Japan has decided to return the Chinese fishing vessel captain it had detained over an incident involving two Japan Coast Guard ships. But the implications of this dispute are likely to be far reaching. Over the coming weeks we’ll be hearing a lot from analysts on what this row means for both countries, but in the meantime it’s clear it throws up a number of intriguing questions.
The most immediate is why Japan changed its mind now? According to Reuters, Japanese prosecutors overseeing the case went on record saying that the release reflected consideration for Sino-Japanese ties. But international relations surely exceed the job description of prosecutors.
China for its part will have felt that this was anyway not an appropriate case for a Japanese prosecutor to be dealing with because they already claim the islands, known as Diaoyu in China and Senkaku in Japan. This difference in perceptions over the status of the islands goes a long way toward explaining why it has been so difficult for the two sides to find a mutually satisfactory way of tackling the problem, and to be fair to China it’s clear why if it claims the islands it wouldn’t necessarily have been content to let the Japanese legal process follow its natural course (although it also has to be said it’s becoming increasingly hard to find a body of water in Asia that China doesn’t claim).
And it’s this issue of regional claims that brings up another intriguing question – what on earth is China doing? In the latest instance, one Japanese commentator speculates in the Mainichi newspaper that internal politics are behind the tough stance with Japan, arguing that Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao are trying to deflect criticism from conservatives with a tough stance on this issue.
But with country after country this year it has appeared to many to go out of its way to rub neighbours up the wrong way over territorial issues – India, Japan, Vietnam – with sweeping claims or interference and sometimes threatening rhetoric. This has had the presumably unintended (but perfectly predictable) effect of drawing the United States closer to countries in the region. This is certainly set to be the case with Japan after this latest disagreement. US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen this week confirmed strong US backing for its ally over the issue, and China looks to have squandered an opportunity to exploit tensions over the differences between the US and Japan over security issues like the Futenma air base. Will China’s threatening of serious consequences for Japan be the kind of language that turns out to have pushed Japan back toward the US embrace, and will it give a further excuse for those pushing for greater investment in Japan’s military (I mean Self Defence Forces)?
On the face of it, Japan looks like the immediate loser after buckling under growing Chinese pressure. But this dispute has been carefully watched by other countries in the region (including the Japanese public). Chinese policymakers will need to ask themselves if its decision to escalate this issue so quickly and so vigorously will come back to haunt it. Certainly it won’t have done anything to reassure any of its neighbours that they have nothing at all to worry about over China’s rise.
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Jianhan
It’s not just China or Chinese that could get emotional with territorial disputes, every county does including Japan, Vietnam, Britain, India…
This incident seems a bigger deal only because the involved happen to be the second and third largest economies, especially one of them being the favourite bashing (not always unreasonable) target by the global media.
Diaoyu island should belong to either of those two, but Taiwan.
Chinaman
I don’t mind if Taiwan claim Diaoyu island for now. We will take over Taiwan before 2050. China will also take over Japan, Korea, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, Australia, New Zealand, and the entire pacific. It will be Soviet Union of China.
kai pan
@ Chinaman
Don’t make silly statements about China wanting to establish a Soviet Union of China. It makes you sound like a sissy.
China does not want to take over any country.
China would like to have land returned that was taken by force when China was weak. However, this is a question for the future and does not require aggressive measures for a solution.
If one looks at 18th century maps of China, one will easily see that Tibet and Xinjiang were historically part of China; even the island chain called the Ryukyu Islands had a tributary relationship with the Chinese Empire dating back to the 15th century.
China has no need for territory belonging to other countries.
Chinaman
If you look at China’s economic power, political influence, and foreign policy, neighbouring countries are already under Beijing’s control. Even Kevin Rudd speak good Mandarin. For 30 years, China follow Deng Xiaoping’s strategy ‘to conceal brilliance and cultivate internal strength’ (tao guang yang hui). Now things starting to change. Even Hu Jintao told China’s senior diplomats “to strive to make our country more influential politically, and help ensure that our country has a more friendly image, with greater moral appeal.” Why? If our image is friendly then they will join us instead of becoming enemy. China would like to have land returned that was taken by force when China was weak is same as what I say. China will not use force but become good friend with all for the good of Asia. No problem if they put some flag for each state in the future Soviet Union of China.
