Slashdot Mirror
China Creates Air Defence Zone Over Japan-Controlled Islands, Issues War Threat
cold fjord writes "France24 reports, "Beijing on Saturday announced it was setting up an 'air defence identification zone' over an area that includes islands controlled by Japan but claimed by China, in a move that could inflame the bitter territorial row. Along with the creation of the zone in the East China Sea, the defence ministry released a set of aircraft identification rules that must be followed by all planes entering the area, under penalty of intervention by the military. Aircraft are expected to provide their flight plan, clearly mark their nationality, and maintain two-way radio communication allowing them to 'respond in a timely and accurate manner to the identification inquiries' from Chinese authorities. The outline of the new zone ... covers a wide area of the East China Sea between South Korea and Taiwan that includes the Tokyo-controlled islands known as the Senkakus to Japan and Diaoyous to China. "China's armed forces will adopt defensive emergency measures to respond to aircraft that do not cooperate in the identification or refuse to follow the instructions," according to the ministry. ' The Politico adds, "Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said Saturday the United States is 'deeply concerned'" over the move. Spiegel Online has background on the conflict with Japan and on related regional issues. This announcement follows the recent publication in Chinese state media of maps showing nuclear strike plans against the U.S."
We've always been at war with Eastasia.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
They don't care about the islands, they care about the water around them. They are abundant in fish and oil/natural gas.
SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
It's far more than symbolic. Controlling the islands grants access to the large Economic Exclusion Zone around them and the fishing fields, oil/gas resources and any other natural resources..
They've considered this, but have found that strapping prostitutes to the hard mounts would have little to no safety benefits.
"I don't have any problem with nuclear weapons - they're a fact of life now. I just want ours to be the best."
I agree. Knowing that our nukes are shinier than China's will make our death so much more satisfying.
Civil War seems more likely. All of this posturing seems to be more intended to impress their own people then outsiders and can be read as a government nervous about keeping its all powerful image to an increasingly wealthy population.
Maybe the war has already been fought and won.
That's how Sun Tzu says to do things. The victorious warrior wins first and then goes to war, while the defeated warrior goes to war first and then seeks to win.
This. When you have internal dissent at home, you make up external existential threats.
Hell, it works for us doesn't it?
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Err, dont look now, but this is *exactly* the internal logic in China that is leading them to assert themselves like this. Only they see the US as the aggressive power that's been appeased for too long already, and that case actually seems a bit stronger than the reverse. It's not like China allied with Mexico and started supplying them with weapons and encouraging them to stir up old border disputes - but that's exactly what the US is doing in e.g. the Philippines, Vietnam, Japan, etc.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
What would happen (I say someone, but not completely jokingly) if the US sent in a Carrier Battle Group
And Americans wonder why people of other nationalities look at them funny?
You realise you are fulfilling the Team America World Police stereotype by even suggesting that, right? This is a territorial battle between China and Japan, leave it to them to sort out or fight it out over on their own. Radical concept, I know, but just because something happens, it does not require you to sit your ass in the middle of it just because you can.
I have kids, whenever I have two kids who behave like this, the first thing I do it take away whatever they are fighting over.
Ah, "daddy knows best", I hear that worked out really well for Native Americans, and then the African Americans. Paternalistic racism, the "solution" that just keeps on giving! Daddy America has gotta teach them stupid chinks how to behave like real people, huh?
It doesn't have anything to do with ICANN. It has everything to do with China realizing it cannot keep expanding its economy without a lock on a lot more natural resources. They've already claimed most of the S. China Sea all the way down the Philippines. Their "deals" in Africa are designed to lock in their claim to Africa's natural resources. They have even expressed an interest in making claims in the Arctic.
Put quickly, there is no governor on China's ambitions. Their domestic politics requires them to keep their young people supplied with enough interest in economic gain so that they don't turn to political interests. They also see the U.S. as a declining power.
This is only the beginning. It will be rough century.
Yes and no. Vietnam cuddled up to the U.S., not the other way around. They felt threatened by China. Can you imagine that?
The Philippines told the U.S. to go suck eggs years ago when they closed the U.S. bases. Then the Muslims in the south got armed and pissed, the Philippines decided a bit of military training with U.S. advisers would be acceptable. But China next decided they owned the entire S. China Sea right down the Philippines. The Philippine government then more or less said, "bases, shmases, let's be buddies again like the good old days when you booted out the Japanese."
China brought increased U.S. involvement in SE Asia on themselves.
Mainly because the US is imperialist, and its material wealth is directly tied to its coercive abilities inside and outside of its borders. If the west's wealth wasn't built on enduring theft and slavery, you might see a different configuration. China is only recently moving in that direction with its economic posturing in Africa and South America – and its pretty evident that this is mainly reactionary. Given its age, and the level of historic contact with other nations in the past, China has mostly only sought empire within its own borders, whereas the west has always taken a colonial usurpation approach.
And the idea of ROI is a mistaken understanding of US power. You paid for it – but the return was never meant for you. The bloated war-mongering US military machine returns day in and day out by threatening untold violence against any economic dissent and any obstruction to continued US exploitation of the world's people and resources. The people footing the bills aren't the people reaping the rewards, and they were never meant to be. But the interests that are being protected are being served very well indeed.
but no, not this time either.
I doubt if this will turn into a real war.* China is mostly just pandering to their own population as a smoke screen for the changes that came out of the recent CCP meeting in Beijing. This sort of pandering works well in China. Because of gender-selective abortions, they have tens of millions of unattached young men in their late teens and twenties, with little chance of starting a family or even finding a GF. It is very easy to stir these young men up into an anti-Japanese frenzy. In fact, the hard part is keeping a lid on it. The last time the Chinese government tried this, they ended up with riots, and torched Japanese cars and Japanese restaurants, despite both the cars and restaurants having Chinese owners.
*OTOH, almost everyone thought the same thing in July of 1914.
So if you can't keep a lid on all those young men, what do you do with them? A war might take care of the problem while giving you even more excuses to suppress civil liberties.
This is the country that ran tanks over unarmed students in a public square in the middle of their capital city. Do you really think they need to look for excuses to suppress civil liberties?