China – US candid dialogue aims at easing anxiety


China-US S&ED: Over 90 outcomes to boost China-US relations

China and the United States have achieved over ninety outcomes from the 6th Strategic and Economic D…

US-China Dialogue 2014China-U.S. annual dialogue opens, President Xi gives speech

 The sixth round of China-US Strategic and Economic Dialogue has opened here in Beijing. The two-day …

The sixth round of China-US Strategic and Economic Dialogue and the fifth China-US High-Level Consultation on People-to-People Exchange are being held in Beijing these two days. At a time when this bilateral relationship remains subtle and both have speculated about each other’s strategic outlook, such high-level dialogue offers a chance for them to listen to their counterparts to ease anxieties brought by problems between them.

The strategists and public opinion in both countries have made thorough analyses of bilateral ties, yet they still fail to offer grounded conclusions. The fundamental reason is that in the history of international politics, such a big power relationship has never existed before.

The Chinese leadership envisioned the notion of a new type of great power relations, which the US leadership has accepted. The positive attitude of both has injected hope to the 21st century.

There will be more friction between the two. There will be twists and turns as China rises and the US tries to maintain its hegemony. Both can easily highlight a concrete problem, while high-level dialogue is needed to ease the speculation in both societies.

China’s rise seems to be the most uncertain factor for the Sino-US relationship and the political pattern of the Asia-Pacific region in the 21st century. A comprehensive understanding of China’s rise will help lay the foundation of this bilateral relationship.

The driving forces of China’s rise come from the demand of the Chinese people. No one can stop this process. China and the US should build up an open system that can accommodate China’s rise and soften the impact of China’s rise on the politics of Asia-Pacific and other regions.

Many view the territorial disputes between China and its neighboring countries as its ambition for expansion. The US should be able to see that China has no intention to create new geopolitical patterns through these disputes, nor would it make use of the conflicts to expand its strategic space.

Even when China has no intention, its impact has been felt. Meanwhile, US support for Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam has caused some effect on China’s neighbors. These two factors should not interact with each other to intensify mutual strategic mistrust.

The significance of the heart-to-heart dialogue is the same as that of establishing a crisis-management mechanism. It may take a while before the two realize great power relations, but China-US relations are fundamentally different from ties between the US and the former Soviet Union.

There will be continuing pessimistic comments from the public in both countries. It is vital that both governments remain determined. It will be a significant political achievement if the two develop a relationship that is different from the one under the Yalta system during the last century.

Source:Global Times Published: 2014-7-9

Related:
 

[2014-07-10 07:26] Washington’s support for the true troublemakers, on the other hand, has convinced many that it is plotting to contain a rising China.

 

Dialogue to disperse suspicions

[2014-07-09 07:29] The new type of major-country relationship, once a favored catchphrase of well-wishers, is no longer what it was immediately after the meeting between the Chinese and US presidents last summer.

 

Attitude to the war matters

[2014-07-08 07:27] History is the best textbook. That is what President Xi Jinping said at the ceremony to mark the 77th anniversary of the Chinese People’s War Against Japanese Aggression on Monday.

Watch Japan’s surrender Video; Beware of Japan’s evil designs!


China publishes video of Japan´s surrender for first time

Beware of Japan’s evil designs

Japan militarism_AbeJapan militarism_Abe PlotThe volatile political situation in Europe (and partly in West Asia) led to the Great War 100 years ago, with the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Germany (or the Central Forces) on one side and Britain, France and Russia (or the Allies) on the other. What started essentially as a “European war” soon turned into a world war with the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria joining the Central Forces and Italy, the United States and Japan joining the Allies.

The international situation today is radically different from what it was 100 years ago. Regional conflicts do exist, but there is no conflict between two major powers or blocs that seems unlikely to be resolved through talks. The main contradictions and conflicts today are the ones between the sole superpower, the US, and emerging powers like China and Russia. Despite the comparative decline in its power, the US is not willing to yield its self-perceived sphere of influence to China or Russia. But despite being uncomfortable with the idea of seeing a powerful China, the US has agreed to establish a “new type of major-power relationship” with China.

China is surrounded by complicated maritime disputes with Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines, but these countries seem to be acting on the instigation of the US, and are not in a position to engage in a large-scale military conflict or war with China. In fact, these countries’ attitude toward China depends on the direction Sino-US relations take.

About 120 years ago, Japan launched an aggressive war against China, which ended in the collapse of the Chinese navy and the signing of the unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki, which forced the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911) rulers to cede some of China’s territories and pay reparations to Japan. The main reason China suffered such a fiasco was that, as a weakening feudal country, it was not prepared to fight an asymmetrical war with an emerging capitalist power.

China, along with the rest of the world, has undergone considerable changes since then. Today China is the world’s second-largest economy and one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. Despite that – and despite possessing nuclear weapons – China is still a peace-loving nation striving to build a harmonious world.

After being defeated in World War II, Japan has had to follow a pacifist Constitution, written with the help of Allies, mainly the US. And coupled with the economic downturn since the 1980s and the international community’s stipulation that allows it to only develop its Self-Defense Forces – as opposed to a full-fledged military – Japan today is in a position that is totally different from the late 19th century.

Yet Japan has taken a dangerous step toward militarization by reinterpreting Article 9 of the Constitution. Since the move allows Japan to dispatch troops overseas to take part in “conflicts”, it should be seen as a warning not only to China but also to the international community as a whole.

With the peaceful rise of China and escalation of Sino-Japanese disputes, Japan has begun shifting its strategic focus southwestward. A series of military moves by Tokyo in recent years, such as the deployment of missiles on its southernmost island, Miyako-jima, which is closest to China’s Diaoyu Islands and the stationing of the most advanced missiles on the southern tip of Kyushu Island, indicate that Japan’s military policy is targeted mainly at China.

Japan also plans to build military bases on Miyako-jima, Amami-shima and Ishigaki-jima, its three southern islands nearest to the Diaoyu Islands, and deploy outpost forces there. During a recent visit to Miyako-jima, a senior Japanese defense official told local officials that “the local defense vacuum” should be filled in.

Japan’s military maneuvers in Miyako-jima, some 2,000 kilometers from Tokyo but only about 200 km from China’s Taiwan, are obviously aimed at strengthening its military might to counter China, especially over the Sino-Japanese maritime disputes. This is how a recent Russian TV program summed up the situation.

Japan has also set up a joint land-, air-and sea-based monitoring system over various straits. For example, every time a Chinese ship crosses the Tsugaru Strait, it will be under surveillance of Japanese warships, helicopters and P-3C aircraft.

