Will the US intervene militarily in the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台), known in Japan as the Senkaku Islands, dispute?
As the dispute between China and Japan approached a new critical point last month, then-US secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton held a meeting with Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida. The Chinese side interpreted this as Washington taking Japan’s side, but all Clinton said after the meeting was that the US “urges all parties to take steps to prevent incidents and manage disagreements through peaceful means.”
Japan has focused its Asian strategy on the Diaoyutais since the beginning of this century, because having rights over the islands is critical to the expansion of its territorial waters.
To strengthen its position in the confrontation with China, Japan has hoped for US military intervention. Its Asian strategy is based on the US-Japan Security Treaty, which makes Tokyo dependent on Washington. As for the US, the treaty functions as a strategic deterrent for China, but is merely a link in the US’ Asia-Pacific strategy. There are clear asymmetries in the US and Japanese strategic deployments.
The US is focusing its deterrent on China, but also sees Japan as a potential threat. China might one day cease to be the US’ main target and be replaced by Japan. As such, the US would prefer that the dispute between China and Japan over the status of the Diaoyutais continue.
Although the US hopes that China and Japan will start talking, it also believes the depth of the dispute could lead to a stalemate, which would benefit the US in maintaining its strategic leadership in the East China Sea.
China’s rise is making Japan insecure and Japan is more dependent on the US-Japan Security Treaty to alleviate such concerns. Almost every new Japanese prime minister wants the US to restate its commitment to this treaty.
However, there is a gap between Japan’s expectations and the US’ commitment. First, the US is unlikely to place all its eggs in one basket in its strategic deployment in the Asian-Pacific region. Second, the Diaoyutais rank far below the Korean Peninsula, Taiwan and the South China Sea in strategic importance. Third, there are other important strategic points in the area such as Okinawa and Guam. Fourth, the US needs to cooperate strategically with China on economic, regional and global security issues. Fifth, a US military intervention in the Diaoyutais dispute will hurt regional stability and complicate the issue.
The US intervening militarily in the dispute would only help Japan realize its national or Asian strategic interests, but could harm the US by increasing tensions with Beijing.
Memories of the Japanese invasion during World War II make it hard for Tokyo to form strategic alliances with most East Asian countries against China. This will force Japan to rely even more on the US, highlighting the asymmetry of US-Japanese relations.
As the saying goes, “whoever started the trouble should end it.”
To avoid any incidents over the Diaoyutais issue, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe would do better to try to build up a crisis management mechanism with Beijing to facilitate communication rather than sending a special envoy to meet Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping (習近平). By doing so, he would be able prevent the crisis from growing further due to misjudgments or even turning into a war.
On the basis of the so-called “1992 consensus” and the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement between Taiwan and China, a Sino-Japanese crisis management mechanism should also include Taiwan. After all, Taiwan is also a party to the Diaoyutais dispute.
Lee In-ming is vice president of the China University of Science and Technology.
Translated by Eddy Chang
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other
As technological change sweeps across the world, the focus of education has undergone an inevitable shift toward artificial intelligence (AI) and digital learning. However, the HundrED Global Collection 2026 report has a message that Taiwanese society and education policymakers would do well to reflect on. In the age of AI, the scarcest resource in education is not advanced computing power, but people; and the most urgent global educational crisis is not technological backwardness, but teacher well-being and retention. Covering 52 countries, the report from HundrED, a Finnish nonprofit that reviews and compiles innovative solutions in education from around the world, highlights a
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
RSS