John Chan
Chinaman, are you sure you are a Chinaman? You sound like a neo-con who tries to undermine China’s effort to rise peacefully. Armageddon probably is what you are looking for.
Ken
Chinaman is a derogatory term for Chinese people. He is not Chinese.
Jianhan
Correct the last sentence.
Diaoyu island should belong to NEITHER of those two, but Taiwan.
mareo2
I start to think that that is the only solution, but if Japan give it to Tawian we are are going to get a lot of flack from China.
harry
Li deng hui the person so many taiwanese are proud of once said Diaoyu island belongs to japan. there are just too many japan lovers in taiwan.
SE962582C
To quote quote ” … ties. But international relations surely exceed the job description of prosecutors.” and unquote.
What an utter nonsense! Notwithstanding being untrue.
It is anyway and anyhow not, NOT, up to the non-Citizenry, NON-JAPANESE Alien persons, especially persons not, NOT, being Constitutional Lawyers, or Experts or Specialists, to decide what are the Job-Description[s] of the JAPANESE Prosecutors.
SE962582C
Would he the person concerned and in question ever possibly receive a “Fair Trial” in the First or 1st Place?!
And if was he the person concerned and in question actually and really be both, BOTH, “Personally Responsible” and, AND, be “Criminally Responsible”?!
It can, CAN, actually be argued, e.g., for example and for instance, that he were not, NOT, if he were, WERE, a Chinese Governmental Agent and/or Chinese Agent of State, especially if Duress, Threats and/or Hostages was or were involved.
And where would you, or could you, possibly find the linguistically Chinese-speaking Interpretors in Japan that CAN ALSO be used at a Japanese Court-Room, Court-House, Court of Law and Court of the Judicature, IN AN OPEN COURT, that
That are not, NOT, also not, NOT, being of Chinese Descent, direct or indirect?!
SE962582C
And where would you, or could you, possibly find the linguistically Chinese-speaking Interpretors in Japan that CAN ALSO be used at a Japanese Court-Room, Court-House, Court of Law and Court of the Judicature, IN AN OPEN COURT, that
That are not, NOT, also [] being of Chinese Descent, direct or indirect?!
cha
First of all, I think it is better to share this island between two countries rather than get relationship hurt during every incident. Obviously, the international law does not work sometimes, why can’t Japan and China to pave a new path first. Sharing can boost two country’s interaction, more over, the area of island can be a bridge for Japanese and Chinese tourists or fishing men.
Second, I personally believe the captain should be punished lightly. However, considering the issue over the island, Japanese government shouldn’t have taken Japanese law on the captain, they should have foreseen the final consequence. If China did not take a tough measure, it would be thought an acceptance of the idea the island belongs to Japan, what country would do this?? From the first, it was a Japanese political misstep. They put the game on, and this game has winner and loser in the end.
Michael
Jason, this is second piece of yours within a few days that are totally missed the mark. I am surprised by your lack of perspectives and your one-sidedness (biased against China.)
The first piece is the one you wrote just two days ago – “China, Paint, Corner.” You talked about China backed itself to a corner. It looks like that Japan was the one being backed into the corner.
Now you wonder “what on earth is China doing? ” Well if it is a big surprise to you that China is finally able to defend its sovereignty (to a limited degree) and rescue its citizen from illegal detention by Japan, you still lived in 1937.
On July 7, 1937, Japan launched a full scale war into China to “search” for one “missing” soldier. Obviously Japanese “search” team (the military) was not able to find the man nearby, so they occupied much of China for a brutal period of eight years. Chinese government was weak and powerless at the time. The Sino-Japanese war ended with US bombing of Japan in 1945, and Japan’s surrender to the allies (including China). Twenty million Chinese lost their lives during the war. Until today, Japan has not even both to apologize as of today.
