Increasing Militarisation in the Pacific Asian Region

Discussion of and voting on pressing world matters.
Post Reply
User avatar
Coin
Mise, Pangur Bán agus PILOT WHALES
Posts: 1457
Joined: 14:15:01 Thursday, 02 August, 2012

Increasing Militarisation in the Pacific Asian Region

Post by Coin » 19:54:57 Friday, 23 September, 2016

Image
The People's Republic of China is deeply concerned by the growth in rearmament across the Pacific region. As we have stated many times before, peaceful development is necessary for Asia to take her place in the world, and needless heightening of tensions helps noone within the Asian Pacific seaboard - only those further afield with an interest in war.

We call on nations in the Asian region not to be puppets to the bellicose agenda of certain actors.

We would further state to the delegates of the United Nations that China has no interest in heightening tensions in the region - and has taken no actions to change the military status quo. The Chinese government is aware that some have sought to paint us as such, which is nothing short of propaganda aimed at dividing an - in the main - peaceful continent and seaboard.

China therefore restates our defining goal in international relations to be - in common with our domestic agenda - harmonious development. In order to maintain the peace we have now, we warn against those seeking to isolate China diplomatically or strategically as shattering a mutually beneficial peace.
KR: Unie van Suid-Afrika
MG BoP: Medīnat Yisrā'el

User avatar
Useful Dave
Hoxhaist
Hoxhaist
Posts: 35
Joined: 19:19:41 Saturday, 20 August, 2016

Re: Increasing Militarisation in the Pacific Asian Region

Post by Useful Dave » 00:23:55 Monday, 26 September, 2016

Image
It is truly in the interests of all nations to strive for peaceful development over gains made at another's expense or gunboat diplomacy. As such, it is understandable that for a nation to flourish it must feel secure in it's borders of safety. This extends not only to China, but the multitude of other nations whom border the South China Sea. While as a nation, we as much as any have experienced the threat of naval aggression within the past century, that shouldn't prevent us from seeing where the other perspective may draw from.

When comparing navies, until the recent increase in warship construction, the People's Liberation Army Navy was triple the size of any contesting navy in the region. This is the status-quo which would be enforced were the region to return to it's state of earlier this year, and while we do not believe that the Chinese government has any intent to abuse such a status-quo, it paints a confusing picture that regional states merely following in the stead of their leader are 'heightening tensions' by doing so.

Perhaps, given the circumstances, our local states should come together to lay forth their individual concerns and mutual interests regarding the state of regional defence. Working in concert, and taking the Washington Naval Treaty as an example given it's fair division of naval re-armament by nation, Australia would be willing to play host to such a conference as a relatively neutral party. Setting a solid limit upon the construction of warships per nation would ensure that no state could hold a lead over others simply via placing excess funding into weapons of war.

User avatar
Serenissima
England Expects Every Man Will Do His Duty
Posts: 1151
Joined: 23:49:08 Wednesday, 17 April, 2013
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Increasing Militarisation in the Pacific Asian Region

Post by Serenissima » 11:44:29 Monday, 26 September, 2016

Image
Japan believes that talk of an "arms race" is, at best, unnecessary concern for a fantastical scenario. As the Australian delegate points out, the status quo is that the People's Republic of China maintains the second largest military force on Earth, and the largest land force by manpower ever raised since the Second World War: without even being at war mobilisation status, or, indeed, without even believing that the Asia-Pacific region is anything but a "peaceful continent and seaboard". We do not disagree that there is, in the main, peace in the region, but Japan seeks to maintain the capability to defend itself, just as China does. Japan hopes that such peace, stability and co-operation can be maintained in perpetuity with friendly relations between all nations in Asia - and indeed, the world. Nor do we believe or accuse China of having aggressive intentions, merely of having built the potential capability for aggression.

If this is the case, and an honest belief by the Chinese government, that military forces are an unnecessary anachronism, we call upon China to immediately reduce its standing military forces, as there is clearly no need to maintain such capabilities, in the eyes of the Chinese delegation. Japan will, for its part, be pleased to further support efforts for international peace, reconciliation, and disarmament even among conventional defensive capabilities, should China, and other Pacific nations, join us in the same effort in the spirit of multinational brotherhood and co-operation. But we cannot help but note that the People's Republic of China has, to date, refused to attend talks on peace and disarmament at the Hiroshima Conference. It seems that China supports the idea of others disarming, but will not even consider the thought of doing so itself. We support the Australian delegate's proposal for an arms limitation treaty in the Asia-Pacific region, provided that the proposed limitations be fair, bind China equally, and do not merely enforce an unbalanced, unsustainable status quo.

Japan also notes that our intentions, and reasons were doing so, were clearly communicated to the Chinese government before the Diet's constitutional reform programme was even legislatively introduced, and yet our diplomats received no response to our overtures of peace and efforts to manage the situation calmly and co-operatively. China has, instead, chosen to remain silent until now, engaged in no official communication with the Japanese government, and has rather chosen to make a rather passive-aggressive case to the United Nations, claiming to be nebulously threatened by unspecified parties and, in turn, threatening to even further build its already enormous military strength. The very attempt by China itself to make demands of those it clearly views as enemies, while maintaining its own strength and refusing to even consider attending the major international disarmament conference presently being arranged, is more responsible for heightening tensions than any action any other nation has taken.

We will say it now, in order to be absolutely clear, what we have said before, in our own diplomatic notes to the Chinese government some months ago. There is no threat to China from Japan, nor any other nation, and the idea that China is endangered or threatened by aggression from its neighbours, given the strategic situation, is, to put it mildly, ludicrous. The only present potential destabilising influence in the Asia-Pacific region is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea - and we are also forced to note that this government is closely aligned with China. There is no such destabilising influence in Europe, and yet the nations of the European Union frequently maintain significant military forces to guarantee their security and that of their interests - but this does not raise accusations of causing an unnecessary arms race, despite the lack of regional threats to peace in Europe along the same lines.

To put it simply, Japan - in the same way to China, with its own standing military forces - is merely exercising its rights to effective self-defence, as guaranteed in Chapter VII, Article 51 of the United Nations Charter - and, indeed, as arguably required, as per our ability, to do so by Chapter VII, Article 43. As our constitution now permits Japan's full participation in the responsibilities of a member of the United Nations and its peacekeeping mission, it is now allowed in our own law - and we would believe encouraged by the UN Charter - that we take up our responsibility for the world and gain the capability to do so.

That said, it would be inaccurate to say that our defence forces operate in the exact same way as China, as the constitution of Japan, even after its revision, renounces and prohibits the aggressive use of force by the reformed Japanese National Defence Force, as well as warfare and the threat of war by the state, as tools of international diplomacy. We would be eager to see such amendments in the constitution of the People's Republic of China, and other nations, as a better guarantee of security in the world, and the Asia-Pacific, than sabre-rattling by claiming an 'arms race' ever could be.
"Imagine lies, and then write them down in order. That is literally all authors do!"

Serenissima's WW2 BoP: The GM (obviously)
Metal Gear BoP: Japan
1971: Israel
Dawn of Worlds: Aaru, the Soulguide
Kaiserreich BoP: Canada

User avatar
Tellos
Stalinist
Stalinist
Posts: 308
Joined: 22:24:36 Sunday, 31 March, 2013

Re: Increasing Militarisation in the Pacific Asian Region

Post by Tellos » 19:29:18 Monday, 26 September, 2016

Image


The Russian Federation as a long standing partner of the PRC asks our friends what fears they have over the region specifically. The Japanese SDF is a military we all knew it and the idea that we hold them from having one by calling it a police force is silly. They have more than 300,000 active and reserve personnel last we checked. With ships as big as small carriers and fighter squadrons as well as a surface fleet. Are we to look at this and believe that by holding to a 61 year old treaty's idea of what to call it we limit it's capacity?
United States of America - BOP 1830

United States of America - BOP 1935

Russian Federation - BOP Metal Gear

User avatar
Coin
Mise, Pangur Bán agus PILOT WHALES
Posts: 1457
Joined: 14:15:01 Thursday, 02 August, 2012

Re: Increasing Militarisation in the Pacific Asian Region

Post by Coin » 21:53:59 Monday, 26 September, 2016

Image

Wang Guangya
王光亚


Image

Permanent Representative of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations
We thank the delegates of Russia, Australia and Japan for their contributions towards this important issue which we have brought before the United Nations. China bears a view different to what has been expressed, but with general agreement on certain points. However the analysis presented to delegates which attributes to China the responsibility for the very tensions we seek to defuse, is perhaps indicative of the incorrect information peddled against us.

We would specifically thank Russia for the opportunity to refute a myth that our concerns regard the change to the Japanese constitution. China is not in the business of interfering in the domestic affairs of other countries. Despite our rather obvious concern that a prime minister who prays at the controversial Yasukuni Shrine is committed to major naval rearmament - the constitution is not the issue here. China is not in the business of forcing the UN to debate whether or not Japan may change her constitution. We raise here moves towards an arms race in Asia - not the reclassification of pre-existing armed forces, which is Japan's prerogative. Further, despite what Japan claims, China does not view Japan or the Japanese people as an enemy - despite efforts to provoke us into doing so.

It would be proper at this point also, to correct a former speaker, and state that China is not the chief naval power in the region. The PLAN is a force built to defend Chinese territory and trade; never has it waged aggressive war or deployed abroad, and never would the PRC commit to such. It is admittedly a large force - as all China's armed forces are - but the Chinese population is the largest in the world! Our navy is not the largest in the region - that honour belongs to the USA. 8 American naval units of the USN are permanently stationed in the Pacific, not even a half of total US strength, and this discounts actively deployed air and army personnel from South Korea to Guam.

Have we a memory so short? Might China remind delegates, that the former US president and his administration plotted to destroy the peaceful and civilised rise of China and her economic development, by developing stealth nuclear warheads intended to wipe Beijing off the map. All nations condemned this. Is it truly "ludicrous" for China to raise concerns now, when nations closely aligned with Washington behave as they do? Concern at the doubling of Taiwanese naval forces, the stated wish of the Japanese government to expand to the size of at the least Chinese naval forces, US military expansion, and a deliberate campaign across the region which paints China as a danger. This is not at all to condemn all as being in the same vein as the former US president; quite the contrary, it is to call on them to see that they do not dance to a warmonger's tune.

Delegates, let me assert one-hundred-percent that China's international policy remains harmonious development. We are saddened at rhetoric deployed against China, but have raised the issue to seek to address slurs against our stated policy. Beijing will do her utmost to uphold peace - and in that desire, merely asks that other nations in the region do not needlessly hurtle us all towards an arms race. We are thus very willing to speak to our neighbours further on the issue of regional defence; but would be minded to suggest the USA be present also, as their absence would be in actuality - to quote our Japanese colleagues - ludicrous.
KR: Unie van Suid-Afrika
MG BoP: Medīnat Yisrā'el

User avatar
Serenissima
England Expects Every Man Will Do His Duty
Posts: 1151
Joined: 23:49:08 Wednesday, 17 April, 2013
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Increasing Militarisation in the Pacific Asian Region

Post by Serenissima » 19:57:00 Tuesday, 04 October, 2016

Image
Japan notes that China, while not having expanded its capacity, has no reason to do so, in any case, at least not on our account, as pointed out by the Russian delegation. Similarly, we also note that there has been no response from China to the Australian proposal for a specific conference and arms limitation treaty in the region, nor has China even been willing to attend the ongoing conference on disarmament of weapons of mass destruction at Hiroshima - and nor has the United States, for that matter, which is deeply disappointing and concerning.

We have heard many words assuring peaceful intentions, and asking for trust - and spoken many of the same ourselves. Japan asks for the same respect in this matter - trust - that China desires. Nevertheless, as an outstretched hand of conciliation, and to take the first steps, we announce that there will be no further increase in size of the JNDF, in order to show our commitment to peace, and the same defence of our nation and its trade that China enjoys. This is an interim declaration, pending the signing of a formally-agreed treaty on the subject of arms limitation, in order to assuage Chinese concerns of an arms race. We trust that a fair and reasonable arrangement can be made between us all, that recognises the right of all Asian nations to self-defence.
"Imagine lies, and then write them down in order. That is literally all authors do!"

