Friday, September 07, 2012

On any dispute, China is all mouth but no trousers


Japan's central government has agreed to buy Senkaku islands or Diaoyu islands in Chinese, a group of uninhabited islands that also are claimed by China and Taiwan, as reported Wednesday, which would potentially increase regional tension over the simmering territorial dispute.

Of course, Chinese government surely reacted quickly and loudly. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman said the islands have been "China's inherent territory since ancient times." The mainstream media, like CCTV and People Daily, all spoke or wrote to claim Chinese territory over the islands. And many netizens spoke online that they would fight against Japanese to defend the islands. Vow, what a mess!

Well, as a shitzen in China, I'd like to speak to Japan: Take it easy, China is all mouth but no trousers.They may speak much, but they would do little.

See, almost all the countries beside Japan have territory disputes against Japan, like South Korea and Russia (not including USA), but what did the leaders of South Korea and Russia do?
There is the dispute of the Kuril Islands between Russia and Japan, and Medvedev, Russia's leader, stepped on the island and wrote a poem: how beautiful my motherland is!
There also is the dispute of the Liancourt Islands between South Korea and Japan, and Lee Myung-bak, South Korea's leader, stepped on the islands to claim the territory.

What do you see about Chinese leaders for the dispute of Senkaku islands? They did nothing at all. Moreover, the government repressed those non-government-supported protest against Japan.

In addition, the Chinese leaders will have to hold a big conference to decide who is the boss of the communist party for the next 5 years, and traditionally, they only care about it, no one would care about the islands. So, no one will speak loudly against Japan in case which may influence negatively to his own political position. Thus, is it strange that the Chinese government actually will pay NO attention to the dispute?

No comments: