Diaoyutai dispute btwn China and Japan

http://www.american.edu/projects/mandala/TED/ice/DIAOYU.HTM

part of the troubled relations between our two countries. And It has prompted much extreme nationalism here already.

btw, Japan also has disputed islands with South Korea and Russia.

Hi JB:

I completely agree that this is part of the difficult relations btwn Jp and Chin, not to mention the rape of nanking - (heard of Iris Chang, by any chance? She was the chinese-american author who make this issue really public and well known for the first time, unfortunately, she committed suicide last year, possibly out of depression) - and now, the close relations with America and Jp because of the arguing over the lifting of the arms ban by the EU. Do you have any views over that issue, just generally? How about the relations btwn Chin and Jp, overall? I think its just gross and how the Japs were just crowing about their win in the Asain soccer match a while ago (when they weren't even supposed to win it, apparently) - it just seems to emphasise on the extreme nationalistic feelings btwn both sides.

I see your from China too!! Great!

In my point of view, there are mainly two parts of the mutual conflict.

One is the History-related disputes (including the Japanese Textbook, Diaoyutai...), another part is strategic conflict between our two countries at present. (arms ban, also Diaoyutai, and even Taiwan is involved).

They are not divided irrelevantly, on the contrary, there are tightly tied together. The historical disputes have made the strategic issue seem to be a bit more violent, for instance, see what citizens of Beijing did after Japan's "victory" on the soccer field.

about arms embargo, you may see my and many brilliant guys and gals' comments here, I deeply recommended it to you

About Irish Chang, surely I know her, though our media doesn't talk about her much, I am fairly a good information catcher :wink:
I respect her, she is a heroine. If she had never existed, most of you would never know what happened in Nanjing (the city I am living in) and China during the WW2.

Pleased to know that you are enthusiastic in this issue Pragmatic. I'd like to talk more if you show me your specific interests

JB - I think I have found a kindred spirit in you - I compeltely agree that Iris chang is a heroine. If it wasn't for her, not only would the world know about the rape of Nanking, but also about the communist fear era in America - when the Chinese scientist was kicked out of america and he went on to develop the first nuclear bomb in China instead. (Should we thank the american government??)

Re specific interests...they mainly focus on china and it's asain and international relations - btwn Jp, HK, USA and the ASEAN countries (you know that island dispute btwn China and Malaysia, Philipines etc?) There's also tibet and Taiwan indpendence...I think if its about China - I am interested in it. How about you?

It's great to know someone from China and thus will have better knowledge than I do, here in Australia. Where did you learn such great English by the way?

I taught him...lol

exactly
(honestly, my English still has a long way to go)

ok, talk about Tibet first.

I have read a interesting interview with Dalai Lama in Newsweek (you may never hear about him from the state media).

He said his purpose had been changed: not for independence, but the autonomy.

I realized, that the "autonomy" which has been long claimed by my government was limited.

At least, no political autonomy. My politics teacher said such kind of autonomy is not allowed, maybe that is true. Political autonomy has no difference with independence. And I believe that independence is unacceptable.

What's your opinion?

Independence is unacceptable?

About 600 King Namri Songtsan of Yarlung, the territory south of the Tsangpo River, begins the unification of Tibet's many kingdoms.

About 627 Songtsan Gampo succeeds his father and continues to consolidate Tibet under his rule.

641 Songtsan Gampo introduces Buddhism to Tibet. Having already married three Tibetans princesses and a Nepalese princess, Brikuthi, he takes a Chinese princess, Wen-Ch'eng, as his bride, thus creating alliances with the countries to the west and east.

670 Warfare breaks out between Tibet and the T'ang dynasty of China. Tibet gains influence along trade route through central Asia.

754 Tritsong Detsan takes the throne.

About 779 Samye, first Buddhist monastic university, fifty miles south of Lhasa, founded by Padmasambhava. The Sanskrit Buddhist sutras and tantras--the Tripitaka--translated into Tibetan; establishment of the tantric meditation system.

821-22 Treaty between Tibet and China commemorated by an inscription carved on a monument that stands in front of the Potala Palace.

About 836 Langdarma succeeds Tritsug Detsan and, under pressure from Bon priests, begins to suppress Buddhism in central Tibet, burning monasteries and driving out monks.

842 Assassination of Langdarma by Buddhist monk. Succession contested. Kingdom dissolves, leaving Tibet in a state of political upheaval.

1207 Tibetan leaders quietly submit to Genghis Khan.

Seems Tibet was independent for centuries

Your information is nearly flawless, panzade.

Tibet really have been independent for centuries. It has independent spirit, independent religion, independent nation, independent culture, and independent language.

But it submited to Ghengis Khan finally, and the following emperors, even Republic of China.

I don't believe that Chinese Communist Party would bother to to "conquer" Tibet if it was an "independence".

Panzade, when I say "independence of Tibet is unacceptable" my brain was actually in a mess.
I know what you mean. I know in terms of history, culture, religion, nationality, Tibet is virtually independent.

But you know, you can't persuade billions of Chinese to believe so. That is not due to the so-called "Communist propoganda"----even our forefathers far back to 7 hundred years ago also believe so, I promise

I believe you JB
And I appreciate how difficult it is for you to remain an independent thinker amidst the party line.

