China Projecting Power in South and East China Seas

[sferrin]

Source:
http://news.yahoo.com/us-vows-defend-japan-against-china-185432324.html

Not with this administration.

 

[Triton]

Source:
http://news.yahoo.com/us-vows-defend-japan-against-china-185432324.html

Not with this administration.

Neither would have the George W Bush Administration or a conjectural Romney Administration. Too much money to lose by getting involved in a territorial spat between Japan and the People's Republic of China. Both Republican and Democratic Administrations have kowtowed to the wishes of Beijing.

 

[Grey Havoc]

US blames China for rising tensions in South China Sea (Financial Times [Registration may be required])

The Obama administration has significantly sharpened its rhetoric about China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea over the last week amid growing pressure from allies in the region for Washington to take a firmer line.

In public statements in recent days, senior US officials placed the blame for tensions in the region solely on China and warned that the US could move more forces to the western Pacific if Beijing were to declare a new air defence zone in the South China Sea.

 

[Triton]

"China's Television War on Japan"
Contributing Op-Ed Writer
By MURONG XUECUN

FEB. 9, 2014

Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/10/opinion/murong-chinas-television-war-on-japan.html?hpw&rref=opinion&_r=0

BEIJING — Iron Palm Du Dapeng’s eyes are burning with rage. The Chinese martial arts expert strikes a Japanese soldier with his fist and then, using his supernatural powers, tears the soldier in half. Blood splatters, but not a drop lands on the kung fu master.

This is one of many violent scenes in the Chinese television series “The Anti-Japanese Knight,” a recent action drama set during the Japanese invasion of China in the 1930s. Like many Chinese television dramas, the “Anti-Japanese Knight” promotes patriotism and praises the Communist Party for defeating the Japanese, while conveniently leaving out mention of the decisive role played by the Chinese Nationalists in that war. The violence and anti-Japanese tone send a clear message that killing is acceptable — as long as the targets are “Japanese devils.”

I have little doubt that many Chinese people take the “Anti-Japanese Knight” and its version of history as fact, just as I used to think that China won the second Sino-Japanese War by digging tunnels in villages and planting homemade land mines, thanks to “Tunnel Warfare” and “Landmine Warfare,” two classic Chinese-made war movies from the 1960s.

Before television arrived in the countryside, film teams took projectors to villages to screen movies; they were often shown outdoors. As a child in the 1970s, I’d go to screenings as often as possible, blissfully unaware that most of what I was watching was Communist Party propaganda. I must have watched “Tunnel Warfare” and “Landmine Warfare” at least a dozen times.

When I turn on the television these days, I notice not much has changed. The second Sino-Japanese War may have ended in 1945, but the Chinese people are still haunted by it. Enemy Japanese soldiers run amok on Chinese screens. The state-approved films and TV dramas of today are more colorful and the actors are better-looking than in the films of 1960s and ’70s, but the themes remain the same.

The state prohibits content that “incites ethnic hatred,” yet according to Southern Weekly more than 70 anti-Japanese TV series were screened in China in 2012. And in March 2013 the newspaper reported that 48 anti-Japanese-themed TV series were being shot simultaneously in Hengdian World Studios, a film studio in Zhejiang Province, in eastern China.

The result of this stream of rancor is just what you’d expect. A July 2013 Pew research report found that 90 percent of Chinese people have an unfavorable view of Japan. And the hatred for Japan is intensifying. Pew said that “favorability” for Japan has fallen 17 percentage points since 2006.

The anti-Japan virulence drummed up by the media is in full display online. Websites popular among young Chinese nationalists, like Tiexue (Iron Blood) and April Media, are riddled with slogans such as “Destroy Japanese dogs!” or “Annihilate the Japanese people!”

The flow of hate comes while China is building up its military, leaving its neighbors on edge. Beijing will spend $148 billion on its military this year, up from $139 billion in 2013. It launched its first aircraft carrier in 2012, and is building a fleet of submarines that it hopes will outnumber the American fleet.

A hard-line, anti-Western documentary film produced by the Chinese military called “Silent Contest,” circulated online in October 2013, revealed a troubling war-thirsty mind-set among the military. The video attempted to make the case that the United States is actively working to sabotage the Chinese government. Whoever leaked this video may not represent mainstream military thinking, but there is no doubt that pro-military voices are growing louder.

Meanwhile, Beijing repeatedly criticizes Tokyo’s “militarism.” But what are China’s leaders thinking when they promote such hate of their neighbor? The world must be vigilant against “militarism” whenever it arises, but the Chinese government needs to review its own propaganda policies — and weigh the consequences of barraging citizens with such a negative view of Japan.

For now, a small chain of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea is the focal point of contention between the China and Japan. In 2012, tensions over the islands triggered anti-Japanese riots in Chinese cities. Cai Yang, a 21-year-old construction worker in Xi’an, smashed the skull of Li Jianli, the owner of a Japanese car, with a bicycle lock.

Mr. Cai’s mother, explaining the source of her son’s “patriotic” rage, couldn’t have been more trenchant with her question: “When we turn on the TV, most of the dramas are about anti-Japanese war. How would it be possible to not to hate Japanese?”

 

[Grey Havoc]

From the comments section of this Yahoo News article:

Cheshire 5 hours ago

Having raised partly in Palawan, let me tell you some basic fact most on Luzon don't know.
1. 58% of our ocean seafood for Luzon and metro manila comes from reefs and islets off of the west coast of Palawan and Mindoro. These fishing areas fall within the nine dash line.
2. Up to 40% of the electrical generation capacity for Luzon comes from off-shore natural gas fields. Losing Palawan's offshore field ALL OF THESE fall within the so-called 9 dash line. THAT would could lead to a increase in production costs and decreased ability to be competitive at present increased rates on the Luzon grid is due to plant maintenance. Shows the short term impact of the temporary loss of malampaya's gas flow. 20-32 % per estimates in total charge increases.
3. Palawan has a population of roughly a million - it provides at last count a destination point for some 500,000 of this first half of the years 2.4 m reported tourists. If government earns even only $100 in taxes from tourism spending - do the math.

A little history on how the islands of the (west Philippine sea can provide points of control in a conflict)

Now lessons of history are often repeated when lessons are lost in the present, but go back and look at reports from 1934, when then governor Higino Mendoza warned of Japanese Naval vessels and small airstrips being built on little 'south china sea islands' - aka the spratly's et al - (most of the current developed runways be it in the parcels, pag-asa, or ito abe - are built on old IJN runways!) warned that is war ever came those island could be a points of attacks. He was proven correct when seaplane torpedo and light attack bombers hit several points in visayas from those very airstrips and seaplane bases.
The late Gov. Mendoza, also noted increased Japanese fishing trawlers all along Palawan's west coast. He later led Palawan's lone USAFFE regiment and served as the island guerrilla leader. He was beheaded leading a resistance that never surrendered, and fought until liberation came. Never allowing occupiers more than token movement outside of the capitol town (now city) of Puerto Princesa and some island towns that were captured.

An interesting point TIMAWA's might note is the current PCG Auxiliary commandant is his son, R. Adm Higino Mendoza jr. Who often speaks openly of the need to organize and strengthen groups like the PCG-Aux. For movie buff's and the showbiz minded he's the dad of actor Matt Mendoza.
Hence don't worry, Palawan will be prepared.

On a postscript there is something called war plan pawikan or war exercise pawikan which took place before the Mischief reef incident where airborne Philippine army troops 'retook' Puerto Princesa in mass jump in the 1990's. One of the largest AFP joint training exercises during the term of FVR.

So, yes Palawan is prepared, organized and capable of holding out if anything did happen. Some would pick up blowguns and join the batak tribe hunters - who did so well versus the Japanese in ww2. But let me be very clear - the nine dash line no matter how one looks at it if it is imposed as it is as mischief reef then the PRC will control the SCS and its resources. Much needed by the Philippines and the rest of ASEAN. appeasement and dilpomacy has not worked - and - in the months since Panatag with all of DFA's talk of going to the UN - nothing on that front has been done. As Pnoy said - pumasok na bakuran at inankin na ang ilang bahagi ng bansa.

Its only a matter of time for this to escalate. By all analysts views and even from the statement of china's 'party controlled media.' so this thread is not an 'if' but when in view of most from the province I call home.'

 

[Triton]

"Japan upgrading air forces in response to regional threats"
Feb. 13, 2014 at 2:20 AM

Source:
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2014/02/13/Japan-upgrading-air-forces-in-response-to-regional-threats/UPI-11431392276000/

SINGAPORE, Feb. 13 (UPI) -- Japan, concerned about rising regional tensions, will spend more on defense, government officials said.

Japanese officials are attending the Singapore Ari Show 2014 to view the latest equipment available.

The upgrades will allow the Japan Air Self-Defense Force to boost its air and maritime forces.

Besides upgrading its current air arm of U.S.-built F-2 and F-15 fighters JASDF will purchase 28 U.S.-built Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II combat aircraft, 17 Bell-Boeing MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft and three Northrop Grumman Global Hawk UAVs by 2019, the Aviation International News reported Wednesday.

Tokyo is concerned not only about North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile programs, but rising tensions over its Senkaku island archipelago, whose ownership is disputed by China.

Japan's National Security Strategy published in December, reorients JASDF to create an amphibious brigade, which promotes plans to buy the tilt-rotor Osprey aircraft.

Additionally, JASDF intends to spend $950 million upgrade to its fleet of four Boeing E-767 AWACs aircraft by improving their mission computers, electronic support measures, identify-friend-or-foe and cryptographic equipment.

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2014/02/13/Japan-upgrading-air-forces-in-response-to-regional-threats/UPI-11431392276000/#ixzz2tEZhY9qU

 

[Triton]

Meanwhile, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe wants the Russian Federation to return the Southern Kurils to Japan:

"Abe Pledges to Settle Russia Territorial Spat During His Term"
by Isabel Reynolds and Takashi Hirokawa Feb 12, 2014 7:50 PM PT

Source:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-13/abe-pledges-to-settle-russia-territorial-spat-during-his-term.html?cmpid=yhoo

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe vowed to settle a dispute with Russia over islands seized at the end of World War II, a move that would free him up to seek resolution of a more divisive territorial spat with China.

The area at the center of the disagreement with Russia consists of four islands near Japan’s northernmost main island of Hokkaido taken over by the then-Soviet Union at the end of the war. Japan, an archipelago made up of more than 3,000 islands, is involved in a separate dispute with South Korea over territory in the sea almost equidistant between the two countries.

“I am determined to resolve this problem somehow while I am prime minister and we will hold another summit at the G8 meeting in Sochi and then President Putin will come to Japan in the autumn,” Abe told parliament today in Tokyo. “I want to put all possible efforts into resolving the problem.”

Abe and Putin have met five time since he took office in December 2012, seeking to boost business and security ties even as they wrangle over rights to the islands. Abe has not held summits with China or South Korea, partly due to the bitterness of their conflicting territorial claims. Chinese and Japanese warships regularly tail each other around their disputed islands in the East China Sea.
Declaration of War

At the end of the war in the Pacific in 1945, the Soviet Union renounced a neutrality treaty it had signed with Japan in 1941 and in August, declared war on Japan. By early September, the Soviet Union took control of the islands of Etorofu, Kunashiri, Shikotan and Habomai and deported thousands of Japanese residents over the next few years, according to Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Differences over the islands proved the stumbling block to Japan and the Soviet Union signing a permanent peace treaty after negotiations in 1956. The two sides signed a joint declaration reestablishing diplomatic relations and agreed to continue talks on the islands. There have been bilateral talks on the issue under Abe, though little progress has been made on resolving the dispute.

Abe last week attended an annual rally to demand the return of the islands known as the Northern Territories in Japan and the Southern Kurils in Russia. At the rally, Abe said that it was “not normal” that the two sides have failed to sign a peace treaty 68 years after the war because of the dispute

 

[Triton]

"Australia concerned about Asian arms race"
Feb. 13, 2014 at 2:44 AM

Source:
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2014/02/13/Australia-concerned-about-Asian-arms-race/UPI-55961392277440/?spt=mps&or=4

SYDNEY, Feb. 13 (UPI) -- Australia's greatest future threat is China, a just released Australian Strategic Policy Institute report concluded.

A major factor driving massive arms purchases in Asia is territorial differences, particularly disagreements over conflicted islet archipelagoes that were once "no-go" zones, both diplomatically and developmentally, but now are seen as potentially valuable assets with rich fishing and hydrocarbon reserves, News.com.au website reported on Thursday.

China unsettled its neighbors in November by declaring an "air defense zone" in the East China Sea, setting off tensions with Japan, South Korea and the United States. China is reported to be considering a similar "air defense zone" in the waters surrounding the Paracel and Spratly island chains, whose ownership China disputes with the Philippines, Malaysia and Vietnam.

Australia's military buildup to counter rising regional tensions includes two new LHDs (landing, helicopter, dock ships) HMAS Adelaide and HMAS Canberra, due to enter service within the next few years, being built as a collaboration between Navantia and BAE Systems -- Maritime.

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2014/02/13/Australia-concerned-about-Asian-arms-race/UPI-55961392277440/#ixzz2tF3fEbGd

 

[Jemiba]

Australia's military buildup to counter rising regional tensions includes two new LHDs (landing, helicopter, dock ships) HMAS Adelaide and HMAS Canberra, due to enter service within the next few years, being built as a collaboration between Navantia and BAE Systems -- Maritime.

"Honi soit qui mal y pense", but to me once again it seems to be clear, that in every single one of such political tensions,
there are more, than just one looking for its advantage !

 

[Triton]

"Covetous Scrutiny for Military Hardware in Singapore"
by DANIEL SOLON FEB. 11, 2014

Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/12/business/covetous-scrutiny-for-military-hardware-in-singapore.html?_r=0

Against a background rattling of sabers, Asian air force chiefs are likely to be taking a more covetous look than usual at the military hardware on display at this week’s Singapore Airshow.

In the past few months, muscle-flexing by China has led to confrontations with the Philippines, South Korea and Japan in contested waters of the South and East China Seas.

In November, China unilaterally declared an air defense zone for an area of the East China Sea containing a group of islands known as the Senkaku in Japanese, and the Diaoyu in Chinese, that Japan has controlled for decades; and in an area over a submerged reef called Ieodo in South Korea and Suyan Rock in China, that is controlled by South Korea.

Japan already operated its own air defense zone over the Senkaku Islands. Korea, in response to the Chinese move, said in December that it was expanding its air patrol zone in the disputed areas.

At stake is more than national pride and geopolitical assertiveness. The contested seabeds are believed to hold extensive reserves of oil and natural gas.

Still, if the case for building air surveillance and defense capabilities is strong, financial pressures on emerging market economies mean that defense ministries in the region must cope with tight budgets. Maximum bang for the buck is the order of the day.

A broad range of fighter and maritime surveillance aircraft is competing for sales to Asian governments. One leading contender is Lockheed Martin’s new F-35 Lightning II, the product of the Joint Strike Fighter cooperative program that started in 1996. Since its plane’s introduction in 2001, Lockheed Martin has delivered some 100 F-35s. The United States Marine Corps is scheduled to start deploying a short takeoff and vertical landing version in 2015, though recent reports say this may be delayed by software maintenance and reliability problems.

Richard L. Aboulafia, a commercial and military aviation analyst at the Teal Group, in Fairfax, Va., puts the stealthy, technically advanced F-35 in a class of its own, describing it as “the only fifth-generation fighter program on the world market.” It is, he says, a generation more advanced than possible rivals such as Boeing’s F-15 Eagle and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Dassault Rafale, the Saab Gripen, or Russian and Chinese counterparts.

The F-35 program, however, is 70 percent over initial cost estimates and years behind schedule. It was roundly criticized last month by the Pentagon’s procurement chief, J. Michael Gilmore.

Still, Japan has said it intends to acquire 42 of the Lockheed Martin fighters, with the first four to be delivered by 2017. South Korea also has plans to buy 40, for delivery in 2018 to 2021, though a senior South Korean official said last month that further program delays would be “problematic.”

Australia, a partner in the program, plans to take about 100 aircraft.

For potential buyers who are not members of the program partnership, however, there are significant negatives, said Alexandra Ashbourne-Walmsley, a military analyst and director of Ashbourne Strategic Consulting, in London.

Export customers “will essentially receive a sealed box for a very high price,” she said, since the United States is unlikely to supply the sensitive classified source codes for the F-35’s advanced weapons and radar systems.

While “the F-35 is clearly the most advanced manned fighter jet in production,” Ms. Ashbourne added, “the downside is that it is likely to be unavailable to countries not already F-35 program partners before the mid-2020s.”

Boeing, meanwhile, is continuing to promote its long-serving F-15 — with production assured through 2018 — and its Super Hornet, operational since 1999. Boeing has orders for the Super Hornet through 2016 and has been wooing Malaysia as a potential buyer.

Among other fighter offerings, the Rafale, from the French group Dassault, has met with little export success over the past 20 years, but it has a potential order for 126 planes from India, which could be signed in April. Of those, 108 would be built in India, but disagreements remain between the Indian government and Dassault over quality assurance and performance guarantees.

Eurofighter’s Typhoon has also had limited recent export success. At the end of last year, its production line was assured only through 2018.

Sweden’s Saab Gripen NG, the latest upgrade model in that program, recently signed a deal to sell 36 fighters to Brazil, a choice by the Brazilian government that Mr. Aboulafia described as highly rational, on three grounds.

First, “the world fighter market is quite cost-sensitive,” he said. “Second, Brazil faces no major strategic threats. The rest of South America consists of friendly nations or basket cases and the Brazilian Air Force needs only to control drug traffic and the Amazon Basin.”

“Third, the Brazilian economy is in grim shape, and Gripen NG’s operating costs are about one half of the F/A-18’s,” Mr. Aboulafia said.

Chasing more orders after its Brazilian deal, Saab opened an Asia-Pacific office in Bangkok in September. In 2008 it sold 12 earlier versions of the Gripen to the Royal Thai Air Force, along with two Saab 340 AEW surveillance aircraft and an integrated defense system.

