Secretary of State Clinton clearly stated that the Senkaku Islands fall within our defense perimeter in the Far East, so China has no excuse for not understanding that they risk war if they try to resolve the dispute with military force:
Speaking at a joint news conference with Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida in Washington, and without mentioning Beijing directly, she said the US opposed "any unilateral actions" to undermine Japanese authority over the islands.
The Chinese are acting like this is all news to them:
But in a commentary piece, the official Chinese news agency Xinhua criticised Washington's position, saying it "cast doubts on (US) credibility as a responsible power in the region".
It was "unwise" for Washington "to throw support behind Japan in Tokyo's islands dispute with Beijing", Xinhua said, adding: "This unbalanced position has betrayed its declared intention to stay neutral on the issue."
The US proposal for "tighter military alliance with Japan will only encourage Tokyo's dangerously right-leaning tendency", Xinhua said.
Seriously? The Chinese are saying this with a straight face?
Our position is simple: we are neutral on the ultimate disposition of the islands as long as it is done peacefully and as long as freedom of navigation is assured by whoever holds the islands. This has been clear for some time:
Remember, we don't care much how these countries resolve their differences. We just don't want war and we don't want freedom of navigation eroded. But Chinese expansive claims make it in our interest to resist China.
Good grief, China, of course we side with the smaller countries who don't pose any threat to us with their claims and capabilities.
And if China tries to take the islands, our defense treaty with Japan kicks in. What is hard to understand about that? We aren't "neutral" about our allies, and failure to support our allies would be the actual betrayal--not refusing to bow to Chinese aggression.
Further, Japan is capable of taking on China in a fight over the Senkakus, despite dramatic increases in Chinese military power over the last decade.
This analysis that says that Japan's navy lacks offensive power because it doesn't have aircraft carriers grossly under-estimates what Japan could do:
Back in October 2012, James Holmes argued convincingly that Japan had a “Cold War navy” designed to fill specific niches in a mutually beneficial partnership with the United States.“Under the division of labor worked out between the two navies, the U.S. Navy supplied the offensive firepower, manifest in aircraft carriers and other high-end implements of war. The defensive-minded JMSDF [Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force] acted as a gapfiller, making itself proficient at niche missions like minesweeping, anti-submarine warfare, and offensive submarine warfare."
I'm not about to argue with that assessment, which brings us to the next point: is Japan doing anything to change this situation, and if so, what?
The author goes on to discuss how Japan is upgrading their capabilities.
I would, however, like to take exception to the assessment that Japan's "Cold War" navy lacks offensive capabilities.
Saying that Japan lacks an offensive oriented navy capable of taking the war to China is not the same as saying that Japan's fleet is incapable of taking offensive action against a Chinese effort to capture the Senkakus. Sure, Japan's fleet isn't a global force like ours is. But if you haven't noticed, the Senkakus are fairly close to Japan. Japan doesn't need a massive logistics train to fight near the Senkakus.
Please note that even Japan's "Cold War" capabilities would serve them well in a limited naval and air war over the Senkakus: offensive submarine and anti-submarine warfare, mine warfare, and I'll add naval air defense--including anti-ballistic missile capabilities.
But Japan isn't restricted to these means. Japan has a sizable anti-surface warfare capability with all their submarines and surface ships that possess anti-ship missiles.
Japan may not be able to sail across the ocean to launch a surprise attack, but Japan is capable of sinking Chinese warships and submarines in the East China Sea and shooting down Chinese planes.
And given the problem we have in approaching Chinese shores with our expensive aircraft carriers, how anyone can suggest carriers are the sole offensive force of a modern navy is beyond me. It wasn't even true by the end of the Cold War, remember.
So I think Japan could fight and defeat a Chinese attempt to control the Senkaku Islands. China should try to restrain their pride in what they've built so far by remembering that Japan is a tough target. Does Peking really think they can match the Japanese in training and technical expertise?
Further, it isn't like China is likely to find allies rather than Japan should it come to a fight.
There is also a lot we can do the help Japan win that fight without directly intervening.
And as an important aside to this issue, no, ratifying the Law of the Sea won't resolve these island problems with China.