Hi JB and Panzade:

Uh...just a quick question - are you Chinese too, Panzade? Its just that your history of Tibet is great but you're from Florida...and since everyone here uses nicknames, its hard for me to tell whether you are Chinese or not...a guy or a girl...(haha) - I mean, for all I know, you and JB could be Chinese male professors from harvard (tell me if you are!!!) or something - how about a short self introduction from both of you next time?

Back to Tibet: once again JB, you are absolutey correct - Tibet is indpendent in many ways and yes - the CCP would not waste their time conquering (I don't even want to use that word!! but its better than the western version of INVASION - yeah right!!) some place unless they believed in it.

I know alot of westerners here belive that Tibet should be independent, one significant reason being that because of Tibet's spirituality and culteral difference - etc etc. But if you look at this as a reason (or the main reason) for indpendence from China - or from anywhere - well, there won't be a China for very long.

China has 1.3 billion people - and not all of them are Han (which I believe is the main population) You have the Muslims, the Canton, the Shanghai (and a heap of other minorities) - and they are all different in langauge, religion, culture - but they claim indpendence because of this alone. Can you imagine how many countries there will be if this was the sole critieria??

Finally - we are already have difficulty with Taiwan, and to a lesser extent, the Diaoyutai island dispute. If we do "lose" Tibet - this will act as a domino theory again - one after another, everthing people of China, every territory etc etc will all want indpendence, even with a fight. You can see know how much Russia has changed - how WEAK it is, compared to the 60s when they were THE potential enemy of the US. One reason is because of the breaking up of the USSR and the claiming and granting of indpendence many smaller regions - eg: Ukraine. China could easily fall into the same fate (and why should it have to? Just because USSR was willing to give up territory, does not mean that China has to follow suit.)

Two more things before I die from shortness of breath ( ):

1) the Weega people of China (muslim minority) are now intending to claim indpendence sometime in the future.

2) Have you people watched Brad Pitts "7 years in Tibet?" If so, any opinions on it?

*gasp* must go now.

Hi everyone:

(I reckon we should change the name of this site to "China 100%" instead - we talk about China all the way!!)

What does everyone think about the proposition that...(oh, gosh, I don't want to say this because it is contraversial) but could one argue that: china shouldn't be bound by UN conventions (not because we are the USA and we can do what we want - no offence to anyone in the US) but because China never really got to participate in UN talks when it was being formed?

My thinking is this - we have the UN, formed by mainly the big three - UK, USA and Russia. All good - two western and one eastern. But which of them can truly truly represent the views of SE Asia - eg: China? If you think about it, the UN was founded with ideals that really can't conform to China, yet today, China is criticised for not obeying the UN conventions (eg - human rights, the independence of Tibet, etc.) But then (and please correct me if I am wrong) how and why should we obey many of the conventions when we were not even a particpant in the talks at the very starting point?

This is just a THOUGHT, I am not intending to justify anything or criticise the UN at all. I welcome any thoughts and views and apologise for any offence taken.

A couple of things Prag.

If you click profile under my post you'll learn more than you need to about me.
Some of your historical perspective is a bit hazy.

"In 1945, representatives of 50 countries met in San Francisco at the United Nations Conference on International Organization to draw up the United Nations Charter. Those delegates deliberated on the basis of proposals worked out by the representatives of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States at Dumbarton Oaks, United States in August-October 1944. The Charter was signed on 26 June 1945 by the representatives of the 50 countries. Poland, which was not represented at the Conference, signed it later and became one of the original 51 Member States."

Just because there was a change of government when Mao triumphed shouldn't invalidate China's work in setting up the UN.

The Soviet Union can be used as an example of satellite cultures and races that eventually break away.
The forced integration of dissimilar cultures and races can only be achieved, in the long run through occupation and genocide as was done in the US and Australia. One hopes that China will have enough enlightenment to avoid that path in Tibet.

In my point of view, UN's main purpose is to aviod international conflicts, at most WW3.

It has nothing to do with the "starting point", but the powers, especially the big powers in the world. Because originally there are chiefly USA, UK, USSR (okay, plus Republic of China and France) okay to be the "big powers", so the original five are they.

But if we get another "big power" or one of our big powers weakens, we'd better make some adjustment.
The replacement between Republic of China and People's Republic of China is a good example.


Panzade, Is that you?

Yes JB, I thought I'd clear up the mystery for Pragmatic.

Hi everyone:

PANZADE: (Ahh, so you're not Chinese!! :wink: ) And what a nice photo that is - reminds me of the era of the Platters (one of my favourite bands). Re the profile - I am sorry, I forgot there were profiles for view - and how long, btw, did it take you to type it up?


You mentioned that "The forced integration of dissimilar cultures and races can only be achieved, in the long run through occupation and genocide as was done in the US and Australia..." But the question is whether China is trying to integrate dissimilar cultures and races? To the best of my knowledge and understanding, the CCP is merely stating that Tibet is part of China - we are not trying to integrate anything. This is impossible anyway, given the number of different peoples in China (something along the lines of 7 different races?) Its more of the issue of uniting all chinese people - only then can a country exist and only then will the country to stronger.

What do you think? (I think that there should be more emoticons, for one thing)

All I can say Prag, is; Tibet has never been a part of China in my opinion. Just as Mexico has never been a part of the U.S.
The issue of dissimilar cultures is a moot point;Tibet has been independent of China for thousands of years

Actually, there is alot of information on the Diaoyutai disputes, but most of them are in Chinese.
Anyway, I think it's very important to let other people to understand the Chinese situations.