In a telephone interview last month, Lennart Sindahl, the head of Saab’s aeronautics business group, emphasized the Gripen NG’s relatively low purchase cost and highly competitive operating expenses.

Mr. Sindahl also said that his company was exploring a possible Sea Gripen variant that could be capable of operations from small aircraft carriers, building on the existing aircraft’s short-airfield capability.

Mr. Aboulafia, of the Teal Group, said a new working relationship between Saab and Embraer of Brazil, in the context of the Brazilian Gripen deal, was “another intriguing development.” Embraer’s role “as a kind of co-prime contractor” for the Gripen NG program could be the seed of a wider collaboration, he suggested.

Embraer itself will also be at the Singapore show. The company is developing its KC-390 medium-lift twin-jet transport, now starting prototype production, though no prototype is yet flying.

Jackson Schneider, president of Embraer’s defense and security unit, said that Indonesia had bought 16 of its A-29 Super Tucano light attack and reconnaissance turboprops, a plane that, like the Gripen, fits advanced electronics to a low-cost airframe.

Boeing, meanwhile, will be showing its P-8, a maritime surveillance version of the ubiquitous 737-800 commercial transport plane, which recently entered service with the United States Navy. India has already ordered eight of the planes.

In November, Boeing also announced a new, lower-cost maritime surveillance aircraft program, known as the MSA. Based on the Bombardier Challenger 605 business jet, it is fitted out with P-8 and AWACS-based surveillance systems. The MSA is being presented to potential buyers this year.

In 2001, Japan opted to buy Boeing’s KC-767 aerial refueling tanker, signing a contract for four in 2003. They could, for example, be used to refuel the short takeoff, vertical landing variant of the F-35 that might be operable from helicopter carriers — diplomatically never described as aircraft carriers — being built by the Japanese Navy.

Airbus meanwhile has sold five A330 MRTT tanker/transports to Australia, and India has listed Airbus as a “preferred bidder” for a six-plane tanker procurement deal. The Airbus A400M transport, too, will soon be flying in the region, with four bought by Malaysia that are due for delivery in 2015 and 2016.

A version of this article appears in print on February 12, 2014, in The International New York Times.

 

[Deino]

To admit I have that strange feeling that this tread became a fairly one-sided pro-Japan and US and anti-China view what's not really helpfull to fully understand the situation and even more since it ignores other countries' own political ambitions, which simply use this so called unilateral Chinese aggression to follow their own goals.

Like Jemiba already noted, "there are more, than just one looking for its advantage" !

A Rebuke to Japanese Nationalism

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-16/a-rebuke-to-japanese-nationalism.html?cmpid=yhoo.view

A series of recent blunt statements from U.S. officials have left no doubt that Washington blames China's maritime expansionism for rising tensions in Asia. Now, America's main ally in the region needs to hear a similarly forthright message.

Japan had been clamoring for the U.S. to speak out more forcefully after China imposed an “air-defense identification zone” over a set of islands claimed by both countries. Officials in Tokyo have warned that any hint of daylight between Americans and Japanese only encourages further bullying from the mainland. For that same reason, U.S. officials have tempered their criticism of statements and actions by Japanese leaders that irk China, not to mention other victims of Japanese aggression during World War II.

This circumspection is becoming counterproductive. Since China imposed its air-defense identification zone in November, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has visited the deeply controversial Yasukuni shrine, which honors, along with millions of fallen soldiers from various conflicts, 14 Class A war criminals from World War II. What's more, several of Abe's nominees to the board of the state broadcaster NHK have made appallingly retrograde comments that Abe has declined to disavow. One claimed the horrific 1937 Nanjing Massacre never took place, while another pooh-poohed complaints that the Japanese military had exploited thousands of women from Korea and elsewhere as sex slaves during the war. Other Abe allies are busily trying to rewrite textbooks to downplay Japan's wartime brutality.

Japanese officials seem unconcerned with the impression all this creates abroad, arguing that relations with China and even with fellow U.S. ally South Korea can hardly get worse, and in any case are unlikely to improve so long as nationalists remain in power in those countries. A more conciliatory Japanese attitude, they are convinced, would only prompt endless humiliating demands from Beijing and Seoul.

Worse, Japan seems to be taking U.S. backing for granted. Abe went to Yasukuni even after Vice President Joe Biden quietly urged him not to. Details of their conversation were then strategically leaked, presumably to showcase Abe's defiant stance. In private, Japanese officials snipe about the Barack Obama administration’s alleged unreliability. Anything other than unstinting support for Japan is taken as a lack of backbone.

The U.S. should push back, and less gently than usual. President Obama's trip to Asia in April is an opportunity for the White House not only to reaffirm its disapproval of Chinese adventurism but also to make clear that Abe’s provocations are threatening stability in the region, and damaging the U.S.-Japan alliance.

This won’t change many minds inside Abe’s inner circle, of course. But most Japanese are acutely sensitive to any hint of U.S. displeasure. (Nearly 70 percent of respondents to one poll called on Abe to heed the negative reaction to his Yasukuni visit, which included a mild expression of “disappointment” from U.S. Ambassador Caroline Kennedy.) Voters threw out Abe once before when he let nationalist obsessions distract him from minding the economy. Sustained domestic pressure is needed to rein him in again.

Abe is not necessarily wrong to want to make Japan a more muscular nation -- to rejuvenate its economy, open up its society and normalize its self-defense forces. A more robust Japanese military could play a bigger role in promoting global and regional stability -- whether through anti-piracy patrols or peacekeeping missions -- and come to the defense of its allies. Inflaming Chinese and Korean sensitivities helps achieve none of those goals.

All it does is raise the likelihood of conflict in the region. That Abe's recent actions and comments may be less dangerous than China’s adventurism is beside the point. He’s eroding the international goodwill that Japan has built up over decades as a responsible democracy -- all for no good reason. If he can’t see that for himself, perhaps the U.S. -- and his own citizens -- can help him.

To contact the editor responsible for this article: David Shipley at davidshipley@bloomberg.net.

