Skip to comments.Chinese fishing boat detained in Japanese waters
Posted on 02/02/2013 8:48:37 PM PST by traumer
TOKYO, Feb. 2 (Xinhua) -- The Chinese Consulate General in Fukuoka confirmed that Japanese coast guard detained a Chinese fishing boat Saturday for alleged unauthorized coral fishing in Japanese waters.
The incident took place at around 8: 53 a.m. local time at waters 44 km northeast of Japan's Miyako Island in Okinawa Prefecture, according to the consulate.
A total of 13 Chinese crew members were on board when the boat, which registered in China's Hainan Province, was detained.
The captain, along with two other sailors, was transferred to Miyako Island by Japan's patrol vessels, while the other sailors and the boat were still in the place where they were caught.
The consulate said the Japanese coast guard can not provide further details as the captain did not carry relevant files related to the sailors and the boat.
The consulate has urged Japanese side to ensure the safety of the Chinese sailors and will visit the captain when he arrived at Miyako.
You can be sure they’ll keep doing this, also.
If Japan does nothing, China will construe that as giving in. If, on the other hand, Japan detains the Chinese, then China will cast herself as having been wronged, and it will be, “Nanking, Nanking” 24/7.
China is a virtuoso at diplomatic torture, and will play it’s Victim Card to the fullest.
Japan Will Live In Interesting Times.
The 3 am clock will never ring.
Is it John Kerry on the phone ?
I’ve been following this situation for awhile and I don’t believe the Japs will take this lying down. Imagine if the Japs put the same effort they put into making gadgets into their self defense force. They would probably have flying robots.
Viewed from a Chinese perspective, the line Fukuoka - Okinawa - Taiwan line is a hostile barrier that PLAN northern and central fleet units must pass through when accessing the Pacific Ocean proper. Okinawa is the center point and cork in the bottle. Okinawa is also a key base location for US forces.
Recently, the Chinese have been showing military interest (hydrographic surveys and submarine transits) in international seas around Okinawa and the PLAN has conducted fleet maneuvers in areas approaching Okinawa from the west.
In a brew-up over Taiwan, it is likely that the PLA has plans to neutralize both Japanese and American use of Okinawa as a staging base to support the ROC on Taiwan if necessary. Given their asymmetric warfare doctrine, their planning would probably call for submarine-launched commando raids that receive support from an indigenous 5th column based in Okinawa's Chinese community and perhaps would be followed up by air strikes by long range bombers. Of course, the fact that such actions would cause immediate war with Japan (and most likely with the US) means it is a decision the Chinese would very carefully consider before executing.
You are suggesting a possible war between China and the US. There has never been a real shooting war between two nuclear powers. (The Kargil War in 1999 was very limited in scope and, although India and Pakistan both had nuclear capability, it is doubtful either side had many if any deploy-able weapons.) Let's say China attacks US bases on Okinawa or US carriers in the Pacific. Both sides exchange conventional blows. How does this not escalate to a nuclear exchange?
The use of nuclear weapons is a special category (weapons of mass destruction) even within the relatively unconstrained use of force envisioned in high intensity conflict. Generally speaking, in the Post-Cold War era, their use is reserved to those cases where continued existance of the state is threatened. During the Cold War, Soviet and NATO doctrine had these weapons being released to strategic and operational commanders. Though both sides trained for this employment, it, mercifully, never occurred.
Since the existance of the PRC, US, or Japan (as a non-nuclear US ally) is not endangered in this scenario, there has to be another escalating factor that triggers their use. Combat losses, even though severe, are not a justification; their acceptance is part and parcel of the decision to engage in military operations.
The Chinese know this and so does the United States. (Ditto for India and Pakistan in the example you cite.)
Of course, there is always the possibility of a miscalculation, especially when fickle and excitable politicians are involved.
Good answer but you are assuming that the Chinese are as rational as you are. I hope you are right.
(Smiling) That’s the reason for the last sentence.