The Great Game Changer: Belt and Road Intiative (BRI; OBOR)

[Keel]

This will not happen any time soon , I would like to lecture to you and others here about Japanese history in context to the policy of alliance systems of the past. Japan , in recent history, has always sought after alliances with powerful nations. During the late 19th century Japan was allied to both the British and Prussian Empire; in the early 20th century, prior to WWI, Japanese Empire was allied to the British Empire. Then in WWI, we were allied to the British and Americans. In WWII, we were ostracized by the British and Americans because of the decision to invade Manchuria and China; thus forcing Japan to sign the Tripartite Agreement in 1939; creating the Axis Alliance. Japan should learn from our failure in WWII; and that is to avoid entangling alliances.



Correct. We are not a 'rapidly' expanding military power. How can a nation that bases its foreign military policy to those of defensive posture be considered an 'expanding power'.




Territorial conflicts? No. Territorial disagreements as in regards to islands in the East Sea, but there have been no military conflicts or provocations that had led to military units being fired upon.




Incorrect. Tho Japan opposes Russian occupation of Southern Kuril Islands, there have been no military exigencies on either on the JSDF or with our Russian counterparts.

Disagreement is the better term. Lastly, and China is devoid of territorial differences with India, Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei, Korea, Japan ?

Territorial conflicts - YES
Military conflicts - NO, or NOT YET!
I am not denying our terriorial conflicts with the above - some intense ( Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan) some softened (India ) some rarely in discussion at all ( Malaysia, S Korea, Brunei)
We just have a long border and coast line; and a wide territory to cover, that's all!

 

[Aepsilons]

Territorial conflicts - YES
Military conflicts - NO, or NOT YET!
I am not denying our terriorial conflicts with the above - some intense ( Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan) some softened (India ) some rarely in discussion at all ( Malaysia, S Korea, Brunei)
We just have a long border and coast line; and a wide territory to cover, that's all!

I find it disingenuous that you refer to Japanese-Chinese maritime row as being "intense" and the territorial issue with India as "softened". India and China fought a border war in '62, and have had bloody skirmishes in the past, and continue to have border intrusions as of this year.Despite the fact there has never been actual live firing or exigencies between both our nations' forces. Not since the end of the War.

Maritime issue with Japan and China must and will be ironed out in the future; and if the 2008 East China Sea Consensus serves as a case basis, we see that a diplomatic solution can be realized.

Lastly, a conflict between Japan and China over maritime row is counterproductive to the entire region. It would serve neither Japan's or China's interests. Do you know how much trade Japan and China have annually? It is $320 Billion (and rising).The largest in the entire region. A war between China and Japan would serve the interests of other powers that want a disharmonious East Asia.

Don't fall for the naivety and trap, my friend. Don't be so myopic and narrow minded.

 

[Armstrong]

@Nihonjin1051 - So Brother, during WW2 Japanese Nationalism was based around veneration for the Emperor...now what is Japanese Nationalism based around ?

 

[Keel]

Precisely !
Tell me, specifically, how has Japan been 'aggressive' as of late ?

who are you going to fool?

Protests as Abe announces constitutional change - CNN.com
Japan's cabinet approves changes to its pacifist constitution allowing for 'collective self-defence' - Australia Network News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Japan may buy additional F-35 jets if price falls, Onodera says | The Japan Times

Japanese prime minister opens way to send soldiers on foreign missions | Daily Mail Online

Shinzo Abe reveals plans to lift Japan's ban on fighting in conflicts overseas | World news | theguardian.com

Japan’s war potential and the case of the Izumo ‘destroyer’ | East Asia Forum

Chinese anger as Japan launches biggest warship since WWII - Telegraph

I find it disingenuous that you refer to Japanese-Chinese maritime row as being "intense" and the territorial issue with India as "softened". India and China fought a border war in '62, and have had bloody skirmishes in the past, and continue to have border intrusions as of this year.Despite the fact there has never been actual live firing or exigencies between both our nations' forces. Not since the end of the War.

Maritime issue with Japan and China must and will be ironed out in the future; and if the 2008 East China Sea Consensus serves as a case basis, we see that a diplomatic solution can be realized.

Lastly, a conflict between Japan and China over maritime row is counterproductive to the entire region. It would serve neither Japan's or China's interests. Do you know how much trade Japan and China have annually? It is $320 Billion (and rising).The largest in the entire region. A war between China and Japan would serve the interests of other powers that want a disharmonious East Asia.

Don't fall for the naivety and trap, my friend. Don't be so myopic and narrow minded.

I am not ruling out trade and other exchanges
But Japan is a country that follows closely the American directives on political issues my friend. You are siding more with our potential enemies like India, the Philippines, Vietnam. Action is louder than words my friend!

 

[Aepsilons]

who are you going to fool?

Protests as Abe announces constitutional change - CNN.com
Japan's cabinet approves changes to its pacifist constitution allowing for 'collective self-defence' - Australia Network News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Japan may buy additional F-35 jets if price falls, Onodera says | The Japan Times

Japanese prime minister opens way to send soldiers on foreign missions | Daily Mail Online

Shinzo Abe reveals plans to lift Japan's ban on fighting in conflicts overseas | World news | theguardian.com

Japan’s war potential and the case of the Izumo ‘destroyer’ | East Asia Forum

Chinese anger as Japan launches biggest warship since WWII - Telegraph

1. The F-35II As are to replace our aging fleet of F-4 fighters.

2. The Izumo and Hyuga are light carriers, we need them to project power because Japan , as an archepelagic nation, requires a naval force that has the capability to move forces from island to island.

3. Japanese soldiers going abroad will be doing so through peace keeping duties and will be doing so under the banner of the United Nations Peace Keeping Force. The JSDF , JGSDF won't be sending armies for expeditionary campaigns. lol.

I am not ruling out trade and other exchanges
But Japan is a country that follows closely the American directives on political issues my friend. You are siding more with our potential enemies like India, the Philippines, Vietnam. Action is louder than words my friend!

1. Has Japan contributed soldiers , aircraft, naval vessels in Operation Desert Storm? In Operation Iraqi Freedom? In Afghanistan? In Syria? In Somalia? In Libya? In Serbia? In Georgia? Have you seen the the activities of JSDF these past 70 some years, my friend ? It was defense posture and maintaining a guard on possible Soviet intrusion. That's it.

2. I don't understand your fear or weariness of a resurgent Japan when that simply is no the case. First of all, i think you have not read the details of Collective Self Defense. It does not mean Japan has the right to attack first or initiate offensive campaigns. Collective Self Defense explicitly forbids the use of a 'First Strike Initiative'. Rather stipulates that Japan's JSDF can only react and respond if Japanese military units are attacked first, and if allies are under attack, the nation has the legal right to come to the aid of said ally if it wants to. It does not say it will come to the aid, it says that it has the ability to come to the said ally's aid.

3. Cooperation between Philippines and Vietnam and India and the like are natural. We have economic partnerships there, military cooperation are based on the need to develop military situational awareness, and disaster response readiness.

 

[somsak]

Nionjin Thats why i say Russia Japan good relation b3nefit China. Coz SK route is very difficult. Therefor Sakarin route is.much better. The rest reasoning is the same.

China's vision of "new silk road" never involves Japan
Japan is USA's closest ally in the Pacific apart from Ozies
Japan is rapidly expanding its military power
China has territorial conflicts with Japan
Russia has territorial conflicts with Japan
Japan has conflicts with all its neighbours
The connection can only be resctricted to trade and culture; nothing more than those.

Why donot yiu pull Japan into China Russia side?

 

[LowPost]

As an advocate of peace I welcome rapport between 中国, 日本 and 俄罗斯. Just wanted to let you guys know that in contrast to some members here I'm not a warmonger at all. World affairs is a dirty game (quote from mike2000), I'm aware of that, but I believe in peace nonetheless.

 

[Aepsilons]

As an advocate of peace I welcome rapport between 中国, 日本 and 俄罗斯. Just wanted to let you guys know that in contrast to some members here I'm not a warmonger at all. World affairs is a dirty game (quote from mike2000), I'm aware of that, but I believe in peace nonetheless.

Its sobering to come across Chinese members here that hold that view. I value you and another member @Tang Yi . To peace between our two brother countries. For two thousand years Japan had developed with China. Here is to two thousand more years !

 

[Aepsilons]

@Nihonjin1051 - So Brother, during WW2 Japanese Nationalism was based around veneration for the Emperor...now what is Japanese Nationalism based around ?

The ultranationalism of the past was due in part to rabid propaganda ministry. Nowadays, I would say that nationalism is very limited in Japan. There is no wide scale ultra-nationalist groups or anyone voicing about Japanese racial superiority (which was common in the past). Compared to Americans, I'd say we're not as nationalistic. Additionally, Japanese don't usually protest en mass , its not in our culture. We value order, strict adherence to hierarchy and harmony.

We experimented in excessive ultra nationalism in the past. It didn't really do us any good...

 

[Keel]

1. The F-35II As are to replace our aging fleet of F-4 fighters.

2. The Izumo and Hyuga are light carriers, we need them to project power because Japan , as an archepelagic nation, requires a naval force that has the capability to move forces from island to island.

3. Japanese soldiers going abroad will be doing so through peace keeping duties and will be doing so under the banner of the United Nations Peace Keeping Force. The JSDF , JGSDF won't be sending armies for expeditionary campaigns. lol.

1. Has Japan contributed soldiers , aircraft, naval vessels in Operation Desert Storm? In Operation Iraqi Freedom? In Afghanistan? In Syria? In Somalia? In Libya? In Serbia? In Georgia? Have you seen the the activities of JSDF these past 70 some years, my friend ? It was defense posture and maintaining a guard on possible Soviet intrusion. That's it.

2. I don't understand your fear or weariness of a resurgent Japan when that simply is no the case. First of all, i think you have not read the details of Collective Self Defense. It does not mean Japan has the right to attack first or initiate offensive campaigns. Collective Self Defense explicitly forbids the use of a 'First Strike Initiative'. Rather stipulates that Japan's JSDF can only react and respond if Japanese military units are attacked first, and if allies are under attack, the nation has the legal right to come to the aid of said ally if it wants to. It does not say it will come to the aid, it says that it has the ability to come to the said ally's aid.

3. Cooperation between Philippines and Vietnam and India and the like are natural. We have economic partnerships there, military cooperation are based on the need to develop military situational awareness, and disaster response readiness.

We dont trust your Abe.
You have far more other fighter jets to choose from than F-35 for your "replacementt" on top of your own "stealth planes" in the making
All are seen as a rising, heavily militarized and aggressive Japan. Sorry to tell the truth!

 

[mike2000]

I dont understand what memebers here are trying to prove with Pictures.lool Of course every leaders will have smiling pics with another leader he visits even if that country is a rival/ennemy. Do you think if/when Xi visits Japan to meet Abe/or vice versa he wont be smiling and saying some nice words about Japan(well at least for that day.lol) and trying to promote more partnerships as well. Of course he will, Thats the usual protocole. So pics doesnt mean anything about one country relationship with another

Coming to topic, China and Russia cant contain Japan no matter how hard they try, Simply because the U.S has a huge presence in Japan. So they being able to contain Japan will mean they have been able to contained the U.S as well(good luck with that.lol). In fact im afraid its the U.S(with its partner Japan) who will be doing the containing if anything.lool Since they are still both combined way more powerful/advance than Russia and China.

Its true Japan has several issues with which will prevent it working or partnering with Russia anytime soon(not for a longggggggg time) of which are: Many of us dont even mention it that much but both countries are still technically at war with each other(just like North and south Korea) since they never signed a peace treaty after world war II, secondly Russia still retains/controls the islands it seized from Japan at the end of the war till today and will never return it back(so a long term problem/upstacle for good relations), Thirdly Russia keeps sending soldiers/building military posts/and carrying out war games in this islands claimed by Japan close to Japanese shores everytime, they also send bombers/fighters to spy on Japan here and then which creates tension/mistrusts(thankfully the U.S is there to prevent any miscalculations and restore order/act as deterent), Fourthly Russia has nothing much to offer Japan tbh apart from its natural resources which Japan can source from any region/market so Russia has little to no Leverage over Japan(in fact they have none at all.lol), Lastly and most importantly, the U.S is still Japan largest/sole security guarantor/main ally and has its largest oversea military base in Japan and its presence there will only increase with time as Asia becomes more militarize with the Rise of China and Russia trying to reaffirm itself in the region.The U.S will never allow any rapproachment bewteen Japan and Russia, since the U.S still considers Russia a regional rival ansd Japan will always(well in the long term) remain a U.S/western ally since it serves its interests as well, afterall what can Russia offer Japan? Nothing.lol So if anything Russia has nothing in common with Japan apart from selling its raw materials to Japan.lool

This doesnt means Russia will/should stop all trade with Japan, of course not, we live in a globalize world. Even China and Japan who are sworn ennemies trade with each other more than any country in Asia(even more than Japan trades with its ally the U.S). So Russia can sell gas/oil/build pipeline to Japan and Russia can import more high tech electronics/automibiles etc goods from Japan (win win), but this doesnt means they will be ally/partner anytime soon if ever. So business is business and politics is politics.

 

[Keel]

Nionjin Thats why i say Russia Japan good relation b3nefit China. Coz SK route is very difficult. Therefor Sakarin route is.much better. The rest reasoning is the same.

Why donot yiu pull Japan into China Russia side?

Wishful thinking!
And the Japanese is not showing any favourable gesture like giving up the sovereignty claims of Diaoyu Islands for a start. Claiming ownership of the islands is legally wrong on the American and Japanese parts. Read Potsdam Declaration and Cairo Declaration separately please for an understanding of who own Diaoyu Islands legally.

 

[Aepsilons]

Wishful thinking!
And the Japanese is not showing any favourable gesture like giving up the sovereignty claims of Diaoyu Islands for a start. Claiming ownership of the islands is legally wrong on the American and Japanese parts. Read Potsdam Declaration and Cairo Declaration separately please for an understanding of who own Diaoyu Islands legally.

​

• The Senkaku Islands were not included in the territory which Japan renounced under Article 2 of the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951 that legally defined the territory of Japan after World War II. Under Article 3 of the treaty, the islands were placed under the administration of the United States as part of the Nansei Shoto Islands. The Senkaku Islands are included in the areas whose administrative rights were reverted to Japan in accordance with the Agreement between Japan and the United States of America Concerning the Ryukyu Islands and the Daito Islands that entered into force in 1972.

• The Senkaku Islands have historically and consistently been part of the Nansei Shoto Islands which have been part of the territory of Japan. From 1885, surveys of the Senkaku Islands had been thoroughly conducted by the Government of Japan through the agencies of Okinawa Prefecture and through other means. Through these surveys, it was confirmed that the Senkaku Islands had been not only uninhabited but also showed no trace of having been under the control of the Qing Dynasty of China. Based on this confirmation, the Government of Japan made a Cabinet Decision on January 14, 1895, to erect markers on the islands to formally incorporate the Senkaku Islands into the territory of Japan. These measures were carried out in accordance with the internationally accepted means of duly acquiring territorial sovereignty under international law (occupation of terra nullius). The Senkaku Islands are not part of Formosa (Taiwan) and the Pescadores Islands that were ceded to Japan from the Qing Dynasty in accordance with Article II of the Treaty of Shimonoseki, concluded in April 1895.

• Although the Treaty of Shimonoseki does not clearly define the geographical limits of the island of Formosa and the islands appertaining or belonging to Formosa ceded to Japan by the Qing Dynasty of China, nothing in the negotiation history (or otherwise) supports the interpretation that the Senkaku Islands are included in the island of Formosa and the islands appertaining or belonging to it in Article 2b of the Treaty.

• Furthermore, Japan had already undertaken preparation, from 1885, even before the Sino-Japanese War, to formally incorporate the Senkaku Islands into the territory of Japan while carefully ascertaining that no state including the Qing Dynasty of China had control over the Islands. Following the Cabinet Decision in January 1895, which was made before the concluding of the Treaty of Shimonoseki, the Government of Japan incorporated the Senkaku Islands into Okinawa Prefecture and consistently treated the Islands as part of Okinawa Prefecture, not as an area under the jurisdiction of the Governor-General of Taiwan which was ceded to Japan after the Sino-Japanese War.
  • These facts make it clear that, both before and after the Sino-Japanese War, the Government of Japan has never regarded or treated the Senkaku Islands as part of the island of Taiwan or islands appertaining or belonging to the island of Taiwan, which had been part of the Qing Dynasty of China. Thus, it is evident that the Senkaku Islands could never have been part of the cession made under the Treaty of Shimonoseki.
  • Moreover, it was recognized in the Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty of 1952 that Japan renounced all right, title and claim to Taiwan, the Pescadores and other islands under Article 2 of the San Francisco Peace Treaty. Against the above background, however, there was absolutely no discussion on territorial sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands in the process of negotiations for the Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty. What this means is that it was considered as the rightful premise that the Senkaku Islands were the territory of Japan from before that time.

Reference:

Retrieved from: Senkaku Islands Q&A ｜ Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan

 

[TheMatador]

China alone is enough to inflict a devastating blow on Japan if they forget their status as defeated nation in WW2 and try to become normal. Russia's blessing is just icing on the cake.

 

[Beidou2020]

Russia and China will bury Japan.