 

[Orionblamblam]

To admit I have that strange feeling that this tread became a fairly one-sided pro-Japan and US and anti-China view

Are any other nations making credible land/sea/resource-grabs like China is doing?

 

[Arjen]

Russia (2007) and Canada (2013) have called dibs on the North Pole.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/aug/02/russia.arctic
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/canada-risks-tensions-russia-claiming-ownership-north-pole-v21845764

<edit>...and Denmark. Something to do with the underwater Lomonosov Ridge being contiguous with Greenland/Lincoln Shelf/Siberian Shelf.

From the Guardian's piece:

Kim Holmen, the research director of the governmental Norwegian Polar Institute, told the Guardian that Russia's confidence could be misplaced. Asked whether sediment samples from the ocean bed could prove the Lomonosov ridge and the Russian continental shelf were one and the same, he said:

"In the geological sense, yes, but in the cartographic and political sense, no.
The United States and Europe were at one time connected, the Appalachians and the Scottish mountains are the same geological formation, but Scotland cannot claim the United States is part of its territory because of that. These samples cannot prove once and for all that the whole discussion is over."

United Scotland of America. Think about it.

 

[sferrin]

Russia (2007) and Canada (2013) have called dibs on the North Pole.

And of course that's exactly the same as calling dibs on somebody else's territory. :

 

[Deino]

To admit I have that strange feeling that this tread became a fairly one-sided pro-Japan and US and anti-China view

Are any other nations making credible land/sea/resource-grabs like China is doing?

I'm not sure why again this overhype ... for the moment the Chinese side - as the title is named - established an AZID .... nothing more. All other links here in this tread regarding "they steal land", "there's an arms-race" ... "Australia is worried" are nothing proven and especially when some other certain countries in that region, in return do nothing in return to either solve this issue to deescalate this situation ... the even provoke even more.

The point is simply that these territorial issues were never solved and even certain circles in the US administration admit this ... as such why all this mess ?? If a Japanese fighter scrambles to intercept a Russian bomber it is not even worth a note, if the PLAAF intercepts a Japanese aircraft it seems right to be the start of WWIII.

Again it's not only one side which is playing tricks and making politics for its own advantage, even if some don't want to see that since it fits so nicely to the own politics.

Deino

 

[Orionblamblam]

for the moment the Chinese side - as the title is named - established an AZID .... nothing more.

Would you be so accepting if, instead, it was *Japan* putting an "Air Defense Zone" over exactly the same territory?

If a Japanese fighter scrambles to intercept a Russian bomber it is not even worth a note, if the PLAAF intercepts a Japanese aircraft it seems right to be the start of WWIII.

And what if that Japanese fighter did the interception over, say, Beijing?

 

[Deino]

Would you be so accepting if, instead, it was *Japan* putting an "Air Defense Zone" over exactly the same territory?

Yes, for sure ... if the situation would be the same: namely "disputed and unsolved" ... then YES.

And what if that Japanese fighter did the interception over, say, Beijing?

I think You really can't compare the main capital which is undisputed part of a country with some admitted disputed island - or simply rocks - in the Pacific !



To admit the biggest problem IMO is simply that we here in the West simply cannot understand what each of these two countries - China and Japan - accept as disputed or undisputed following the "events" which happened or were done in WWII. For both sides there are still so many open bills and each one thinks the other side ows so much or has still to pay for old sins. I can fully understand that the the Japanese politics right now which is undisputed very much nationalistic in a certain sense i a thorn in many chinese eyes ... nad in contrast the so long sleeping dragon is a surely fear for others. But we - and esp. the USA - should be more than careful not to be misused by one of these sides ... otherwise the events right now are indeed more than similar to the events exactly 100 years ago in Europe where my coultry made not only one severe mistake with devastating consequences.

By the way here's an interesting read:
http://www.businessinsider.com/china-japan-conflict-could-lead-to-war-2014-1

Deino

 

[VH]

This statement bears scrutiny: "The downfall of every regime begins when the government begins to believe their own propaganda."

China is buying into this 'China Strong' madness and is heading down a dangerous path. Its a path that can lead to serious trouble for China.

 

[Triton]

"U.S. Signs off on Japanese Collective Self Defense"
by Peter Lee | February 12, 2014

Source:
http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2014/02/12/obama-administration-relents-japanese-pressure-collective-self-defense/

 

[Triton]

"Japan’s Leader Compares Strain With China to Germany and Britain in 1914"
By JANE PERLEZ JAN. 23, 2014

Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/24/world/asia/japans-leader-compares-strain-with-china-to-germany-and-britain-in-1914.html?_r=0

BEIJING — Relations between Asia’s two biggest powers, Japan and China, have been strained for months, with near-constant sniping over a territorial dispute and the two countries’ fraught history.

Now, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan has escalated the war of words, telling an audience on Wednesday at the Davos conference in Switzerland that the increasing tensions between China and Japan were similar to the competition between Germany and Britain before World War I, a blunt assessment that concurs with recent remarks by prominent historians.

Mr. Abe, a star speaker at the gathering, said a “similar situation” existed in both periods because while each set of countries enjoyed strong trade relations, that was not sufficient to overcome the strategic rivalry.

His remarks were in answer to a question at a forum moderated by a columnist for The Financial Times, Gideon Rachman, who has written on the subject.

The prime minister then went on to argue that China’s annual double-digit increase in military expenditures was a major source of instability in the Asia-Pacific region.

Mr. Abe previously stoked controversy in December when he visited the Yasukuni Shrine, where Japanese war dead are commemorated, including 14 Class A war criminals.

The Obama administration had warned Mr. Abe not to make the visit. Japan is Washington’s major ally in Asia, but the United States must balance those ties with its relationship with China.

An increasingly assertive China has also angered its neighbors, most recently with its unilateral declaration of an air defense identification zone over a chain of islands in the East China Sea claimed by China and administered by Japan.

The deputy secretary of state, William J. Burns, and the assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs, Daniel Russel, were in Beijing on Wednesday and Thursday for talks on a variety of issues. American officials do not want to become mediators between China and Japan, but they are eager to encourage Japan and South Korea, also an American ally, to improve their sour relations, administration officials have said.

In Beijing, Mr. Abe’s remarks comparing Germany and Britain in 1914 with China and Japan today met with a blistering response. The chief spokesman for the Foreign Ministry, Qin Gang, said that Mr. Abe was “saying these things for the purpose of escaping Japan’s history of aggression.” Mr. Qin said that any possibility of a meeting between Mr. Abe and the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, as Mr. Abe has suggested, was out of the question.

After Mr. Abe made his remarks, Japan’s chief cabinet secretary, Yoshihide Suga, said that the prime minister had not meant that war was possible between China and Japan, and pointed out that in his formal address to the conference Mr. Abe had called for peace and stability in Asia.

 

[Triton]

"Kerry warns China against new air defense zone"
Saturday 15 February 2014

Source:
http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/article/1428339/kerry-warns-china-against-new-air-defence-zone

US Secretary of State John Kerry warned China on Friday against unilateral moves to set up a new air defence zone, saying such a step could threaten regional stability at a time of heightened tensions.

After a day of talks with senior Chinese leaders including President Xi Jinping, Premier Li Keqiang and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, Kerry stressed that he had also highlighted the need to ease concerns over Beijing’s territorial ambitions.

The top US diplomat’s trip comes at a pivotal moment for the region, with flaring disputes between Beijing and Tokyo over their World War II history and disputed islands in the East China Sea sending relations between the Asian powers plummeting to their lowest point in recent years.

The issue of North Korea was also high on the agenda, with both sides putting specific ideas on the table for how to prod Beijing’s belligerent ally to take concrete steps towards denuclearisation.

Washington was deeply angered when Beijing last year declared an air defence identification zone (ADIZ) over the East China Sea which includes the disputed islands, saying it could lead to confusion high in the skies.

Kerry told reporters he had warned Beijing against any further such moves, amid reports that China is considering a similar ADIZ over the South China Sea, where it has competing claims with several countries including the Philippines -- another US security ally.

“We’ve made it very clear that a unilateral, unannounced, unprocessed initiative like that can be very challenging to certain people in the region, and therefore to regional stability,” Kerry stressed.

Any future such moves should be done “in an open, transparent, accountable way,” he said, adding China should meet “the highest standards” of openness “to reduce any possibilities of misinterpretation”.

His talks had also focused on “the specific road ahead” to resolve the competing maritime claims which have poisoned relations, and while China agreed it should be done peacefully, Kerry referenced Beijing’s belief that it has a “strong claim based on history, based on fact”.

For his part Wang “introduced the history of the East China Sea and South China Sea issues and elabourated on China’s firm stance”, Beijing’s foreign ministry said in a press release.

Zone not a claim of sovereignty

He stressed that “no one can shake our determination to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity”, it added.

Beijing requires aircraft flying through its ADIZ to identify themselves and maintain communication with Chinese authorities, but the zone is not a claim of sovereignty.

Nonetheless fears of an aerial or maritime clash over the East China Sea islands have spiked following its declaration by Beijing. Chinese and Japanese patrol boats regularly shadow each other in the waters near the islands.

At the same time Beijing has been acting increasingly assertively in the South China Sea, which it claims almost in its entirety.

Kerry, who arrived in Beijing from Seoul on the second leg of an Asia tour, reiterated Friday that North Korea must take “meaningful, concrete and irreversible steps towards denuclearisation”.

And he said the Chinese leaders had been “forceful” in reaffirming their commitment to that goal.

Wang said that China will never allow any chaos or war on the Korean peninsula, according to the official news agency Xinhua, quoting him saying: “China is serious on this. We not only say so, but do so.”

Chinese state media, however, remained focused on the historical issues at play, with the China Daily newspaper on Friday running an editorial cartoon depicting Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe offering a Valentine’s Day rose to a dead kamikaze pilot’s skull.

The cartoon appeared to be a reference to a recent bid by the Japanese city of Minami-Kyushu for World War II kamikaze fighters’ farewell letters to be included in a UNESCO world heritage register, a move that drew swift condemnation from Beijing and Seoul.

The Global Times newspaper, which is close to China’s ruling Communist Party, wrote in an editorial Friday that while Kerry’s visit to Beijing is expected to be a “smooth” one, the US’ promised “pivot” to Asia “has triggered pressure on China’s strategies”.

 

[Triton]

...Asia-Pacific nations appear set on procuring the single-engine stealth fighter for a variety of reasons: as a guarantor of interoperability with US forces; a hedge against the rise of China’s military and its own stealth fighters, the J-20 and J-31; and fears the US is losing its security grip on the Asia-Pacific region as China continues to push forward on plans to dominate its near seas and break through the first island chain into the Pacific.

“China has turned into Lockheed’s greatest salesman ever,” said Richard Aboulafia, vice president of analysis with the Virginia-based Teal Group.

The Chinese military’s aggressive posturing and the leadership’s rhetoric, coupled with the Chinese Air Force’s and Navy’s somewhat premature efforts to field stealth fighters and an aircraft carrier, have highlighted East Asian interest in fifth-generation fighters.

From "All Eyes on F-35: Threats from China Shape Conflicting Priorities Throughout Asia-Pacific"
Feb. 10, 2014 - 12:07PM |
By WENDELL MINNICK
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140210/DEFREG03/302100033/All-Eyes-F-35

 

[sferrin]

I do think it interesting that the first place the USMC is going to put F-35s is in Okinawa. Coincidence I'm sure.

 

[Triton]

I'm not sure why again this overhype ... for the moment the Chinese side - as the title is named - established an AZID .... nothing more. All other links here in this tread regarding "they steal land", "there's an arms-race" ... "Australia is worried" are nothing proven and especially when some other certain countries in that region, in return do nothing in return to either solve this issue to deescalate this situation ... the even provoke even more.

The point is simply that these territorial issues were never solved and even certain circles in the US administration admit this ... as such why all this mess ?? If a Japanese fighter scrambles to intercept a Russian bomber it is not even worth a note, if the PLAAF intercepts a Japanese aircraft it seems right to be the start of WWIII.

Again it's not only one side which is playing tricks and making politics for its own advantage, even if some don't want to see that since it fits so nicely to the own politics.

Deino

Are you agreeing then that the Air Defense Identification Zone covering most of the East China Sea created in November 2013 was the result of China's territorial disputes with Japan and South Korea? Particularly, to escalate the territorial dispute with Japan over the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Islands) and force the United States to choose sides in the dispute?

China's neighbors feel threatened by the ADIZ and the nation's military buildup.

 

[Triton]

We seemed to have missed this news from January 1 in our discussion:

"PM Abe publicly declares need to revise Japan’s pacifist constitution"
Jan 02, 2014 John Hofilena

Source:
http://japandailypress.com/pm-abe-publicly-declares-need-to-revise-japans-pacifist-constitution-0241747/

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, fresh from again drawing the ire of China and South Korea with a surprise year-end visit to the highly controversial Yasukuni shrine, has publicly declared in his New Year message to the Japanese citizenry that he is still resolute in his desire to change the nation’s pacifist constitution which was drafted after Japan’s defeat in Second World War. Article 9 of the Japanese constitution forbids the use of war to settle international disputes.

“As it has been 68 years since its enactment now, national debate should be further deepened toward a revision of the constitution to grasp the changing times,” Abe wrote in his traditional New Year message that was posted on Wednesday on his website. “Now is the time for Japan to take a big step forward toward a new nation-building effort,” he added. Abe is pushing for what he calls an “active pacifism” on Japan’s security front, where the nation “plays an active role in world peace and stability.” Abe said in his message that he will push for a revision of the Japanese Constitution to be enacted and in force before the Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympics comes around. “By 2020, I think Japan will have completely restored its status and been making great contributions to peace and stability in the region and the world,” he said.

Also in his message, Abe underlined the importance of defending Japanese territory from China’s “growing assertiveness” in the region. Recently, China raised tensions in the area by announcing a unilateral air defense zone that overlapped with territories of Japan and of neighboring countries – specifically including the airspace above uninhabited islands in the East China Sea controlled by Tokyo but disputed by Beijing.

When Abe took power in December last year, his initial focus was on improving Japan’s economy. Recently though, evidences of his nationalist approach has been showing, passing a state secrecy law which critics say is a threat to democracy in Japan. Abe has long been a proponent of amending a key article in the constitution that limits Japan’s military to self-defense and bans the use of force in settling international disputes. Abe has made it known that he would like to see the Japanese Self-Defense Forces (SDF) become a full-fledged military, a plan that raised concerns in Asian countries, most of whom were occupied by Japan during the WWII.

 

[Triton]

Will HMS Queen Elizabeth or HMS Prince of Wales pay a visit?:


"UK Official: Expect Greater British Presence in Asia-Pacific"
Feb. 18, 2014 - 12:32PM |
By NIGEL PITTAWAY

Source:
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140218/DEFREG/302180020/UK-Official-Expect-Greater-British-Presence-Asia-Pacific

SINGAPORE — A senior defense official forecasts a stronger UK presence in the Asia-Pacific over coming years as the region rebalances with the economic and military growth of China and India.

David Hatcher, regional director for Asia, the Americas and Australasia with the United Kingdom’s Trade and Investment Defence and Security Organisation, said that the UK was taking a much closer interest in the region.

“We know that our security as a trading nation and our stability and prosperity all depend on security and stability around the world and Asia-Pacific is a key area,” he said at the close of last week’s Singapore Airshow. “We wish to contribute to its security, stability and prosperity.”

Hatcher said that the United Kingdom would continue to be active within the Five Powers Defence Arrangements (FPDA), signed by the UK, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia and New Zeland in 1971.

“We recognize the United Kingdom is a serious country with a very big economy and a very big defense budget. We are a P5 [UN Security Council] member and we are listened to and we believe we should act accordingly. And that means being present in important regions,” he said.

“Yes, that means there will be more trade missions, there will be more ministerial visits and there will be more armed forces visits of one kind or another. We are out there and we’re back to stay. We find that most people welcome that.”

With regard to the rise of China as an economic and military power, Hatcher said the world needs to accept that changes are coming.

“Some people’s attitude is that China needs to be contained, which really is a 19th century colonial attitude and is not the right approach,” he explained.

“The right approach is to understand that times are changing; and it is not just China, India is also becoming a much more meaningful power, with a large population and a growing economy and we need to be aware of this and work with them.”

From a trade perspective, Hatcher was at the Singapore Airshow to forge closer ties with the Singapore government and local industry.

“With Singapore, we know we are dealing with a very discerning, very discriminating and very demanding customer and partner,” he said.

“I have been trying to identify, for the benefit of the UK and Singapore governments and our industries, where we can co-ordinate and work in parallel together to our mutual benefit.”

From a US perspective, the newly appointed US ambassador to Singapore, Kirk Wagar, said that the large US presence at the airshow was an example of President Obama’s pivot to Asia strategy.

“We really want to let everyone here know how much our whole of government business and private sector is here to stay,” he told reporters just before the show began.

“Our job as an Embassy and as a government is to support our American businesses here and work to forge even closer ties with the region. It’s good for us, it’s good for the countries that we work with and I’m excited to be a part of it.”

 

[SOC]

I do think it interesting that the first place the USMC is going to put F-35s is in Okinawa. Coincidence I'm sure.

Oops. Gonna be a really long haul to get them somewhere they'll actually make a difference :-X

Are you agreeing then that the Air Defense Identification Zone covering most of the East China Sea created in November 2013 was the result of China's territorial disputes with Japan and South Korea? Particularly, to escalate the territorial dispute with Japan over the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Islands) and force the United States to choose sides in the dispute?

Why couldn't it be a delayed, considered response to Japan expanding its ADIZ? If China is in the wrong here than why wasn't/isn't Japan?

China's neighbors feel threatened by the ADIZ and the nation's military buildup.

The "buildup" is partially explained by throwing off the final shackles of monumentally incompetent policy; China now has advanced technologically to where it can build weapon systems with parity to Western equivalents. If China replaces 500 J-7s with 500 J-10s, that's not a buildup, it's finally being able to field a modern air arm. Plus, they're economically better able to do things like make craploads of fighters and tanks now, where they weren't a few decades ago. What is being built up substantially is China's missile forces, and that's a much more serious threat.

