• Sun
  • Aug 31, 2014
  • Updated: 12:20pm

Diaoyu Islands

The Diaoyu Islands are a group of uninhabited islands located roughly due east of mainland China, northeast of Taiwan, west of Okinawa Island, and north of the southwestern end of the Ryukyu Islands. They are currently controlled by Japan, which calls them Senkaku Islands. Both China and Taiwan claim sovereignty over the islands. 


Obama reassures Japan over Diaoyu Islands, but warns against provoking China

President reassures Tokyo that US would come to its aid, but warns against provoking China

PUBLISHED : Thursday, 24 April, 2014, 11:11pm
UPDATED : Friday, 25 April, 2014, 4:39pm

US President Barack Obama yesterday treaded a diplomatic fine line as he reassured Japan that the US would come to its defence over territorial disputes with China, while also calling on Prime Minister Shinzo Abe not to escalate tensions.

In an overt display of unity and reassurance, Obama reiterated a message that Japan has been hoping to hear - that the two countries' mutual defence treaty would cover the uninhabited islands in the East China Sea that China calls the Diaoyus and Japan the Senkakus - but he also called on Beijing and Tokyo to resolve any disputes peacefully.

"And let me reiterate that our treaty commitment to Japan's security is absolute, and Article 5 covers all territories under Japan's administration, including the Senkaku Islands," he said after a summit with Abe in Tokyo.

While stressing America's neutral position on sovereignty claims, Obama said Tokyo had historically administered the islands and this should not be "subject to change unilaterally", referring to China's efforts to establish an administrative and military presence in the area.

Until recent years, Washington had been reluctant to publicly clarify its position should a conflict break out between Beijing and Tokyo over the islands.

But in a written interview with Japan's Yomiuri Shimbum published on Wednesday, Obama became the first serving US president to say that the islands were covered by the alliance treaty.

Japanese media reported that the same statement was expected to be included in a joint declaration between the two leaders. The declaration was delayed as negotiators from both countries were still trying to narrow their differences over the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement.

With tensions over the islands intensifying, the US has recently stepped up rhetorical support for Tokyo while criticising China for its "intimidation and coercion" in the disputed area.

Watch: Obama backs Japan in China island row

But Obama yesterday called on his Japanese counterpart to refrain from further provocation and seek dialogue with China.

"I emphasised with Prime Minister Abe the importance of resolving this issue peacefully - not escalating the situation, keeping the rhetoric low, not taking provocative actions, and trying to determine how both Japan and China can work co-operatively together," Obama said.

Obama is using his tour of Asia to reassure allies as bitter territorial disputes continue with an increasingly assertive China.


