Treaty with Japan covers islets in China spat: U.S. official
By Paul Eckert | Reuters – 1 hr 48 mins ago WASHINGTON (Reuters) -
The uninhabited islets in the East China Sea at the center of a bitter dispute between China and Japan are "clearly" covered by a 1960 security treaty obliging the United States to come to Japan's aid if attacked, a top U.S. diplomat said on Thursday.
"We do not take a position on the ultimate sovereignty of these islands," Kurt Campbell, assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, told a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee.
Japan has controlled the rocky islets since 1895 - except during the 1945-1972 U.S. post-war occupation of Okinawa - and calls them the Senkakus. China, and rival Taiwan, maintain they have an older claim and call them the Diaoyu islands.
"We do acknowledge clearly ... that Japan maintains effective administrative control ... and, as such, this falls clearly under Article 5 of the Security Treaty," Campbell said at the panel's hearing on Asian territorial disputes.
He told the Senate subcommittee that recent violent anti-Japanese demonstrations in China and other actions that stoked tensions were a growing worry to the United States.
The long-standing territorial dispute bubbled over again last week when the Japanese government decided to nationalize some of the islands, buying them from a private Japanese owner.
"We are concerned ... by recent demonstrations, and, frankly, the potential for the partnership between Japan and China to fray substantially in this environment," said Campbell.
"That is not in our strategic interest and clearly would undermine the peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific as a whole," he added.
The Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan was signed in 1960 as a successor to a 1951 bilateral security treaty and underpins what is seen as the most important of five U.S. treaty alliances in Asia.
Article 5 says "Each Party recognizes that an armed attack against either Party in the territories under the administration of Japan would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional provisions and processes."
The article also commits the allies to report "any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof" to the U.N. Security Council and to halt those actions once the Security Council takes steps to restore peace and security.
He said this stance on the islets is the same that has been articulated by American officials since 1997.
Subcommittee chairman Senator Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat and veteran Asia military expert, urged the Obama administration "to respond, carefully and fully" to Chinese actions in the East China Sea and the South China Sea, where China has other territorial disputes that have intensified in recent years.
"This threat has direct consequences for the United States," said Webb, who noted a declaration in 2004 by the George W. Bush administration and in 2010 by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the U.S. security treaty obligations extended to the disputed islets.
"Given the recent incursion by China into waters around the Senkaku Islands, it is vital that we continue to state clearly our obligations under this security treaty," he said.
(Editing by Warren Strobel and Sandra Maler)
Beijing security tight after anti-Japan …
Protesters hold up Japan's national …
The uninhabited islets in the East China Sea at the center of a bitter dispute between China and Japan are "clearly" covered by a 1960 security treaty obliging the United States to come to Japan's aid if attacked, a top U.S. diplomat said on Thursday.
"We do not take a position on the ultimate sovereignty of these islands," Kurt Campbell, assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, told a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee.
Japan has controlled the rocky islets since 1895 - except during the 1945-1972 U.S. post-war occupation of Okinawa - and calls them the Senkakus. China, and rival Taiwan, maintain they have an older claim and call them the Diaoyu islands.
"We do acknowledge clearly ... that Japan maintains effective administrative control ... and, as such, this falls clearly under Article 5 of the Security Treaty," Campbell said at the panel's hearing on Asian territorial disputes.
He told the Senate subcommittee that recent violent anti-Japanese demonstrations in China and other actions that stoked tensions were a growing worry to the United States.
The long-standing territorial dispute bubbled over again last week when the Japanese government decided to nationalize some of the islands, buying them from a private Japanese owner.
"We are concerned ... by recent demonstrations, and, frankly, the potential for the partnership between Japan and China to fray substantially in this environment," said Campbell.
"That is not in our strategic interest and clearly would undermine the peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific as a whole," he added.
The Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan was signed in 1960 as a successor to a 1951 bilateral security treaty and underpins what is seen as the most important of five U.S. treaty alliances in Asia.
Article 5 says "Each Party recognizes that an armed attack against either Party in the territories under the administration of Japan would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional provisions and processes."
The article also commits the allies to report "any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof" to the U.N. Security Council and to halt those actions once the Security Council takes steps to restore peace and security.
He said this stance on the islets is the same that has been articulated by American officials since 1997.
Subcommittee chairman Senator Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat and veteran Asia military expert, urged the Obama administration "to respond, carefully and fully" to Chinese actions in the East China Sea and the South China Sea, where China has other territorial disputes that have intensified in recent years.
"This threat has direct consequences for the United States," said Webb, who noted a declaration in 2004 by the George W. Bush administration and in 2010 by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the U.S. security treaty obligations extended to the disputed islets.
"Given the recent incursion by China into waters around the Senkaku Islands, it is vital that we continue to state clearly our obligations under this security treaty," he said.
(Editing by Warren Strobel and Sandra Maler)
Beijing security tight after anti-Japan …
Protesters hold up Japan's national …
Beijing security tight after anti-Japan …Protesters hold up Japan's national …Japan firms say China protests affect business plans: Reuters poll
By Tetsushi Kajimoto and Izumi Nakagawa | Reuters – 3 hrs ago
A man kicks the door of a Japanese …TOKYO (Reuters) - About 41 percent of Japanese firms see friction with China affecting their business plans, with some considering pulling out of the country and shifting operations elsewhere,
a Reuters poll showed, amid growing tensions sparked by a territorial dispute.
However, only a fraction of firms said improving relations with Asia should be at the top of the agenda for the next government, to be formed after general elections that must be held by around August 2013.
The poll comes as relations between Asia's two biggest economies have hit their lowest point in decades over a dispute centered on an uninhabited group of islands in the East China Sea -- known as the Senkaku in Japan and Diaoyu in China.
Street protests in China have forced some Japanese firms to suspend operations in that country, and the share prices of Japanese firms with exposure to China have tumbled.
But the poll of 400 large and medium-sized firms, of which roughly 260 responded between August 31 and September 14, was taken before the worst of the protests, which damaged factories, restaurants and retail stores.
Firms in sectors such as wholesale, transport equipment and electric machinery were among those expecting the most fallout from worsening relations with China and other parts of Asia.
Some of the firms which see friction with China affecting business plans have suffered not only from rowdy protests involving damage and consumer strikes, but other problems as well.
"We were stranded at customs there even as we followed proper procedures for exporting parts," said one machinery firm.
A transport machinery company complained that it was excluded from bidding in China.
"We need to consider closing our base in China and withdrawing our personnel," said one metal products company.
Others voiced caution about investing in China, while considering putting off plans to make inroads into Chinese markets or seeking alternate sites.
China, the world's second-largest economy, and Japan, the third-largest, have total two-way trade of around $345 billion, but some experts believe anti-Japan sentiment could prompt firms to rethink investments in China in the longer term.
In the Reuters poll, 56 percent of firms urged the next Japanese government to put the utmost priority on steps to prop up the economy and stabilize currency rates, while only 2 percent cited smoother diplomatic relations with Asia.
With the dollar hovering around 78 yen, not far from a record low of 75.31 yen hit last October when Japanese authorities intervened heavily to stem their currency's gains, about one-third or respondents sought yen-selling intervention to help safeguard the export-reliant economy.
On the government's contentious plan to double the sales tax to 10 percent by 2015, 45 percent said it should be implemented as planned while 40 percent said the state of the economy at the time should be considered before making a final decision.
Only 10 percent called for putting off the sales tax rise, in stark contrast with the many lawmakers who are wary of a voter backlash over the tax increase.
(Editing by Kim Coghill)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.