This part of the history is very relevant for three reasons. 1) Japan had not respected China’s sovereignty when it was strong and needs to be reminded by China frequently. 2) Diaoyu island was receded to Japan as part of Taiwan by China because of China’s loss during the first Sino-Japanese (1894-95), and it should be returned to China as part of Japan’s surrender in 1945. Unfortunately United States, as the occupier of Japan, chose to give it to Japan. 3) China is not that weak any more, and should start to defend its sovereignty and protect its citizens.
It is true that neither sides (China or Japan) come out of this as a winner. There could be no winner in ANY disputes between two powerful neighbors.
kai pan
@Michael
I believe you totally missed the point of Jason Miks’ argument. Was this a “pyrrhic victory” for China by “forcing” the Japanese Government to return the Chinese captain?
The key to Miks’ argument is in the definition of “pyrrhic victory,” namely, “a victory won at too great a cost to have been worthwhile for the victor.”
Your reference to 1937 and the war against Japan are irrelevant to the fact that China may have caused itself more harm than benefit from the clumsy handling of this event.
Note the following news headlines:
The Telegraph (UK) reported:
“China has succeeded in pushing Japan deeper into US arms.”
“The [Japanese] defence ministry is reported to be exploring plans to expand the size of the Japan’s ground personnel by 13,000 troops – almost 10 per cent – as early as next year. The expansion would be the first in almost 40 years and come amid growing regional tensions, particularly in areas where China’s navy is increasingly active.” [21 Sep 2010]
“Aquino raises Spratlys issue, talks with Obama at US-ASEAN meet” [09/25/2010]
“U.S., Asian Allies Take Firmer Stance on China
Asean Seeks Stronger Positions on Territorial Disputes Amid Concern Over Beijing’s Growth and Rising Military Power” – [SEPTEMBER 23, 2010]
The question is not the merits of China’s claim to the Diaoyu. The question is: Was this a smart move by China flexing its muscles (now)?
I believe China is uniting all its neighbors against it. That is not a smart move. They are seeking protection and support from the US.
China is also weakening its claim of building its “soft power.” Even Mongolia is turning against China.
“Mongolian neo-Nazis: Anti-Chinese sentiment fuels rise of ultra-nationalism”
Guardian (UK) [2 August 2010]
China’s military is intoxicated with its new toys. Unfortunately, they have no experience in fighting except the “war games” they play with themselves. The last real war they had was a shocker for them when the Vietnamese gave them a bloody nose.
China is making diplomatic and military mistakes. This is a reflection of lack of clear leadership.
There will be a war with China and China is making strategic errors which will lead to China’s defeat. This would not happen with Chairman Mao.
Michael
@Kai Pan,
1) About understanding Jason’s point – I understood Jason’s point perfectly. I just disagree with his biased perspective against China, as evidenced by this and many other articles of his. If you may, you can check his articles on the same topics – “China, Paint, Corner”, “China Fishing for Outrage?”. If I can summarize the theme of his articles on this topic, he is basically saying that China can do nothing right, losing is losing, and winning is losing too. The only right things for China, in Jason’s prescription, is to respect Japan’s application of domestic law and wait for the captain to be tried.
2) About “pyrrhic victory”, China was forced by Japan in this incident, and China has no choice but to defend its sovereignty right and rescue its citizen from illegal detention. If it comes with a cost, so be it. If Jason is not so biased, I would agree with his point that China is not really a winner due to the high costs. Unfortunately, Jason’s bias prevents his to have a balanced reporting: there is a huge cost for Japan too. Jason glossed over the other side with a simple sentence of “On the face of it, Japan looks like the immediate loser after buckling under growing Chinese pressure. But…”
3) About other country’s responses to China – You raised an interesting point here about China’s soft power. China was losing its soft power over the summer to United States prior to this incident. I actually think this trend is to be slowed, not accelerated, by China’s strong stance over Diaoyu islets. For China to be successful in the region, there is a need for clever mix of soft and hard powers. For too long, China wants to be loved. It is time to flex its muscle occasionally. China has overlapping claims of sovereignty with many other countries. Those can not be resolved by smiles alone. When they realize China means business, there is less a chance for conflicts.
piglet
so you mean China will force people to love it? good luck with that.
Michael
@piglet
Love is over-rated. I live in the United States. Everyone in the world is having a love-hate relationship with US. But tell you the truth, nobody in the states actually cares.
kai pan
@Michael
China has “overlapping claims of sovereignty” with India, Japan, Vietnam, and others (Brunei, Malaysia, Philippines, etc.)
Michael said: “When they [other countries] realize China means business, there is less a chance for conflicts.”
China fought wars with India, Vietnam, and Japan in the past. Those wars were isolated from each other.
Today, those claims of “sovereignty” are being used by a certain power to unite a coalition against China. China is foolish to fall into this trap.
China is making stupid strategic moves by creating a problem one day with India, another problem with Vietnam the next, and an additional one with Japan a week later. That doesn’t sound like a clever strategy to me.
China’s strategy for dealing with contradictions with other countries is not working.
China should manage its “problems” so that they don’t get on the front page of newspapers around the world.
China is now demanding that Japan apologize for arresting the captain of the ship. I don’t think that is going to happen. This “problem” is going to escalate if China demands an apology and Japan refuses.
What will China do next, use North Korean diplomacy?
If China wants to flex its newly gained muscles, well, it will discover that its little muscles are not enough.
Chou En-lai and Chairman Mao were past masters in dealing with problems like this. Unfortunately, China has no Chou En-lai or Chairman Mao.
SE962582C
… if not a “may” or a “might”, if [NOT] even a “Would”, “knock on” upon his Front Door.
Do please leave the Poor Man alone, please Sir!
And whatever you do, DO NOT and DON’T Mention the WAR! It is ALL OVER! What is this, 1928 or 1937?! Should you still be alive by now, let alone behind a Computer and using it?! You are FAR TOO YOUNG for that kind or that sort of nonsense! Unless of course you would rather want to, wish to or care to start another one and another War!
Aj
Can someone help me understand what this comment means? It doesn’t make any sense to me.
SE962582C
All I was or one were attempting to say was that “Please, leave Mister MIKS, Mr Miks, and the Man and the Gentleman alone, and please stop the Personal Attacks and Vilification against him the Man and the Gentleman.”
He lives, does live, and lives apparently in Japan, just so that you know.
John Chan
There is no victory to China. All nations in Asia have to dance to the USA’s tone. The only benefactor of all the bickering between China and its surrounding nations is USA. Now those nations surrounding China have learnt to behave in according to the code of conduct for the sidekicks prescribed by the USA. China has to choose either to give up its sovereign right on areas are in dispute, or risk to be isolated in Asia. If USA can wring China in, then EU and Russia will quietly fall in line too. Japan is just a pawn in the USA’s grand geopolitical chess game. China has suggested to all its surrounding nations not to take unilateral actions in disputed areas, those disputes should be left to the future when the environment becomes more suitable to resolve them, but Japan has to do the otherwise. For Japan, orders from the USA are hard to say no. I guess hundred some years of colonial ruling make those nations surrounding China hard to refuse the marching orders from their ex-colonial masters.
Drive by
This is an important victory for China. The author missed the point. It confirms the sovereignty of China over the disputed area. It demonstrates the ineffectiveness of U.S.-Japan security treaty. It proves to ASEAN nations that U.S. backing only means lip service, even to one of its most important ally in the world.
Mikeem
Are we discussing the same event here? What I, and many others saw play out over the past few days was a dramatic China whining (again) about it’s “feelings”. China has manipulated it’s citizens into an ‘us against them’ mentality and so has to play the role of victim in every international dispute.
It demands respect like a bully demanding lunch money. How about earning our respect with some innovation, new management techniques, global leadership, an addictive pop culture? Like Japan did for decades and continues to do.
But here’s my real peeve. With China, all that talk of peaceful rise was only useful when they were in a position of weakness, now with economic and military power it’s like “let’s go annoy the neighbors”.
AT
If the Chinese fully believe that all its neighbors dance to the tune of the US and do not have legitimate national interests, then China will head into conflict with all its neighbors.