Also, feeling threatened by something that represents no new territorial claims is a bit ridiculous. You can see both sides of the argument to be sure, but at the end of the day the ADIZ doesn't really do anything.

 

[sferrin]

Oops. Gonna be a really long haul to get them somewhere they'll actually make a difference :-X

That's what these are for:

 

[starviking]

Why couldn't it be a delayed, considered response to Japan expanding its ADIZ? If China is in the wrong here than why wasn't/isn't Japan?

Because Japan expanded its ADIZ to cover an inhabited Japanese island?


Because China's ADIZ, unlike others, demands permission to transit, whereas the standard only requires permission if a flight intends to enter national airspace?

 

[sferrin]

Also, feeling threatened by something that represents no new territorial claims is a bit ridiculous.

It's the intent behind it that's the problem. Like somebody walking up to you and getting in your face. They're not touching you or brandishing a weapon so you shouldn't be bothered. Right?

 

[SOC]

Because Japan expanded its ADIZ to cover an inhabited Japanese island?

Because China's ADIZ, unlike others, demands permission to transit, whereas the standard only requires permission if a flight intends to enter national airspace?

Japan's extended ADIZ also covered part of Taiwan's pre-existing ADIZ, so there is precedent for an overlap in the region. Reporting a flight plan doesn't necessarily constitute requiring permission unless China starts turning back unreported airliners.

That's what these are for:

Aviano > Okinawa. Far closer to Africa and the Middle East, doesn't require you to sail halfway around the world to get there, can merge with decks out of Naples, and doesn't have to worry about a billion inbound warheads.

 

[sferrin]

Aviano > Okinawa. Far closer to Africa and the Middle East, doesn't require you to sail halfway around the world to get there, can merge with decks out of Naples, and doesn't have to worry about a billion inbound warheads.

Pretty sure they said Okinawa.

 

[SOC]

Pretty sure they said Okinawa.

Exactly.

 

[sferrin]

Pretty sure they said Okinawa.

Exactly.

Obviously it's part of the "Pacific Pivot". I don't see the problem.

 

[Grey Havoc]

http://news.usni.org/2014/02/18/navy-official-china-training-short-sharp-war-japan

 

[starviking]

Japan's extended ADIZ also covered part of Taiwan's pre-existing ADIZ, so there is precedent for an overlap in the region. Reporting a flight plan doesn't necessarily constitute requiring permission unless China starts turning back unreported airliners.

Definitely a precident, though it must be borne in mind that the closest inhabited Japanese island to Taiwan is about 40 kms of the Taiwanese coast. Overlap in that case is near guaranteed.


China has said it will investigate unidentified contacts in their ADIZ, IIRC. hopefully nothing Hainan-esque will occur.


Finally, I have to say there is a noticable gap in analysis on the ADIZ issue. Recently China has been touting unilateral expansions of the Japanese ADIZ in 1972 and 2010, and few if any are asking why.


1972 - Okinawa is returned to Japan.
2010 - ADIZ is expanded to cover the western half of Yoniguni Island.


Maybe the truth is not confrontational enough to sell newspapers?

 

[Triton]

Japan's extended ADIZ also covered part of Taiwan's pre-existing ADIZ, so there is precedent for an overlap in the region. Reporting a flight plan doesn't necessarily constitute requiring permission unless China starts turning back unreported airliners.

Definitely a precident, though it must be borne in mind that the closest inhabited Japanese island to Taiwan is about 40 kms of the Taiwanese coast. Overlap in that case is near guaranteed.


China has said it will investigate unidentified contacts in their ADIZ, IIRC. hopefully nothing Hainan-esque will occur.


Finally, I have to say there is a noticable gap in analysis on the ADIZ issue. Recently China has been touting unilateral expansions of the Japanese ADIZ in 1972 and 2010, and few if any are asking why.


1972 - Okinawa is returned to Japan.
2010 - ADIZ is expanded to cover the western half of Yoniguni Island.


Maybe the truth is not confrontational enough to sell newspapers?

The East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone wasn't created in a vacuum by the People's Republic of China. One must also take into account the numerous naval encounters, diplomatic incidents, and massive public protests that have occurred regarding the Senkaku Islands since 2004 that have escalated the dispute. The governments of the United States, Japan, and South Korea see the creation of the East China Sea ADIZ as an escalation of the Senkaku Islands dispute.

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senkaku_Islands_dispute#cite_note-154

China for its part has not addressed the concerns of the United States, Japan, or South Korea of including the disputed territory within the East China Sea ADIZ and has reacted only with indignation, which has not decreased tensions. There is certainly a Cold War that exists between Beijing and Tokyo.

 

[VH]

Things must really be bad on the domestic front in China for their government to continue to create external enemies in an effort to unite the Chinese people.

 

[VH]

The "buildup" is partially explained by throwing off the final shackles of monumentally incompetent policy; China now has advanced technologically to where it can build weapon systems with parity to Western equivalents. If China replaces 500 J-7s with 500 J-10s, that's not a buildup, it's finally being able to field a modern air arm. Plus, they're economically better able to do things like make craploads of fighters and tanks now, where they weren't a few decades ago. What is being built up substantially is China's missile forces, and that's a much more serious threat.

Also, feeling threatened by something that represents no new territorial claims is a bit ridiculous. You can see both sides of the argument to be sure, but at the end of the day the ADIZ doesn't really do anything.

What is really ridiculous is China thinking that this handful of untried pilots and military personnel they have managed to cobble together can take on Japan and all the rest of the allies in a shooting war. China needs to sit down quietly somewhere and reflect upon the decisions they are making before they step off into something they will regret

 

[_Del_]

I don't know that they think they can "take on" the West/Japan; I imagine they think that if they make a move they won't have to. I'm not sure I disagree. I find it hard to imagine this administration would take up a fighting stance against China over mostly unoccupied rocks claimed by Japan. I think we'd see the POTUS on TV talking about how serious this is and how everyone needs to play nicely together to resolve the situation peacefully while China fortifies their new holdings. Words are wind.