By Global Public Square
For more What in the World watch "Fareed Zakaria GPS" this Sunday at 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. ET.
If history is any guide, second terms are often disrupted by a foreign policy crisis. It's easy to see how that might happen over the next four years with Iran or Syria.
But, there is a distinct possibility that the next big foreign policy crisis will take place somewhere else, perhaps thousands of miles away, in Asian waters, over five islets and three barren rocks – all uninhabited except for a few feral goats.
For months now, Chinese and Japanese naval forces have been confronting each other in the East China Seas. Both countries claim a set of tiny islands. The Japanese call them the Senkaku Islands. The Chinese, the Diaoyus. The dispute involves energy – there are immense amounts of natural gas under the East China Seas – but above all it involves politics and history.
Asia’s greatest geopolitical problem is that its two great powers – the two largest economies and militaries – have an unresolved, bitter relationship.
More from CNN: Behind the island dispute
China and Japan have never had to occupy the global stage as equals. One has always dominated the other. For most of the past 500 years, China was the region's hegemon and Japan accepted its role as a distant satellite of the great Chinese empire. That changes in the late 19th century as Japan became the first Asian country to modernize its economy and society and “catch up” with the West.
After the Meiji Reformation, Japan’s military strength grew, and in 1895, it defeated Qing dynasty China. One of the consequences of the war was that Tokyo formally annexed the Senkaku islands, but their sovereignty has been in dispute for the last 40 years with China asserting its historic claims and Japan its modern possession.
Over the past two months, both countries have acted in ways that could easily spiral out of control towards conflict. The result has been frequent encounters between Japanese and Chinese ships as they patrol these waters and riots and protests within both countries – with the populations in each getting more nationalist. And, there have been few efforts by either government to defuse the situation and move towards a diplomatic solution.
The United States gets involved because it is bound by treaty to come to Japan’s aid, and Washington has confirmed that the Senkaku islands are covered by this obligation. In other words, if one of these naval encounters goes awry and China and Japan get into a conflict, the United States of America could well find itself involved in an Asian war.
More from GPS: Choosing sides in the East China Sea
I realize that this sounds far-fetched, but given the extremely bad relations between China and Japan, it’s possible that honor, pride, miscalculation and accident could lead us there. And remember, we are in the midst of an enormous leadership change in China. One that is far more significant than this month’s election in the United States.
We now know the identity of China’s new president: Xi Jinping. He faces some major challenges. China’s growth is slowing and it needs a new kind of economic development. Its political system needs to be reformed, at the very least tackling corruption, but perhaps more radical changes are needed.
Finally, Xi will have to find a way for China’s rise to take place without unsettling its neighbors – and maintaining a cooperative relationship at the same time with the United States. It all makes President Obama's job seem a lot easier by comparison.
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
Human Resources Directors/VPs are THE MOST INCOMPETANT people at any company BAR NONE!!!! A bunch of overpaid useless c_nts!!!!!!
There......I feel better now. Carry on.
That not only describes the Human Sources director but all the right-wing politicians in Washington who want to needlessly drag us into this confict too so that they can further fatten up their bank accounts. We need to stay out of this conflict completely but will we?
There aren't many left. I look forward to the day when there are only dems in DC and wars exist no more. Right
@Hez316: Check your history. WW1 W. Wilson A Dem. WW2 F.D.R. A Dem. Korean War Truman a Dem. Vietnam Johnson a Dem. 9/11 attack conceived while Clinton was in office also a Dem. Civil War Lincoln a Rep. 1st Gulf War G. Bush a Rep. "after someone invaded an ally”. War on terror W. Bush after we were attacked on 9/11/01. The only one who started a major war was Johnson. I know it will be argued that W. Bush started the Iraq war but with the blessing of congress remember that.
What the hell does that have to do with this article?
You must be an HR executive!!!!!!!!!!!! Hahahahahahaha
China wants a war ? Lets try to keep peace right now and raise military spending by 40%
PEACE-that's what we all want...
No, evidently many people do NOT in fact want peace.
They want what the other guy has, and will break the peace to get it. Whether it's physical violence or economic violence, we are all engaged in it. When we buy cheaply-made products from China, we are supporting economic slavery.
