The Long-Awaited Sino-Japanese Conflict: Pogroms and Arms

U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta warned that if provocations continue, the territorial disputes in East Asia could result in the spreading of conflict, reports the BBC.

“I am concerned that when these countries engage in provocations of one kind or another over these various islands, that it raises the possibility that a misjudgment on one side or the other could result in violence and conflict.”

The American officer’s statement comes on the heels of anti-Japanese protests that have swept through China as a result of disputes over the Senkaku Islands, which were recently nationalized by Japan. Demonstrations were held throughout China on Sunday. In the city of Shenzhen, police were forced to use tear gas and water cannons to disperse the angry crowd.

As a result of the demonstrations, several Japanese companies that operated within Chinese territory have suffered; two major electronics manufacturers, Panasonic and Canon, temporarily ceased operations after attacks on their factories.

Meanwhile, China reiterated its claims on the territory of the disputed Senkaku Islands or, as the Chinese call them, the Diaoyu Islands. In response, Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda urged Beijing to “remain calm” and take steps to protect Japanese people living within Chinese territory.

At the same time, the Associated Press, referencing Pentagon chief Leon Panetta, reports that Washington and Tokyo have reached an agreement regarding the deployment of another element of the U.S. missile defense system in Japan.

The two countries’ leadership is yet to agree upon the exact location of the additional radar station for early warning of missile threats.

The Minister of Defense also noted that the main purpose for deploying the new element of the American missile defense system would be to counter possible missile attacks from North Korea; the appearance of a second radar station in Japan is not directed against China.

However, these soothing speeches are having no effect on Beijing — China is beginning the construction of a new military-industrial complex. This time, they will be relying on the independent production of modern weaponry and the leading role in the restructuring of their “defense” will be given to the private sector, reports Reuters.

Specifically, the large-scale privatization program will affect the largest of China’s defense contractors, such as the Chinese State Shipbuilding Corporation, the Aviation Industry Corporation of China and the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation, which will be transformed into home-grown analogs of the American giants Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, and the British BAE Systems.

Wu Da, a top manager at the company Changsheng Fund Management Co Ltd, stated:

“Our country’s defense sector should match the strength of our economy. Some areas of China’s defense sector have gained significant strength with the help of recent years’ extensive financial investment into military industry, but you won’t find out about how good a situation they are in financially or technologically, since the Chinese will not expound upon this topic.”

Beijing is also planning to allow public auctions for small, unclassified defense contracts. Experts point out that the impending modernization of China’s military-industrial complex will free the country from dependence upon foreign imports, and that includes Russian ones.

Andrei Karneyev, deputy director of the Institute for Asian and African Nations at Moscow State University, sent his commentary on the situation to Odnako:

“Despite the gravity of the situation, none of the major players are interested in causing this conflict to escalate into a violent confrontation, as this would have very serious consequences for all participants. So what we are witnessing is a confrontation on the verge of escalation from rhetoric to military action.

“Balancing on this fine line, the governments of these countries nevertheless understand quite clearly that it’s one thing to hold demonstrations or issue harsh statements — it’s another thing entirely when events align that can lead to tragic events. That is why most experts still do not see any danger of a direct military conflict, but they do recognize the possibility of significantly worsening relations and the freezing of certain contracts along cultural or economic lines.

“In this context, the various activities for the strengthening of the U.S.-Japan military alliance fit within this framework. It’s also not news that the Americans are inclined to support their ally in this conflict, although they understand, of course, that relations with China are essential to the United States. If Japan is America’s main strategic ally or partner, then China is a strategic rival. In their speeches, American diplomats claim that they are urging both sides to remain calm, but of course, their sympathies lie closer to Japan. But this does not mean that conflict or the collapse of relations between China and the U.S. is inevitable. I don’t think that the U.S. sees any benefit for itself in the sparking of any sort of conflict.

“It is understandable that no one wants to lose face; no one wants to give the impression that they are backing down and making concessions when it comes to issues of sovereignty.

“Russia is now posing itself as a nation that would like to restore its position in the Asia-Pacific region. The most recent summit in Vladivostok demonstrated Russia’s intention to return to the Asia-Pacific region as one of the leading powers. When it comes to the dispute between China and Japan, Russian diplomats have been attempting to avoid becoming too involved in the discourse on the topic. In an informal way, Russia could be interested in pursuing some sort of coordination with China, since we do have a conflict with Japan over the Kuril Islands.”