While deploying its armed forces in its southwestern region, Japan has unashamedly presented a different face to the international community. For example, it has repeatedly complained that “China’s warplanes dangerously approach Japan’s (planes) ” and that “China’s warships lock their fire control radar at Japan’s (ships) “, to seek sympathy of the international community. By beefing up forces using the “China threat” theory, Japan has exposed its ulterior motive, that is, it is preparing for a possible war with China, even though such a war is not likely to break out.

Given the complicated international security situation, China should remain vigilant against Japan’s military designs and continue its efforts to achieve peaceful sustainable development and build a harmonious world in a bid to play a bigger role on the global stage.

By Li Daguang (China Daily)/Asia News Network
The author is a professor at the National Defense University, People’s Liberation Army.

Related:

July 7 marks the 77th anniversary of the Marco Polo Bridge Incident, also known as the Lugou Bridge [Read it]

Kenjirō Funaki´s confession on aggression against China

China’s State Archives Administration has released another wartime confession from one of 45 convict…

Related posts:

Japan’s move escalates regional tension, signals fascism emergence: foreign experts Foreign analysts and scholars have harshly …
http://www.cngongji.cn/english/ A grand gathering is held to mark the 77th anniversary of the beginning of the Chinese People’s …
Video: Japanese World War II criminals ‘ confessions released After the end of World War Two , when Japanese war cr…
The Japanese cabinet’s approval Tuesday of the right to collective self-defense is a major shift of Japan’s defense policy. J…

Today July 7, remembering Japanese atrocities: China marks 77th anniversary of anti-Japan war 1937


China National Memorialhttp://www.cngongji.cn/english/

China marks 77th anniversary of start of anti-Japan warA grand gathering is held to mark the 77th anniversary of the beginning of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggressions at the Museum of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggressions in Beijing, capital of China, July 7, 2014. (Xinhua/Pang Xinglei)

China marks 77th anniversary of start of anti-Japan war

July 7 incident: String of events leading up to 1937 fight

Next Monday marks the 77th anniversary of the July 7 incident, or the “Lugou Bridge Incident&qu…A grand gathering is held to mark the 77th anniversary of beginning of Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggressions in Beijing, July 7, 2014.

July 7 is an anniversary that should be remembered by both Chinese and Japanese.

Seventy-seven years ago, at Lugou Bridge, known as Marco Polo Bridge to the Western people, Japanese troops attacked Chinese defenders in the nearby fortress town of Wanping, marking the beginning of the eight-year Anti-Japanese War.

Civilians were killed by gunfire, bombs, gas and biological weapons; women were raped; forced laborers were tortured to death.

It was a devastating tragedy not only for China, but also for Japanese people.

Ignoring objections from peace lovers at home, warmongering fascists initiated the war, leaving Japanese soldiers to shed their blood away from their motherland and women and children deserted back home. Those people who provoked the war marked their own country with humiliation in history.

What’s more, 77 years later, the Japanese government still fails to introspect on what it did in the past and cherish the current peace.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s cabinet endorsed a reinterpretation of its pacifist Constitution on Tuesday for the right to collective self-defense, the latest move in challenging the international bottom line. A Japanese person even set himself alight in protest.

From the slapstick of the “nationalization” of China’s Diaoyu Islands by the former Japanese government, to Abe’s ridiculous visit to the Yasukuni Shrine and to the pacifist Constitution reinterpretation, right-wingers in Japan have initiated a series of provocations.

War is hell, but there are always devils who try to spark war and trample peace under foot.

Born in an island country with limited natural resources, Japanese people are respected for their diligence and energy-saving awareness. However, there are always a small number of people who attempt to loot the resources of other countries by way of invasion, bringing catastrophe to neighbors including the Korean Peninsula, India, Vietnam, the Philippines and China.

Decades have passed. With the common efforts of government leaders and civilians who cherish peace, China and Japan have greatly strengthened economic ties and cultural exchanges by putting hatred behind them. But some in Japan are now always trying to disturb the international postwar order by ignoring history, something no peace lover in either country wants to see.

China has a deep-rooted culture of seeking peace and expects the Abe government to stop its provocations. Otherwise, they will have to take their medicine.

Japan frays nerves of neighboring countries

For the Chinese people, July 7, 1937 was a day when one of their worst nightmares began, as it marked the beginning of the eight-year-long China’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.

During the 1930s and 1940s, the Japanese empire, where many reckless militarist policies were born, invaded China and some Southeast Asian countries, causing huge pain to Asian people.

Seventy-seven years later, the psychological wounds of the Chinese people have not been fully healed, as Japanese rightists have repeatedly denied its atrocities of the aggression and taken a provocative approach in addressing ties with its neighboring countries.

Even worse, these wounds are once again touched recently as the cabinet of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on July 1 approved a resolution that would allow the country to exercise the so-called “collective self-defense right” by reinterpreting its pacifist Constitution, despite strong protests from home and abroad.

According to the war-renouncing Article 9 of the country’s Constitution, Japan has been banned to exercise the right to collective self-defense after World War II due to its heinous war crimes to Asian countries.

However, the resolution would enable Tokyo to fight for “countries with close ties” with Japan even though Japan itself is not under attack, which signals that the Japanese government has shifted its previous restrictive postwar security policy to a more proactive one.

It is by no means the first time that the Abe’s administration irritates its neighbors and stirs up regional tensions by adopting provocative policies.

In recent years, Tokyo has tried hard to strengthen its military buildup and seek military expansion amid festering historical and territorial disputes with neighboring countries, including the attempt to revise its national defense policy in late December last year.

Right-wing Japanese politicians have repeatedly watered down Japan’s history of aggression and visited the notorious Yasukuni Shrine that honors the country’s war criminals, which has further alarmed regional countries including China and South Korea.

The Japanese government has played up hard the so-called China-threat theory, and dressed up itself as a victim of Beijing’s peaceful development, paving the way for the country to develop its self-defense forces.

However, what Abe has done is equivalent to playing with fire, as he is leading his country down a dangerous path.

As a relatively small island country with scarce natural resources, it is really unwise for Japan to engage in big-power geopolitics and aggressions against its neighbors.

As the provoker and defeated country of the World War II, Japan should learn from the lessons of the wars and give up its attempt for better warships and missiles as its recklessness would affect Asia as a whole.

Beijing always tries to develop a strategic partnership of mutual benefits with its neighboring country, but a dangerous Tokyo has wasted many precious chances to build sound bilateral ties amid its endless provocations.

As one of the important players in Asia and on world arena, it is high time for Japan to face up to its aggression in history and pursue the path of peaceful development instead of angering the region with rounds and rounds of irresponsible words and provocative policies.

Sources: China Daily/Asia News Network

Related:

Evidence reveals Japan used chemical, biological weapons

China’s Jilin Provincial Archives Administration has released 450 postal review documents on Japan’s…

Japanese war criminal Kamisaka Katsu´s confession released

Kamisaka admitted that he killed about 20 Chinese people by means of beheading and bayoneting in Feb…

Related posts:
Video: Japanese World War II criminals ‘ confessions released After the end of World War Two , when Japanese war cr…
The Japanese cabinet’s approval Tuesday of the right to collective self-defense is a major shift of Japan’s defense policy. J…

Japan’s move escalates regional tension, signals fascism emergence: foreign experts Foreign analysts and scholars have harshly

Japanese World War II criminals’ confessions released


Japanese war criminals

  1. After the end of World War Two, when Japanese war criminals were apprehended and interrogated, they wrote confessions.

    More documents decoded to reveal Japan´s war crimes

    An archive bureau in northeast China is drawing together experts to decode a vast number of document…

    BEIJING, July 3 — Confessions made by 45 Japanese war criminals tried and convicted by military tribunals in China after World War II (WWII) were published online on Thursday.

    Handwritten confessions, along with Chinese translations and abstracts in both Chinese and English, have been published on the website of the State Archives Administration, said the administration’s deputy director Li Minghua at a press conference on Thursday.

    “These archives are hard evidence of the heinous crimes committed by Japanese imperialism against the Chinese,” Li said.

    “Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, disregarding historical justice and human conscience, has been openly talking black into white, misleading the public, and beautifying Japanese aggression and its colonial history since he took office,” Li told reporters.

    “This challenges WWII achievements and the post-WWII international order.

    “The administration has made them available online before the 77th anniversary of the July 7 incident to remember history, take history as a mirror, cherish peace… and prevent the replay of such a historical tragedy,” Li added.

    The July 7 incident, or the Lugouqiao Incident, in 1937 marked the beginning of China’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, which lasted eight years.

China began publishing “confessions” of 45 convicted Japanese World War II criminals on Thursday, officials said, in Beijing’s latest effort to highlight the past amid a territorial dispute between the two.

BEIJING: China began publishing “confessions” of 45 convicted Japanese World War II criminals on Thursday, officials said, in Beijing’s latest effort to highlight the past amid a territorial dispute between the two.

The documents, handwritten by Japanese tried and convicted by military courts in China after the war, are being released one a day for 45 days by the State Archives Administration (SAA), it said in a statement on its website.

In the first, dated 1954 and 38 pages long, Keiku Suzuki, described as a lieutenant general and commander of Japan’s 117th Division, admitted ordering a Colonel Taisuke to “burn down the houses of about 800 households and slaughter 1,000 Chinese peasants in a mop-up operation” in the Tangshan area, according to the official translation.

Among a litany of other crimes with a total toll in the thousands, he also confessed that he “cruelly killed 235 Chinese peasants seeking refuge in a village near Lujiayu”.

He also “ordered the Epidemic Prevention and Water Supply Squad to spread cholera virus in three or four villages”.

The document, which is littered with descriptions of “Japanese imperialists”, appeared to have been written by someone with native-level command of Japanese, said one Japanese journalist who saw it.

However, some of the sentences were very long and contained multiple clauses, possibly indicating it had gone through several drafts.

It was not clear whether Suzuki’s or the other yet-to-be-published confessions — all of them relating to 45 war criminals put on trial in China in 1956 — were previously publicly available.

Suzuki was held by Soviet forces at the end of the conflict and transferred to Chinese custody in 1950, earlier Chinese documents said, adding that he was sentenced to 20 years in prison by the court and released in 1963.

The publication of the confessions comes as Tokyo and Beijing are at odds over a territorial dispute in the East China Sea, and as Beijing has argued that a reinterpretation of Japan’s pacifist constitution could open the door to remilitarisation of a country it considers insufficiently penitent for its actions in World War II.

China regularly accuses Japan of failing to face up to its history of aggression in Asia, criticism that has intensified since the democratic re-election in December 2012 of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who has advocated a more muscular defence and foreign policy stance.

China was outraged in December last year when Abe visited Tokyo’s Yasukuni Shrine, where the souls of Japan’s war dead, including several high-level officials executed for war crimes after World War II, are enshrined.

“These archives are hard evidence of the heinous crimes committed by Japanese imperialism against the Chinese,” the SAA’s deputy director Li Minghua was quoted as saying by the official Xinhua news agency.

“Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, disregarding historical justice and human conscience, has been openly talking black into white, misleading the public, and beautifying Japanese aggression and its colonial history since he took office,” Li said.

The SAA said the documents were being released to mark the 77th anniversary Monday of the Marco Polo Bridge incident, a clash between Chinese and Japanese troops near Beijing, commemorated as the start of what is known in China as the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, which ended with Tokyo’s World War II defeat in 1945.

Japan’s move escalates regional tension, signals fascism emergence: foreign experts Foreign analysts and scholars have harshly …
The Japanese cabinet’s approval Tuesday of the right to collective self-defense is a major shift of Japan’s defense policy. J..

Japan’s removal of ban on collective self-defense signals fascism emergence, escalates tension, stirs international unease


Japan empire 1942

Japan’s move escalates regional tension, signals fascism emergence: foreign experts

Foreign analysts and scholars have harshly criticized a resolution passed by the Japanese cabinet on Monday to allow it a larger military role in Asia, saying it will escalates regional tensions and is a sign of fascism emergence.

The resolution, which allows Japan to exercise the right to collective self-defense by reinterpreting the pacifist Constitution, greenlights Japan to take military action to defend other countries even though the nation itself is not under attack, marking a major overhaul from Japan’ s postwar security policy.

“Japan is changing,” warned Shada Islam, the director of Brussels-based Policy, Friends of Europe in a written interview with Xinhua.

The move is part of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s drive to transform Japan into a “normal country” when it comes to defence and security, said Islam, adding that he has also pushed through a law to strengthen control of state secrets, created American-style National Security Council, and lifted Japan’ s self-imposed restriction on exporting weapons.

Japan militarism_AbeAbe’s so-called “proactive pacifism” is clearly not popular at home and he has had to abandon his original plan to secure direct constitutional revision — but this move should reassure the United States that Japan is taking on some responsibility for its own defence, she said.

