China vs Japan/US? Diaoyu island.

I know there have been heated discussions between China and Japan over Diaoyu island for years now, but things have seemed to have escalated recently with Japan and the US joining forces regarding that area, regardless of China's disagreement.

Japanese Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba on Tuesday said that the Diaoyu Islands will be included in a security and cooperation treaty between Japan and the US, in a decision worked out with his US counterpart Hillary Clinton, the Jiji Press reported. This is not the first time Japan has made these kinds of statements but given the timing, after a series of incidents that inflamed tensions over the islands, analysts see the reiteration of these remarks as escalating confrontation between China and Japan.

My girlfriend (who is Chinese) is saying that Chinese media is really focusing on this, with talks of a physical conflict. I don't have any Chinese news links as yet as I'm waiting for her to get on to a computer to send them to me, so for the time being I'm using English sources.

"The US has adopted a double standard on the Diaoyu Islands. On the one hand, the US claimed that the Diaoyu Islands are included under its bilateral treaty with Japan and on the other, it said it won't take any stance in the dispute," Wang said, adding that Japan's repeat of the statement will certainly provoke confrontation with China.

SOURCE

It may just be birds puffing their feathers out, but it seems to be more than just 'talking' as a response recently.

The uninhabited and long-contested Senkaku Islands, controlled by Japan but claimed by China, have again turned into a flash point amid Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda’s recent proposal to buy the territory from a private Japanese landowner. China sent three ships to the area last week as an apparent response, prompting a protest from Japan.

“From [the] Chinese perspective, no matter whether the Tokyo metropolitan government or Japanese government purchases the Diaoyu Islands or nationalizes them by other means, it’s still a step to consolidate the legality of Japan’s control and jurisdiction,” Zhou Yongsheng, deputy director of the Japan Study Center at China Foreign Affairs University, wrote last week in the Global Times. “China won’t indulge such behavior, and will inevitably take strong countermeasures.”

Washingtonp ost

I also found this report from the 16th of this month:

A Chinese Communist Party editorial said last week: ''Each time Japan takes one step, we should take 1½, or even two, steps forward, making Japan aware of the grave consequences caused by its aggression against China.'' Any of these measures would inflame tensions with Japan and intensify anti-China sentiment. This would help neither the two countries nor the region.

NEWS QUOTE

Strong words.
My question is, if a conflict did arise where military clashed, the US would no doubt be expected to get involved to help Japan. But with all the ties they have to China (Bonds, import/exports etc) would the US really get involved? If so, surely Korea and other countries would get dragged in?

Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Thanks guys.

Id like to think we (the US) wouldn't get involved, but I am sure we would even though it isn't really our business.. sticking our nose where it doesn't belong is our specialty

The US gets involved in order to try and destabilise China in order to stop them becoming the most powerful superpower. Can't see this happening. This is how much the US has imported from China this year so far, 161,974 million dollars.

This action is to put pressure on the US deliberately in order to gain concessions for Japan. Seems more likely.

Tensions are high all over the world. This conflict has been centuries in the making. When Japan occupied China the Chinese people were treated like dogs. They were constantly forced to do whatever the soldiers wanted or killed if they resisted.

Now that China has grown up they are full of resentment for the Japanese. I am sure they would love to repay the Japanese in kind and even fight the USA if we were to back Japan.

Right now it is just sabre rattling, but it could lead to more if something happens.

both sides will bluster awhile over it then it will quietly die down and an accord reached via calm discussion between both parties ... unlike westerners who resort to violence to solve everything ... its an arguement thats been going on off and on for decades - funny it always heats up when the americans poke their noses into it ...

i don't think so . really its big problem.

Curious as to why this is in the WW3 section. Do you think this will spark WW3? Just curious...
The U.S. will try to sit down with both sides before getting involved in kind of conflict. We have enough to worry about in the ME right now. Getting involved with the conflict eventually drags the Koreans in and the last thing we need is our military spread even thinner than we already are. Or is this part of China's plan?

China versus Japan? China would steam roll over the Japanese in a matter of weeks.

If the US got involved then China would most likely strike Taiwan as well as supporting a N. Korea's missile program. We would see the US and China fighting via proxy (US would arm Taiwan, Japan and other countries in the region while China uses its huge reserves of man power to just flood the enemy homelands).

I doubt it would lead to direct confrontation unless N. Korea decided to invade the South and the US was forced to step in against N.K. which would lead to China retaliating.

It is just a power show by China to bully other regional powers into fearing for their safety and draining US forces to take the ease of Iran and Syria (I am guessing) and make some space to move around.

As I posted in another thread similar to this one,

If the US got fully involved, they would wipe China's butt militarily speaking. Even if N Korea ramped up they wouldn't stand a chance. Each would suffer heavy losses before the US would really start feeling the pinch.

Economically speaking....the US would just close the door to China, they need us like we need them. We're joined at the hip that way.

Originally posted by behindXtheXveil
Id like to think we (the US) wouldn't get involved, but I am sure we would even though it isn't really our business.. sticking our nose where it doesn't belong is our specialty

We are obligated as we signed the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan in 1960 that protects Japan from aggression from foreign invaders. Since we limited their ability to manufacture defensive weapons and to arm themselves, they really have a very limited ability to defend themselves as a result of the Japanese Instrument of Surrender.

That's the problem we can't. China is smart staying out the middle east. they are snatching territory in it's stomping ground. this is what they do, why didn't anyone see this coming besides us? that's the first thing we said on ats when obama was elected, china is gonna start snatching territory.

your going to stretch those boys paper thin if a conflict arises between japan and china.

reply to post by Noinoi



Some good info here:

island dispute details

You will notice some change in policy after fossil fuels are found, go figure.

It reminds me of the movie, there will be blood.

Originally posted by damingus
Curious as to why this is in the WW3 section. Do you think this will spark WW3? Just curious...
The U.S. will try to sit down with both sides before getting involved in kind of conflict. We have enough to worry about in the ME right now. Getting involved with the conflict eventually drags the Koreans in and the last thing we need is our military spread even thinner than we already are. Or is this part of China's plan?

No one would have guessed that Duke Ferdinand's assassination would spark WW1.

Though I'd say attacking Poland had predictable results in starting WW2.

As for spreading our military thin, we have 700+ bases in 100+ nations, we
are already spread all over the whole damn planet.

World Police indeed....

reply to post by Ex_MislTech

Interesting! Thanks for the link.
It seems this conflict has been going on for a long time. I was looking at a historical run-down on wiki:

# January: On 21 January 2012 Diet lawmakers Koichi Mukoyama and Yo#aka Shindō surveyed the islands by ship and later stated that the islands, several of which are still private property of Japanese citizens, needed to be fully nationalized. Their visit was the first by national politicians since 1997.[110]

# March: On 16 March, the PRC sent maritime patrol boats Haijian 50 and Haijian 66 to patrol near the Senkaku Islands, with foreign ministry spokesman Liu Weimin announcing that the move was to help safeguard the PRC's territory and that the islands were part of PRC's territory. The crew of a nearby Japanese coast guard vessel stated that the Haijian 50 entered Japanese territorial waters for 25 minutes and warned the ship to leave. A Japanese government spokesman later stated that the ship had not actually entered Japanese waters, but the Japanese government lodged an official protest with the Chinese ambassador to Japan, Cheng Yonghua.[111][112] According to the People's Daily 21 March 2012, an unnamed official of the State Oceanic Administration stated that the PRC intends to patrol the Diaoyu Islands in order to challenge a potential future Japanese claim to the islands based on the international 50-year standard "statute of limitations" for claiming possession of a territory.[113]

# 7 July 2012: The Japanese Prime Minister stated that these islands are an integral part of his country and the Government is considering their purchase from the Japanese owner.[114]

# Three Chinese patrol vessels entered the disputed waters around these islands on 11 July 2012.[115] On 15 July 2012, Japan recalled their ambassador to China to work on the response to the transgression.[116]

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT

I posted this in the WW3 section due to the possible outcome from this. China vs Japan/US.
Korea could get involved with rhetoric pro- China. And I'm sure that if China were to be legitimately threatened then Russia would probably get involved.