Even if we take the assumption that all those neighbors are US puppets, as the Chinese government does, which is better: bring China into conflict with all those neighbors and blame the US, or try to woo them away from the US orbit. If China doesn’t believe that it can woo all those countries away from the US, then the only logical conclusion is that China would have to militarily force those neighbors away from the US.
In either situation, none of this is “peaceful rise”.
Spock
What does “peaceful rise” mean to you? Anyone can come and take a piece of land from China? What will you do if your “peaceful neighbor” practice shooting in front of your yard or use a binocular to peek into your house? Did China invade other countries militarily using arbitrary excuses? Did China station any troops anywhere in the world?
Treat others as you would like to be treated!
AT
Let’s put it this way: coming from a South East Asian country that has a territorial dispute with China, it seems to me that it is China that has been coming into my country and claiming territory that isn’t theirs. Also, it has been China sending warships to my vicinity.
AT
In terms of China stationing its troops in other parts of the world… want to bet that it’s just a matter of time. Any country seeking to become a great power will do so, especially if they have interests, and trust me, China’s interests are global in nature. The most likely areas for these bases will be Myanmar and somewhere near the Red Sea.
hg
—”increasingly hard to find a body of water in Asia that China doesn’t claim”?
If you think China have no sovereignty over the islets, only because it is a communist country, how about Taiwan, which also conflicts with Japan on them and how about Korea which has dispute with Japan over other island.
Even an unpopular country like China deserve a territory, especially when nobody can say honestly to who this islets belong to. I am glad even some western media also started challenging Japanese claim. You guys can enlighten yourself:
http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/10/look-out-for-the-diaoyu-islands/
Chinese Student
It is not about who win and who lose. It is about justice and fairness. Japan killed 35 million Chinese people during World War II and yet they never show remorse. That is why global Chinese people are upset and angry this time when Japanese government arrests Chinese fishmen near Diaoyu islands which have been part of China for thousands of years.
SE962582C
To quote quote ” … part of China for thousands of years” and unquote.
You do, DO, realise that you WILL have to prove that, PROVE THAT, with Skeletons and buried Human Remains, along with buried ancient artefacts that are REAL, not some fake ones from a Factory that you can buy even in Hong Kong, at Canton/Guangzhou and/or at Taipei;
Rather than some pieces of paper of Maps, which could very well be RECENT and, AND, be Forgeries as well; and do you, and could you, Sir?!
Cand1date
To all of you whining about Japan not apologising for it’s behaviour during WWII.
WAKE UP! Japan has apologised numerous times. Pretty much every damn Prime Minister since the war has apologised. The Emporer has apologised, numerous politicians throughout the years have apologised. If you don’t believe me look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_apology_statements_issued_by_Japan
How many damn times do they need to apologise? It’s no wonder that ordinary Japanese citizens have a growing resentment against the Chinese (and to a lesser extent the Koreans). Every damn gesture their government makes is negated or (in)convieniently forgotten. To the Japanese people it seems like no matter what they do, it’s not good enough, and never will be. Pretty soon, Japan will actually stop apologising for what happened 3 generations ago. Sadly, I’m sure that’ll just make you guys whine all the more.
No Analysis
the author starts with a rhetorical questio and ends with the following opinion:
“Certainly it won’t have done anything to reassure any of its neighbours that they have nothing at all to worry about over China’s rise.”
Where is the analysis? I am no professional foreign relations expert, but I will take the flame bait.
I want to take a country by country look at each of China’s neighbors reaction or possible reactions to the recent tensions in the East China Sea. China is a continental power bordering over a dozen neighbors.
1) Countries bordering Northern China include North Korea, Mongolia, Russia and a number of central Asian states.
China recently twice hosted the N. Korean dictator Kim Jung-Il, so I assume the N. Korean reaction is at least neutral and non-negative. South Korea’s reaction is harder to read. Although South Korea confronts China on the issue of North Korea, but the South also has island disputes with Japan in the East Korea Sea. So the S. Korea reaction is muted as I am sure they are watching this closely.
Russia and Japan has territorial disputes in the Kuril. So Russia is watching mutedly for now. While the tension in the East China Sea was rising high, China, Russian and other members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization conducted a military exercise in Kazakhstan. There is no sign of deteriation in relationships. So the SCO member states would take at least a neutral position.
2) South Asia
The analysis here is straight forward. If the recent tension in the East China Sea makes India uneasy, then Pakistan has reason to rejoice. As for Afghanistan, Nepal and Bhutan, I am not sure these countries reactions matter much in Geopolics, but in the coming decade, we will see India and China wrestle for influence in these countries even more intensely than now.
3) ASEAN
US and China will in the coming decade wrestle for influence over ASEAN member states.
Here is a quick run down:
The first group are countries that share the S. China Sea dispute. Because China has chosen a divide and conquer strategy, the reactions are split.
Vietnam: negative
Philipines: negative
Malaysia: muted
Brunei: muted
The next three countries, Thailand, Singapore and Indonesia would like to straddle the fence. The prime minister of Singapore made it pretty clear in NY not long ago, “don’t make us choose.”
The remainder of the group, Burma, Laos, Cambodia, I have not heard anything from them. But a guess is at least neutral.
4) Other countries in the vacinity.
What about Australia? I guess they are trying to think this through, due to the debate generated by Hugh White’s recent essay suggests.
Japan? It is pretty obvious.
Taiwan, this is the million dollar question. From what I read from Taiwanese sources, they have sounded neutral so far.
In sum, most of China’s neighbors have no beef in the recent tensions in the East China Sea and their reactions are naturally neutral. Even for ASEAN members, the reactions are split. Because most of them do not share territorial disputes and straddling the fense makes strategic sense for them.
Thus the author’s double negative statement: “Certainly it won’t have done anything to reassure any of its neighbours that they have nothing at all to worry about over China’s rise”, is unfounded after all.
Kim
The person who said South Korea is neutral on this (or even suggestively hints South Korea supports China) is definitely wrong. All the South Korean medias have pointed out the ridiculous moves China is making, emboldened and drunk with their recent economic success. South Korea is watching carefully what China is doing because South Korea also have border issues with China who claims the Korean held island of what Koreans call “Leodo Island”. South Korea waches warily of China, because they never forgot how China partied with visiting North Korean leaders, while we were moaning for our 46 sailors were murdered by China’s close ally, North Korea. China took North Korea’s side, and replied to South Korea with threats, innuendos, arrogant attitude, and abusive languages to our government officials. China also claimed that the entire Yellow Sea is China’s territory (Sounds familiar? The article is true, there isn’t a sea that China doesn’t claim).
Of course, we also are reminded everyday how hundreds of Chinese fishing boats fish illegally in Korean waters, not only disregarding our coast guards who are attempting to defend S.Korea’s sovereignty, but also, abusing our unarmed coast guards with shovels, picks, stones, metal poles, and other home made weapons. A Chinese pirate even killed one of our coast guard officers. China never apologized for that, nor were there any offers of compensations. Of course, you can forget about the PRC reporting anything about the dead Korean officer. Things like that would never make it on 6 o’clock news Beijing, but the news about the Chinese getting arrested for doing the same thing (stealing fish), would make it on the news. South Korea have on the average, held 5000 of Chinese citizens each year for coming into Korean waters and drift netting, resulting in over fishing our waters. This has been going on for the last 20 years. You think the Chinese will apologize for that, let alone try to stop this illegal international law breaking? Definitely not. Yet, when it comes to Chinese pride, this one Chinese boat that Japan held, takes the cake. All these threats and showmanship over one lousy boat? Talk about overblown nationalism by the masses. Sure, Koreans are looking on at this, but not neutrally. They’re looking on with fear of China, contempt for Chinese behavior, with a bad taste in everyone’s mouth – wondering if this is what China’s rise means. If China wants respect from others, they should earn that respect. They can’t earn respect by threatening, bullying, lying, and being a*holes.
This only tells us (the international community) only one thing. Just sink the invading Chinese ships and pretend ignorance and deny knowing anything (just like North Korea did with South Korea’s ship sinking, which China full heartedly supported) about what happened to the sunk Chinese ships.
PS: Koreans also still not forget the 10,000 Chinese protesters violently protesting in Seoul Korea, in 2008 (during the Olympic torch relay in Seoul), beating up Korean citizens in their own country, because they dared to “insult China” with their pro-North Korean refugee and pro-Tibetan placards. Not to mention all the false Chinese rumors and lies about Koreans “stealing Chinese culture and Chinese history”. Koreans were accused of claiming outrageous claims on Chinese history and culture as being Korea’s. Koreans never made these claims. They were manufactured lies made up by ultra nationalistic Chinese internet mobs who wanted an anti-Korean hate wave in China, which by the way is sweeping Chinese internet forums.
SE962582C
You have made you point; Thank you and thank you very much and very much indeed, Sir!
The Korean-speaking Zainichi ethnic Koreans in Japan were, and are, ARE, also not very nice or polite, either, to say the very least, not to mention being physically aggressive and violent at times, towards the Japanese-speaking Japanese Hosts of theirs.
SE962582C
The Korean, the ROK-Korean, and/or the South Korean are both infallible and CAN DO NO WRONG; can he, can he or can she, Sir?!
The Koreans, the ROK-Koreans, and/or the South Koreans are both infallible and CAN DO NO WRONG; can they, again, Sir?!
slowguy
No, it’s clearly the Japanese who believe THEY are infallible and can do wrong, especially when it comes to their history with Korea and the Koreans in their midst, from the Hideyoshi Invasions and the Mimizuka, the murder of Empress MyeongSeong, the Kanto earthquake massacre of Zainichi Koreans, etc., etc., etc. Right, the Japanese have never done wrong by the Koreans… never, uh-uh.
John
“PS: Koreans also still not forget the 10,000 Chinese protesters violently protesting in Seoul Korea, in 2008 (during the Olympic torch relay in Seoul), beating up Korean citizens in their own country, because they dared to “insult China” with their pro-North Korean refugee and pro-Tibetan placards. Not to mention all the false Chinese rumors and lies about Koreans “stealing Chinese culture and Chinese history”. Koreans were accused of claiming outrageous claims on Chinese history and culture as being Korea’s. Koreans never made these claims. They were manufactured lies made up by ultra nationalistic Chinese internet mobs who wanted an anti-Korean hate wave in China, which by the way is sweeping Chinese internet forums.”
I live in Korea and it isn’t only the koreans who felt that was a distaseful action by China. Their embassy provided the flags and the weapons that the so-called students used.
If that is how a guest acts in thier neighbors house, then I will do everything I can to make sure they never come in my house. It is a pyrrhic victory, trust me on that.
For all the Chinese who bitch about the Japanese in the 1930s, well congratulations, you are on the same path they are. You better hope you win this next war you seem to be so eager to start.
if you don’t start a war, well good though I will never trust a Chinese person from mainland China any more after listening and watching how you speak too and treat your neighbors.
SE962582C
To quote quote ” … trust a Chinese person from mainland China any more … ” and unquote.
China is China, ‘End of the Story!
Unless the Context requires, of which it does not, then there is not, NOT, a so-called quote “Mainland China” and unquote (and not “The Red China” for any more either); and no English-speaking persons in This and These Day and Age would actually bother to use that term, unless being absolutely necessary, if AT ALL;
Only a Taiwanese/Formosan person would actually bother with that Term in These Days; but sans/without prejudice, are you, Sir?! I’d and one’d think that I, one and We all ought to be told.
Mark
The Chinese are Marxist Thugs. They are a police dictator state. Watch out Asia you know what happens eventually with dictatorships—they use nationalism to stay in power. It’s all about the Power. They stole Tibet, they are trying to steal parts of India, they are stealing Islands in the South China Sea that belong to the Phils, Vietnam and even Malaysia. They are not trustworthy and their military is the power. A military dictatorship—how lovely. Japan better wake up and rearm….they once had a world class blue water navy and God they need it now….and this is from an American.
hk
Chinese are wise people….so hope everything cools down soon !!