U.S. believes Japan-U.S. security treaty covers disputed isles

[Korean]

U.S. believes Japan-U.S. security treaty covers disputed isles - Japan foreign minister | Reuters

U.S. believes Japan-U.S. security treaty covers disputed isles - Japan foreign minister

TOKYO | Mon Sep 17, 2012 4:27am BST
(Reuters) - Japanese Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba said on Monday Tokyo and Washington agree that disputed East China Sea islets claimed by Japan and China are covered by the Japan-U.S. security treaty.

"I did not bring up the topic today, but it is mutually understood between Japan and the United States that (the islands) are covered by the treaty," Gemba told reporters after meeting U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta in Tokyo.

 

[kawaraj]

Thanks for mentioning this.

The treaty also covers Takeshima Islands.

 

[Korean]

Thanks for mentioning this.

The treaty also covers Takeshima Island.

Actually it doesn't cover the Liancourt Rocks and the Kurils, because the treaty only covers territories where the Japanese administration extends. The recently revised Japanese coast guard law confirms this, where the coast guard jurisdiction applies to Diaoyudai but not the Liancourt Rocks and the Kurils.

This is why the Diaoyudai is covered but the Liancourt Rocks and Kurils are not. The Liancourt Rocks actually falls under the scope of the Korea-US defense treaty.

 

[kawaraj]

Actually it doesn't cover the Liancourt Rocks and the Kurils, because the treaty only covers territories where the Japanese administration extends. The recently revised Japanese coast guard law confirms this, where the coast guard jurisdiction applies to Diaoyudai but not the Liancourt Rocks and the Kurils.

This is why the Diaoyudai is covered but the Liancourt Rocks and Kurils are not. The Liancourt Rocks actually falls under the scope of the Korea-US defense treaty.

do you know US S.Korea treaty is considered subpart of US Japan Treaty?

Under US-Japan alliance, the whole Sea of Japan is guarded and Takeshima is part of it.

 

[ahfatzia]

"I did not bring up the topic today, but it is mutually understood between Japan and the United States that (the islands) are covered by the treaty," Gemba told reporters after meeting U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta in Tokyo.


One can only assumes.

 

[Korean]

do you know US S.Korea treaty is considered subpart of US Japan Treaty?

It isn't.

Under US-Japan alliance, the whole Sea of Japan is guarded and Takeshima is part of it.

See for yourself.
【尖閣国有化】海保のè*¦å¯Ÿæ¨©è¡Œä½¿å¯èƒ½ãªï¼‘９カ所を官å*±å‘Šç¤ºã€ç«¹å³¶ã¯é™¤å¤– - MSN産経ニュース

海保の警察権行使可能な１９カ所を官報告示、竹島は除外
2012.9.15 00:44 ［尖閣諸島問題］
　海上保安庁と警察庁は１４日、法改正により、海上保安官が警察権を行使できるようになる３都県の島や諸島計１９カ所を官報に告示した。沖縄県・尖閣諸島は含まれるが、島根県の竹島や北方領土は「外国の実効支配下にあり、法の執行が事実上不可能なため」として除外した。

The Liancourt Rocks and Kurils are specifically excluded from the jurisdiction of Japan's coastguard and police under the September 14th revision of Japan's maritime law. The Japanese law says Japan's coastguard and police don't have jurisdiction over the Liancourt Rocks, so why the hell do you think Americans would be there?

Heck, the only Americans operating over the Liancourt Rocks are the jets from US Forces Korea, because the airspace over the Liancourt Rocks falls under the Korea Air Defense Identification Zone defined by the US DoD in 1952.

 

[kawaraj]

【尖閣国有化】海保のè*¦å¯Ÿæ¨©è¡Œä½¿å¯èƒ½ãªï¼‘９カ所を官å*±å‘Šç¤ºã€ç«¹å³¶ã¯é™¤å¤– - MSN産経ニュース
The Liancourt Rocks and Kurils are specifically excluded from the jurisdiction of Japan's coastguard and police under the September 14th revision of Japan's maritime law. The Japanese law says Japan's coastguard and police don't have jurisdiction over the Liancourt Rocks, so why the hell do you think Americans would be there?

Heck, the only Americans operating over the Liancourt Rocks are the jets from US Forces Korea, because the airspace over the Liancourt Rocks falls under the Korea Air Defense Identification Zone defined by the US DoD in 1952.

You misunderstand the military sphere and civilian sphere.

grown up from a Korean kid you better learn more common sense than this poisoning propaganda from Kindergarden,

 

[Korean]

You misunderstand the military sphere and civilian sphere.

There is no mistake. JADIZ also excludes the Liancourt Rocks, KADIZ includes the Liancourt Rocks. Thus the SDF has no responsibility to defend the Liancourt Rocks from anything under the Japanese law, it is none of their business.

So Japan has no jurisdiction over the Liancourt Rocks both in either military and civilian laws.

 

[kawaraj]

I think your assumption is wrong in the first place.

Takeshimas or Liancourt Rocks are part of Japan territory.

 

[Korean]

I think your assumption is wrong in the first place.

It is not an assumption, but a fact.

Takeshimas or Liancourt Rocks are part of Japan territory.

Too bad the USA didn't agree back in 1952, because it was the US DoD which drew the KADIZ line over the Liancourt Rocks, and Japan accepted the US decision by drawing the JADIZ along the KADIZ line in 1967 to exclude the Liancourt Rocks.

And you can see the official US position by their actions. When Japanese Foreign Ministry officials visited the US State Department to support its bid to take the case to the ICJ, the US State Department flat out rejected the ICJ bid, saying that this must be handled bilaterally instead of going to the ICJ as asked by Japan. And you know what would happen if this was to be handled bilaterally, going nowhere.

 

[kawaraj]

Too bad the USA didn't agree back in 1952, because it was the US DoD which drew the KADIZ line over the Liancourt Rocks, and Japan accepted the US decision by drawing the JADIZ along the KADIZ line in 1967 to exclude the Liancourt Rocks.

And you can see this from the US stance on the islands. When Japanese Foreign Ministry officials visited the US State Department to support its bid to take the case to the ICJ, the US State Department flat out rejected the ICJ bid, saying that this must be handled bilaterally.

that's a convenience that to keep the alliance in the hype of Soviets invasion back in 1960s.

the US didn't recognize Takeshimas is Korean territory, which is so obviously clear.

 

[Korean]

the US didn't recognize Takeshimas is Korean territory, which is so obviously clear.

Surely it did, by drawing the KADIZ around the Liancourt Rocks in 1952 and listing the Liancourt Rocks as Korean territory upto the 4th revision of the San Francisco Treaty. Even today, its the US Forces Korea jets that drill around the Liancourt Rocks, not the US Forces Japan and the Liancourt Rocks falls under the jurisdiction of the US Forces Korea if something was to happen.

 

[kawaraj]

Surely it did, by drawing the KADIZ around the Liancourt Rocks in 1952 and listing the Liancourt Rocks as Korean territory upto the 4th revision of the San Francisco Treaty. Even today, its the US Forces Korea jets that drill around the Liancourt Rocks, not the US Forces Japan and the Liancourt Rocks falls under the jurisdiction of the US Forces Korea if something was to happen.

you just can make thing out of nothing, nice kindergarden education.

US takes no position on Takeshima dispute - Silobreaker

 

[Korean]

you just can make thing out of nothing, nice kindergarden education.

Well, the US says it takes no position on the Diaoyudai dispute. Does that mean the US will do nothing when China invades the Diaoyudai? Is that what you want to see happen? No. The US will intervene.

The same thing with the Liancourt Rocks. The Liancourt Rocks falls under the US-Korea mutual defense treaty and the US will "intervene" should Japan decide to settle the matter by a military action.

 

[oct605032048]

People have serious business to do here. Little baby SKorean should step aside and play with your sticks.

Well, the US says it takes no position on the Diaoyudai dispute. Does that mean the US will do nothing when China invades the Diaoyudai? Is that what you want to see happen? No. The US will intervene.

The same thing with the Liancourt Rocks. The Liancourt Rocks falls under the US-Korea mutual defense treaty and the US will "intervene" should Japan decide to settle the matter by a military action.