The Senkaku or Diaoyu Islands Dispute

The Senkaku or Diaoyu Islands Dispute
The Senkaku or Diaoyu Islands Dispute
International relationships can be explained in three basic theories, realism, liberalism and constructivism. The theory of liberalism rejects the idea and impact of politics in relationships while encouraging international cooperation and organization. The theory of constructivism believes that international relationships are constructed from historical and social relationships built between nations with time. The theory of realism stresses that world politics play an important role in the classification of international conflicts between countries. Defensive realism emphasizes the impact of hierarchical power plays a role in establishing a relationship between countries. Offensive realism believes in the use of force and power through domination to achieve security. Both the Chinese and Japanese powers believe in the need to dominate their rivals to attain supremacy. This paper highlights how realism is demonstrated in the Sekanku or Diaoyu conflict between China and Japan and shows that while the theory is not impactful, it best explains the current state of the dispute.
Japan and China are economic giants in the Far East known for their common tension throughout the different ages of civilization. Research indicates that the community exploited the islands in sheltering their kingdoms against an inversion from the clans of the Japanese early settlements (Sato, 2019). The Qing Dynasty also had similar instances of war resulting in the defeat of the Chinese side hence the Japanese took the islands from them. There has been a series of civil wars over the islands between the two states in the past over regional waters and land around these islands. In 1943, before the end of the Second World War, the Cairo Agreement attempted to bring about peace between the two countries by advocating the return of the conflicting areas to their original owners. Hence in 1945, the Japanese government agreed to the Cairo declaration to return the islands to the Chinese side. The military evaluation has proven that these islets are useless for military activity and are too small to be inhabited (Swaine, n.d.). There is not a quite distinct reason to explain why these islands have remained contested grounds between the two countries. The conflict over the ownership of the island and the islets has a long history of tension in the region since past civilizations, a mystery that has never been solved.
The dispute between the two countries tightened when the Japanese bought the islands from Washington, leading to the claim of ownership of the islands too. This has led to the rampant activity of the islands even though the crisis between the country and China is not resolved yet. Looking at it from a protective angle, the Japanese naval fleet arrested a trawler from the area near the islands belonging to a Chinese fisherman (Kim, 2018). It can be noted that comments from leaders in the Japanese government are a clear indication that they are just beginning to protect their territory even with military action. This concept of acquiring ownership of the islands created a new course for the conflict between the two countries. It can be argued from the realists’ perspective that Japanese people wanted to gain superiority over the islands by simply acquiring them from Washington. This will leave the Chinese with no defense over the islands if the transaction was completed successfully. By buying the islands the Japanese people will have full control of the islands.
The implications of the world wars especially World War II is still very fresh in the minds of the two rivals. The aftermath of the war created a lot of rifts and imbalance in the two countries in terms of regional and local development as well as the economic status of the nations. The fresh results are still eminent and the two countries are not ready to take in another attack from the wars bigger than their civil wars of the 19th century and late 20th century (Ling & Nakamura, 2019). Despite that, none of the two countries is willing to be the root cause of another regional war that will draw attention from the United Nations and their allies. For this reason, each of the two countries is being very careful not to be the first to shoot at the opponent's military vessels. It can be possibly urged from the idea that the islands will provide a sense of control over the sea route controlled by the two islands making it almost difficult for the Chinese army to use the islands to take cover during the war as did the ancient Chinese populations in the Ming dynasty. Owning the islands will give either country military superiority over their counterparts.
The impact of a war is very unpredictable especially if the opponents do not understand the real situation they are up against. Being superpowers on the Eastern side of Asia, the two are unsure of their enemy war strength and evaluation and studying such classified information may take long enough to wait for the wartime. This means that opponents will have to take their time to make the best of choices if they have to go to war. The Chinese government has given the Japanese a window for negotiation to save the region from getting into the war. For this reason, the Chinese are tending to be a little focused on negotiations rather than war at the moment (Weingand, 2009). According to the theory of realism, the Japanese are not willing to settle down the issue with negotiation because they do not want to appear weaker and lenient to the ideas proposed by the Chinese hence fueling the cold war to escalate.
The tension between the tw...