Politics Island Debate - how far will it go?

[Sydneyfan]

Yeah, that's a good point Sydney Bloods. China has too much to lose by going to war over this at this moment. China is on the rise, Japan's been in the doldrums for a couple of decades now and reached their peak in the 90's, while each year sees China on a stronger footing compared with the US. Sure, the US have the military but increasingly it's China bankrolls it. China just have to bide their time and in the meantime could use this dispute to fuel xenophobia whilst taking the focus off - its many - internal issues.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

They also now have an excuse for a military build up in the pacific without being seen as being "aggressive"

 

[Admiral Byng]

I meant our closest expansionist "friend" to the north. So not the USA, China, Japan or Great Britain

Kamaria?

 

[nut]

The war has already started

On Sunday, September 16th, Sina Weibo, the Twitter-like Chinese social networking service, erupted with the news that a university student had been trampled to death, and another man had been severely beaten just for driving a Toyota Corolla.

http://japandailypress.com/chinas-p...chinese-man-beaten-for-driving-toyota-1712329

 

[nut]

Fair enough if it was a crown but a corolla? This is getting very serious...

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

I thought Russia would get involved as they have historically in the past supported China, but I can't help but feel they'd relish the opportunity to see some economic superpowers weaken themselves.

Japan and Russia have their own problems with disputed sovereignty over islands;

http://indrus.in/articles/2012/12/1...l_dispute_over_the_southern_kurils_21077.html

The Russia-Japan territorial dispute and the controversy over the Southern Kuril Islands – Kunashir, Shikotan, Habomai and Iturup, which have been under Russia’s jurisdiction since the end of the Second World War is still continuing.

The islands form a strategic boundary between the Russian Sea of Okhotsk and the Pacific Ocean. Given the increased activities of naval forces and other powers in the region, the strategic value of these islands has increased over the years.

These four islands are also said to be very rich in natural resources and contain substantial energy resources...

Russia is probably worried at the increase of nationalism in Japanese politics today. An assertive Japan might set about correcting the various territorial wrongs it sees in its neighbourhood, but to even start doing so militarily it has to alter it's presently anti-war Constitution. On the Japanese Self-Defence Forces;

http://www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/abe-wants-freer-rein-for-military

...Japan’s military is kept on a very short leash under a war-renouncing constitution written by U.S. officials whose main concern was keeping Japan from rearming soon after World War II. But if Japan’s soon-to-be Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has his way, the status quo may be in for some change.

Abe, set to take office for a second time after leading his conservative party to victory in elections on Dec 16, has vowed a fundamental review of Japan’s taboo-ridden postwar security policies and proposed ideas that range from changing the name of the military — now called the Japan Self-Defense Forces — to revising the constitution itself.

Most of all, he wants to open the door to what the Japanese call “collective defense,” which would allow Japan’s troops to fight alongside their allies — especially the U.S. troops who are obliged to defend Japan — if either comes under direct attack. The United States has about 50,000 troops in Japan, including its largest air base in Asia.

Right now, if Japan’s current standoff with China over a group of disputed islands got physical, and U.S. Navy ships coming to Japan’s assistance took enemy fire, Japan wouldn’t be able to help them...

There could well be big rumblings in the 'hood in the near future, but who would war really benefit, with the global economy teetering on the brink as it is?

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Well considering a major war was what brought the western world out of the great depression, perhaps the governments of most nations?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Well considering a major war was what brought the western world out of the great depression, perhaps the governments of most nations?

Dunno man, most manufacturing jobs are no longer in so-called 'first world' nations any more. They're all in the cheapest labour pools - China, India, etc. Could the U.S even get it up for a massive industrial & manufacturing binge anymore like it did in WW2?

Undoubtedly someone somewhere WOULD benefit. Remains to be seen whether it would be the U.S and its current 'world order'.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Dunno man, most manufacturing jobs are no longer in so-called 'first world' nations any more. They're all in the cheapest labour pools - China, India, etc. Could the U.S even get it up for a massive industrial & manufacturing binge anymore like it did in WW2?

Undoubtedly someone somewhere WOULD benefit. Remains to be seen whether it would be the U.S and its current 'world order'.

We would by selling raw materials to both sides and staying neutral.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

We would by selling raw materials to both sides and staying neutral.

I should hope so. Australia should be joining the Non-Aligned Movement right about now, as I see a big power shift in South East Asia in the near future. It's always best to have neither party holding misgivings against you.

 

[nut]

We would by selling raw materials to both sides and staying neutral.

Thats what the US did in the first part of WW2

 

[Ice-Wolf]

I should hope so. Australia should be joining the Non-Aligned Movement right about now, as I see a big power shift in South East Asia in the near future. It's always best to have neither party holding misgivings against you.

I agree. I think our best bet would to to scale back our military relationship with the US, still allow them port access for shore leave ect but not allow them to have any military bases in Australia. I think the Marine base in Darwin is a mistake and all it does is piss off the Chinese and potentially the Russians for no real benefit for us.

I think our outlook should switch back to closer ties to the Commonwealth nations and our local neighbours and maintaining or forging good working relationships with the major powers, I also think it is only a matter of time before Russia turns its focus back to the pacific so ity would be good to be on good terms with them as well.

We need to use our time on the Security Council to build our own voice, instead of being a puppet for our allies, friends should be able to disagree and the US should be mature enough to understand that.

 

[Total_Juddshanks]

I still say its a case of sabre rattling.

In fact I think china is smarter then you all give credit. Set this up say you'll go to town rile up people, then back down to US pressure.

Then ride the wave of angst towards foreigners to distract from growing domestic problems, additional while the international media is covering this it's a great time to crack down on dissidents and troublesome areas.

Interesting theory, but yeah, I don't think China is that smart ( or more correctly I don't think that would work).

The CCP is not above playing the foreigner card, but domestic anti-japanese sentiment isn't a tap they can turn on and off- get a normal rational mainland chinese onto the topic of japan, and see them blow their stacks.

This has become such a die in the ditch issue that bowing to japanese pressure would be a big blow to the prestige of the new chinese leadership, and probably make their domestic situation worse, not better. Conventional wisdom is that a large chunk of the CCP's moral authority in china comes from building china's prestige internationally and not being seen to eat s**t from the japanese.

If I were the Japanese PM, I would suggest that both parties agree to vest sovereignty in the UN (if such a thing is even possible in an international law sense) pending binding arbitration by a feckless and suitably disinterested third party- just take the heat out of it, and give China a way to back down without losing too much face.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Interesting theory, but yeah, I don't think China is that smart ( or more correctly I don't think that would work).

The CCP is not above playing the foreigner card, but domestic anti-japanese sentiment isn't a tap they can turn on and off- get a normal rational mainland chinese onto the topic of japan, and see them blow their stacks.

This has become such a die in the ditch issue that bowing to japanese pressure would be a big blow to the prestige of the new chinese leadership, and probably make their domestic situation worse, not better. Conventional wisdom is that a large chunk of the CCP's moral authority in china comes from building china's prestige internationally and not being seen to eat s**t from the japanese.

If I were the Japanese PM, I would suggest that both parties agree to vest sovereignty in the UN (if such a thing is even possible in an international law sense) pending binding arbitration by a feckless and suitably disinterested third party- just take the heat out of it, and give China a way to back down without losing too much face.

There's no way Japan can backdown now, for them it's about building back what they lost in WW2, just remember china could have purchased the islands if they actually wanted them, they didn't.
The timing of this comes just as the Chinese were building up arm's and growing tension within china for a less hard stance on many domestic issues.

Right now the Chinese people are only concerned with this dispute, it's worked swimmingly. So far the back down may anger people but the Chinese wont risk a conflict involving the US as it not only damages the growth of china, but they aren't yet ready to take on the might of the US when it comes to air and sea.

 

[Jakko]

A more than interesting article about a Chinese Colonel. Take it for what its worth (he might just be a rogue nutter, or he might give some basic hints as to Chinese military views on its old neighbours).

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...olf-chinese-colonel-warns-20130122-2d52d.html

 

[The_Reaper]

This is partly an issue with saving face. Japan has never satisfyingly repented for its war crimes to the victims.

When ever one PM does so, the next buggers everything up.

Japan has never recognised WWII in the way Germany has.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

A more than interesting article about a Chinese Colonel. Take it for what its worth (he might just be a rogue nutter, or he might give some basic hints as to Chinese military views on its old neighbours).

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...olf-chinese-colonel-warns-20130122-2d52d.html

So of I understand this correctly he's a nutter employed by the Chinese communist party, to give out unofficial positions of the party.

In some sort of attempt to intimidate regional powers by not so subtly suggesting that china will grossly overreact to disputes involving the rival nations?

I don't understand why you would do this, all it does is spread paranoia and fear between foreign powers.

That style crap is more likely to lead to war then anything else.

 

[Jakko]

So of I understand this correctly he's a nutter employed by the Chinese communist party, to give out unofficial positions of the party.

In some sort of attempt to intimidate regional powers by not so subtly suggesting that china will grossly overreact to disputes involving the rival nations?

I don't understand why you would do this, all it does is spread paranoia and fear between foreign powers.

That style crap is more likely to lead to war then anything else.

IMO, the people that matter know all of this anyway. Guys like this are aiming for the type of person that thinks we could just sit back and ignore a china-japan/phillipine/taiwan type skirmish/disagreement, become the little lamb as he puts it. They arent stupid (yes, even china will have plans in place for a potential takeover of the pacific, just as countries like the US and russia have scenario planning). They have simliar resource issues that Japan had 75 years ago. They need sea lanes open or they just wont get the resources needed for a big war. For them, that means they would love Australia to tell the US to get stuffed and be all alone.

 

[Jakko]

Well its all heating up a little bit over the last few days.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/us-assures-japan-in-islands-dispute-with-china-20131128-2yays.html

 

[Jakko]

China sends some planes to defend the area. They really, really don't like the Japanese!

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/28/japan-south-korea-chinese-air-zone-islands

How long until Japan flies a couple of planes over the island, with USAF high cap F22s?

 

[Sydney Bloods]

It's a reply to the US's b52 flyer over on November 30.

Basically in there latest "claim" to the island the Chinese put in a no fly zone over the area surrounding the island.

And told everyone that no plane could enter the area without China being notified in advance, the next day the US ordered a fly over and notified the Chinese after they had landed.

I still say it's nothing more then posturing.

Nothing will happen without a significant change in Chinese politic's.

It would not surprise me if China used this as an excuse to crackdown on other territories it makes claims over.

 

[Pie eyed]

This is purely based on there actions towards their neighbours and supposedly their own people nothing to do with their skin colour (are they really yellow anyway?), I think we need to keep an eye on them rather than worry about issues even further from home. If New Zealand was expansionist and antagonistic I'd want to keep an eye on them too.

I think you missed the local political relevance of the term.
Whenever a Liberal Government is slightly exposed as incompetent (read the current Abbott Government) they fall back on alarmist rhetoric about the "real danger" to the North, whether Japan, China (Red Peril?) to take the focus form their ineptitude.

 

[Power Raid]

Well considering a major war was what brought the western world out of the great depression, perhaps the governments of most nations?

real wars always start after currency wars

 

[Ford Fairlane]

This would have to be one of the most complicated geo-political intertwinings possible.

• Hundreds of years of less than cordial China-Japan tensions that continue to the modern day
• Atrocities committed during World War 2
• A rising Chinese economy coupled to a declining (or at least stagnant) Japanese economy
• US alliance with Japan to maintain the pacifist Japanese constitution, if the US abandon Japan then it opens the door for re-armament, certainly nuclear
• Claims over disputed territorial boundaries, some of which were decided unilaterally post-WW2
• Political regimes trying to remain relevant and leaning on increasing nationalism to do so
• Countries surrounded by neighbours determined to keep each other's ambitions in check

Given all of these tensions I'm with Sydney Bloods - the only solution is diplomatic. Everybody has too much to lose in any other scenario. But it is a delicate balancing act.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Exactly any action by Japan would mean China rolls straight over them, they can't be seen to strike first as they need a war weary u.s to back them up. And if they do get rolled when seen as aggressors support for the political right in Japan would collapse

China can't afford to strike either because the reality is as dependant on China as the US is theres other countries that can fill demand if needed.

A US boycott alone could cripple China let alone if Europe afraid of nuclear exchange joins the boycott.

And if that happens all of China's disputed claims would be on the table, at the very least they would be forced to give up many islands and Taiwan.