PRCs go nuts over Fishing Islands

[Wishcumstrue]

As for the China people, actually they are just venting their frustrations about domestic issues, like corruption, etc. as you said - on a safe target, i.e. the Japs. Actually why the China people have so much resentment bottled up inside them is because they are not free to talk about the problems in their own country.

 

Protest rallies against corruptions in Wukan in 2011.

 

The protests ended after provincial officials intervened and ceded to some demands - Can we do this in Singapore?

 

 

 

 

[CKP]

Because the islands belonged to China since centuries ago... There are even historical records, not held in China, that backs their claim.

 

Wrong.

 

Evidence of China's "effective, uninterrupted control, administration or jurisdiction"?

 

None and zero.

 

Don't tell us generically that there is evidence... what IS the evidence?

 

Japan has a long list of records that showed control and administration provided in previous posts.

 

Sorry.

 

[CKP]

The USA, being the "big brother" in that region at the end of the war, could see that the end was coming for Chiang's Nationalist govt, and very likely decided to keep quiet and retain the disputed islands as part of Jap territory, to form a defensive chain against Communist China that was going to take over the mainland pretty soon. And that really happened a couple of years later, and the beginning of the Cold War.

 

 

Sorry, conspiracy theory. Your own feeling.

 

Check records again.

 

The authorities of imperial China, republican China and, until 1970, the PRC

did not dispute Japan`s ownership.

 

In January 1895, the Sino-Japanese War had turned in Japan`s favour, but

the acquisition of the Senkaku Islands cannot be linked in a legal sense to Japan acquiring Taiwan in the

Peace Treaty of Shimonoseki, which was concluded in April of 1895.

 

However, the acquisition of the Senkaku Islands occurred after ten years of hesitation by the Japanese government in view of possible

negative Chinese reactions, and the decision was not conveyed to other countries at the time, but made public

only in 1952 (Urano 2005, 123 ff; Su 2005, p. 54; Okuhara 1971, p. 98; Zhou Jian 1991, p. 233).

 

The difference between China`s official interest in the Senkaku Islands and that shown in the Paracel and Spratly

Islands in the South China Sea, is remarkable. In the latter case, the Chinese government asserted its rights as

early as the 19th century, when other countries took an interest in them or even laid claim to them (Buszinsky

& Sazlan 2007, pp. 144-45).

 

Read, read and read...

 

 

 

[LoverofCar]

we need bruce lee to wake up from grave!!

 

 

[Incidentalsingaporean]

rumour is Zhou yong kang ask his kahkia to assasinate Xi Jinping and He Guoqiang. Xi Jinping stayed away from public after the failed assasination by Zhou... CCP in violent power struggle, Diaoyu tai is to divert attention from the internal turmoil in China

[Sosaria]

Sorry, conspiracy theory. Your own feeling.

 

Check records again.

 

The authorities of imperial China, republican China and, until 1970, the PRC

did not dispute Japan`s ownership.

 

In January 1895, the Sino-Japanese War had turned in Japan`s favour, but

the acquisition of the Senkaku Islands cannot be linked in a legal sense to Japan acquiring Taiwan in the

Peace Treaty of Shimonoseki, which was concluded in April of 1895.

 

However, the acquisition of the Senkaku Islands occurred after ten years of hesitation by the Japanese government in view of possible

negative Chinese reactions, and the decision was not conveyed to other countries at the time, but made public

only in 1952 (Urano 2005, 123 ff; Su 2005, p. 54; Okuhara 1971, p. 98; Zhou Jian 1991, p. 233).

 

The difference between China`s official interest in the Senkaku Islands and that shown in the Paracel and Spratly

Islands in the South China Sea, is remarkable. In the latter case, the Chinese government asserted its rights as

early as the 19th century, when other countries took an interest in them or even laid claim to them (Buszinsky

& Sazlan 2007, pp. 144-45).

 

Read, read and read...

 

 

The period from 1949, the Communist takeover of China, until the 1970s, I think China was in a state of turmoil, internal power struggle, famine, etc. Where got time to pursue all these claims? Also, there is no harassment of fishermen, etc. - so everything was kept low-profile.

 

Until recently when the Japs started to re-assert their claims and take action against Chinese fishing crew - spurred the Chinese into countering them. It's bad timing for the Japs as well, because China happens to be going through leadership change, and the leadership cannot appear to be weak.

Edited September 17, 2012 by Sosaria

[Viceroymenthol]

if u suay suay looks japanese then how ah?

 

my fren always mistaken as japanese when he go overseas...next mth go china hope he dont kenna.

 

how to look japanese? you mean walk around with tiny penis hanging out?

[D3badge]

Japan want int court only for dokdo island cos Korea controls it. Japan doesn't want int court for diao yu islands.

 

The fishing islands (Korea too) was seized by imperial Japan in 1890+.

After ww2. Japan was to return all territories. But the USA later gave the islands to Japan instead cos China was communist.

So China does have a case here.

And the US is stuck cos they are also partly responsible .

 

Lots of history

 

After it was discovered in 1968 that oil reserves might be found under the sea near the islands,[4] Japan's sovereignty over them has been disputed by the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC, also known as Taiwan) following the transfer of administration from the United States to Japan in 1971.The Chinese claim the discovery and control of the islands from the 14th century. Japan controlled the islands from 1895 until its surrender at the end of World War II. The United States administered them as part of the United States Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands from 1945 until 1972, when the islands reverted to Japanese control under the Okinawa Reversion Treaty between the United States and Japan.[5]

 

The Japanese central government formally annexed the islands on 14 January 1895. Around 1900, Japanese entrepreneur Koga Tatsushirō (古賀 辰四郎?) constructed a bonito processing plant on the islands with 200 workers. The business failed in 1940 and the islands have remained deserted ever since.[17] In the 1970s, Koga Tatsushirō's descendents Zenji and Hanako Tatsushirō sold four islets to the Kurihara family of Saitama Prefecture. Kunioki Kurihara[18] owned Uotsuri, Kita-Kojima, and Minami-Kojima. Kunioki's sister owns Kuba.[19]

The islands came under US government occupation in 1945 after the surrender of Japan ended World War II.[17] In 1969, the United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE) identified potential oil and gas reserves in the vicinity of the Senkaku Islands.[20] In 1971, the Okinawa Reversion Treaty passed the U.S. Senate, returning the islands to Japanese control in 1972.[21] Also in 1972, the Taiwanese and Chinese governments officially began to declare ownership of the islands.[22]

[D3badge]

Japan want int court only for dokdo island cos Korea controls it. Japan doesn't want int court for diao yu islands.

 

The fishing islands (Korea too) was seized by imperial Japan in 1890+.

After ww2. Japan was to return all territories. But the USA later gave the islands to Japan instead cos China was communist.

So China does have a case here.

And the US is stuck cos they are also partly responsible .

 

Lots of history

 

I think China Sea dispute quite amazing as come all the way to Sabah and Brunei

 

if Malaysia claim us because of history how??? we go back to and all boleh??

Edited September 17, 2012 by D3badge

[Wishcumstrue]

And so? Is the information and record inaccurate, dodgy or fraudulent?

Do you have evidence to show?

 

Lots.

Just one example "海国记"

http://www.mycarforum.com/index.php?showto...t&p=4600174

 

 

"Other side of the same coin" is obviously neither a argument nor evidence.

It is a meaningless and non constructive cliche.

 

This would not be just another "cliche" if one had read a little more of the "other side of the coin".

That was why I thank your contribution from the Japanese perspective. We don't have to go the negative way, do we?

 

It is only normal for the Japanese to present such evidence; likewise,

one expects the Chinese to be presenting the evidence of their own prior discoveries.

 

It is NOT normal for any government to BUY a privately owned annexed property and turn it into its own territory.

And all these are done under a commercial transaction within a short period which has no International agreement.

In fact, when Tokyo colonization the island of Taiwan in 1895, the Japanese government also did the same thing to Diaoyu Island in that same year. - hence the dispute remains until today.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Megatop]

http://www.economist.com/node/21562913

[CKP]

Lots.

Just one example "海国记"

http://www.mycarforum.com/index.php?showto...t&p=4600174

 

 

In short, effective control and administration trumps prior discovery under international law.

 

Sorry, but there is no need for you to re-post information of China's prior to me which I already mentioned but did not dispute.

 

 

Common sense tells you the world will be in a very messy place if

 

"Prior discovery" trumps "effective control and administration" in international law.

 

 

 

 

 

[CKP]

These pictures were not shown in Singapore media nor were events reported much, because of the obvious tension these could cause.

 

 

I think you are treading dangerous territory

 

but CONTINUALLY posting GRAPHIC, VIOLENT images

 

which are disconnected, unrelated to the topic at hand...

 

bordering on fanning sentiments against a certain group or subject.

 

 

 

That said, I will not FLAG you for a yellow since I believe in the freedom of speech.

 

[CKP]

The period from 1949, the Communist takeover of China, until the 1970s, I think China was in a state of turmoil, internal power struggle, famine, etc. Where got time to pursue all these claims? Also, there is no harassment of fishermen, etc. - so everything was kept low-profile.

 

Until recently when the Japs started to re-assert their claims and take action against Chinese fishing crew - spurred the Chinese into countering them. It's bad timing for the Japs as well, because China happens to be going through leadership change, and the leadership cannot appear to be weak.

 

 

You are not familiar with the Treaty of San Francisco after WW2.

 

"The Treaty of Peace with Japan (commonly known as the Treaty of San Francisco or San Francisco Peace Treaty), between Japan and part of the Allied Powers, was officially signed by 48 nations on September 8, 1951, at the War Memorial Opera House in San Francisco, United States. It came into force on April 28, 1952.

 

This treaty served to end officially World War II, to end formally Japan's position as an imperial power, and to allocate compensation to Allied civilians and former prisoners of war who had suffered Japanese war crimes. This treaty made extensive use of the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to enunciate the Allies' goals."

 

While China objected to the South China Sea provisions of the treaty,

China was completely silent on Senkakus....

until the several oil exploratory surveys around 1970.

 

 

History shows, contrary to your opinion that China do protest and dispute about territory

never mind how "precarious" was their situation.

 

Thus, your argument about "silent because was weak" is clearly invalid argument.

 

Besides, that's not how the court of law works as well,

entertaining such reasons of "self perceived weakness" for not raising objections.

 

 

People's Republic of China Objections to the Treaty

 

Due to the ongoing Chinese Civil War and thus the question of which Chinese government was legitimate, neither the Republic of China in Taiwan nor the People's Republic of China in mainland China were invited to the treaty negotiations.

 

On August 15, 1951 and September 18, 1951 the Peoples Republic of China published statements denouncing the treaty, stating that it was illegal and should not be recognized. Besides their general exclusion from the negotiation process, the PRC claimed that the Paracel Islands, Spratly Islands and Pratas Islands in the South Pacific were actually part of China. [10]The treaty either did not address these islands, or in the case of the Pratas Islands turned them over to the United Nations.

Edited September 17, 2012 by CKP

[CKP]

It is NOT normal for any government to BUY a privately owned annexed property and turn it into its own territory.

And all these are done under a commercial transaction within a short period which has no International agreement.

In fact, when Tokyo colonization the island of Taiwan in 1895, the Japanese government also did the same thing to Diaoyu Island in that same year. - hence the dispute remains until today.[/color]

 

 

You are not familiar with the The Treaty of Shimonoseki and Taiwan.

 

I already stated in earlier posts that:

 

Taiwan was annexed thus was part of the above treaty but Senkakus were not annexed but "no man's land".

 

 

 

Also, after the treaty of San Franciso (specifically ARTICLE 2) was in force after 1952,

 

China did not raise issues or questions about the sovereignty

 

of Senkakus, nor raised objection of Senkakus being placed under US administration.

 

Clearly, Senkakus was not considered to be part of Taiwan or China.

 

[Cerealkiller]

JUSt dun get it why Korea and China wun allow the matter to be handle by International Court as the Jap proposed.

 

becos Japan will win if International court is involved

[macrosszero]

I fail to see what purpose gory photographs which I suppose are from Indonesia has on this discussion.

[Nightkids]

The hatred runs too deep. It's not just only WWII but a string of post-war political spats from both Governments.

 

This is just the tip of the iceberg...

 

 

Sentosa was the killing place for sinkies during WW2......why sinkies don hate the Japs like PRCs do......???