The media said that although the United States said not choose sides tendencies evident in Asia
the Hillary will visit to China.
Although the United States has always stressed that the territorial disputes in Asia, “neutral” and “choose sides”, August 28, U.S. State Department spokesman said, “Senkaku Islands” is the official title of the Diaoyu Islands ; from the end of August to the end of September, the United States and Japan in the East China Sea region analog Island wins “joint military exercise; United States has repeatedly stressed that the US-Japan Security Treaty applies to the Diaoyu Islands. A series of facts to show that the issue of the territorial disputes in Asia, the United States clearly words and deeds.
mouth say “choose sides” of the actual tendencies evident
August 28, to answer a reporter’s question in China, U.S. State Department spokesman Newland Sino-Japanese territorial dispute, the United States does not “choose sides”. But when a reporter asked how the United States title to the presence of the Sino-Japanese dispute over the Diaoyu Islands, Newland said, the official U.S. official title is “Senkaku Islands”. Newland also said, “Since the the 1972 Senkaku Islands as part of Okinawa was returned to Japan, has been in the actual control of the Japanese government,” the US-Japan Security Treaty applies to the Senkaku Islands.
“treasure” of Japanese media this speculation, saying that it was the United States’ first public clarification ‘Senkaku Islands’ is the official name of the territory of the Sino-Japanese dispute. Along, whether it is the official U.S. or U.S. think tanks, the media, the title of the Sino-Japanese dispute territory are very vague. Usually the case, the U.S. official, mainstream think tanks and media in the mention of the island, will also list the two names: “Senkaku Islands” or “Diaoyu Islands”.
I do not know is, intentionally or not, the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton last three years when it comes to this issue, many times omit the “Diaoyu Islands” China appellation. After the 2010 Sino-Japanese “collision”, Hillary Clinton and the U.S. State Department spokesman times the island directly called the Senkaku Islands.
Similarly, successive U.S. administrations have been whether the US-Japan Security Treaty applies to the Diaoyu Islands issue evasive, and deliberately kept “strategic vagueness. October 2010, Hillary Clinton answered questions from reporters after meeting with former Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara, beginning in this issue is evasive, but in the number of Japanese reporters questioning Hillary Clinton for the first time made it clear that: “‘ Senkaku Islands’ belong to the scope of Article 5 of the US-Japan Security Treaty, which is part of the United States to make a greater commitment to Japan’s security. “
the United States and Japan in the East China Sea action frequently
in the Sino-Japanese territorial dispute on the issue, the United States, in addition to constantly stand in favor of Japan, recently also in the East China Sea frequently to strengthen security cooperation “,” show of strength “.
U.S. Marines and the Japanese Self-Defense Forces, has begun to expand in the East China Sea islands for 37 days to combat joint military exercises, this exercise will continue until the end of September. Although the US-Japan joint military exercise has long been routine, but clearly “anti-seize the island as the main content of the joint military exercises, this is the first time. Especially in Japan on the Diaoyu Islands issue provocation, the context of the Sino-Japanese territorial frictions, the United States and Japan held a large-scale joint military exercises, and also includes exercise simulated intercept tactics of Dongfeng 21D anti-ship ballistic missile, its relevance has been very obvious.
US-Japan military declared “the exercise is not in any particular country as the imaginary enemy”, but both American and Japanese media experts agree that the exercise simulated the situation as “Japan’s outlying islands attacked “, is in fact assumed the Diaoyu Islands by the Chinese army captured after the US-Japan military Joint Strike seize control again.
U.S. military revealed last week that the United States will expand missile defense system in East Asia. U.S. media also revealed that the United States plans to deploy in the southern islands of Japan early warning radar, and ready in “a country in Southeast Asia”, “is likely to be the Philippines ‘deployment of a third X-band radar, thereby expanding the East Asia of the United States’ missile defense system. Some believe that the United States, Japan, Russia and analysis, and the United States to establish a missile defense system in East Asia, mainly aimed at North Korea’s missile program, but more realistic, deeper intent “against China.
Since 2010, the United States explicitly “return to Asia-Pacific strategy” to further strengthen the security alliance with the Asian “allies”, an important pillar of this strategy. Japanese Defense Minister Morimoto sensitive visited the United States in early August, U.S. Defense Secretary Panetta stressed that the US-Japan alliance is the cornerstone of U.S. security strategy in Asia-Pacific “. Implicit bias in the Sino-Japanese the territorial disputes Shangming where Japan and the United States to further the pragmatic use of Japan bridgehead. Beixian isolated for Japan, because of their territorial disputes in Asia, with China, South Korea, Russia has to pay a price to get the support of the United States, is the inevitable choice. These costs, in spite of the Japanese people oppose concessions to the United States on the relocation of U.S. bases in Okinawa, to buy the United States there are security risks Osprey transport aircraft, and so on.
involving territorial disputes by multiple standards
recently retired near the former White House National Security Council Senior Director of Asia-Pacific Affairs Bader told the reporter that, U.S. involvement in territorial disputes in Asia, “very unwise” because it will enable the United States into a lot of unnecessary trouble, does not meet the interests of the United States. This is why U.S. officials have repeatedly stressed that the territorial disputes in Asia, “choose sides” of the key reasons.
However, this does not prevent the United States secretly execute multiple standards. On the Diaoyu Islands dispute, the United States secretly favoring Japan. But in the face of Dokdo (Takeshima) dispute between Japan and South Korea, the United States is very low-key, absolutely impartial. Japan and South Korea, two allies of the United States in East Asia, the United States any tendentious stance will likely damage the US-Japan and US-ROK alliance relations, thereby affecting the United States’ return to the Asia-Pacific strategy.
Similarly, in the territorial disputes in the South China Sea, the Philippines, Vietnam continued provocations, the United States makes any position. But when the legally established three Shashi Sansha garrison, the U.S. State Department immediately issued a statement, saying that the South China Sea “confrontational rhetoric, resource development differences, coercive economic action, including the use of obstacles prevented from entering around the Huangyan Island event escalation , especially the Chinese to upgrade three Shashi administrative level, the move to build a new garrison in the South China Sea disputed region, contrary to resolve their differences through diplomatic cooperation, further exacerbating tensions in the region upgrade risk. The declaration of this name names, is rare in international diplomatic practice.
famous American expert on China, Paal, vice president of the think tank Carnegie Peace Foundation, said: “the United States only for China but not for other countries criticize China observers therefore believe that the United States has stood against the Chinese party. such injustice performance, weaken the claims in the United States based on the principle of international law practices. “
Paal think the South China Sea, not World War II in Europe” Sudeten region, no need to resist aggression, without objection “policy of appeasement”. Not the militarization of its foreign policy, has long since no such attempts. China’s neighbors is not passive and weak. With these neighboring countries, China in trade, investment and other areas to carry out a more constructive cooperation, and are not subject to such dispute. Moreover, the United States has a direct interest in the South China Sea is actually limited. Not half a territorial claims in the United States in the region. Enterprises and citizens of the United States is also not at risk.
Therefore, Paal, simply adhere to its principled position already stated in the United States, the support of a sovereignty dispute in the South China Sea side, and by the affected countries are fair procedures. To this end, the U.S. government needs to maintain its impartial stance, and avoid such misunderstanding State Council press statement from happening again.(edit: SN015) Share: