![[11]](https://s.yimg.jp/i/jp/blog/p3/images/paging_for2.gif){kind=small}
|
South China Sea
Try not to blink As China asserts itself as a naval and air power, and as America responds, the risks of confrontation are growing May 30th 2015 | BEIJING | http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21652348-china-asserts-itself-naval-and-air-power-and-america-responds-risks AMERICAN officials are losing patience with China. On May 22nd the vice-president, Joe Biden, was blunt. He warned naval-college graduates of “new fault lines” emerging between the great powers. China, he said, was challenging freedom of navigation in the South China Sea by reclaiming land on disputed reefs on a “massive scale”. Two days earlier America had signalled its annoyance by sending a surveillance aircraft close to one of the reefs where China is building an airstrip. Such secretive flights are common, but this one was different. The plane also took a crew from CNN, which broadcast the Chinese navy’s testy response through a radio transmission in English: “Leave immediately, in order to avoid misjudgment.”
Chinese officials and state-controlled media have reacted angrily to America’s rhetorical offensive (reinforced by CNN’s dramatic footage of the spyplane mission over Fiery Cross Reef, showing sand being sucked from the bottom of the sea and sprayed onto the island-in-the-making by Chinese dredgers). On May 25th a Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman called on America to end its “provocative behaviour”. Global Times, a state-owned newspaper known for its hardline views, said war would be “inevitable” if America kept complaining about the island-building. On May 24th the People’s Daily, the Communist Party’s main mouthpiece, warned America that those who “hurt others” could “end up hurting themselves”. Mercifully, the heated words have not so far been matched by hot-headed military behaviour in or above the sea itself. Both America and China are anxious to avoid clashes. But in order to make its point, America is considering moves that might be construed by China as threatening. American spy flights, as well as similar missions by its ships, have so far kept at least 12 nautical miles (22km) away from the reefs they are monitoring. That would be the outer limit of China’s sovereign domain if the reefs were islands (ie, permanently above sea) and were indeed Chinese. Now the Pentagon is considering whether to probe these lines.
China has long said it owns most of the reefs and islands in the South China Sea, and has also asserted vaguely defined rights to most of the sea itself. Other countries around the sea dispute these claims (Vietnam and the Philippines both say they own Fiery Cross Reef). America takes no position in the sovereignty debate, but it says arguments should be resolved peacefully, without affecting freedom of navigation. China’s warnings to American spyplanes suggest that it is already trying to impose restrictions on military traffic. Despite America’s increasingly public complaints, there has been no change in the frantic pace of China’s reclamation efforts on several reefs (pictured is an American spyplane’s photograph of work on Fiery Cross Reef). On May 26th China’s defence ministry released a “white paper” on military strategy. It said the country should build a “modern maritime military force” to protect China’s “maritime rights and interests”, including in the South China Sea. Ash Carter, America’s defence secretary, said a day later that China’s actions in the area showed it was out of step with “international norms that underscore the Asia-Pacific’s security architecture”. America and China’s neighbours worry that China may eventually declare an “Air Defence Identification Zone” (ADIZ) over the South China Sea—requiring aircraft to identify themselves to the Chinese authorities before entering. In November 2013 China alarmed the region by establishing an ADIZ over the East China Sea, covering islands claimed by Japan (see map). It said its armed forces had the right to take “defensive emergency measures” against those failing to comply. America quickly sent two unarmed B-52 bombers through the zone without notifying China. Some Chinese experts believe that China is unlikely to declare an ADIZ in the South China Sea soon because it would be even harder to enforce over such a vast area. On May 26th, however, a Chinese foreign ministry official said his country would decide whether to establish one partly on the basis of “whether and to what extent the security of airspace is threatened”—a clear warning to America. Chinese academics say that testing China’s resolve could prove dangerous. Should America sail a naval ship close to one of the reefs it “may very well force Beijing to respond forcefully,” says Zhu Feng of the China Centre for Collaborative Studies of the South China Sea at Nanjing University. No Chinese leader, he says, wants to be seen as a “chicken”. Neither, however, does America. It is relieved that China’s neighbours are beginning to speak out more forcefully about the problem as well. In April the ten-member Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), which is usually at great pains not to antagonise China, called the island-building a threat to “peace, security and stability”. ASEAN countries welcome America’s military presence in the region. But privately they have also been asking the Americans to avoid ratcheting up tensions. No Asian country wants to be forced to make a clear choice between backing America or backing China. For America, staying out of trouble will be tough. |
全体表示
[ リスト | 詳細 ]
コメント（0）
|
Nuclear power in Japan
Legal fallout Court cases frustrate efforts to restart Japan’s nuclear plants Apr 25th 2015 | NIIGATA | From the print edition THE world’s biggest nuclear power plant runs along nearly 4 kilometres (2½ miles) of the coast of the Sea of Japan. At full pelt it generates enough electricity to supply 2.7m households. But the seven reactors at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa complex sit idle, along with the rest of Japan’s nuclear-power facilities. Four years after meltdown at the Fukushima Dai-ichi power plant, all Japan’s 48 usable reactors are the focus of safety concerns. An industry that once produced nearly a third of Japan’s electricity remains paralysed.
The government badly wants some of the idle reactors put back to work to cut a huge bill for imported fuel. On April 22nd it got a shot in the arm when a court on Kyushu, the third-largest of Japan’s four main islands, rejected an attempt to block the restart of two reactors at the Sendai plant. It said the reactors were safe to operate, despite active earthquake faults and a volcano in the area. Kyushu Electric, the plant’s owner, believes it could be generating power again by July. Yet the ruling contrasted with another one handed down a week earlier by a court in Fukui prefecture, down the coast from the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant. That decision blocked Kansai Electric Power from restarting two reactors at its Takahama site. It said stricter government-induced regulations after the Fukushima disaster were no guarantee that another disaster could be prevented. The court warned of “imminent danger” to local citizens if the reactors were restarted. The decision surprised the government. It is formulating a new energy plan that calls for nuclear power to meet up to 20% of Japan’s electricity needs by 2030. The Fukui ruling will not derail that, the chief cabinet secretary, Yoshihide Suga, insists. He says the new regulations are among the world’s strictest. Such confidence in restarting the reactors may be misplaced. Every one of them is the subject of a lawsuit by locals trying to stop them from being fired up again. The government and the energy utilities will continue to argue that although they cannot completely rule out another accident, they have made nuclear power as safe as possible. By rejecting that argument, the Fukui court has set a precedent other courts may follow, says Mutsuyoshi Nishimura, a former climate-change negotiator. Kansai Electric has challenged the Fukui ruling. Experts say the company will very likely get a higher court to overturn it. But the longer legal tussles drag on, the older the reactors become, putting their eventual operation in doubt. The Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), Japan’s new watchdog, is reviewing about 20 reactors for compliance with its regulations. Luc Oursel, the late chief executive of Areva, a French nuclear giant, predicted in 2013 that two-thirds of Japan’s plants would eventually restart. Few believe that now. For Tokyo Electric Power (TEPCO), the operator of the ruined Fukushima plant, these issues are a matter of life and death. Kashiwazaki-Kariwa is its only remaining viable nuclear facility. The company says it loses \100 billion ($835m) per reactor every year that the reactors are down. The plant’s chief, Tadayuki Yokomura, says that TEPCO has poured $2 billion into reinforcing the facility against earthquakes and tsunamis. There is, he insists, no reason why all seven reactors cannot be restarted. The problem is that he has yet to convince the public of that. From the print edition: Asia |
|
Obama: China has benefited by U.S. presence in Asia
By Steven Mufson and David Nakamura April 28 at 12:57 PM
President Obama said Tuesday that China has "benefited" from the U.S. presence in Asia and rejected the notion that new defense guidelines between the United States and Japan should be viewed as a provocation in Beijing.
"China became an economic juggernaut incorporated into global trade" under the current system, Obama said during a news conference in the Rose Garden, after a meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. "So, no, we don’t think a strong U.S.-Japan alliance should be seen as a provocation." Obama added that millions of Chinese have risen out of poverty, and that could "not have been done were there not a stable trading system and world order underwritten in large part by our alliances." Obama's remarks came a day after the United States and Japan announced a revised defense agreement that would allow Japan's Self-Defense Forces to take a more active role in regional security. The changes, which are relatively modest, allow Japan to act when U.S. forces are threatened by a third country. The president acknowledged the tensions that have arisen between China and other Asian nations from maritime disputes in the South China and East China seas. "But that is not an issue arising as a consequence of the U.S.-Japan alliance," he said. "Rather than resolve it through normal international dispute settlements, they are flexing their muscles. We've said to China what we would say to any country: 'That’s the wrong way to go about it.' " Abe, meanwhile, was asked to address the issue of Japan's wartime use of "comfort stations," which forced as many as 200,000 women into sexual slavery during World War II. Abe's refusal to issue a full-throated apology has angered South Korea and China. But Abe again declined to directly apologize or take full responsibility for Japan. "I am deeply pained to think about the comfort women who experience immeasurable pain and suffering as a result of victimization due to human trafficking," he said. "This is a feeling that I share equally with my predecessors." Abe emphasized that he has endorsed previous statements from Japanese leaders that acknowledged the country's role in the abuse. But he added that "throughout the history of the 20th century, women's dignity and basic human rights have often been infringed upon during wars." During the first full day of Abe's visit, the two nations agreed to strengthen a wide variety of links on trade, military cooperation, cybersecurity, nuclear nonproliferation, anti-terrorism efforts, climate change and humanitarian assistance. At the news conference, Obama and Abe also touted progress on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a 12-nation free trade and regulatory pact in the Asia Pacific region that the president has called one of his top priorities.
