Showing posts with label Vietnam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vietnam. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 12, 2016

DTN News: Philippines Wins South China Sea Case Against China

DTN News: Philippines Wins South China Sea Case Against ChinaSource: K. V. Seth - DTN News + The Guardian
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - July 12, 2016: China has lost a key international legal case over strategic reefs and atolls that it claims would give it control over disputed waters of the South China Sea. The judgment by an international tribunal in The Hague chiefly in favour of claims by the Philippines will increase global diplomatic pressure on Beijing to scale back military expansion in the sensitive area.

By depriving certain outcrops – some of which are exposed only at low tide – of territorial-generating status, the ruling effectively punches a series of holes in China’s all- 

encompassing “nine-dash” demarcation line that stretches deep into the South China Sea. It declares large areas of the sea to be neutral international waters.

Beijing claims 90% of the South China Sea, a maritime region believed to hold a wealth of untapped oil and gas reserves and through which roughly $4.5tn of ship-borne trade passes every year. Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also contest China’s claims to islands and reef systems close to their territory than Beijing’s.

Sporadic violence between Chinese vessels and those of south-east Asia militaries have broken out in recent decades and the verdict, the first international legal decision on the issue, could have unpredictable consequences.

The court case at the permanent court of arbitration in The Hague, the UN-appointed tribunal that adjudicates in international disputes over maritime territory, has been running since 2013.

The judgment does not allocate any of the outcrops or islands to rival countries but instead indicates which maritime features are capable under international law of generating territorial rights over surrounding seas. 

China has previously stated that it “will neither accept nor participate in the arbitration unilaterally initiated by the Philippines”. The tribunal ruled, however, that China’s refusal to participate did not deprive the court of jurisdiction and that the Philippines’ decision to commence arbitration unilaterally was not an abuse of the convention’s dispute settlement procedures.

Prof Philippe Sands QC, who represented the Philippines in the hearing, said: “This is the most significant international legal case for almost the past 20 years since the Pinochet judgment.” Last year, US officials claimed the Chinese had built up an extra 800 hectares (2,000 acres) on their occupied outposts across the South China Sea over the previous 18 months.

The main focus of activity has been on Mischief Reef, where satellite images reveal the island is growing bigger, and is surrounded by fleets of dredgers and tankers.

Speaking on the eve of the court’s ruling, Bonnie Glaser, a senior Asia adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said she did not anticipate a major escalation from Beijing over its findings but admitted its reaction was hard to predict. “[If] the Chinese really do perceive that the ruling is just poking a finger in their eye I think there is a good possibility they will lash out,” she said.

“I believe we have all underestimated Xi Jinping,” Glaser said of China’s strongman president who has pursued an increasingly assertive foreign policy on issues such as the South China Sea. “He just seems quite comfortable with a high level of friction with every country.”

China’s foreign minister spoke to the US secretary of state, John Kerry, by telephone last week to warn Washington against moves that infringe on China’s sovereignty, Chinese state media reported.

And Beijing conducted military drills in the South China Sea, deploying at least two guided missile destroyers, the Shenyang and Ningbo, and one missile frigate deployed.

China says it follows a historical precedent set by the “nine-dash line” that Beijing drew in 1947 following the surrender of Japan. The line has been included in subsequent maps issued under Communist rule.

But the Philippines strongly contests China’s claims, specifically on nearby islands it says are part of the West Philippine Sea. Manila argued in seven hearings that China has exceeded its entitlement under the UN convention on the law of the sea. That gives China 12 miles of territorial waters around islands it controls, far less than claimed under the nine-dash line.

Beijing has the support of Russia and Saudi Arabia but has also garnered backing from dozens of smaller nations far from and not greatly affected by the hearing, including landlocked African countries Niger and Lesotho, as well as Palestine, Afghanistan and Togo. Vanuatu, a Pacific island nation of fewer than 300,000 citizens, also supports Beijing.

The Philippines has been backed by the US, UK, France, Japan and others.

The Philippine president, Rodrigo Duterte, is widely considered unpredictable and his moves in the next days and weeks will determine what could happen next.

