Japan is engaged in three territorial disputes over small islands; one a quarrel that could involve the US in armed conflict, another that angers US leaders and a third that is calm.
In the first, which is over islands the Japanese call Senkaku, the Chinese Diaoyu (釣魚) and the Taiwanese Diaoyutai (釣魚台), armed patrol ships have been sailing close to one another and firing water cannons at each other in the East China Sea. It is an accident or miscalculation waiting to happen.
At the same time, a war of words erupted at the UN General Assembly last week as the Japanese reiterated their legal and historical claim to the islands, while the Chinese repeatedly accused the Japanese of “stealing” their ancient territory.
US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton met separately with the Chinese and Japanese foreign ministers in New York in an attempt, apparently unsuccessful, to get both sides to back off. The Chinese have several times cautioned the US not to meddle in this quarrel.
A US State Department spokesman told the press after Clinton’s meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi (楊潔篪) that she urged “Japan and China [to] engage in dialogue to calm the waters, that we believe that Japan and China have the resources, have the restraint, have the ability to work on this directly and take tensions down.”
After her meeting with Japanese Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba, the secretary’s spokesman said she had urged Japan to “move carefully, deliberately and effectively in its bilateral diplomacy with China.”
The danger is that both the Chinese and Japanese have taken rigid public positions with heated rhetoric. For either to retreat would cause a loss of “face” and unpredictable political consequences. This comes when China is about to undergo a change of leadership and Japan’s parliamentary government may call an election before long.
The danger for the US lies in a mutual security treaty with Tokyo that might require an armed intervention on the side of Japan. The US has taken no position on the territorial claim, but has declared that the security treaty applies to the Senkakus, as they are under Japanese rule.
The uninhabited islands are within striking distance of the US air base at Kadena on Okinawa. A spokesman for the Pacific Air Forces in Hawaii declined to say whether F-15 or F-22 squadrons there had been alerted, it being customary not to comment on operational matters. However, prudent commanders undoubtedly have their eyes peeled.
In the second dispute, over rocks in the sea between Japan and the Korean Peninsula called Takeshima by Japan and Dokdo by South Korea, another war of heated rhetoric erupted at the UN last week.
A US official, asked which side was more at fault, spat out a reply: “We’re ticked off at both of them.”
In this case, Clinton called Gemba and South Korean Foreign Minister Kim Sung-hwan together. Her spokesman said later she had urged them “to calm the waters [and] maintain cool heads.”
Other officials have said both should attend to more serious threats, such as that from North Korea.
“We have no intention of playing a mediating role” on the territorial claims in this dispute, the spokesman added.
The US has a security treaty with each side, but both have been told quietly that the US would not feel obligated to back either one if an armed conflict breaks out between them.
In contrast to the bitterness between China and Japan and South Korea and Japan, the issue of four islands north of Hokkaido, Japan’s northern island, lies quiet. Russia, then the Soviet Union, captured them at the end of World War II, but Japan still claims them. The US openly supports the Japanese claim.
There may have even been some movement toward resolving the dispute. At the meeting of APEC members in Vladivostok last month, Russian President Vladimir Putin invited Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda to visit Moscow at an unnamed date.
Putin, who wants to see Russia have more influence in Asia, told a press conference with Noda: “We are interested in developing relations with Japan and we want to conclude all the problems that we inherited from the past. We spoke about what we can do in the nearest future.”
Compared with what the Japanese have been hearing from the Chinese and Koreans, that must have sounded like a Tchaikovsky symphony.
Richard Halloran is a commentator in Hawaii.
US president-elect Donald Trump continues to make nominations for his Cabinet and US agencies, with most of his picks being staunchly against Beijing. For US ambassador to China, Trump has tapped former US senator David Perdue. This appointment makes it crystal clear that Trump has no intention of letting China continue to steal from the US while infiltrating it in a surreptitious quasi-war, harming world peace and stability. Originally earning a name for himself in the business world, Perdue made his start with Chinese supply chains as a manager for several US firms. He later served as the CEO of Reebok and
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
US president-elect Donald Trump in an interview with NBC News on Monday said he would “never say” if the US is committed to defending Taiwan against China. Trump said he would “prefer” that China does not attempt to invade Taiwan, and that he has a “very good relationship” with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Before committing US troops to defending Taiwan he would “have to negotiate things,” he said. This is a departure from the stance of incumbent US President Joe Biden, who on several occasions expressed resolutely that he would commit US troops in the event of a conflict in
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
RSS