The Instigator
saruking
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Tophatdoc
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

The Current Tension in the East China Sea Islands Dispute is Japan/US fault.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Tophatdoc
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/20/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,187 times Debate No: 44325
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (3)

 

saruking

Pro

In this Debate I Will argue that the current dispute over the Diaoyu/Senkaku/Diaoyutai island is the fault of the Japanese government with the indirect/direct support the United States of America.. I'm not arguing wither the islands sovereignty belong to Mainland China, Japan or Taiwan but rather the raising tension in the East China Sea is the fault of the Japanese government with the indirect/direct support the United States of America.

The first round is for acceptance only. No new arguments may be made by Con in the last round of the debate, because Pro has no debate round left to rebut them.
Tophatdoc

Con

I accept this challenge.
Debate Round No. 1
saruking

Pro

#1 History is not defined by years but rather by consequences of events. The First Major Event is Japan invasion of China in 1931 Or as far as the First Sino-Japanese war. This is not forgotten by the People of China, Korea, and Southeast Asia nations. The wound did not Heal yet as it's constantly reopen by Right Wing Japanese politician in the years leading up to the Current tension.

#2 China military spending and increase assertiveness over its dispute island is the result of the restructuring of China national defense strategy. This change was indirectly caused by the First Iraq War and the Iraqi usage of Chinese weapon which were dominated for the most part by the Coalition lead by United States. Meaning China military spending was not direct at Japan but rather directed at the United States and its obligation to Taiwan and the United States Seventh Flee in Singapore.

#3 China world"s 2nd largest economy and largest trading nation (recent and also could be debated), as it needs resources to continue its economic growth and making sure that no nation or party can interfere with trade lanes of the South and East China Sea. Once again this is not directed at the Japanese as the tension was lessened by the normalization of 1970"s.

This Current Dispute events STARTS with Japan nationalized/purchase the Disputed Islands in the East China Sea on September 2012. This Means the Change of the Status Quo from Deng Xiaoping diffusion of the Island dispute during 1972. ( "It does not matter if this question is shelved for some time, say, 10 years. Our generation is not wise enough to find common language on this question. Our next generation will certainly be wiser. They will certainly find a solution acceptable to all." (Deng Xiaoping) This was the best means of reducing tension in both Sino-Japanese relations and the East China Sea region and Japan miscalculated with it acts. While I recognized that the nationalization of the islands by the Japanese Government was an attempt to prevent Shintaro Ishihara Former Mayor of Tokyo (a Right Wing Nationalist) from purchasing the Islands. Thus a move to prevent/reduce the tension but nevertheless A Purchase is still A Purchase. This was still an Act of choosing evil even if it's the lesser Evil but Evil nevertheless.

The Freedom of Speech is a wonderful gift of the modern era, but this gift has also allow Right Wing authors, politicians to storm up the Chinese and Korean nationalism. As they attempt to down play and/or rewrite World War 2 history in both media and public education. This fuels the tension of today. While Germany has satisfied the European/Allied nations, Japan has not with its neighbors. With the Current administration visit to Yasukuni Shrine (the US also is "disappointed" with visit) and denial of Comfort women (sex slave) by Shinz!3; Abe (the Current Prime Minister of Japan December 26, 2012- Present). This fundamentally has broken the trust of the Chinese and Korean people and furthering the fuel of tension on both State levels and people to people levels.

The un-bilateral creation of Japan ADIZ (Air Defense Identification Zone) which was created by United States and taken over the Japanese government in 1969, which neither the Chinese nor Russian recognize. Even through the media in the recent news are covered with China creation of its own ADIZ ( November 2013). Japan did not consider the feeling of its neighbor when it expanded and maintain the ADIZ created by US. I also Add that Before the tension with purchase of the island. Japan ADIZ expanded in 1972 and 2010. 2010 one created an overlap of Taiwan ADIZ.

China is not Ideal state by western ideology, and the bias political negativity in the media about China (the state, culture and people) are plenty but China Did Not Start the tension over island. Both China and Japan worked through and maintain the relations with issues like 2008 with Chunxiao gas field issue, although disputed at first, but nevertheless solved. Japan un-bilateral nationalization of the islands however is crossing the red line. The Japanese government doesn't even recognize there is a dispute over the islands, furthering from the Status Quo of the 1972).