*Link for This article compiled by K. V. Seth + The Guardian
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*Photograph: IPF (International Pool of Friends) + DTN News / otherwise source stated
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS


Thursday, September 11, 2014

DTN News - DEFENSE NEWS: Is China Ready To Use Military Might in Southeast Asia

DTN News - DEFENSE NEWS: Is China Ready To Use Military Might in Southeast Asia 
Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by K. V. Seth - DTN Defense News
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - September 11, 2014China's Harbin (112) guided missile destroyer takes part in a week-long China-Russia "Joint Sea-2014" navy exercise at the East China Sea off Shanghai, China. 

In an annual report to Congress, the Pentagon said China is developing and testing new types of missiles, expanding the reach of its navy and upgrading its air force. China is also investing in military capabilities in cyberspace, space and electronic warfare.

The report said China’s military modernization was driven primarily by potential conflict in the Taiwan Strait, but also by its expanding interests and influence abroad, and increased tensions in the East China and South China seas. In November, China conducted its largest naval exercise to date in the Philippine Sea.

China has been engaged in territorial disputes with several of its neighbors, including U.S. allies Japan and the Philippines. China is currently locked in a tense, offshore standoff with the Vietnam.

In a long-standing U.S. criticism of China’s military expansion over the past two decades, the Pentagon criticized China’s lack of openness about its strategy, which it said has caused concerns in Asia.

“Absent greater transparency from China and a change in its behavior, these concerns will likely intensify as the PLA’s military modernization program progresses,” the report said, referring to China’s People’s Liberation Army.


China’s government in March announced a 12.2 percent increase in military spending to $132 billion. That followed last year’s 10.7 percent increase to $114 billion, giving China the second-highest defense budget for any nation behind the U.S., which spent $600.4 billion on its military last year.

Several Asian nations are arming up, their wary eyes fixed squarely on one country: a resurgent China that’s boldly asserting its territorial claims all along the East Asian coast. 

The scramble to spend more defense dollars comes amid spats with China over contested reefs and waters. 

Other Asian countries such as India and South Korea are quickly modernizing their forces, although their disputes with China have stayed largely at the diplomatic level. 

*Related Images;


*Link for This article compiled by K. V. Seth - DTN Defense News
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*Photograph: IPF (International Pool of Friends) + DTN News / otherwise source stated
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

DTN News - AIRLINES NEWS: Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 Mystery

Asian Defense News: DTN News - AIRLINES NEWS: Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 Mystery
Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by K. V. Seth from reliable sources Fox News
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - March 10, 2014Vietnamese aircraft spotted what they suspected was one of the doors belonging to the ill-fated Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 on Sunday, as troubling questions emerged about how two passengers managed to board the Boeing 777 using stolen passports.

The discovery comes as officials consider the possibility that the plane disintegrated mid-flight, a senior source told Reuters.

The state-run Thanh Nien newspaper cited Lt. Gen. Vo Van Tuan, deputy chief of staff of Vietnam's army, as saying searchers in a low-flying plane had spotted an object suspected of being a door from the missing jet. It was found in waters about 56 miles south of Tho Chu island, in the same area where oil slicks were spotted Saturday.

"From this object, hopefully (we) will find the missing plane," Tuan said. Thanh Nien said two ships from the maritime police were heading to the site.

An authority told Reuters that it was too dark to be certain the object was part of the missing plane, and that more aircraft would be dispatched to investigate the site in waters off southern Vietnam in the morning.

Rahman said that the search area has been increased to 50 nautical miles, from 20, and includes 34 aircraft and 40 ships. Aircraft are conducting 12-hour searches, until sundown, while ships are scheduled to continue the search throughout the night.

Meanwhile, Interpol says no country checked its database for information about stolen passports that were used to board the Malaysia Airlines flight that disappeared with 239 people on board Saturday less than an hour after taking off from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, bound for Beijing.

In a sharply worded criticism of shortcomings of national passport controls, the Lyon, France-based international police body said information about the thefts of an Austrian passport in 2012 and an Italian passport last year was entered into its database after they were stolen in Thailand.

Interpol said in a statement it was investigating all other passports used to board the flight and was working to determine the "true identities" of the passengers who used the stolen passports.

"I can confirm that we have the visuals of these two people on CCTV," Malaysian Transport Minister Hishammuddin Hussein said at a news conference late Sunday, adding that the footage was being examined. "We have intelligence agencies, both local and international, on board."

Hussein declined to give further details, saying it may jeopardize the investigation. Hussein said only two passengers had used stolen passports, and that earlier reports that the identities of two others were under investigation were not true.

European authorities on Saturday confirmed the names and nationalities of the two stolen passports: One was an Italian-issued document bearing the name Luigi Maraldi, the other Austrian under the name Christian Kozel. Police in Thailand said Maraldi's passport was stolen on the island of Phuket last July.

A telephone operator on a China-based KLM hotline on Sunday confirmed to The Associated Press that "Maraldi" and "Kozel" were both booked to leave Beijing on a KLM flight to Amsterdam on March 8. Maraldi was then to fly to Copenhagen, Denmark, on KLM on March 8, and Kozel to Frankfurt, Germany, on March 8.

She said since the pair booked the tickets through China Southern Airlines, she had no information on where they bought them. The ticket purchases reportedly took place almost simultaneously, and the tickets were numbered consecutively, according to the BBC.

A U.S. official told Fox News that a key priority is clarifying the status of the passports, whether they were lost or stolen, and determining through airport security screening and video who got on the flight under those names.

The statements came as officials said finding the wreckage of the flight is “the utmost priority."

“There is still no sign of the aircraft,” Azharuddin Abdul Rahman, director general of the Department of Civil Aviation, said during a news conference in Kuala Lumpur.

The U.S. Navy sent a warship, the USS Pickney, which was conducting training and maritime security operations off the South China Sea, and a surveillance plane. Singapore said it would send a submarine and a plane. China and Vietnam were sending aircraft to help in the search.

It is not uncommon for it to take several days to find the wreckage of an aircraft floating on the ocean. Locating and then recovering the flight data recorders, vital to any investigation, can take months or even years.

When pressed on reports of fake passports used by at least two passengers on board the flight and the possibility of a terrorist attack, Rahman re-stated that the priority is to find the aircraft and that any probe investigating a terror link is independent of the search mission. Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak has also said it is “too early to make any conclusive remarks.”

Earlier, Malaysia’s air force chief told reporters that military radar indicated that the plane may have turned from its flight route before losing contact.

Rodzali Daud didn't say which direction the plane might have taken when it apparently went off route.

"We are trying to make sense of this," he told a media conference. "The military radar indicated that the aircraft may have made a turn back and in some parts, this was corroborated by civilian radar."

Malaysia Airlines Chief Executive Ahmad Jauhari Yahya said pilots were supposed to inform the airline and traffic control authorities if the plane does start to return. "From what we have, there was no such distress signal or distress call per se, so we are equally puzzled," he said.

Vietnamese air force planes spotted two large oil slicks late Saturday in the first sign that the aircraft had crashed. The slicks were each between 6 miles and 9 miles long, the Vietnamese government said in a statement.

But there was no confirmation that the slicks were related to the missing plane, but the statement said they were consistent with the kinds that would be produced by the two fuel tanks of a crashed jetliner.

The plane was carrying 227 passengers, including two infants and 12 crew members when it “lost all contact,” with Subang Air Traffic Control at 2:40 a.m., two hours into the flight, the airline said. The plane was expected to land in Beijing at 6:30 a.m. Saturday.

Around the time the plane vanished, the weather was fine and the plane was already at cruising altitude, making its disappearance all the more mysterious.

Just 9 percent of fatal accidents happen when a plane is at cruising altitude, according to a statistical summary of commercial jet accidents done by Boeing. The plane was last inspected 10 days ago and found to be "in proper condition," Ignatius Ong, CEO of Malaysia Airlines subsidiary Firefly airlines, said at a news conference.

The lack of a radio call "suggests something very sudden and very violent happened," said William Waldock, who teaches accident investigation at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Prescott, Ariz.

The plane "lost all contact and radar signal one minute before it entered Vietnam's air traffic control," Lt. Gen. Vo Van Tuan, deputy chief of staff of the Vietnamese army, said in a statement issued by the government.

U.S. officials said late Saturday that a team of safety experts had been dispatched to Southeast Asia to assist in the investigation. Officials from the National Transportation Safety Board told Fox News that the team, which includes investigators from the agency and technical experts from the Federal Aviation Administration and Boeing, had been sent to the region despite the fact that the plane had not been located due to the lengthy travel time from the U.S. and the team's desire to be in a position to assist local authorities right away. The FBI is also assisting in the search.

Meanwhile, a former intelligence official told Fox News that the information about stolen passports from two adjacent European countries, combined with recent warnings for flights to the United States about the risk of possible shoe bomb attacks, is concerning.

The airline said onboard the plane, there were 152 passengers from China, 38 from Malaysia, seven from Indonesia, six from Australia, five from India and three from the U.S. and others from Indonesia, France, New Zealand, Canada, Ukraine, Russia, Taiwan and the Netherlands.

The U.S. State Department later confirmed in a statement that three Americans were aboard the jetliner.

In the United States, a friend confirmed to the Associated Press that an IBM executive from North Texas named Philip Wood had been aboard the jet. Freescale Semiconductor, a company based in Texas, also confirmed Saturday that 20 of its employees -- 12 from Malaysia and eight from China -- were passengers.

The airline says the plane's pilot is Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah, a 53-year-old who has been with the airline for over 30 years. The plane's first officer is Fariq Ab.Hamid, a 27-year-old who joined the airline in 2007. Both are Malaysians.

At Beijing's airport, authorities posted a notice asking relatives and friends of passengers to gather at a hotel about nine miles from the airport to wait for further information, and provided a shuttle bus service.

Malaysia Airlines has 15 Boeing 777-200 jets in its fleet of about 100 planes.

The 777 had not had a fatal crash in its 20-year history until the Asiana Airlines crash in San Francisco in July 2013.

Fox News' Catherine Herridge and Dan Gallo, as well as The Associated Press contributed to this report.

*Link for This article compiled by K. V. Seth from reliable sources Fox News
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*Photograph: IPF (International Pool of Friends) + DTN News / otherwise source stated
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS

Saturday, March 1, 2014

DTN News - DEFENSE NEWS: The A-10 Thunderbolt II Jet - Warhog of the Skies

Asian Defense News: DTN News - DEFENSE NEWS: The A-10 Thunderbolt II Jet - Warhog of the Skies
Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by K. V. Seth from reliable sources Boeing
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - March 1, 2014: The A-10 Thunderbolt II, also known as the Warthog, is a twin-engine aircraft that provides close-air support of ground forces and employs a wide variety of conventional munitions, including general purpose bombs. The simple, effective and survivable single-seat aircraft can be used against all ground targets, including tanks and other armored vehicles. The aircraft is currently supporting operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The first flight of the A-10 was in May 1972, and a total of 713 aircraft have since been produced. Over 350 A-10 aircraft are in service with the US Air Force, Air Combat Command, the U.S. Air Force Reserve and the Air National Guard.

A-10/OA-10 Thunderbolt IIs have excellent maneuverability at low air speeds and altitude, and are highly accurate weapons-delivery platforms. They can loiter near battle areas for extended periods of time and operate under 1,000-foot ceilings (303.3 meters) with 1.5-mile (2.4 kilometers) visibility. Their wide combat radius and short takeoff and landing capability permit operations in and out of locations near front lines. Using night vision goggles, A-10/OA-10 pilots can conduct their missions during darkness.

The single-seat cockpit is protected by all-round armor, with a titanium "bathtub" structure to protect the pilot that is up to 3.8cm thick. The cockpit has a large bulletproof bubble canopy, which gives good all-round vision.

The A-10 can carry up to six Maverick AGM-65/B/D/G/H/K air-to-surface missiles, and up to four AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles.

With its superior manoeuvrability and firepower, the A-10 Thunderbolt II jet is one of the toughest aircraft operated by the U.S. Air Force.

Attacking Targets on the Ground

The A-10 Thunderbolt II jet provides close air support for U.S. troops on the ground. The aircraft attacks tanks and other armored vehicles, as well as enemy ground positions. Developed in the 1970s, it was the first aircraft created to provide close air support to U.S. ground forces.

The A-10 Thunderbolt II has excellent manoeuvrability due to its large wing span. It is heavily armed with a 30 millimeter Avenger Gatling cannon that is capable of firing 3,900 rounds per minute; AGM-65 Maverick air-to-surface missiles; cluster bombs; and Hydra rocket pads. And, the aircraft is extremely durable with over 1,000 pounds of armor. The A-10 Thunderbolt II’s exterior is so tough that it can withstand direct hits by armor piercing bullets and explosive projectiles. The heavy duty armaments and protective armor have earned the aircraft the nickname "Warhog" among U.S. soldiers.

Developed during Vietnam 

The A-10 Thunderbolt II was designed in response to the large number of ground-attack aircraft that were shot down during the Vietnam Conflict by small arms and low level gun fire. The U.S. military decided to develop a tough and heavily armored aircraft that could provide close air support and survive ground attacks. The first versions of the A-10 Thunderbolt II came into service in 1976.

Over the years, the A-10 Thunderbolt II has been used extensively in war zones. The aircraft first saw combat during the 1991 Gulf War and was responsible for destroying almost 1,000 Iraqi tanks and more than 2,000 military vehicles. The A-10 Thunderbolt II also served in Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan.

Upgrades and Pilot Reaction

Over the years, the A-10 Thunderbolt II has received many upgrades and enhancements. The U.S. government is spending more than $2 billion to refurbish the aircraft and keep them operational through the year 2030. About 700 A-10 Thunderbolt II aircraft have been built to date, and each aircraft costs about $12 million to manufacture. Current modifications are designed to provide the jets' with precision weapon capabilities.

Despite the durability and strength of the A-10 Thunderbolt II, the aircraft has not always been popular with U.S. Air Force pilots. Many fighter pilots complain about switching to the aircraft as they find it slow and dislike its appearance. Fighter pilots generally prefer faster and sleeker jets to an aircraft that has the nickname "Warhog."

*Link for This article compiled by K. V. Seth from reliable sources Boeing
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*Photograph: IPF (International Pool of Friends) + DTN News / otherwise source stated
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

DTN News - SPECIAL REPORT ON SENKAKU ISLANDS: Is The Senkaku Island Dispute All Just A Huge Conspiracy?

Asian Defense News: DTN News - SPECIAL REPORT ON SENKAKU ISLANDS: Is The Senkaku Island Dispute All Just A Huge Conspiracy?
Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources By John
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - September 25, 2012: The Senkaku Island dispute has been blowing up again lately and the media is all ablaze with anti-Japanese protests in China. Japanese businesses are being vandalized, Japanese cars destroyed, and all sorts of crazy nonsense has been going down over there lately. So why are the Senkaku Islands so important to these countries and who do they really belong to?
Luckily for you, I’ve done extensive research, cracked the case, and can say with utmost certainty who has the rights to lay claim to the islands.

THE SENKAKU ISLANDS AND HOW IT ALL BEGAN

Before this whole deal made its way into the media, I didn’t really know much about the Senkaku Island debate, let alone where these islands were. The Senkaku Islands, or Diaoyu as they are known in China, are a group of five uninhabited islands and three barren rocks located in the East China Sea between Japan, Taiwan, and China, with all three countries laying claim to them.
Following the Meiji Restoration, the Japanese government formally annexed what was known as the Ryukyu Kingdom as Okinawa Prefecture in 1879. The Senkaku Islands, which lay between the Ryukyu Kingdom and the Chinese Qing Empire, became the boundary between the two nations.
In 1885, Japan considered taking formal control of the Senkaku Islands. However, the islands had been given Chinese names, Chinese newspapers were claiming that Japan was occupying islands off of China’s coast, and Japan just didn’t really want to make the Qing Empire suspicious of anything by annexing the islands. As such, the request to initiate formal control over the islands was rejected.
In 1895, during the First Sino-Japanese War, Japan decided to incorporate the islands under the administration of Okinawa, stating that it had been conducting surveys there since 1884 and that the islands effectively didn’t belong to anyone, with there being no evidence to suggest that they had ever been under the Qing Empire’s control.
After China lost the Sino-Japanese War, both countries signed the Treaty of Shimonoseki which stated that China would surrender the island of Taiwan together with all islands appertaining or belonging to said island of Taiwan.
The tricky part here is that there was no agreement as to who had control over the Senkaku Islands prior to this, so it is debatable as to whether or not the Senkaku Islands were actually included as part of the Treaty of Shimonoseki. This detail is important because the treaty was rendered moot when Japan lost World War II in 1945. The Treaty of San Francisco nullified prior treaties concerning the area.
Like I said, there is a disagreement between the Japanese, Chinese, and Taiwanese governments as to whether or not the islands are implied to be part of the “islands appertaining or belonging to said island of Taiwan” in the Treaty of Shimonoseki. China and Taiwan both dispute the Japanese claim to the island by citing Japan’s abovementioned reasons to turn down the request to incorporate the islands in 1885. Both China and Taiwan assert sovereignty over the islands.

THE COVERUP

Unfortunately for Japan and China, the abovementioned history means absolutely nothing. Through my extensively painstaking research on the topic, I uncovered the greatest government conspiracy coverup fiasco known to man. Neither Japan, China, or Taiwan have the right to claim the Senkaku Islands as their own.
I discovered that shortly after Lithuania’s personal union with Poland in 1386, a brave and handsome Lithuanian man set out on a sailing expedition from the port city of Klaipėda in search of fame and fortune. Tragically, the ships did not return for they had become irreparably damaged and moored on a rocky, uninhabited archipelago in a strange and distant sea.
The captain of the ship detailed the landscape and surroundings in his journal as he slowly passed away from starvation. He wrote of his dreams and aspirations, his love for his country, and claimed the archipelago in the name of his family.
This man was my ancestor. I traced back the lineage and I found that I am the true heir to the Senkaku Islands. Both the Chinese and Japanese governments know this and they’ve tried to hide the fact that the islands belong to me and my family with their made up histories and elaborate fairy tales. I profess that I am the only one who may rightfully lay claim to these lands. I declare myself high king of the Senkaku Islands.
But just for fun, let’s explore why China and Japan think that they have the right to claim the area and not me.

THE CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS

The Senkaku Islands are currently administered by Japan, but Taiwan and China both lay claim to them as well. The United States occupied the islands after World War II from 1945 to 1972 and even though they do not have an official position on the validity of the competing sovereignty claims, the islands are included within the U.S. Japan Security Treaty. This means that if Japan needed to defend the islands, it would be likely to compel action by the United States military.
Both China and Japan indicated their sovereignty claims with respect to the islands to the United Nations Security Council at the time of the US transfer of its administrative powers to Japan after its occupation in 1972. Sovereignty over the islands would give Japan exclusive oil, mineral, and fishing rights in surrounding waters.
Basically what happened was that the US handed the islands over to Japan, and China wasn’t too happy about it because they believed it should be placed in their hands, not Japan’s.

CHINA’S CLAIM TO THE ISLANDS

It seems that China really didn’t put up too much of a fuss about these islands until after it was discovered that there might be oil reserves under the sea surrounding the islands. The study was conducted in 1968, and the Chinese started getting really adamant over their claims to the region shortly thereafter, especially with the US choice to hand control of the region over to Japan. From the Chinese perspective, this is what it looks like for the Senkaku Islands.
1. China claims the discovery of the islands for themselves, citing early recordings of such in old maps and travelogues.
2. The islands were China’s frontier off-shore defense against wakou (Japanese pirates) during the Ming and Qing dynasties (1368-1911) and an old Chinese map of Asia as well as a map compiled by a Japanese cartographer in the 18th century show the islands as being a part of China.
3. As mentioned above, Japan took control of the islands during the First Sino-Japanese War in 1895 by means of the Treaty of Shimonoseki. But a letter from the Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs in 1885 warning against annexing the islands due to anxiety about China’s response, shows, in China’s opinion, that Japan knew the islands were not actually “up for grabs.”
4. The Potsdam Declaration stated that “Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku, and such minor islands as we determine,” with “we” being the victors of the Second World War, including the Republic of China. Japan accepted the terms of the Declaration when it surrendered and China sees this as a reason for stating they have rights to the islands in question.
5. Both China and Taiwan never endorsed the US transfer of the islands to Japan in 1970s.

JAPAN’S CLAIM TO THE ISLANDS

The Japanese stance on the issue is that there isn’t even an issue at all. Japan believes that there is no territorial issue that needs to be resolved over the Senkaku Islands whatsoever. In a counter to the abovementioned Chinese points, Japan has stated the following.
1. According to Japan, the islands have been uninhabited and have showed no trace of being under Chinese control prior to 1895.
2. The islands were neither part of Taiwan nor part of the Pescadores Islands, which were ceded to Japan by the Qing Dynasty in the Treaty of Shimonoseki. Therefore, the Japanese believe their claim to the islands was not affected by the San Francisco Peace Treaty.
3. Though the islands were controlled by the United States as an occupying power between 1945 and 1972, Japan was given and has exercised administration over the islands ever since.
4. Taiwan and China only started claiming ownership of the islands in 1971, following a May 1969 United Nations report that a large oil and gas reserve may exist under the seabed near the islands.
So, as one can see – they are simply bickering over lands that they have no legitimate stake in. Those islands are mine and I’m considering submitting a formal complaint of sorts, but I fear that without widespread worldwide support, I will fall victim to the same fate as many Japanese businesses and establishments in China as I’m sure the validity of my claim will be questioned.