Public opinion in Japan will continue to act as a brake on some of the Abe’s more ambitious plans, so Abe will have to carefully balance his policies, she said, adding that the resolution “will certainly not enhance security and could increase tensions in northeast Asia.”

It is absurd for Japan to allows collective self-defense, said Enes Begicevic, a journalist from Bosnia and Herzegovina, adding that Japan’s move will lead to regional instability.

“This constitutional change is both historic and worrying as it moves one of the pillars which has maintained the balance of peace in East Asia since the end of the Second World War,” said Augusto Soto, professor of ESADE institution of Ramon Llull University and Director of Dialogue with China Project.

This measure could have the effect of destabilizing Asia and the Pacific and this is understood by an important part of public opinion in Japan which is against the Abe administration. However, this opinion does not have the political power to stop the Japanese government’s initiative, he said.

In the face of this situation China could launch a political offensive in order to try and convince Japanese public opinion that the announced measure goes against Japanese interests, he advised.

“The new interpretation of the constitution that Japan’s cabinet has adopted now may do little good to the security situation in the Asia-Pacific region,” Angel Maestro, a Spanish columnist of the Financial World and a expert on asian affairs.

Japan’s neighbors may worry this is the sign of a new rise of the fascism in Japan’s Political Arena. These countries may strengthen their defense forces as insurance against the possibility that Japan has chosen an expansionist foreign policy as it did during the Second World War, which would raise tensions in the region and escalate conflicts that already exist, he said.

“I think it may increase the historical mistrust that Japan already faces from its neighboring countries, especially China and Korea, about its military intentions,” said Piin-Fen Kok, Director of China, East Asia and United States Program with the EastWest Institute.

It’ s up to Japan to explain clearly to its neighbors why it is doing this, and why this is good for regional and global security. Japan also needs to provide assurances to its neighbors that it will not revert to its militaristic past, Kok said.

“Collective self-defense is a compromise born from Shinzo Abe’s political will, who leads a group of people that don’t represent the mainstream of Japanese politics,” Professor Axel Berkofsky, senior associate research fellow of Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI) has told Xinhua.

“It is funny to say that Japan should regain the respect of the world. It was just saying: It’s a weak commitment, a political move, a dream, a vision of Abe himself,” he added.

- Xinhua (Editor:Wang Xin、Huang Jin)

Japan’s removal of ban on collective self-defense stirs international unease

The Japanese cabinet has approved a resolution that would allow the country to exercise the right of collective self-defense by reinterpreting the Pacifist Constitution.

Japan Self Defense force

The resolution sets three conditions that would enable exercise of the right including “clear danger” to the lives of its people due to armed attacks on Japan or “countries with close ties”.

The move is an overhaul of Japan’s exclusively defense-oriented security policy after World War II and over half of Japanese are against it.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said that China is opposed to Japan’s pursuit of its domestic political goals by deliberately inventing a “China threat”, and urged Japan to respect the legitimate security concerns of its Asian neighbors and deal prudently with relevant issues. He said that Japan must not undermine China’s sovereignty and security interests, nor should it harm regional peace and stability.

Japan’s removal of the ban on collective self-defense comes at a time of strained Sino-Japan relations, said Yuan Yang, a researcher with the Academy of Military Sciences of PLA. According to Yuan, China’s rapid economic and military development is the motive behind Japan’s move to constrain China.

Yuan Yang believes that lifting the ban on collective defense would ease certain restrictions on the Japanese military forces and might lead to gradual expansion of its military capability.

Yuan points out that Japan’s emphasis on “countries with close ties”, rather than confining itself to its allies, increases the possibility of conflict between China and Japan. There is now the possibiltiy that the two countries might clash over issues related to third parties as well as the Diaoyu Island issue and other issues in the East China Sea.

Zhou Yongsheng, a professor with the China Foreign Affairs University, has also noted that the most serious consequence of removing the ban on collective self-defense might be a military alliance betweeen Japan and countries like the Philippines and Vietnam.

Faced with this situation, China needs to show the world that with peaceful development as its basic state policy, it will never pose any threat to other countries. It should try to unite all peace-loving forces, especially peace forces in Japan, to prevent these Japanese government moves. But China also needs to make it clear to the world that with its own strengthened military forces, it has nothing to fear from the provocative actions of other countries. – (People’s Daily Online)

Related posts:

The Japanese cabinet’s approval Tuesday of the right to collective self-defense is a major shift of Japan’s defense policy. J…

American hegemony cannot bring security to Asia


American defense secretary Chuck Hagel delivered a speech at the Shangri-La Defense Dialogue in Singapore on May 31st. In response to this irresponsible speech, the deputy chief of the General Staff of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Wang Guanzhong pointed out that Hagel’s speech was filled with terms that will incite unrest in Asia.  Images for American hegemony cannot bring security …

American defense secretary Chuck Hagel delivered a speech at the Shangri-La Defense Dialogue in Singapore on May 31st. In addition to defending America’s pivot to the Asia-Pacific region, he also declared that the Diaoyu islands fall under the mutual defense treaty with Japan and voiced support for Japan’s right to collective self-defense. Moreover, he placed emphasis on his criticism of China and made use of many threatening words.

In response to this irresponsible speech, the deputy chief of the General Staff of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Wang Guanzhong pointed out that Hagel’s speech was filled with terms that will incite unrest in Asia. China had not foreseen that Hagel would deliver such an offensive speech. His accusations against China were unreasonable.

In order to maintain its hegemony and enjoy an economic dividend from the rapid development of Asia, America has devised a series of new Asia-Pacific strategies such as “Back to Asia”, “Pivot to Asia” and “U.S. Asia-Pacific Re-balance Strategy” to expand its military presence in Asia. America’s so called “U.S. Asia-Pacific Re-balance Strategy” has increasingly aroused concern and anger among many of the countries affected on the one hand, and become the butt of criticism of influential strategists at home. We find ourselves in total disagreement with Hagel’s groundless accusations – he would do well to subject himself to similar critical analysis.

As is widely accepted, the Diaoyu Islands, Xisha, Zhongsha and the Nansha islands have formed an integral part of China’s territory since ancient times – there is no shortage of historical and legal evidence to support China’s claims. China has nevertheless shown great restraint and patience in its calls for regional peace and stability, even when confronted with unreasonable demands and provocation on the part of other countries. China has exercised military restraint over the issues concerning the Diaoyu Islands, Huangyan Island and even the Xisha islands. Meanwhile, Japan’s ‘Self-Defense Force’ jets have incessantly intruded into the East China Sea, far from the Diaoyu Islands to harass and threaten unarmed Chinese patrol aircraft.