United States of America is and was one of dominate Force of the pacific/Asian region. Even through United States is thousands of sea miles away from Asia, its military bases, former territories and former colonies have allow the US to maintain a presences in the Asia/Pacific Region. Taiwan is A Key issue that involves both Japan and United States and stability of the region. Japan annexed Taiwan after the first Sino-Japanese war, which may or may not have included the currently disputed islands. United States came into the picture, after it made sure Taiwan (the Republic of China) was under its protection after People"s Republic of China involvement in the Korean War. The United States Did Not recognize PRC part of UN until January 1979 and according the declassified documents; United States did not recognize Taiwan as part of China during the Cold war. Meaning PRC for the most part was not in the consideration of United States ( A nation that preach "all things that"s good" while denying the legitimacy of a government that govern 1/6 of the world population and the continuation of a government (ROC) that already has decades of record on corruption, massacres, assassination, and other criminal acts.) This brings me to my point, that the United States government is/has placed Taiwan and the disputed islands sovereignty up for grab into order to upset the world 2nd and 3rd largest economy into conflict. Using Japan own desire to rejuvenate its patriotism to upset a rival that is China (PRC). As the United States congress passes legislation that emboldens Japan from an Attack, ensuring Japan to move its domestic policies recklessly.
Tophatdoc

Con

"#1 History is not defined by years but rather by consequences of events."

If this is the consequence of events why don't we bring up relevant events and not irrelevant events. Both Chinese and Japanese governments were different at the time of the Japanese invasion of China in 1931. The Japanese government was militaristic and was a monarchy[1]. China was still recovering from the period of Warlords so there was no one Chinese "government." The most accepted government at the time was Chiang Kai Shek and the Kuomintang[2]. Neither governments exist in today's time. China is ruled by the Communist Party in a one party state[3]. While Japan is governed by a parliament(National Diet)[4]. The parties who were involved in 1931and their successors are non-existent.My opponent may attempt to bring up the idea that the Communist Party was a power in 1931. But I say the Communist Party did not become a power of significance until the late 1930s[5].

[1]http://www.britannica.com...
[2]http://www.britannica.com...
[3]http://www.britannica.com...
[4]http://www.britannica.com...
[5]http://www.britannica.com...

"China military spending and increase assertiveness over its dispute island is the result of the restructuring of China national defense strategy."
This is not true, the Chinese government has consistently increased spending since the 1970s. Only in the 1980s, did it look like there was less spending. But this is not true because the Chinese economy grew during this period so it looked as if they were decreasing spending[6]. It only made up a smaller percentage of what was being spent.

[6]http://www.globalsecurity.org...

"#3 China world"s 2nd largest economy and largest trading nation (recent and also could be debated), as it needs resources to continue its economic growth and making sure that no nation or party can interfere with trade lanes of the South and East China Sea.#3 China world"s 2nd largest economy and largest trading nation (recent and also could be debated), as it needs resources to continue its economic growth and making sure that no nation or party can interfere with trade lanes of the South and East China Sea."

Pro has only conceded the point that Japan is not responsible for the current dispute over the Senaku Islands. Japan is merely acting in defense since it is China that is expanding their reach. Even the CCP's party newspaper isn't denying they are the agressors. Last month a writer wrote "Any country with a normal development strategy will not tolerate Japan's attempt to become a military power." China has made it clear they are not interested in being peaceful neighbors with Japan. Instead they want to dominate Far East Asia and control trade as well.

[7]http://english.peopledaily.com.cn...

"This Current Dispute events STARTS with Japan nationalized/purchase the Disputed Islands in the East China Sea on September 2012."

Japan has controlled the island since 1895. Then during a period between the 1940s and the early 1970s the United States controlled the Senkaku Islands. Nowhere during that period did China control those islands. The island was owned by a Japanese citizen before 2012[8]. The Japanese government purchased the islands from the private owner. It is China who has raised a ruckus and utilized threats against Japan who has the bought the land. So who is it really who has raised the tension? Not Japan.

[8]http://www.bbc.co.uk...

"The Freedom of Speech is a wonderful gift of the modern era......With the Current administration visit to Yasukuni Shrine (the US also is "disappointed" with visit) and denial of Comfort women (sex slave) by Shinz!3; Abe (the Current Prime Minister of Japan December 26, 2012- Present). This fundamentally has broken the trust of the Chinese and Korean people and furthering the fuel of tension on both State levels and people to people levels."

Freedom of Speech does not even exist in China. Shall we forget the "Blind Lawyer," Chen Guangcheng has seeked asylum in the United States[9]. The Chinese government has made it clear they don't tolerate dissidence at all. Shall we forget the protests in Tibet and Xinjiang[10][11].At least in Japan, there have been many critics of Shinzo Abe's trip to the Yaskun Shrine[12]. The Chinese government is untrustworthy because they seek to control and dictate what information their citizens receive. When their citizens attempt to speak out against societal wrongs they suit up the military to crush them.

[9]http://www.washingtonpost.com...
[10]http://www.nytimes.com...
[11]http://www.theguardian.com...
[12]http://www.japantimes.co.jp...

"The un-bilateral creation of Japan ADIZ (Air Defense Identification Zone) which was created by United States and taken over the Japanese government in 1969, which neither the Chinese nor Russian recognize."

It was not a problem until the Chinese made it one because they seek to dominate their neighbors.

"United States of America is and was one of dominate Force of the pacific/Asian region.... Taiwan is A Key issue that involves both Japan and United States and stability of the region. Japan annexed Taiwan after the first Sino-Japanese war, which may or may not have included the currently disputed islands."

Agreed.

" As the United States congress passes legislation that emboldens Japan from an Attack, ensuring Japan to move its domestic policies recklessly."

Japan is the defender not the attacker. It is China who seeks to control those who are outside their borders as well as those within them.They have little to credibility as being "trustworthy" or "peaceful" with the behavior they exhibit and continue to exhibit.

The following are reasons why Japan did not start the dispute as Pro claims:
1. China started the dispute.
As I pointed to above the islands were owned by a Japanese owner. Now when the Japanese decide to purchase those islands from that owner, it is China who raises the ruckus. China built up the tension not Japan. The Chinese government does not control Japan like it can control their citizens. They won't be able to roll a tank over them that easily.

2. China reigns as the unequivocal king of disputes in Far East Asia.
China is a horrible neighbor. China has lost credibility due to all of their disputes. Here is a list of disputes in the last 10 years alone aside from the current dispute with Japan.
South China Sea Disputes
-Brunei:China has conflicted with Brunei in the South China Sea over territory[13].
[13]http://www.rediff.com...
-Indonesia:China has conflicted with Indonesia in the South China Sea over territory[14]
[14]http://www.thejakartapost.com...
-Malaysia: China and Malaysia are disputing territory in the South China Sea[15].
[15]http://www.theaustralian.com.au...
-Philippines: Chna and the Philippines are disputing terrirory in the South China Sea[16].
[16]http://www.voanews.com...
-Taiwan:The mainland Chinese government has made claims over Taiwan multiple times.But they have also clashed over territory in the South China Sea[17].
[17]http://www.taipeitimes.com...
-Vietnam: China has been known to attack Vietnamese boats fishing near the Paracel Islands. Vietnam and China fought over the islands back in the 1970s. But the dispute is up in the still[18]. China sparked tensions over the Spratly Islands as well[19].
[18]http://www.bworldonline.com...
[19]http://www.csmonitor.com...

Other Disputes
-India:India and China are still disputing over their border since 1962[20].
[20]http://www.reuters.com...
-North Korea:North Korea and China have disputed territory along their border on Mount Paektu[21].
[21]http://chinaperspectives.revues.org...

I ask, if the Chinese government is peaceful why would they have had all of these disputes in the last 10 years alone? That is because they are not peaceful. They want to dominate their neighbors that is why. The government has no credibility of being "Trustworthy" or "peaceful" amongst their neighbors. Whereas Japan has only conflicted with Russia and China over borders. The Chinese are openly seeking control of the South and East China Seas for trade purposes. They are the provocateurs and should not feign as if they are somehow the victim.

3. Chinese leaders have admitted they won't tolerate Japan multiple times and keep saying it.
The CCP's newspaper admits it. See what I posted above to see what they said.

4.China's aggressive policies have resulted in the buildup of several militaries in Far East Asia aside from Japan.
Debate Round No. 2
saruking

Pro

After reading con points, i think i'll counter two repeating claims made by CON

(1) The islands are Japan
They're not Japan. it disputed islands and the sovereignty of the islands weren't never given to Japan by US. SO they don't belong to Japan.
(2) China is a bad bad girl (i say girl because China refer to it countries as motherland)
China domestic politics or its disputes with other countries is not relevant to This Debate. i'm not debating that China is a Saint. or that China actions on other disputes.

"If this is the consequence of events why don't we bring up relevant events and not irrelevant events. Both Chinese and Japanese governments were different at the time of the Japanese invasion of China in 1931."

#1 I"m appalled by your attempt to downplay World War 2/ Sino-Japanese war as "irreverent" due to different government system. All the currents states of PRC, Japan and Taiwan are the successor of their rightful historic past. Disregarding such history as simply a thing of the past is exactly why the people of China, Korea, Taiwan and other member of the international communities are angry with the Current Japanese government. Also the Republic of China is still in existences as Taiwan, while not recognize by the international communities due to one-China policy. Taiwan is one of the embodiment of Chinese civilization. This means Taiwan also contributes/leads in Chinese culture/social production.
Also the legitimacy of Chinese government has shifted to Chinese Communist Party, that does not imply that the Chinese people are completely different. As both people and government are progression and Not stationary moment of history. The current Japanese government is projecting hints of progression that leans to right wing militarism (much like imperial Japan of the 19-20 century).

"This is not true, the Chinese government has consistently increased spending since the 1970s. Only in the 1980s, did it look like there was less spending. But this is not true because the Chinese economy grew during this period so it looked as if they were decreasing spending[6]. It only made up a smaller percentage of what was being spent."

#2 Con makes fails to read through my argument, as he perceptive that i have attempted to claim that China military has not been increase their military spending. i never made any sort of claim but rather the point was that Chinese military command is shifting their resources to specific units such as cyber, missile, satellite, navy, air forces are built towards in the attempt for improve their anti-denial and defense capability against US in the Taiwan independence scenario. Con has failed to prove evidences that suggest that the Chinese military strategy had intentionally been directed at the current East China Sea islands before Japan nationalization of the islands.

http://rt.com... (anti satetllities)
http://en.wikipedia.org...(anti Carrier)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk... (Chinese sub appear in US Carrier formation)

#3 A nation sea trade route is an legitimate reason for defense. it's not a act of aggression. Also i must once again remind Con that the US intervention in Taiwan a relevant reason for Chinese defenses. This event had nothing to do with Disputed island as the status quo of 1972 lessen the tension.
Also your own source "http://english.peopledaily.com.cn...; points out the Japan is Military allying themselves with US and for a nation that has pacifism embedded its constitution to think that there is debate to remove it is worrisome indeed.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp...

"Japan has controlled the island since 1895. Then during a period between the 1940s and the early 1970s the United States controlled the Senkaku Islands. Nowhere during that period did China control those islands. The island was owned by a Japanese citizen before 2012[8]. The Japanese government purchased the islands from the private owner. It is China who has raised a ruckus and utilized threats against Japan who has the bought the land. So who is it really who has raised the tension? Not Japan."

Con once against forgets the historical past of imperialism before 1895. In 1894 the Sino-Japanese war ended. it's convenient that Japan annexed the current disputed islands a year after of winning the war against China. Islands that were debated by Japanese military command on the Qing dynasty ownership of islands

http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com...

"Pro has only conceded the point that Japan is not responsible for the current dispute over the Senaku Islands. Japan is merely acting in defense since it is China that is expanding their reach. Even the CCP's party newspaper isn't denying they are the agressors. Last month a writer wrote "Any country with a normal development strategy will not tolerate Japan's attempt to become a military power." China has made it clear they are not interested in being peaceful neighbors with Japan. Instead they want to dominate Far East Asia and control trade as well."

Any nation have the legitimate reason to defend their perceived territories as Japan purchase/nationalization of the disputed islands is the point of aggression. China and Japan had their bumpy ride but the current tension over the islands is restarted by Japan point of aggression. Regardless who had admission control, the sovereignty of the islands is disputed. ANY Political Move towards the islands adds to tension thus japan purchase of the island is a shift away from the status quo of the 1972 solution.

"Japan has controlled the island since 1895. Then during a period between the 1940s and the early 1970s the United States controlled the Senkaku Islands. Nowhere during that period did China control those islands. The island was owned by a Japanese citizen before 2012[8]. The Japanese government purchased the islands from the private owner. It is China who has raised a ruckus and utilized threats against Japan who has the bought the land. So who is it really who has raised the tension? Not Japan."

Con fails to make the case that by nationalizing the disputed islands the tension has arisen because of japan. Regardless who had admission control, the sovereignty of the island is disputed. Any political move towards the islands adds to tension thus japan purchase of the island is a shift away from the status quo of the 1972 solution.

http://www.fmprc.gov.cn...