Negotiations between the United States and Japan are nearing completion, with just a few outstanding issues, and both sides are hoping to come to agreement in a few weeks — which could give crucial momentum to the deal. However, Obama still must convince Congress to support the deal, and lawmakers are currently weighing "fast-track" legislation that would smooth the way for completion. However, Obama faces stiff opposition from most Democrats, labor unions and environmental groups. "It's never fun passing a trade bill in this town," Obama said, "because people are understandably concerned about the potential impact on specific industries and general concerns people have about globalization and technology displacing workers. But this will end up being the most progressive trade bill history." The Abe visit is full of symbolism and historical echoes — a speech to Congress, a visit to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum and a walk Monday through the Lincoln Memorial. The United States and Japan share many of the same strategic concerns about a nuclear North Korea, a growing Chinese military and nuclear proliferation. With the approach of the anniversary this summer of the U.S. nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the two countries said that they "affirm that it is in the interest of all States that the 70-year record of non-use should be extended forever and remain convinced that all States share the responsibility for achieving this goal." But much of the news conference focused on China. Asked about the Chinese-backed Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, which aims to help smaller countries in the region, Obama rejected the notion that his administration had lobbied allies not to join the project — which is seen by some U.S. officials as a challenge to the United States' leadership in the region. Although Japan has not entered the AIIB, several U.S. allies, including Britain and Germany, have joined. Obama said the project has potential but emphasized that Beijing must be transparent and accountable with the money and influence. "China’s got a lot of money. They've been running a big surplus for a long time," Obama said. "To the extent China wants to put capital into development projects around the region, that’s a positive, a good thing. Let me be very clear and dispel the notion we were opposed or are opposed to other countries participating." |
|
At Harvard, Abe sticks to Kono message when pressed on ‘comfort women’ issue by Reiji Yoshida Staff Writer Apr 28, 2015 Article history http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/04/28/national/history/abe-restates-deep-remorse-wartime-aggression/#.VUAX0reJjcs Facing an audience Monday at Harvard University in Boston, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe tried to dodge the politically explosive issue of wartime “comfort women” by reaffirming his earlier stance upholding a key 1993 government apology for their ordeal. “Comfort women” is the euphemism Japan used to refer to females who were forced to work at Japanese wartime military brothels in the 1930s and 1940s. During a question and answer session after Abe’s speech on the Japanese economy, a Harvard sophomore asked him if he denies that the Japanese government and military were directly involved in forcing “hundreds of thousands of women” into “sexual slavery.” Abe didn’t directly answer the question, but said he upholds the landmark 1993 apology by then-Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono. “When it comes to the comfort women issue, my heart aches when I think about those people who were victimized by human trafficking, who were subjected to immeasurable pain and suffering beyond description,” Abe told the audience through an interpreter. “My feeling is no different from my predecessors,” he said at the event, which the university streamed live online. Abe was repeating his earlier remarks on comfort women almost word for word, apparently trying to carefully navigate the political minefield surrounding the issue. When asked what steps Japan should take to reduce diplomatic tension in the Asia-Pacific region, Abe said Japan “has steadily tread on the path of a peace-loving nation” based on “deep remorse regarding World War II.” Abe has denied that Japanese government authorities or the military forcibly or directly recruited females for the brothels, apparently trying to emphasize that task was carried out by private-sector operators who mainly recruited females from the Korean Peninsula for Japan’s wartime military brothels. Speaking to the audience at Harvard, however, Abe did not bring up his pet discussion on how the females were brought to the “comfort stations.” Instead he stressed that he upholds the Kono statement, as has prime ministers who came before him. Abe is set to address a joint session of the U.S. Congress in Washington on Wednesday. His speech there is likely to be provide a preview of the statement he will issue in August to mark the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II. Many leaders around the world are keen to hear whether Abe’s address to Congress will touch on Japan’s wartime atrocities and colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula. Abe is widely regarded as a historical revisionist who has tried to play down Japan’s liability for its wartime misdeeds in the 1930s and ’40s. He and his aides appear to be trying to dispel or at least dilute this image while he is in the United States. In the speech he delivered at Harvard before the question and answer session, Abe said he was determined to carry out structural reforms to make Japan’s economy more productive. He also emphasized that he is trying to improve the social status of women in Japan and encourage more of them to enter the workforce. Abe pointed out that he tapped women for two of the top three executive posts of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party and is urging industry leaders to promote more women to management positions. Hiring more women will improve the performance of those companies, Abe argued. “I often say that had Lehman Brothers been Lehman Brothers and Sisters, they would still be around,” Abe said, drawing laughter from the audience. |