THE ANTI-JAPANESE DEMONSTRATIONS


Over the years there have been plenty of demonstrations concerning the sovereignty of the Senkaku Islands. Lately, there’s been a resurgence of them in China, mostly due to Shintaro Ishihara’s decision to let Tokyo Municipality purchase three of the Senkaku islands from their current Japanese owners (the Kurihara family), placing them under state control. The Chinese government angrily protested, stating, “No one will ever be permitted to buy and sell China’s sacred territory.”
On August 15th, activists from Hong Kong sailed to and landed on one of the disputed islands, but were stopped by the Japan Coast Guard. The activists and their ship were detained by Japanese authorities and were deported two days later.
China wasn’t happy about this either.
In Beijing, citizens of began protesting in front of the Japanese embassy and protestors called for the return of the Diaoyu Islands and for Japan to confess her crimes. Chinese protestors marched down the streets chanting slogans such as “Defend the Diaoyu Islands” and “Smash Japanese Imperialism.” They called for the boycott of Japanese goods and for the government to retake the islands. Japanese flags were defaced, Japanese cars were smashed, and shops selling Japanese goods were vandalized.
According to Sing Tao Daily, the Chinese government sent in large numbers of armed police, who called for an end to the violent protests, drove the protesters away, and detained a handful of them.
The riots are also being condemned by a great amount of Chinese citizens and many are hoping for a soon to be realized peaceful solution as can be seen from posts on Sina Weibo (a Chinese microblogging website akin to a hybrid of Twitter and Facebook, used by well over 30% of Internet users in China with more than 300 million registered users).
When I first saw the horrific scenes, I was so ashamed of my own race, seeming so barbaric and outrageous through the lens, that at one point, I felt that such a lawless nation will never have any hope of becoming a peace-loving superpower that is deserving of respect, and that there is no point of staying in a country that can come to Armageddon so easily.
But after reading posts that have flooded Sina Weibo, most of which vehemently condemned such violence, I realize that while the rabble and the crimes they’ve committed in the name of love for China have irreversibly smeared the image of Chinese people, there are much more people who have utter contempt for them.
Currently, the official stance of the involved parties is as follows: China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs is urging people to express thoughts “rationally and within the law,” Japan’s Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda wants China to prevent anti-Japan violence, Taiwan is annoyed but being ignored by pretty much everyone, and the United States just wants everybody to calm down.
As one can see, there’s a lot of stuff going on and the people and the governments are trying to figure out the best way to proceed with everything. Normally, I wouldn’t take a stance on these sorts of situations as they’re usually not entirely black and white cases, but these islands are obviously mine to claim. This I know for sure. Another thing I know for sure is that it’s a bad time to be the owner of Japanese goods in China with all the riots going on. Yikes.

ACTUALLY, THIS HAPPENS A LOT

Unfortunately, territorial disputes are a pretty common thing between Taiwan, China, Japan, Korea, and other Asian countries. Koichi actually wrote about this a while ago in his post about all the current land disputes Japan is involved in.
Just recently at the London Olympic games a South Korean player got in big trouble for displaying a sign with a slogan supporting South Korean sovereignty over disputed islets that are claimed by both South Korea and Japan (called Dokdo in South Korean and Takeshima in Japan). There’s a small chance that these islets belong to my family as well, but I won’t get into that here.
And then of course there’s the whole China/Taiwan deal along with a slew of countless other issues plaguing the region. It would seem that territorial disputes are more rampant in the Asia Pacific are than any other, a full list of which can be found here. I’m sure there will always be plenty of disputes regarding the lands in the area, especially when they’re uninhabited islands such as the Senkaku. My only hope is that the issues can be resolved peacefully.
I’m not even going to get into all the other supposed stakes my family has in distant lands that are currently up for dispute, but here’s where you come in. I need you to help rally support for the cause and get the Senkaku Islands back into their rightful hands. Mine.

So tell me, what are your thoughts on the whole Senkaku Island dispute? Any important details I forgot to touch on? Who do you think has the most valid claim to the islands – Japan, China, Taiwan, or yours truly? What do you think should be done to resolve the issue at hand? Let us know in the comments!
Disclaimer statement
Whilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information supplied herein, DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Unless otherwise indicated, opinions expressed herein are those of the author of the page and do not necessarily represent the corporate views of DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News. 
*Link for This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources By John
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS