Question:
On September 16-17, 2012, during his visit to Japan, the US Secretary of Defense stated, "This dispute between China and Japan regarding the islands could broaden." (AFP 17/9/2012). He added, "I am concerned that when these countries engage in provocations against one another over these disputed islands, it increases the possibility of a miscalculation on one side or the other that could lead to violence and result in conflict." (Same source). This came after Japan’s announcement on 11/9/2012 that it had purchased three islands from a Japanese family in an archipelago in the East China Sea, which it claims ownership of and calls Senkaku. This created tension with China, which claims these islands as its own and calls them Diaoyu. China subsequently sent two warships toward those islands.
The question is: Why did Japan take this step at this time? Does America have a role in this dispute? And could this lead to the outbreak of war between them, or is it a storm that will subside?
Answer:
The answer to the question becomes clear by reviewing the following points:
China claims that three out of five islands belong to it, having been seized by Japan during the war between them in 1894-1895. The Americans took control of them during World War II after defeating the Japanese, placing the administration of these islands under the Japanese island of Okinawa, which they occupied during that war and where they established a large American base. However, they handed those islands back to the Japanese in 1972 by delivering them to a Japanese family that had purchased them from another Japanese family that owned them since the 1890s. The total area of these islands in the archipelago is about 6 square kilometers; some are merely rocks surrounded by seawater and are uninhabited. However, they hold strategic importance in the East China Sea, as they are close to shipping lanes, their waters are rich in fishing resources, and there are reports of potential significant oil and gas reserves. The issue of these islands has been raised between the two countries several times, the most recent being in 2010 when similar tensions occurred.
On 29/6/2012, the United States officially notified Japan that it intended to deploy 12 Osprey aircraft at the Futenma American base on the Japanese island of Okinawa, and that the deployment would take place at the end of the current month (MENA - Masress Almashhad 1/7/2012). The US forces announced that one of these aircraft would begin its journey on 21/9/2012 (Arabic News CN World 20/9/2012). All of this occurred amidst Japanese protests against the American presence. This presence has come to be viewed with dissatisfaction by the Japanese, some of whom demand the departure of Americans from their country. There are 47,000 American soldiers stationed there under a bilateral security treaty signed in 1960 with the Japanese government during the American occupation. This is an American method used to change the form of its occupation while maintaining its influence in the occupied country, as it did in Iraq when it concluded the US security treaty with the Maliki government in 2008 under the official American occupation, and similarly with the strategic security treaty with the Afghan government signed months ago under the ongoing American occupation there.
In this atmosphere of Japanese dissatisfaction with the American presence, America announced the deployment of the aircraft! Naturally, this announcement would increase Japanese opposition. America saw that creating an atmosphere of provocation with China and making it appear that war with China is imminent would make the Japanese accept the deployment of these aircraft and dampen their protests against the US presence, under the guise of America standing with Japan against China! This is exactly what happened; in coordination with the Japanese government, which is closely linked to American policy, the issue of the islands was raised, claiming they belong to Japan despite the dispute with China. This led to the provocation of China, creating a misleading atmosphere of potential collision and war, which serves to calm Japanese opposition to the US presence in their country, viewing it as a necessary aid against China.
Therefore, raising the issue of the islands now, after the announcement of the aircraft deployment, is a deliberate step by the Japanese government under American planning to provoke the Chinese so that tension appears between Japan and China. This causes the Japanese to fear China and surrender to American plans implemented in their region. This is why statements from US officials pointed to the proximity of confrontation or its precursors! The US Secretary of Defense said during his visit to Japan on September 16-17, 2012, "This dispute could broaden." (AFP 17/9/2012). He also said, "I am concerned that when these countries engage in provocations against one another over these disputed islands, it increases the possibility of a miscalculation on one side or the other that could lead to violence and result in conflict." (Same source). He called on "both parties to exercise calm and restraint." The US Secretary of Defense portrays the matter as if a war is about to break out between the two countries, serving American objectives. He reminded them of the security treaties between his country and Japan to show that America is ready to stand by Japan, saying: "We respect our treaty obligations, which have existed for a long time and will not change." (Same source). All this escalation occurred while the US Secretary of Defense was focusing his talks with the Japanese government on American plans to deploy 12 Osprey aircraft at the US base in Okinawa, amid strong opposition from the residents of the southern island, as reported by AFP on 16/9/2012.
China’s reaction was emotional; it allowed mass demonstrations to roam the streets of its cities to protest the Japanese move toward those islands, which the Japanese state did not officially control. However, when Japan announced the purchase of three of them from a Japanese family to become state property, sovereignty officially shifted to the Japanese state, making it as if Japan had annexed them again. This provoked China, which moved some of its ships guarding its territorial waters in the East China Sea toward those islands. Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao made an emotional statement stirring Chinese sentiments, saying: "The era of humiliating the Chinese has passed, never to return." (AFP 17/9/2012). The Chinese remember the humiliation they suffered at the hands of the Japanese, whether in the war of the 1890s or under the direct Japanese occupation of China in the 1930s, which lasted until Japan’s defeat in World War II by America, after which Japan left China to the Americans. The complex of defeat and humiliation suffered by the Chinese remains a provocative factor for them. Thus, stirring such matters among the Chinese is very easy.
In this way, America has hit two birds with one stone by pushing Japan to claim the islands. On one hand, it tensed the atmosphere between China and Japan so that Japan's need for the American presence remains, making it easier for the Japanese public to accept it. On the other hand, America wants to keep China constantly preoccupied with regional territorial disputes to cut off any Chinese aspiration toward global international politics, limiting it to its own region. This ensures the continuation of American plans aimed at encircling China, limiting its influence, and curbing Chinese plans to enhance its regional status and eventual global status, especially vis-à-vis America. Thus, America's plans in the region surrounding China are to achieve this goal. America previously announced its plans to strengthen its presence in the Asia-Pacific as part of a new strategy; Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced on 1/6/2012 this strategy for his country in the Asia-Pacific region by sending six aircraft carriers and shifting 60% of its warships to this region in the coming years until 2020. America is working to fuel all conflicts facing China: in the East China Sea as happened with Japan, and in the South China Sea where there is tension between China and the Philippines over islands and fishing, as well as between China and Vietnam over a dispute where the Chinese expelled the Vietnamese in 1988. All this is to keep China preoccupied in these two regions!
America stands behind those countries in both regions, with the exception of North Korea, inciting them against China to keep China, as we said, busy in its region without exceeding it. This is especially true since America has full control over many of these countries, such as South Korea in the East China Sea, and the Philippines in the South China Sea where American bases exist, as well as Indonesia which follows American policy, and Japan’s orbit around the US.
This concerns America's role in the matter and the raising of the island issue at this time. As for whether this provocation will lead to the outbreak of war between China and Japan over the islands, it is unlikely, at least in the foreseeable future. There are larger and more important islands, such as Taiwan (formerly Formosa), for which China has not ignited a war, even though America agreed with China to work on its peaceful return. Furthermore, there are disputes with the Philippines, Vietnam, and others over islands in the South China Sea without entering into war, otherwise it would open a door it could not close! China will not sacrifice its significant interests with Japan for these islands, as the trade volume between them is about $300 billion annually. Japanese companies operating in China employ more than 20 million Chinese workers, and China benefits from Japanese technology and expertise. Therefore, it is not in China's interest to start a war with Japan for those islands. Chinese Defense Minister Liang Guanglie stated in his meeting with the US Secretary of Defense on 18/9/2012, responding to a journalist's question about whether Beijing intends to resort to force: "We still hope for a peaceful negotiated solution." (AFP 18/9/2012), which indicates it is unlikely that China will ignite a war with Japan over these islands.
If China remains preoccupied with its regional issues, then America will have succeeded in keeping China away from international politics. The correct course would be for China to effectively threaten American policy on a global scale and create problems that threaten its interests. That is, China should implement a policy of effectively threatening American policy in every region of the world, which would make it easier for China to exert effective influence in its regional sphere, particularly in the East and South China Seas.
However, what is observed in China's policy is that it is still misled by the idea that intervening in global politics effectively is not in its interest, and it only cares about its regional area... without realizing that it will not be able to control its region unless it has global political aspirations by creating problems for America to force it to reduce its harassment of China in its region. Unless China adopts this policy, it will remain stagnant, and America will continue to create regional tensions for it one after another.
In any case, perhaps history will repeat itself, or part of itself! The Khilafah (Caliphate) will be established by the permission of Allah, and its international political actions—even before its military actions—in expelling the West and America from the Islamic region will serve as a model to guide China in expelling American influence from around it. Thus, the political actions of the Khilafah will achieve security for China indirectly, just as the Khilafah previously achieved security for China directly. Chinese and Islamic sources mention that the Chinese state requested help from the Islamic Khilafah state during the reign of the Abbasid Caliph Abu Ja'far al-Mansur to help quell disturbances and chaos that swept the country in 756 CE. The Caliph sent a force of 4,000 Muslim soldiers, stability was restored, and they brought safety to the people of the country. The Chinese were impressed by the morals and good conduct of the Muslim soldiers and asked them to stay. Those Muslim soldiers remained there as carriers of the da'wah, spreading Islam, guidance, and light among the people of China. Their descendants today are the Muslims of East Turkestan, whom China is currently persecuting instead of showing gratitude! Will China realize this matter and end its occupation of Turkestan without such ingratitude?!
4 Dhul-Qi'dah 1433 AH Thursday, 20 September 2012 CE