Protests across China, Japanese Diplomatic Shake-up
show comments
  • Luke Lea

    Draw a line through the principal axis of the islands and grant seabed on one side of the line to China and on the other to Japan? Where there are three or four claimants do a pie chart.

  • Luke Lea

    Here’s a nice image of the stakes:

  • Luke Lea

    A little research shows those islands were claimed by Japan in 1895 at the same time they laid claim to Formosa. China has a case.

  • lester

    It is pretty amazing how close two nations can get to war over some speculative offshore gas fields, but our intellectuals on the left in the USA do not bother to use what we know we have beneath our lands and seas.

    Just amazing.

  • lester

    Maybe we should declare war on Japan. Surrender immediately. Have them institute full bore US domestic energy production, onshore and offshore, then declare independence. That is probably what it will take to overcome the stupidity of the demorat party and the greenweenies.

    There is no other nation on earth that wastes or lets lay fallow these tremendous natural resources (oil, gas, coal, rare earth metals, water, wood, corn, etc.)

  • Mike Giles

    In the mind of a Left Loon, it’s “unfair” that the US has all theses resources. It’s “only right” that w leave them in the ground and allow “oppressed” Third World countries to “catch up”. Besides if the US exploits those resources, it would remove any need for the US to give a [darn] about any of those tin pot dictatorships out there.

  • You might nave a point, Luke, except that no-one was living on or near the Senkaku islands when the claim was made (under grounds of terra nullis). The claim actually followed several years of a Japanese fishing family using the islands as a camp and was initiated by the family who were seeking legal recognition of their rights and claims.

  • M. Report

    Trade has a much higher ROI than war.

  • Rob

    Didn’t Japan surrender unconditionally? I’d be very surprised to learn the terms set by the Allies didn’t specify post-war borders.

    If the stakes weren’t so high, it’d almost be comical the sound of an aggressor country whining about that little chunk of land it lost while being repelled (yes, Syria et. Al., that was for you too). Seems right to me, there’s a price to pay when you mobilize your armed forces, walk/fly/float ’em to my country (unprovoked), attack… and fail.

  • CC-in-VA

    M.Report wrote “Trade has a much higher ROI than war” which of course is true. However, if you are China, with huge numbers of surplus young men who cannot find wives (because of the one-child policy having caused selective abortions and skewed the male-female ratio), then going to war using those angry and frustrated young men as expendable cannon fodder is a rational policy choice.

  • Georgiaboy61

    Re: “If the stakes weren’t so high, it’d almost be comical the sound of an aggressor country whining about that little chunk of land it lost while being repelled…” Rob, in case you haven’t noticed, Japan has paid her debt to world society for her crimes in WWII, at least to the extent she is going to do so. Beijing has a record of being extremely bellicose concerning natural resources, even ones that lie well-outside of its waters, such as in the Spratley and Paracel Islands.

    It would have cooled tempers and ugly memories if the post-WWII Japanese leadership had done a better job of apologizing to those who suffered under the empire of Japan during 1910-1945, but that window of time has passed, and modern-day Japanese should not be punished for the sins of their forefathers, in which they had no part. The Chinese and Koreans have just cause for being angry about watered-down history textbooks that whitewash the Nanking massacre and other such atrocities, but these grievances should not cause war.

    For China’s part, she is feeling her oats entirely too much, and is throwing her weight around like a schoolyard bully. Japan is not the only East Asian nation concerned about PRC sabre-rattling. The ROK, Taiwan, Vietnam and others are concerned as well. China’s unapologetic sponsorship of N. Korea’s aggression over the years does not help matters.

    The S. Koreans and Taiwanese are caught in the middle, and had best play their cards carefully.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to and affiliated sites.