"Freedom of Speech does not even exist in China. Shall we forget the "Blind Lawyer," Chen Guangcheng has seeked asylum in the United States[9]. The Chinese government has made it clear they don't tolerate dissidence at all. Shall we forget the protests in Tibet and Xinjiang[10][11].At least in Japan, there have been many critics of Shinzo Abe's trip to the Yaskun Shrine[12]. The Chinese government is untrustworthy because they seek to control and dictate what information their citizens receive. When their citizens attempt to speak out against societal wrongs they suit up the military to crush them."

Con attempts to shift of the point to the lack of freedom of speech in China. This is irrelevant the current debate. The insincerity of the Current Japanese government and Right wing authors towards the victims and history of World War 2 involving that of its neighbor country is relevant and despicable. The current acts made by the Japanese government is direct insult to those whom support pacifism in Japan and Chinese/Korean people that died due to Japanese aggression.

"It was not a problem until the Chinese made it one because they seek to dominate their neighbors."

Con fails to recognize that Japan ADIZ is already an Act of Aggression and Con also failures to recognition that China ADIZ is retaliation at the purchase/nationalization of the disputed islands.

"Chinese leaders have admitted they won't tolerate Japan multiple times and keep saying it.The CCP's newspaper admits it. See what I posted above to see what they said."

Yes, of course the Chinese government wouldn't tolerate japan rising toward militarism. What countries would allow Japanese militarism to rise again?

"China's aggressive policies have resulted in the buildup of several militaries in Far East Asia aside from Japan."

I once again assert that China military strategy is one of deterrent against US intervention in Taiwan not directly toward japan or the Current island dispute UNTILL the Purchase. i already made comments on what kind of weapon china has for this deterrent.

"Now when the Japanese decide to purchase those islands from that owner"
THIS IS AN ACT OF PROVOCATION AND THE FIRST ACT IN THIS CURRENT TENSION BETWEEN CHINA AND JAPAN
WHY DOES CON NOT RECOGNIZE THIS.

"China reigns as the unequivocal king of disputes in Far East Asia."
What does this have to do with the debate? we're not debating whether or not China is a saint and Japan has disputes with All three of its neighbors.

http://en.wikipedia.org... (South Korea supported by North Korea)
http://en.wikipedia.org... (Russia)
http://en.wikipedia.org... (the islands we're debating about.)

I thank Con for taking up this debate, as it is my first and wishes the best debater win.
VOTE PRO
Tophatdoc

Con

I will offer explanations, responses, and a summary in this round. No new evidence will be presented as Pro asked.

"China domestic politics or its disputes with other countries is not relevant to This Debate. i'm not debating that China is a Saint. or that China actions on other disputes."

It is relevant because China attempts to distort information abroad and domestically.

"I"m appalled by your attempt to downplay World War 2/ Sino-Japanese war as "irreverent" due to different government system. All the currents states of PRC, Japan and Taiwan are the successor of their rightful historic past.Disregarding such history as simply a thing of the past is exactly why the people of China, Korea, Taiwan and other member of the international communities are angry with the Current Japanese government. "

I'm disgusted with the multiple times my opponent has attempted to manipulate and distort the resolution which he provided. Did he not say "The Current Tension in the East China Sea Islands Dispute is Japan/US fault?" It says current tension. If pro is going to bring up historical facts he must show how they are relevant to the current tension. I say he did not even show such correlation.

"Con has failed to prove evidences that suggest that the Chinese military strategy had intentionally been directed at the current East China Sea islands before Japan nationalization of the islands."

I never made a claim stating that the Chinese military startegy was directed towards the East China Sea islands. Pro is either misunderstood about what I said or is intentionally misrepresenting it.


" A nation sea trade route is an legitimate reason for defense. it's not a act of aggression. Also i must once again remind Con that the US intervention in Taiwan a relevant reason for Chinese defenses. This event had nothing to do with Disputed island as the status quo of 1972 lessen the tension.
Also your own source "http://english.peopledaily.com.cn......; points out the Japan is Military allying themselves with US and for a nation that has pacifism embedded its constitution to think that there is debate to remove it is worrisome indeed."

Yes, it is relevant to the debate because it describes the current character of the paritipcants in this dispute. Do they have the credibility to claim defense? China does not have the credibility nor the facts to claim defense. It is an act of aggression on China's behalf. Who would deny that China has claimed Taiwan? Is this not an act of aggression? To claim something one does not possess?

Japan's constitution has nothing to do with the disputed islands. Perhaps it has to do with the Japanese military buildup in recent years but that is it.

"Con once against forgets the historical past of imperialism before 1895. In 1894 the Sino-Japanese war ended. it's convenient that Japan annexed the current disputed islands a year after of winning the war against China. Islands that were debated by Japanese military command on the Qing dynasty ownership of islands"

This debate is not about historical events that are not relevant. The debate resolution said "The Current Tensiont," not past tension. So why should we discuss events in the 19th century that are not the result of the current tension.

"Any nation have the legitimate reason to defend their perceived territories as Japan purchase/nationalization of the disputed islands is the point of aggression. China and Japan had their bumpy ride but the current tension over the islands is restarted by Japan point of aggression. Regardless who had admission control, the sovereignty of the islands is disputed. ANY Political Move towards the islands adds to tension thus japan purchase of the island is a shift away from the status quo of the 1972 solution."

China did not control those islands. They can claim as they wish. They may imagine as they see fit. But the Chinese government does not control those islands and neither did any Chinese government in the last hundred years. How can one claim what one does not possess?

"Con fails to make the case that by nationalizing the disputed islands the tension has arisen because of japan. Regardless who had admission control, the sovereignty of the island is disputed. Any political move towards the islands adds to tension thus japan purchase of the island is a shift away from the status quo of the 1972 solution."


Pro has attempted to act as if Japan is responsible for the tension. But did the resolution of this debate not say "The Current Tension in the East China Sea Islands Dispute is Japan/US fault?" It says current tension not past tension. China has instigated the current tension and that is an undeniable fact according to the evidence that I provided.Pro attempts to use history to somehow push the responsbility to Japan. This is not true and even the Chinese government has admitted responsibility for the current tension as I showed in the links in Round 2.

"Con attempts to shift of the point to the lack of freedom of speech in China. This is irrelevant the current debate. The insincerity of the Current Japanese government and Right wing authors towards the victims and history of World War 2 involving that of its neighbor country is relevant and despicable. The current acts made by the Japanese government is direct insult to those whom support pacifism in Japan and Chinese/Korean people that died due to Japanese aggression."

Pro has attempted to deny his own claim. Did he not bring this claim of freedom of speech in Round 2?

"The Freedom of Speech is a wonderful gift of the modern era, but this gift has also allow Right Wing authors, politicians to storm up the Chinese and Korean nationalism. As they attempt to down play and/or rewrite World War 2 history in both media and public education."-Pro, Round 2

Then Pro acts as if he has the credibility to dismiss the Japanese government and not the Chinese. As I demonstrated in Round 2 the Chinese government dictates what it wishes to its' citizens no questions and no answers given. To get out of line in China will result in being crushed. Is this not a more grave offense?

"Con fails to recognize that Japan ADIZ is already an Act of Aggression and Con also failures to recognition that China ADIZ is retaliation at the purchase/nationalization of the disputed islands."


The Japanese had the ADIZ long before the Chinese. So who really is the instigator of this point? It is China. There must not be any doubt cast upon this because the facts are clear for everyone to read.

"I once again assert that China military strategy is one of deterrent against US intervention in Taiwan not directly toward japan or the Current island dispute UNTILL the Purchase. i already made comments on what kind of weapon china has for this deterrent."

How is it deterrence when I provided evidence showing that China is the aggressor?

"THIS IS AN ACT OF PROVOCATION AND THE FIRST ACT IN THIS CURRENT TENSION BETWEEN CHINA AND JAPAN
WHY DOES CON NOT RECOGNIZE THIS."

No, it was none of China's business in the agreement. Where was China's responsibility in this agreement? There was none because the agreement was between a private owner and the Japanese government. China started the tension. Japan did not instigate anything. Pro failed to provide the evidence how Japan instigated the conflict with China as he attempts to assert now.

"What does this have to do with the debate? we're not debating whether or not China is a saint and Japan has disputes with All three of its neighbors."

It has to do with everything in this debate. China is attempting to control islands in the South and East China Seas because it will benefit them in trade. China started this conflict in order to seize more territory as it has done and still is attempting to do in other places. China is not credible at all to claim that someone else started the tension.

Let us some up the points of the debate:
1.My opponent has focused on irrelevant history.
The debate is about the current tension. So Pro must provide history that is relevant to the current tension. Which he did not do.
2. China started the dispute.
As I pointed to above the islands were owned by a Japanese owner. Now when the Japanese decide to purchase those islands from that owner, it is China who raises the ruckus. China built up the tension not Japan. The Chinese government does not control Japan like it can control their citizens. They won't be able to roll a tank over them that easily.
3.Chinese leaders have admitted they won't tolerate Japan multiple times and keep saying it.
The CCP's newspaper admits it. See what I posted in Round 2 to see what they said.

I would like to thank Pro for hosting this debate. I would like to thank the voters and readers who observed. If you came to the conclusion that Pro did not meet the resolution,vote Con please.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by saruking 3 years ago
saruking
Thank you wrichcirw for pointing out my fault of limiting the rounds to 3. I wasn't sure on what structure of this website (as it was my first debate). Also i had mid term coming up and didn't want to spent a overwhelming of time on the debate. In the future i'll will fix this mistake.
Posted by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
RFD:

https://docs.google.com...

Conclusion

This was a relatively high-quality debate by the standards of this website. I come into this debate with a rather large store of knowledge, as Chinese economy was my major in university.

CON was stronger in sources in general, but many of his sources corroborated PRO"s points, so I cannot score sources to him.

I decided to give PRO some leeway for evident 2nd language handicap, and also noted that CON had his fair share of grammatical mistakes, so neutral S&G.

CON displayed good conduct in the final round by adhering to PRO"s rather unfair stipulation that he be given 2 rounds for args/sources, whereas CON would only be afforded one, so conduct CON.

I found the key aspect of this resolution to be unaddressed by CON. PRO frames the conflict as a hegemonic power play between the US and China, even though most of his arguments focused on Japan. CON never addressed this key point, and IMHO this point overrides any and all petty bickering between China and Japan. Given that this key point remained uncontested, I must hand arguments to PRO.

CON"s attempt to discount history was unconvincing. PRO was correct in that CON mischaracterized many key aspects of history pertinent to this conflict. Such points strengthen PRO"s overall case.

The points that CON chose to rebut were convincingly argued...but many of those points (freedom of speech, 2012 specifically) are not nearly as pertinent to the resolution than what PRO argued.

Overall, good debate, relatively close, thanks to both for posting.
Posted by saruking 3 years ago
saruking
@Seeginomikata
Two times you have made the assertion that Japan has the sovereignty.
The first one is based on opinion (facts but i don't' see any) and other is based on navy power.
unless your point is that your a political realist and that the sovereignty will go to the nation that has the most influence and power in the international community. i don't see how navy power is the deciding factor, considering that the military is a united institution that involves ( Air, Ground, Sea, Cyber, and WMD)
#2 IS China ADIZ not the same? A defensive tactic for what it see as Japanese aggression and rising militarism. I mean it is a fact that US planes conducts Spy mission near Chinese waters and air space. Japan Also the same criticism toward China ADIZ can be said about Japan ADIZ being un-bilateral.

"I do not expect you to agree with me, but at least try to understand the feelings of others."
Back at you
Posted by bladerunner060 3 years ago
bladerunner060
An interesting debate on a topic I knew almost nothing about.

Conduct was equal enough.

S&G was likewise equal enough (I might have thought Con's was slightly better...riiiiiight up until he said "seeked". Which is not to say you both were terrible, just that nothing stood out on one side more than the other enough to score).

For sourcing: While Pro did provide some sources, I found several of them not directly relevant to the resolution, while Con's seemed to be, on balance, more reliable sources directly tied to the resolution.

As to Arguments:

Pro made some interesting points. Had this debate been about Japan ALONE, I think his case would have been stronger. Unfortunately, when he made points about how the US never technically gave the lands to Japan, he went down a rabbit-hole where he was already blaming both of them against China, yet hadn't shown why China had involved themselves in the FIRST place. Con demonstrated that China's claims are to be questioned, and that China didn't have a real claim to the island, yet was getting tense about said island. If there is tension, and one side can be shown to have a legitimate interest, and the other side has NOT been shown to have a legitimate interest, I'm going to have to assume that it's the side who hasn't been shown to have a legitimate interest who is at fault for the raising tensions. Arguments to Con.

As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
Posted by Seeginomikata 3 years ago
Seeginomikata
@saruking
I always try to keep an open mind on every subject of contention. I believe what I believe due to the persuasion of cold hard facts.

1. The legitimate sovereign is determined by two things: The recognition (legitimacy) that the people living on that land give, and the ability of the controller to hold the land, by force if necessary.
Since there are no inhabitants on the islands, and Japan has a much better naval force than China's. Japan is the sovereign.

2. Japan ADIZ has nothing to do with the Islands, and anyways the Japanese ADIZ is perfectly reasonable the way it is. It's purpose is to defend Japanese airspace against foreign aggression.
http://www.economist.com...
Japan scrambled planes almost 400 times In 2010 alone against unlawful Russian and Chinese incursions. They are just trying to protect their land, as they stare down threats from multiple militaries right across from a short sea. Danger and actual national security is something that you Americans seem to have a warped and unrealistic view of, since the US has no natural enemies, for you have a friendly undefended border with Canada to the north, and poor disorganized South Americans too busy with domestic troubles to the south, and then the flanks of America are covered by two massive oceans patrolled by the most powerful fleet in history. The concept of having to be neighbors with actual security threats is a foreign concept to Americans, who can always rest easy. Not so for much of the rest of the world, my friend.

I do not expect you to agree with me, but at least try to understand the feelings of others.
Posted by saruking 3 years ago
saruking
@Seeginomikata
I see you already have taken a sided. i will not try to persuade you as i believe you have already made up your mind and will not move from it. But nevertheless i will assert two points.

#1- i think it's fair that under your logic if China is the legitimate sovereign of the islands then Japan/USA would be the one responsible for all resulting tension.

#2 Even if japan is legitimate sovereign over the islands and there is no dispute, Japans ADIZ is still ridiculously big and on the border of China, Taiwan and Russia. Thus an action of provocation before China own action of retaliation with its own ADIZ. Under this, Japan/USA would have undoubtedly been the one to rise tension especially considering that the Zone was created during the Cold war.
Posted by Seeginomikata 3 years ago
Seeginomikata
@ saruking
I didn't expect my comment to be interpreted literally. I should apologize for exaggerating, for I had no clue that people are inflexible squares with no sense of humor.

My point was trying to say that Japan is the legitimate sovereign, and that therefor anyone who disputes the right of the legitimate sovereign is the one responsible for all resulting tensions.
Posted by saruking 3 years ago
saruking
@Seeginomikata It is not the same, US purchase the Florida From Spain. Japan annexed those islands under suspicious conditions as the Chinese and Japanese were at war and the islands sovereign were even debated among Japanese military leaders before the war.
As for China not saying anything. it's domestic trouble (multiple Civil wars) and un-respected status "sick man of Asia" hardly give it a say in the international communities during the Qing dynasty, as parts of the the Mainland china were already colonized by the Great powers of the time. Also I doubt the Chinese had time to focus on the their island disputes (Which was used by Ming primary and not the Qing) with the Republic of China as it wasn't a unified nation and once again civil war/ WW2. The PRC wasn't even recognized as nation by UN until 1971 or invited to any of the treaties involving the islands. The timing worked against the Chinese people and Nation.

Also Japan does not have over 200 years over the islands
annexed in 1895- 1945 1971-2014 = 93 years 43 of which is under administration which is not the same as sovereign right.

My debate isn't about the sovereign of the islands but the tension of the region.
Posted by Tophatdoc 3 years ago
Tophatdoc
@Seeginomikata, "It'd be like Spain claiming that it wants Florida back from the USA" lol
Posted by Seeginomikata 3 years ago
Seeginomikata
Nevermind that China is only side that ever started pressing issues and claims over something that had previously been a complete non-issue.

Nevermind that China decided it wants to consider the entirety of the east china sea and South china seas as their own, regardless of the pre-existing boundaries that are accepted by all the local governments, entire international community (except China), and UN.

but yeah, no its totally Japan's fault for claiming that it has the right to administer the islands that it has owned for over two hundred years, over which China has never once disputed sovereignty until the 50's.

It'd be like Spain claiming that it wants Florida back from the USA, and then after starting a whole global uproar, saying that it was the fault of the USA for keeping Florida and causing an issue when the USA refuses to hand it over back to Spain.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
sarukingTophatdocTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: see comments, good debate.
Vote Placed by Hierocles 3 years ago
Hierocles
sarukingTophatdocTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Excellent debate, very educational. I respect pro's position, but I have to agree that pro never made a sustained argument for why the islands are the legitimate holding of China in the first place. Both sides agree that the islands were purchased by Japan rather than taken by force, and cedes most of the ground in the debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 3 years ago
bladerunner060
sarukingTophatdocTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.