Ships of the Philippine navy have harassed and threatened defenseless Chinese fishermen. Armed Vietnamese vessels have deliberately collided with Chinese government ships and fishing boats. China has never yet drilled a single oil well in the South China Sea, while countries such as Vietnam and Philippines have long been producing oil and gas in the area. We are curious about Hagel’s motives in directing his accusations against China, while ignoring the efforts and sacrifices made by China in the interests of regional peace and stability.

Hagel’s criticism of China as a ‘rule-breaker’ is a typical example of the hypocrisy of American politicians. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea has met with approval from more than 150 countries since it was passed some thirty years ago. In pursuit of its own interests America, the self-styled “world policeman” and “supreme power” did not join the convention. With its own history of double standards, America has no business agitating for international laws and rules and attacking other countries for not abiding by these international rules.

China is no longer the downtrodden victim that it may have been one hundred years ago. China has no intention of stirring up trouble, but it will not sacrifice core national interests. Even in the face of provocation from Japan, the Philippines, and Vietnam, China remains tolerant and insists on peaceful settlement of disputes through bilateral negotiations. However, China is still forced to take counter-measures. We hope the nations involved do not interpret our tolerance as a sign of weakness. We hope they will turn back to the path of solving disputes through negotiation. Moreover, we also wish that America would abide by its promise of not taking sides in sovereignty disputes in Asia. In this way regional peace and stability and the long-term interests of nations in the region can be secured.

The countries mentioned above would be considerably less presumptuous without the support of America. In this sense, America is the chief instigator of unrest in Asia. America’s insistence on its policy of hegemony offers nothing to Asian security and serves only to fuel disorder.<

Source: (People’s Daily Online)    10:11, June 06, 2014
The article is edited and translated from《美国霸权带不来亚洲安全》, source: People’s Daily Overseas Edition, author: Zhang Junshe, a researcher with the Navy Military Academic Research Institute.

China vows firm stance on maritime rights

In response to the G7 statement, China’s foreign ministry has reaffirmed the country’s determination…

Related reading

Related posts:

China says stronger PLA benefits security in Asia China was completely justified in rejecting remarks made by US Defense Secretary Chuck…
The Shangri-La Dialogue (SLD), held annually in Singapore, is a security forum where Western, especially US discourse power has the upp…

  China: S. China Sea claims lawful, based on historical record At the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, the Chief of China´s PLA Ge…
China on Wednesday rejected a Hague-based arbitration tribunal’s ruling giving it six months to respond to a legal claim by the Phi…

China reiterates principle for solving island disputes, China’s claims are lawful based on history


  China: S. China Sea claims lawful, based on historical record

At the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, the Chief of China´s PLA General Staff, Lieutenant Ge…

SINGAPORE, June 2 (Xinhua) — Island or maritime demarcation disputes should be solved through coordination and negotiations between directly involved parties on the basis of respecting historical facts and international law, a Chinese general said on Sunday.

China’s sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction in the South China Sea were established through the long process of historical development, said Wang Guanzhong, deputy chief of general staff of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), at the 13th Shangri-La Dialogue..

It can be traced back to over 2,000 years ago, or the Han Dynasty, when China started discovering and gradually maturing its administration over the South China Sea, especially the Nansha Islands and related sea area, Wang said..

The Xisha Islands and the Nansha Islands, both in the South China Sea, were occupied by Japan during World War II, and returned to China in 1946 under the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation..

After the return of these islands to China, the Chinese government in 1948 mapped out the nine-dash line, which is clearly marked in historical documents and world maps drawn by different countries, the general said..

China’s neighboring countries never raised doubts about China’s sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction over the Nasha Islands, the Xisha Islands and the related sea area until the 1970s when rich oil resources were discovered in the South China Sea, he said..

China, as a signatory country to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), respects the convention which took effect in 1994. However, Wang said, China’s sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction over the South China Sea islands and islets as well as related sea waters came into being over the past 2,000 years..

The UNCLOS, which took effect in 1994, cannot re-demarcate sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction that came into being over such a prolonged period of time in history, while recognizing countries’ historical rights over seas and islands and islets, Wang said..

The UNCLOS is inapplicable to the adjustment of ownership of sea islands and islets, he said. The law governing the sea is an enormous and comprehensive law system, not merely a single UNCLOS..

Meanwhile, the adjustment is also not merely subject to a single international law of sea — there is an enormous international law system which includes the international law of sea, he said. Thus, only using the UNCLOS to argue is not workable, he said..

China has signed the UNCLOS and respects it, but the United States has not signed the convention because it feels many provisions of the convention are against it, he said..

Wang noted China’s stance in this regard is coherent and clear, that is, China advocates solving the disputes over islands and maritime demarcation through direct consultations and talks with the directly-involved parties..

Related post:

China says stronger PLA benefits security in Asia China was completely justified in rejecting remarks made by US Defense Secretary Chuck…

Related:

Abe, Hagel’s accusations rejected

BEIJING, June 2 (Xinhuanet) — Wang Guanzhong, the highest ranking military official in the Chinese delegation at an Asia-Pacific security forum, started his speech on Sunday by highlighting the common aspiration for a utopia with the same name as the event: Shangri-La..

However, the deputy chief of the General Staff of the People’s Liberation Army did not continue with his mild-toned comments as planned on the last day of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore.  Full Story

Abe’s sugarcoating rhetoric at Shangri-La Dialogue disguises militaristic ambition

BEIJING, May 31 (Xinhua) — Although right-leaning Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe managed to deliver a seemingly “politically correct” keynote speech at the annual Asia Security Summit in Singapore on Friday, his awkward rhetoric betrayed his puzzled mind on regional issues..

Overloaded with abundant pleasant words and made-up concepts, such as “proactive contribution to peace” and “proactive pacifism,” as well as new slogans enthusiastically promoted by Abe, the speech was in fact intended to sugarcoat the right-leaning Japan’s militaristic agenda.  Full Story

China´s rebuttal to criticisms from US & Japan well-received

During the Shangri-la Dialogue security forum, China denounced Japan and the US for making provocati…

 

Fu Ying: Freedom of navigation is important to China

China’s former senior diplomat Fu Ying has stressed the significance of the freedom and safety of na…

UNESCO sets up knowledge center in Beijing 
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) set up its International Knowledge Center for Engineering Sciences and Technology (IKCEST) in Beijing on Monday.

War of words shows tensions in Asia Pacific

Asia-Pacific peace should be joint mission

Each and every regional stakeholder should assume the responsibility of safeguarding Asia-Pacific peace.

Congress’ malevolent bill falls on deaf ears

Shangri-La Diaogue: US-Japan accusations are hypocritical as well as self-deceiving, unhelpful; China for Asian security


China says stronger PLA benefits security in Asia

China was completely justified in rejecting remarks made by US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel at the 13th Asia Security Summit, or Shangri-La Dialogue, in Singapore on Saturday.

The US defense chief did everything he could to point an accusing finger. He not only charged China with taking “destabilizing, unilateral actions” in the South China Sea but also criticized the demarcation of an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) over the East China Sea and the so-called cyber spying against the United States.

The US accusations are nothing but groundless and unreasonable. It is inappropriate for the defense chief to fire anti-China remarks from the podium of a regional security forum where the US stance is by no means constructive to regional peace and stability.

Wang Guanzhong, deputy chief of general staff of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army who led the Chinese delegation, rightfully pointed out that Hagel’s speech bore every sign of US hegemony as it was filled with full of incitement, instigation, threat and intimidation.

Video: Chinese general speaks on China´s Asia security outlook

The Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the People’s Liberation Army, Wang Guanzhong, is expected t…

Wang’s comment provides an accurate lens for people to see through Washington’s real intentions in the region. Hagel has criticized China for taking so-called destabilizing and unilateral actions in the South China Sea. In fact, it is the US’s unilateral move in the region that has encouraged some countries in the region to covet islands and islets to which they are not entitled.

Until 2009 no country had challenged China’s de facto control over the “nine-dash line” that outlines its territory in the South China Sea. The area of jurisdiction is explicitly defined, and China holds indisputable proof of its sovereignty over the waters. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, to which some claimant countries have frequently referred, also respects historical sovereignty.

Since 2009, when the Obama administration set out to implement its “rebalancing to Asia” policy, Washington has strengthened its military ties with its regional allies and shipped advanced military equipment to the region. It is no secret that Washington has assumed the role of a wirepuller behind a number of maritime territorial disputes in the region.

As for the US objection to China’s establishment of an ADIZ over the East China Sea, it is obvious that Washington has raised the tone of its criticism out of fear that China’s increasing activities in the region may impair its vested interests.

Since China announced the establishment of the ADIZ on Nov 23, the US has been leading a chorus denouncing the move. Their criticism is hardly worth refuting as China’s ADIZ conforms to international law and international practice – more than 20 countries have set up ADIZs, and the US was the first to do so 60 years ago.

During Saturday’s speech, Hagel tried to depict the US as country that dutifully defends the international order in the Asia Pacific. Washington never hides its intention to play a leading role in regional affairs but with such an unconstructive attitude as displayed in Hagel’s remarks, even countries welcoming a bigger role for Uncle Sam in the region, could not help but wonder about the US’s real intentions. More and more people in this region have begun to realize that the US only wants to fish in troubled waters.

“The United States will not look the other way when fundamental principles to the international order are being challenged,” Hagel said. Again this is hypocritical as well as self-deceiving.

The US has thrown its weight behind Japan, its regional ally, since September 2012 when the Japanese government unilaterally announced its decision to “nationalize” China’s Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea. Washington should be reminded that Japan’s attempt to change the status quo in the East China Sea and its increasingly rightist behavior are posing the greatest threat to the norms governing international order.

As such, by lodging unwarranted accusations against China, Hagel has sent a wrong signal in Singapore. His arguments do a disservice to regional efforts in quelling maritime disputes as well as sowing more seeds of discord in the region.

By Wang Hui China Daily

Provocative remarks from U.S., Japan not helpful for regional security: Chinese general

Shangri-La Dialogue2014-Wang Guanzhong

Wang Guanzhong, deputy chief of the General Staff of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, speaks during the fourth plenary session of the 13th Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore June 1, 2014, the final day of the multilateral forum focusing on security issues in Asia. (Xinhua/Then Chih Wey)

SINGAPORE, June 1 (Xinhua) — The provocative harsh remarks against China by United States Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at a regional security forum are not helpful for regional peace and stability, an army general heading the Chinese delegation said on Sunday.

Delivering a speech on the third day of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, Wang Guanzhong said he has planned to use the opportunity to elaborate on China’s newly proposed approach and framework of common security and cooperative security in Asia but had to move away from the prepared text to respond.

“My feeling is that Mr. Abe and Mr. Hagel were singing notes in chorus. They were corroborating and colluding and using the opportunities to speak first at the Shangri-La Dialogue to take the initiative to provoke and challenge China,” he told military generals, defense chiefs and scholars.

Hagel criticized China as being the one taking unilateral actions on the South China Sea and said that the United States will maintain its leadership in the Asia Pacific and defend the interests of its allies. He also repeated the U.S. pretext of concerns for the freedom of navigation and respect for international law in the South China Sea.

Wang said he did not expect the languages of hegemonism and words of intimidation in the speech of Hagel.

“He made a speech to stoke instability and encourage fight picking in the Asia Pacific. The attitude there is not constructive,” the Chinese general said.

No disputes or incidents have been initiated by China over a long period of time on sovereign and maritime issues and China has always had to respond, he said.

Abe delivered a keynote speech on Friday evening full of thinly- veiled comments aimed at China. He talked about how he intends to revise and push beyond the limit of Japan’s pacifist constitution that was put in place after the World War II and how he intends to go for a larger role for Japan in Asia in security by promoting the idea of “proactive peace” and giving patrol ships to the Philippines and Vietnam to support their maritime claims.

Wang said everybody can see the remarks of Abe, full of innuendoes, are aimed at China.

“Hagel was being quite frank. He just bluntly and openly criticized China, albeit baseless. But I rather like his way of talking. If you want to say something, it’s better to just say it directly,” he said.

“As a prime minister, Abe was invited to the Shangri-La Dialogue by the organizers to give a speech. He could have upheld the goal of dialogue facilitation set for the forum to advance peace and security in the Asia Pacific. He could have contributed constructive suggestions but, opposite to the spirit of the dialogue meeting, he initiated incidents and stoke disputes,” Wang said.

“I think this is not acceptable, and this is not in line with the spirit of the dialogue meeting,” he added.

Wang said that China never took the initiative at the Shangri- La Dialogue to incite disputes.

“If you also look at what the United States and Japan did, it was not difficult to see who took the initiative to pick fights and incite disputes and conflicts. From the speeches of Abe and Hagel, we can see who on earth are aggressive. It is the United States and Japan corroborating with each other, and not China,” he said.

Despite the harsh words from the United States and Japan, Wang called for cooperation and coordination to work for regional peace and stability.

Both China and the United States have common interests in a world of increasingly interdependent countries, and Chinese President Xi Jinping has recently proposed the approach of common security and sustainable security for Asia, which calls for cooperative security and mutually beneficial development to lead efforts for peace and stability in the region.

China has said that the approach of dividing Asian countries into allies and non-allies by the United States will not lead to security for all and that the 21st century is the time to drop the mentality of alliance to achieve security at the expense of other countries.

The approach outlined by China calls for efforts from all the countries in the region to contribute to regional peace and stability through the pursuit of cooperation and development. Scholars said the approach is much more inclusive and that other countries are also welcome to play a constructive role.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Anatoly Antonov voiced concerns for the detrimental impact on regional peace and stability from the wave of color revolutions with democracy as a pretext.

He said that Russia is opposed to the deployment of missile defense systems in the Asia Pacific which breaks the strategic balance in the region.

Antonov also questioned the idea of the United States must be a leader.

“We are opposed to any division of the Asia Pacific nations into ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ ones, leaders and supporters. We are all equal. We have equal rights and obligations. At the same time every nation is unique in terms of its history, cultural heritage and traditions,” he said.

The Shangri-La Dialogue, officially the Asian Security Summit organized by the International Institute of Strategic Studies, a London-based think thank, gathers defense and military representatives and scholars from 27 countries in the Asia Pacific region and beyond. -xinhua

China advocates, implements security concept for Asia

China advocates, implements security concept for Asia
Wang Guanzhong, deputy chief of the general staff of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of China, speaks during a plenary session at the 13th International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) Asia Security Summit: The Shangri-La Dialogue, in Singapore June 1, 2014. [Photo/Agencies]

SINGAPORE — China advocates and implements a security concept for Asia in real earnest, and stands ready to work with other countries to pursue Asian security that is established, shared by and win-win to all, said Wang Guanzhong, deputy chief of the general staff of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of China.

China advocates, implements security concept for Asia

Experts blast Hagel over ‘destabilizing’ accusations 

“The security of China is closely linked to that of Asia. China is a constructive, proactive and positive force for Asia’s peace and security,” Wang said in a speech at the 13th Shangri-La Dialogue.

The event is a multilateral forum organized by the London-based think tank International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has recently put forth the security concept for Asia featuring common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security at the fourth Summit of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia.

“This concept has been widely acclaimed by the Asian countries, ” the senior military officer said.
Wang said China is a constructive, proactive and positive force for Asia’s peace and security because China pursues the path of peaceful development.

He also stressed that China will never contend for or seek hegemony and foreign expansion.
China believes that all countries should have the equal rights to independently choose their own social systems and development paths, said the officer.

“We need to strengthen coordination on the basis of mutual respect, and oppose the attempt by any country to dominate regional security affairs,” he said.

The senior military officer highlighted in his speech that China advocates dialogue and cooperation, and stands for coordinated progress of security and development. “China pursues a neighborhood diplomacy that aims at bringing harmony, security and prosperity to its neighbors,” Wang said.

“We work to promote the sound interaction between regional economic cooperation and security cooperation, and to maintain both traditional and non-traditional security in a coordinated way. “

He said, in 2013, China contributed “nearly 30 percent of the world’s economic growth” and “over 50 percent of the growth in Asia”.

Wang said China will continue to promote sustainable security through sustainable development, and work together with other countries for “lasting peace and prosperity in the region”.

Related:
 

Chinese military endeavors to contribute to maintaining Asia-Pacific security: officer
China advocates, implements security concept for Asia: officer
Chinese diplomat speaks on maritime security
Fu Ying: Abe touts ‘China threat’ to cover for security policy amendment
News Analysis: Asian security calls for mindset change

Related posts:

New security structure needed: Trust, collaboration key to Asian security 

US shows its true colors: hypocritically abuses principles of UNCLOS to benefit itself !


US hypocritically abuses principles of UNCLOS to benefit itself

The high-profile interventions by the US in the disputes between China and some of its neighbors over some islands or reefs and maritime entitlements in recent years, have seen the US frequent making use of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). It seems that according to the US, China has become a violator of UNCLOS.

The fact is that the disputes between China and some of its neighbors over some islands or reefs fall within the scope of territorial disputes, which are not subject to UNCLOS’ regulation and adjustment.

Moreover, China, as a state party to UNCLOS, made a declaration in 2006, which excluded disputes on maritime delimitation and historic title or rights from the compulsory dispute settlement procedures, in accordance with relevant UNCLOS provisions concerning optional exceptions.

The US, which keeps on emphasizing the rule of international law, should be well aware of this background. However, the US has repeatedly distorted UNCLOS to negate China’s lawful maritime claims and rights. Anyone with common sense can understand what the US acts mean.

While the US behaves like a state party to UNCLOS and argumentatively invokes UNCLOS to criticize China, it forgets that it has not ratified UNCLOS itself. As the world’s top sea power and significant coastal state, the US, under the excuse that UNCLOS has become part of the customary international law, has enjoyed all the rights given by UNCLOS while choosing to evade the related duties at the same time. This clearly demonstrates the selective and utilitarian attitude of the US toward UNCLOS.

The US misuse of UNCLOS is also well reflected in its self-granted impunity concerning its maritime military maneuvers. The US possesses ultra-strong naval power and the capacity to control all the world’s strategically important maritime locations, and its freedom of navigation and maritime entitlements have never been threatened.

With the development of modern naval weaponry particularly the enhancement of the electronic telecommunication and reconnaissance capabilities, the US has for a long time expanded its maritime and aerial reconnaissance and deterrence activities into other countries’ exclusive economic zones (EEZ) and the airspace above them, causing disquietude among many developing coastal states, and making the utilization of EEZs for military purposes a highly controversial issue globally.

Washington has made a series of US-style interpretations on UNCLOS’ EEZ regime, such as confusing the EEZ with the high seas in its excessive expansion of its naval ships’ rights to free movement, misinterpreting the provisions concerning the peaceful use of oceans for an improper assertion that all non-invasive military activities are lawful, arguing that its military ships’ close-reconnaissance of other countries’ EEZs are hydrological surveys or intelligence collection, and so on.

The self-granted impunity mentioned above fully reveals the unscrupulous US playing with and trampling on UNCLOS.

And from the perspective of timing, when the US started to put into practice its “pivot to Asia” strategy, it simultaneously began to make an issue of UNCLOS under the circumstances of its not-yet accession into it, and to hype up the East China Sea and South China Sea issues, so as to pave the way for its military “rebalance.”

Rather than adopting a “double standard” in using UNCLOS to realize its selfish interests and “rebalance” other countries, the US, the self-proclaimed defender of regional maritime order and mediator of relevant disputes, should consciously abide by the maritime norms in accordance with the spirit of UNCLOS.

It should  show respect to the joint efforts by China and its neighbors in resolving relevant disputes through consultations and negotiations, and engage more in activities which are conductive to regional peace and stability, maritime cooperation and development.

By Shen Yamei Source: Global Times Published: 2014-4-29 21:43:01
The author is an associate research fellow with Center for Maritime Security and Cooperation Studies, China Institute of International Studies. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

US shows its true colors
US_Japan security treaty

Just as many have observed, united States President Barack Obama’s Asia visit is essentially about Washington’s and its allies’ unease about a rising China.

From Tokyo to Manila, Obama has tried to pick his words so as not to antagonize Beijing. But from the US-Japan joint statement to the new US-Philippines defense agreement, it is increasingly obvious that Washington is taking Beijing as an opponent. With Obama reassuring the US’ allies of protection in any conflict with China, it is now clear that Washington is no longer bothering to conceal its attempt to contain China’s influence in the region. It is even less convincing to say the US pivot to the Asia-Pacific is not targeted against China.

Obama’s rhetoric about peace and international law sounds hollow because it contradicts what Washington and himself have been up to. The US-Japan statement, for instance, is a dangerous license for the increasingly rightist Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to provoke more trouble. Its shameless disregard of historical facts and endorsement of Abe’s rightist inclinations will only cause further instability.

For a considerably long period, Chinese have cherished the naive thought that Washington will rein in its unruly allies when they go too far.

Obama’s current trip should be a wake-up call that this is just wishful thinking. His sweet promises of a new type of major-country relationship should not blind us to the grim geopolitical reality: Ganging up with its troublemaking allies, the US is presenting itself as a security threat to China.

The foremost threat is not the disputes that estrange China from its neighbors such as Japan and the Philippines. It is rather the threatening image of China that is being projected and marketed by these malicious neighbors and their backstage supporter.

Washington’s biased portrayal of China and its legitimate territorial claims is conducive to the US’ pivot and stronger bonds with its allies. But if the US wants to benefit from the thriving Asia-Pacific, it should promote good-neighborliness.

The further prosperity of the region calls for closer intra-regional connectivity, to which the current tensions are a threat. Washington should try to ease those tensions, instead of fanning them.

Most important of all, Washington must come to terms with the reality that China will continue to grow, though it will not follow the US’ hegemonic path.

Washington’s best bet lies in collaborating with, not standing against, Beijing before it is too late. - China Daily

Related posts:

US president barack obama may have congratulated himself in private for apparently pulling off a difficult balancing act, but if so, he is…
Obama’s Manila visit beefs up Philippines    US President Barack Obama is now in Manila, the last stop of his Asia tour, after h…
 

Double standards on Ukraine and Crimea

Malaysia paying the price for flight MH370 !


Flight MH370: Paying The Price Of 6 Decades Of Nepotism, Racism, Rampant Corruption And Incompetence

On January 23, 2008 a very peculiar thing happened. Commercial airspace at one of the world’s busiest airports was shut down for over 50 minutes. On that day, an aircraft without an approved flight plan entered Singapore’s airspace. Immediately, the Republic of Singapore Air Force dispatched a pair of F-16D fighter jets to intercept the aircraft and escorted it to land at Singapore Changi Airport. Upon landing, airport police immediately surrounded the plane.

“At 6.42pm (2142 AEDT), two Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) F-16 fighters were scrambled to intercept a civilian aircraft, a Cessna 208, which was heading towards Singapore airspace without an approved flight plan,” the ministry’s director of public affairs, Colonel Darius Lim, said in a statement. “The aircraft was escorted to land at Singapore Changi Airport.”

The above incident highlights the standard operating protocol an Air Force, Civil Aviation Authority and Local Police Force needs to follow in the event of an unidentified aircraft entering it’s airspace without an approved flight plan.

However amidst this hoo-ha, there was one small detail worth noting. The plane took off from Koh Samui, Thailand. And running the full length between Thailand and Singapore is the land mass of Peninsular Malaysia.

In essence, this means that the Department of Civil Aviation of Malaysia and the Royal Malaysian Air Force had allowed an unknown aircraft to invade over 131 thousand square km of sovereign Malaysian territory and despite this occurring over a period of 3 hours, did not lift a finger to respond.

This incident highlighted a huge security flaw in Malaysia’s Air Defence umbrella. One that if it had patched during any of the subsequent 6 years that followed, would have prevented a bigger tragedy that came with greater embarrassment, scrutiny and loss.

6 years later on 8 March 2014, Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 departed Kuala Lumpur International Airport for Beijing. It never landed at its intended destination. Instead, less than an hour after take-off, the transponder was turned off and 3 sets of military radars tracked the plane flying past Penang and across the breadth of Malaysia from the Gulf of Thailand towards the Indian Ocean.

Unlike the Cessna airplane in the earlier example which was intercepted by the RSAF, 3 sets of people manning Malaysia’s military radars never sounded any alarms. The RMAF never dispatched any fighter jets on standby and the Department of Civil Aviation of Malaysia never shut down Malaysian airspace when a rogue plane very much larger than a Cessna aircraft flew across it’s airspace.

Suffice to say, had the Department of Civil Aviation of Malaysia or the RMAF been doing their job properly as exemplified by the example given above, we would not have gone 9 days and counting into a search for a missing and possibly hijacked plane.

Investigators may have recently concluded that the plane had its transponders deliberately turned off and its flight plan deliberately altered but it is the greater observing public who have the biggest conclusion of all; that Malaysian leadership is sorely incompetent when it comes to handling a crisis. In this respect, Malaysia has much to learn from its Southern neighbour. Had the supposed hijackers targeted a plane flying through a more efficient jurisdiction, the outcome would have been very different today.

Malaysia Flip Flop

Related:    

The Day When 2 Austrians Shut Down Singapore’s Airspace for 50 Minutes.

Relate posts:

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,176 other followers