Diaoyu Islands, and US General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, had conveyed the message to Beijing.

Cui said the Japanese side triggered and escalated tensions over the Diaoyu Islands, and Japan undertook unilateral or coercive action.

When asked repeatedly by reporters who the US thought was taking "unilateral and coercive action" to worsen the current stalemate, China or Japan, Ventrell avoided answering the question directly.

"My understanding is from the perception of both sides; they have concerns about actions the other side has taken," he said.

Chen Qi, an international affairs professor at Tsinghua University, said various recent statements from Beijing and Washington show that the two sides are testing the bottom line on their respective policies regarding the islands.

"It seems that China has stated its position clearly and firmly, but the US position remains ambiguous since it is taking its ally Japan's interests into consideration," Chen said.

But subtle differences in Washington's statements indicate that disagreements exist inside the White House and that many discussions must have been going on to adapt themselves to probably realigning their strategy, he added.

Analysts said that Washington, if it is serious about not taking any position on the Diaoyu Islands, should stop favoring Japan by including the islands in the protection obligations within the US-Japanese Security Treaty.

Jia Xiudong, a senior researcher on international affairs at the China Institute of International Studies, said Washington's intention to contain China will fail since nothing will deter China's defense of its sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands. "The Obama administration attaches great importance to Sino-US relations as they responded positively to Beijing's new definition of bilateral ties as ‘a new type of big country relations' by sending high-level government officials to China soon after Beijing's leadership transition," Jia said.

"Building mutual trust depends on how the two sides manage to handle differences during the many opportunities for communication this year such as the China-US Strategic and Economic Dialogue in July," he added.

 

 

[Randy W]

 

"It seems that China has stated its position clearly and firmly, but the US position remains ambiguous since it is taking its ally Japan's interests into consideration," Chen said.

 

But subtle differences in Washington's statements indicate that disagreements exist inside the White House and that many discussions must have been going on to adapt themselves to probably realigning their strategy, he added.

 

Analysts said that Washington, if it is serious about not taking any position on the Diaoyu Islands, should stop favoring Japan by including the islands in the protection obligations within the US-Japanese Security Treaty.

 

Jia Xiudong, a senior researcher on international affairs at the China Institute of International Studies, said Washington's intention to contain China will fail since nothing will deter China's defense of its sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands. "The Obama administration attaches great importance to Sino-US relations as they responded positively to Beijing's new definition of bilateral ties as ‘a new type of big country relations' by sending high-level government officials to China soon after Beijing's leadership transition," Jia said.

 

 

 

 

I think this pretty well sums up the entire situation - to the Chinese way of thought it's simply a matter of asserting their sovereignty, while, to the U.S., it's a matter of sorting out the claims.

 

I don't think that'll happen as long as China simply stirs up anti-Japanese sentiment, regardless of any half-hearted (or worse) attempts to "defend its sovereignty".

[warpedbored]

I think the US would sit quietly by if China took back Taiwan but the one sure way to start a war with the US would be for China to attack Japan. I don't think China is that stupid.

[Randy W]

I think the US would sit quietly by if China took back Taiwan but the one sure way to start a war with the US would be for China to attack Japan. I don't think China is that stupid.

 

 

The (domestic) corner they have themselves painted into is that they CAN NOT appear to be the aggressor. They simply OWN the Diaoyu Islands, and that is that. Defending your sovereignty is more a matter of patrolling (and occupying) your perimeter. Any attempted occupation of the islands, though, would certainly stir the pot.

[Fu Lai]

The ROC is considered by the USA (and the PRC) to be part of China so there is no "taking back" needed.

 

IMO, China will overwhelmingly attack Japan the moment Japan seriously attacks them, regardless of the USA (who with two recent failed attempts at war in this part of the world, will not attempt a third). So such attacks will not happen.

 

 

That is smart for the USA and will smooth out things with the Chinese people living "STATESIDE".

Edited May 3, 2013 by Fu Lai (see edit history)

[warpedbored]

The ROC is considered by the USA (and the PRC) to be part of China so there is no "taking back" needed.

 

IMO, China will overwhelmingly attack Japan the moment Japan seriously attacks them, regardless of the USA (who with two recent failed attempts at war in this part of the world, will not attempt a third). So such attacks will not happen.

 

 

That is smart for the USA and will smooth out things with the Chinese people living "STATESIDE".

If that were to happen it would be WW-3 and there would most certainly be nukes used. The US would not sit on their hands and let Japan lose. Don't forget we have a Naval base in Japan with nuclear capable submarines.

[danb]

Hello,

 

" I think the US would sit quietly by if China took back Taiwan but the one sure way to start a war with the US would be for China to attack Japan. I don't think China is that stupid."

 

I was surprised by this comment. But I also not sure if I agree or disagree with it. Would the US get invoved in only one case and not the other? I am not sure how the US will react. China defintely does not appreciate it when the US sell arms to either Taiwan or Japan. If you believe the media the Chinese is exerting her influence along many of her borders. There are disputes between China and Japan, India, Vietnam, the Philippines, etc. It would be nice if all the countries would agree to seeking a peaceful solution to these borders disputes. I wonder why peaceful arbitration is not agressively being pursued. War is not a good thing.

 

I wonder how our lives and relationship would be affected with our Chinese loved ones if a war broke out beween the US and China.

 

Danb

[Fu Lai]

I don't think the USA is that stupid. Like I said and think, such attacks will not happen. The USA is neutral on this issue anyway so I also think Japan will not do anything. They are Chinese islands and the neutral stance speaks volumes.

[Fu Lai]

... It would be nice if all the countries would agree to seeking a peaceful solution to these borders disputes. I wonder why peaceful arbitration is not agressively being pursued....

 

China repeatedly calls for peaceful resolutions to everything (links too numerous to post here but easy to find). Their forces and drones are not killing people in foreign lands. Negotiation and diplomacy are the means these days, not BOMB BOMB BOMB.

 

So it is good for all the worried Chinese in America that the USA is staying out of this mess.

[Guest ExChinaExpat]

I've traveled all over the island of Taiwan and talked to many people there about China. The militant older generation is disappearing fast. Ask yourself how many mechanized wars is China actively engaged, and then compare that with the US.

 

China doesn't need to take back Taiwan as Fulai mentioned. They are considered a renegade province. China is successfully making Taiwan's efforts in business and enterprise disappear. More and more Taiwanese are actually moving to China to work and live. It's becoming an easier transition for them to make with the same language and culture.

 

Last night it occurred to me to video the waves of Chinese large bombers that regularly take off in full after burner near my home. I did manage to video one of them. The waves generally last all day, with dozens of bombers taking off within minutes of each other. Car and motoche alarms trigger, dogs bark, and and people plug their ears. But, so far their not out there bombing things. Funny how that is.

 

Edited May 3, 2013 by JiangsuExpat (see edit history)

[warpedbored]

I think China has shown remarkable restraint over Taiwan. I also believe a peaceful resolution will eventually be made. When the US accepted that the PRC is the one true China they pretty much acknowledged that Taiwan is part of China. That being said I think it's obvious that China is rapidly building up their military and plan to usurp the US as the world's most powerful super power. It is also obvious that they've been flexing their muscle and challenging their neighbors as well as the US. They want to control the region's trade, shipping lanes and military installations. The US having a military base with considerable fire power right in their back yard in Japan is considered a threat to those ambitions. Strategically the US has the advantage. Our guidance systems are more accurate and we have proximity to the target for first strike capability. China on the other hand doesn't need as sophisticated of a system as long as they have enough of them they only need to land a few. I have no doubt they have enough of them. The only way mutual annihilation could maybe be avoided would be for the US to make the first strike. I don't think we have the balls for it. Now if China were to attack Japan, especially a US military base in Japan all bets would be off. The US would have no choice but to strike back. I don't think the US could win with conventional weapons. Nukes would have to be used. The end result would be the worst war the world has ever seen. I hope with all of my heart that both countries realize this and restrain themselves. IMO China is playing with fire by threatening Japan.

[credzba]

I hope with all of my heart that both countries realize this and restrain themselves. IMO China is playing with fire by threatening Japan.

 

I agree with you, but what is a country (any country) to do when they believe that land belongs to them, and another country is trying to take it away.

If China does not defend her sovereign property, then they are not a country at all.

China, I believe, thinks Japan is threatening THEM, and China does want Japan to occupy ANY land they own.

 

So, whats your opinion Warpedbored? If I claimed your guitar belonged to me, that you didn't build it, but in fact I did.. then what ?

[warpedbored]

 

I hope with all of my heart that both countries realize this and restrain themselves. IMO China is playing with fire by threatening Japan.

 

I agree with you, but what is a country (any country) to do when they believe that land belongs to them, and another country is trying to take it away.

If China does not defend her sovereign property, then they are not a country at all.

China, I believe, thinks Japan is threatening THEM, and China does want Japan to occupy ANY land they own.

 

So, whats your opinion Warpedbored? If I claimed your guitar belonged to me, that you didn't build it, but in fact I did.. then what ?

 

Who my guitar belongs to is quite clear. Disputed territory is more murky. Who lives there? How long has the dispute been going on? China claims it owns Tibet. Many people dispute that. I don't have enough information to have an opinion on who it really belongs to. Some of Japan's territory was taken away after the war, they are still disputing who owns Sakhalin island. It was and still is to a lesser extent inhabited by the Ainu, The indigenous people of Japan. It was taken away from Japan after WW-2 and given to Russia. The right thing to do IMO would be to let whoever lives there decide. I am merely pointing out how easy this whole mess could blow up and start WW-3