If you truly want peace, you will give up your material wants and live to serve. But then you still won't have peace because those who don't play the economic game are not well-tolerated by those in power.
The biggest threat to those who have power is if we all become content with what we have, and stop wanting more.
Peace sells but who buying? Actually you're right no one wants peace because there is no profit in it.
Indeed Fareed, in this territorial dispute over the islets in the East China Sea, China's new president Xi Jinping would try to not fall out with the top brass of the People's Liberation Army, who see foreign policies with J apan and the US as their domain. The nationalists in both China and J apan are partly responsible for the flare-up of the conflict.
"Never get involved a land war in Asia"
As opposed to a better place?
Here's a radical thought: Since neither country has any population on the disbuted rocks, leave them all as Internaltional Territoy and have both countries negotiate with the UN for Natural Resources. IMHO, neither country truly has soverence (sp?) over the territory, it being well removed from wither country. But then I felt the same way about the Falklands ... and see how that turned out ...
Denmark maintains year-round armed ski patrols in Greenland (about a dozen men in total), just to maintain sovereignty over the territory. Apparently, human presence makes a difference, indeed.
XI: Some foreigners with full bellies (?) who have nothing better to do (?) than try to point fingers at our country.....China does not export revolution,hunger,poverty nor does China cause you any headache, just what else do you want?
True. They're too busy exporting poisoned food and toys.
That's not true. Did you forget that you bought two Chinese made dudos, one for your kwok zucking mouth and one for your azz? As a matter of fact you are having the cheapest thrill of your life at this moment.
Tell that to the Tibetans, Vietnamese, Koreans and Indians. I suspect you'd get a different viewpoint on China's actions.
Peeeping Tom, before you open your kwok zucking mouth to Bullzhit about Tibet, do you realize that you are just a regenerated trash from the "Trash" that drifted accross the Atlantic? If it was up to the Native Americans, they would definitely send you back to a incinerator in Europe and not to be recycled.
Watch out, Tom - the communist party stooge is getting upset....
US did a lot bullzhit elsewehere during the last 10 years, should have lots lessons learned but it seemed not
Well at least you agree Maersk .. that you Chinese are a BIG problem in Tibet. We just don't want you there. You are the kind of people that eats anything that moves ... and you want Tibet to be a part of China because you ugly Chinese want to be like the Tibetans. FACT .. Tibet ain't China!
Only if we are fools.
The US should simply let the region decide the fate of the islands. We have zero interest there other than to throw our weight around. I think we've done that enough over the last 10 years.
Everything can be solved with Dodgeball. I think they need to have a Dodgeball Tornament every 5 years. The winner gets to put thier flag on the little rock islands. If they timed it right it would work out to be everytime the hockey players and owners are not playing hockey. Every 5 years Hockey can take a season to fight amongst themselves too. Sounds like a win win.
I am concerned about a PRC-US war sometime in the next 20-40 years over Taiwan. Technically it is the mainland's territory and if they attack it the US really has no grounds under international law to interfere. But we would because it would be almost politically impossible for US leaders to not intervene. We need to change our China policy.
What do you mean by it's "Technically ... the mainland's territory" ? It's not theirs.
U.S. has already been dragged in there as one force to deal with by the Chinese, real or imagined
Hey, CNN, where is one of my comments in here. It is related to the one above.
Nuke the islands and sink them – points of conflict eliminated!
Which country should do the nuke?
This is not about tiny islands.
This is about mineral rights.
.
Anytime a natural resource is found there will be conflict. Wars have been raging on for centuries and now that most if not all of the land has claimed it now is moving to natural resources. Determining the factors for war, depends of the financial gain of the islands natural resources. Instead of splitting everything 50/50 they will throw their political weight around. All of this was in The Long Emergency: Surviving the End of Oil, Climate Change, and Other Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-First Cent.
China always loves to go back hundreds, even thousands of years, to lay claim to territory. Well that's not how things work in real life. Countries change, borders change. How about if they give themselves up to the Mongolian Empire that they belonged to at some point in history? Should the U.S. dismantle itself and give the land back to the American Indian? Of course not. That's why such territorial claims are ludicrous.
i am poor of English
Revelation 16:12
[ Sixth Bowl: Euphrates Dried Up ] Then the sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up, so that the way of the kings from the east might be prepared........
Revelation 9:16
Now the number of the army of the horsemen was two hundred million; I heard the number of them....
China claims about 90% of the oceans in all of SE Asia as their economic territory, and do not hesitate to use their military to enforce their arbitrary claim. They aren't exporting revolution these days, but they're actively engaging in conquest and expansion. Their current tactics are economic warfare, cyber-war, information and technology theft, and support of proxy regimes like North Korea and Iran. They also cheat at international badminton and make really lousy martinis.
China is not that stupid as you say. It is naval grand displays in there, and all hypes and grandstanding by politicians hoping to benefit from the situation.
The more serious scenario is if one of the party to the conflict will say "get out of here or else.." and he looks like he meant it.
Nothing really truly serious in the South China Sea so far, actually, except for the Sino-Vietnamese exchange of fires that happened some years back. Its all naval posturing and exhibitions in international waters happening there .
Except around islands firmly occupied by their claimants, South China Sea is international space so everybody can sail in there. I don't think anybody has the guts to do what cannot be explained to the world community, in there. But there seems no guarantee to that.
And since it is all about territorial claims in there, and the fact that the claims and counter claims are on going and not settled yet, I think it is proper for any of the claimants to desist and to withhold any move to exploit from their part disputed areas.
Before any exploration for oil and gas maybe territorial issues must be settled first.
Well, we could be drawn into any number of conflicts worldwide, where we have alliance or "interests"! Most Americans are pretty anti-war these days & don't want to see our young people killed over this type of petty conflict! Here's an idea: how many islets are there? Divide them Equally between the 2 nations, say J.apan get's those closer to them & China get's those closer to their mainland! Problem solved, conflict avoided! But that would be too simple! Humans are well known for insisting on making things more difficult for ourselves, due to rivalry & historical squabbles! We should not feel obligated to take sides, but let them work it out as the 2 sovreign nations they are!!
I've posted a comment here, hours later, it still doesn't show up. I've seen a similar complaint here. What is going on?
Your country is censoring your comments! Hahahahhahaha
Does CNN censor this comment?
Your own country is censoring your comments!!!!!! Hahahahahahah
Mitt Romney would of raised Military spending at stop the enemy's now were screwed with Obama as president. God help us all!
Wow it blocked half my comment :/
I would of fixed this but you all voted for President Obama.
I will destroy america.
Wow i knew it.
Got any proof ?
Yes you just admitted it!
"China’s growth is slowing and it needs a new kind of economic development." That's why they are in Africa.....
Yeup., and that's why they turned that unwanted russian aircraft carrier, bought by some chinese company .. to be made into a casino in macao., into a chinese aircraft carrier to bully its neighbors .. how embarrassing. a sailing casino!!
Comparing the US who invaded countless countries post WWII, have cold war mentalities still, the war budget being 15 times of all other nations. Idiot, you are not throwing stones but boulders while in a glass house.
BTW Tibet is a part of China, no arrogant red neck like yourself is going to change that! Which I doubt... your only an internet warrior, you won't do any thing in real life.
For all those of you who talk about peace, let me tell you a little something about yourselves that you probably don't even know: you'd be the first one's who would call the sirens for war as soon as something like this arose. You all have a fairy tale notion of what peace should be like but none of you, given the opportunity, would know how to handle the situation. And to clear something up, it has nothing to do with political parties. Both Democrats and Republicans are in it to win it; it meaning war. They just got different ways of going about it. Peace doesn't occur overnight. It sometimes doesn't occur at all. Sure it's colorful and pleasant to think about it but, damn people, be realistic about it. To believe that peace without conflict and war is attainable in the society we live in is like saying human beings are not selfish, greedy, and self centered by nature. Understand that it is in our DNA. God forbid if we had emotional individuals like yall running congress and the white house; we would be in deep trouble.
Neither one has been good for jobs...
Soundlogic: That post is one of the best yet.
Peace is maintained by those who prepare for war but pray for peace. Only a few pray for war and they receive some gain from it. A true warrior prays for peace but is willing to defend his country and home when needed. In 20 years of service I never meet one man or woman who asked for war. They were ready if it came and were willing to pay the price like the wonderful men and women are doing today.
May God guide them!