Related topics

More on this story

For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

As reported in the Nikkei Asian Reivew -****asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/Obama-demands-Japan-act-on-mending-South-Korean-ties, the story started with :"Using surprisingly harsh language to condemn Japan's wartime brothels, U.S. President Barack Obama on Friday urged Tokyo to squarely face its past and work toward improving relations with Seoul."
Not surprisingly, Abe;s mouthpiece NHK World omitted the comfort woman part.
Obama also said: "that the past is something that has to be recognized honestly and fairly"
My question for Obama is: why can't US also be honest and fair when it comes to the Diaoyu/Senkaku island dispute? Why the double standard?
Did Obama used the unusually harsh words because he did not get the TPP agreement from Abe?
It has been more than 50 years of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks and no breakthrough. The Israeli–Palestinian conflict has formed the core part of the wider Arab–Israeli conflict as well as terrorist plot against U.S. interests in the worldwide. So, should President Obama more focus on Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, instead of his strategic pivot to Asia?
China and the Chinese people have always viewed the United States as a friend, as shown by numerous surveys and studies over the years. In contrast, the US regards in no uncertain terms China as an adversary and enemy, and has recklessly resorted to adopt any means to contain China. Japan is one of America's pawns to contain China. But at the same time Japan is cunningly manipulating and using the US for its own hidden agenda. It would be hard for either China or Russia to be a friend of the United States when the US tries to contain China and Russia so relentlessly to the extent that nothing short of total subservience under the thumb of US will do.
I have not seen any country in which the US and EU got involved in what started as a local conflict have a good ending. Those countries are either in war torn, devastated by civil war or became economically destitute. Now the question in many people’s mind regarding Middle Eastern turmoil is if it is an Arabic spring or really an Arabic winter in hell.
Jennie PC Chiang/江佩珍 04/25/14 美國
Obama is just jealous of China's emerging power economically and cannot stand to bear the fact that someday soon, the USA might not have total global influence..................after your term is over dude, go back to someplace like the Harlem............then, you won't have to be jealous of anything anymore.
How About
Right on pslhk and hongkiejj@malay...! Read how in the home turf the New York Times is already condescending Hussein-O's failure before his trip ends. Remember LBJ who succeeded JFK who got through the Civil Rights Act at a hefty price, so too has BHO's Obamacare- that he must be compliant to what the puppeteers' calls to the rest of the policy.
To baysidedweller, words by this comedian is really cheap, and think nothing too significant will become of it, one way or the other. BHO still fully intends to collect his annual 200k pension after his term finishes.
What OB said in Tokyo never really matters
especially so as AF1 broadcast a final appraisal
of OB’s visit to Japan while it was en route to Seoul
“Nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to”
No administrative protection without TPP control
From Abe’s look in the photo
we may guess what BO had told him
that the US is ultimately just bluffing
Security is meaningful only in conventional situations
and would become irrelevant when conflicts are upgraded to nuclear
Then Japan would be on its own
Security of administration without sovereignty is meaningless
once nuclear annihilation becomes realistically very probable
The US can’t accept the risk of one percent hit in the US mainland
for Japan to usurp sovereignty of Diaoyu
Japan is confronted by the nonplus
that if it prevails in conventional conflicts
China will go nuclear and the US will retreat
As Japan can’t afford to prevail conventionally
there isn’t much Japan can do in the meantime
while China is building up the country's conventional capabilities
I would not read too much in this posturing and declaration by Obama which is expected. pretty old news as a matter of fact.
whatever it is, china n usa will continue to do what is best for their own interest. others are just on the sideline.
time is on china side and eventually, without a shot fired...china will prevail if they can fix and boost up their economy dominance while continue to enhance their military.
japan will have no choice but to back down ...either gracefully or war threat.
Well said...
the ultimate national interest of the US in east asia is preventing formation of Asian Union by wedging in ...as well as a heat war supposed to get involved with directly
Between containment and co-leadership
options so ably summarized by A Lo (23 April)
BO opts for consistency with its Cold War policy
In Europe, there are two post WW2 institutions
EU for internal control (starting with coal, steel, atomic energy)
and NATO as a US watchman against external threats
In west Pacific, the EUNATO function is under one cover
the USjap connection
Japan, “demilitarized” post WW2,
was made a watchman for the US
to serve US Cold War purposes
a function that’s becoming more and more difficult
against the historical irreversibility
of rising China and US decline
BO buys time by preserving the status quo
using TPP for economical control over Japan
and militarized Japan to check China’s ambition
Abe tries to gain back lost time
by instigating conflicts with China
to forge a JapUS tie that serve Japurposes
that it hopes would thwart China’s developments
and expedite it’s own rearmament
Peace is as likely as US ability to keep Nippan on a tight leash
while China and Japan have started an arms race
The most deadly weapon is not military but ideology
China’s economic situation couldn’t be worse than 1949 and 1960
but then China was militarily successful in Korea and the Himalayas
because the people not brainwashed by the west then
believed in the nation’s leadership
Mr.Obama forgotten what he criticized Mr.Putin on Annexation of Crimea, accussing the him of redrawing the world boundaries and now what he declared in Japan is comletely contradictory to his speech. Perhaps, he ahould need a caretaker to rwmind him that he is eating his words, most of the time!




SCMP.com Account