Serenissima's WW2 BoP: The GM (obviously)
Metal Gear BoP: Japan
1971: Israel
Dawn of Worlds: Aaru, the Soulguide
Kaiserreich BoP: Canada

User avatar
Coin
Mise, Pangur Bán agus PILOT WHALES
Posts: 1457
Joined: 14:15:01 Thursday, 02 August, 2012

Re: Increasing Militarisation in the Pacific Asian Region

Post by Coin » 14:30:13 Thursday, 06 October, 2016

Image

Wang Guangya
王光亚


Image

Permanent Representative of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations
The naval rearmament of Japan, a realm in close alliance with the USA, the chief naval power in the Pacific Region since the defeat of Japan and a power with whom China momentarily fought half a century ago, scarcely strikes us as being irrelevant to Chinese naval capacities? Nonetheless, we welcome the move by Japan to end her shipbuilding programme. Will this extend towards the four units already under construction?

I have already stated that our government is very willing to speak on the matter with regional partners.
KR: Unie van Suid-Afrika
MG BoP: Medīnat Yisrā'el

User avatar
Serenissima
England Expects Every Man Will Do His Duty
Posts: 1151
Joined: 23:49:08 Wednesday, 17 April, 2013
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Increasing Militarisation in the Pacific Asian Region

Post by Serenissima » 16:34:30 Thursday, 06 October, 2016

Coin wrote:
Image

Wang Guangya
王光亚


Image

Permanent Representative of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations
The naval rearmament of Japan, a realm in close alliance with the USA, the chief naval power in the Pacific Region since the defeat of Japan and a power with whom China momentarily fought half a century ago, scarcely strikes us as being irrelevant to Chinese naval capacities? Nonetheless, we welcome the move by Japan to end her shipbuilding programme. Will this extend towards the four units already under construction?

I have already stated that our government is very willing to speak on the matter with regional partners.
Once again, we see that the Chinese government is incapable of dealing with reality, and the present, instead calling repeatedly upon events not only not within the lifetime of the majority of people in the world, but not even in the lifetime of the parents of the majority of the people in the world. Japan has no hostile intentions, nor the capability for an attack on China, nor any intention to develop such capability at any time - and, indeed, our constitution prohibits the aggressive use of force and renounces the threat of force as a tool of government policy. With unstable, aggressive states such as North Korea as our neighbours in the region, it would, however, be foolish to remain defenceless, or to rely on the military strength of distant third parties. We had presumed that China would agree that security in Asia should be the responsibility of Asian nations, not the United States - but apparently, despite the complaints, the People's Republic would rather see a continued American presence.

Nevertheless, the answer to the Chinese query is no, unless China itself commits to reducing its own naval strength in equal measure as China is demanding of us - that is, by fifty percent. A call to maintain the status quo is simply a call to maintain the idea that only China may be permitted to have the capability to defend itself effectively. The current Chinese policy is deeply flawed and high-handed, with one rule for China and another for everyone else, and this entire debacle could easily have been avoided had the Chinese government been willing to discuss matters when invited, rather than attempting to gain political advantage through this debate in the UN General Assembly. As noted, however, we are open to a formal arms limitation treaty along fair and equitable terms, and would therefore welcome talks along the lines of the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922.
"Imagine lies, and then write them down in order. That is literally all authors do!"

Serenissima's WW2 BoP: The GM (obviously)
Metal Gear BoP: Japan
1971: Israel
Dawn of Worlds: Aaru, the Soulguide
Kaiserreich BoP: Canada

User avatar
Coin
Mise, Pangur Bán agus PILOT WHALES
Posts: 1457
Joined: 14:15:01 Thursday, 02 August, 2012

Re: Increasing Militarisation in the Pacific Asian Region

Post by Coin » 20:57:02 Thursday, 06 October, 2016

Image

Wang Guangya
王光亚


Permanent Representative of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations
I would reply only for the sake of the more well-mannered discourse from the non-Japanese contributors, who would I am sure appreciate a confirmation of the Chinese government's position.

The quite clear fact is - by virtue of the continued and entrenched security cooperation and the renewed alliance with the United States - that Japanese rearmament on the intended scale is not an item to be seen in isolation. Particularly as it comes so soon after the US had plotted to destroy Beijing in service of a regional war, it is inconceivable for any impartial observer to feel that China would not be extremely concerned by such moves, coupled with the remilitarisation across the region by US-aligned realms. This is in addition to the tone of Japanese diplomatic discourse regarding China, in the open and in private. China supports peace on the Korean peninsula as in all areas; the recent moves will only further scupper hopes for peace in this most sensitive of areas.

Our position regardless of Japan's attempts at provoking us into abandoning discourse, remains the same regarding any regional armament discussion.

Finally, it saddens us to have to reply to Japan - a nation which by virtue of the belligerence of her leaders lost countless souls to bullets, bombs, starvation, and nuclear destruction in the 20th century - regarding her opening comments. As Japan was the aggressor in that time, perhaps the Japanese representative would prefer all forgot the wars our fathers fought against imperialism - but for us, these struggles are not to be cast aside, nor the lessons of that dark period in world history ignored or airbrushed from history books.
KR: Unie van Suid-Afrika
MG BoP: Medīnat Yisrā'el

User avatar
Serenissima
England Expects Every Man Will Do His Duty
Posts: 1151
Joined: 23:49:08 Wednesday, 17 April, 2013
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Increasing Militarisation in the Pacific Asian Region

Post by Serenissima » 22:21:33 Thursday, 06 October, 2016

Coin wrote:
Image

Wang Guangya
王光亚


Permanent Representative of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations
I would reply only for the sake of the more well-mannered discourse from the non-Japanese contributors, who would I am sure appreciate a confirmation of the Chinese government's position.

The quite clear fact is - by virtue of the continued and entrenched security cooperation and the renewed alliance with the United States - that Japanese rearmament on the intended scale is not an item to be seen in isolation. Particularly as it comes so soon after the US had plotted to destroy Beijing in service of a regional war, it is inconceivable for any impartial observer to feel that China would not be extremely concerned by such moves, coupled with the remilitarisation across the region by US-aligned realms. This is in addition to the tone of Japanese diplomatic discourse regarding China, in the open and in private. China supports peace on the Korean peninsula as in all areas; the recent moves will only further scupper hopes for peace in this most sensitive of areas.

Our position regardless of Japan's attempts at provoking us into abandoning discourse, remains the same regarding any regional armament discussion.

Finally, it saddens us to have to reply to Japan - a nation which by virtue of the belligerence of her leaders lost countless souls to bullets, bombs, starvation, and nuclear destruction in the 20th century - regarding her opening comments. As Japan was the aggressor in that time, perhaps the Japanese representative would prefer all forgot the wars our fathers fought against imperialism - but for us, these struggles are not to be cast aside, nor the lessons of that dark period in world history ignored or airbrushed from history books.
China has been a victim of terrible and unjustified Japanese aggression in the past. This, we do not deny, and we have apologised for many times, including, in February of this year, by our own Emperor, comprehensively and finally. Japan's past features many shameful episodes that are not in keeping with the ethics and character of the modern Japanese nation - which is why we have renounced aggression and threats of war in our very Constitution. We have not forgotten, nor ignored or 'airbrushed' anything. Consequently, we recognise the reasons that China feels the need to have a robust defensive military capability, and do not deny it, hence our support for the Australian proposal for an arms limitation treaty, which would, we hope, establish a fair and equitable basis for defence in Asia.

We must make two points, however: firstly, Japan is not the United States, and, if such allegations that the US were planning to destroy Beijing - for all evidence seems to point to this being the intention of terrorists, rather than US policy - were proven true, then Japan would strongly condemn such plans or actions as harmful to peace, and reconsider our relations with the United States even further than we already have done in altering the terms of our relationship, to no longer be subordinate to the United States policy in the defence of our own nation. Secondly, it seems we have learned different lessons from the mistakes of the past. We have learned of international co-operation, of democracy, of peaceful negotiation and the rule of law to prevent such terrible events occurring again. We do not know what China has learned, but given the Chinese constitution and policy, it does not seem to be the same lessons.

Japan intends not to 'provoke China into abandoning discourse', but to implore China to discourse on reasonable terms. China cannot sit by, wielding enormous nuclear armaments and refusing to even consider attending peace conferences on the subject, maintaining the second most powerful military on Earth - and by far the largest by manpower and equipment - and claim that it is other nations in Asia that are the only problem, and that others maintaining their own UN-sanctioned defensive capabilities as they deem necessary. Furthermore, they claim that allies are not relevant when referring to China's allies, but are when related to other nations. As has been said and will be again re-iterated, the capability for aggression against China on the part of other Asian nations simply does not exist, nor will it exist, in any feasible sense. Japan, and we are sure, other nations, seek only to enjoy the same rights of self-defence and the capability to do so that China does.
"Imagine lies, and then write them down in order. That is literally all authors do!"

Serenissima's WW2 BoP: The GM (obviously)
Metal Gear BoP: Japan
1971: Israel
Dawn of Worlds: Aaru, the Soulguide
Kaiserreich BoP: Canada

User avatar
Coin
Mise, Pangur Bán agus PILOT WHALES
Posts: 1457
Joined: 14:15:01 Thursday, 02 August, 2012

Re: Increasing Militarisation in the Pacific Asian Region

Post by Coin » 20:26:47 Thursday, 13 October, 2016

SpoilerShow
Serenissima wrote:China has been a victim of terrible and unjustified Japanese aggression in the past. This, we do not deny, and we have apologised for many times, including, in February of this year, by our own Emperor, comprehensively and finally. Japan's past features many shameful episodes that are not in keeping with the ethics and character of the modern Japanese nation - which is why we have renounced aggression and threats of war in our very Constitution. We have not forgotten, nor ignored or 'airbrushed' anything. Consequently, we recognise the reasons that China feels the need to have a robust defensive military capability, and do not deny it, hence our support for the Australian proposal for an arms limitation treaty, which would, we hope, establish a fair and equitable basis for defence in Asia.

We must make two points, however: firstly, Japan is not the United States, and, if such allegations that the US were planning to destroy Beijing - for all evidence seems to point to this being the intention of terrorists, rather than US policy - were proven true, then Japan would strongly condemn such plans or actions as harmful to peace, and reconsider our relations with the United States even further than we already have done in altering the terms of our relationship, to no longer be subordinate to the United States policy in the defence of our own nation. Secondly, it seems we have learned different lessons from the mistakes of the past. We have learned of international co-operation, of democracy, of peaceful negotiation and the rule of law to prevent such terrible events occurring again. We do not know what China has learned, but given the Chinese constitution and policy, it does not seem to be the same lessons.

Japan intends not to 'provoke China into abandoning discourse', but to implore China to discourse on reasonable terms. China cannot sit by, wielding enormous nuclear armaments and refusing to even consider attending peace conferences on the subject, maintaining the second most powerful military on Earth - and by far the largest by manpower and equipment - and claim that it is other nations in Asia that are the only problem, and that others maintaining their own UN-sanctioned defensive capabilities as they deem necessary. Furthermore, they claim that allies are not relevant when referring to China's allies, but are when related to other nations. As has been said and will be again re-iterated, the capability for aggression against China on the part of other Asian nations simply does not exist, nor will it exist, in any feasible sense. Japan, and we are sure, other nations, seek only to enjoy the same rights of self-defence and the capability to do so that China does.
Image

Wang Guangya
王光亚


Permanent Representative of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations
China once more restates her being open towards proposed discussions on the arms situation in the Asia-Pacific region, for the third time. It is not surprising - given their rhetoric of painting China, the nation which has sought to raise the very issue of regional militarisation to encourage states to resist an arms race, as a threat to excuse a peculiar obsession with military power projection - that Japan would seek to misrepresent our views on the matter, but we trust that by reaffirming our position, other representatives and indeed the Japanese public will not be misled.

Japan and China quite clearly do not see eye to eye on a multitude of subjects. However the misrepresentation of the Chinese position is not only bad form, but condusive solely to further division . On the threat to regional peace posed by a united policy of rearmament and militarisation, the continued false propaganda employed against us diplomatically, and the attempt to misrepresent our position, sidetracking our legimitate concern over the present route of hawkish elements in specific foreign political systems, we have made our position clear. We can only hope that the truth of our position is more apparent to representatives across the world, than to Japan - for none of us should desire an arms race in this 21st century, ignoring the lessons of the past.
KR: Unie van Suid-Afrika
MG BoP: Medīnat Yisrā'el

Post Reply

Return to “The United Nations”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest