Falklands’ conflict erupts as example for current Japan/China clash over disputed islands

Friday, August 30th 2013 - 23:30 UTC

Full article 12 comments

Japan’s outspoken Finance minister and Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso said that the Japanese government needs to make it clear that they intend to defend the Senkaku Islands from whatever invading force. This is to avoid what happened to the Falkland Islands when Argentine troops triggered a war with British forces by landing on the disputed islands in 1982. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules

Britworker
There is a bit if a difference between some rocks no-one lives on and islands which were settled and inhabited long before the aggressor country existed. There is no correlation between the Falklands whatsoever.
In any event, we are not concerned about Argentinas rusting military, they can't even sail out of port. Whereas Japan has a slightly different problem with China's military lol.
Aug 31st, 2013 - 04:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
LEPRecon
This Japan Daily News really is talking out of it's arse and making stuff up, or maybe it's just reporting stuff made up by Japanese politicians.

“Aso told the parliamentary in Yokohama that Britain failed to inform Argentina that it was deploying forces to the Islands to protect it and as a result, Argentina invaded the Falklands, located off their southern coastline.”

The British always had a contingent of Royal Marines on the Islands, normally not more that about 40 at a time.

There was no sudden movement of troops to the area, if there had it's doubtful Argentina would've had the guts to invade, with them being monumental cowards and all. Very brave against unarmed civilians, not so brave when the 'enemy' can shoot back at them.

@1 Britworker

I agree with your post. The Japanese/Chinese situation is completely different to the Falklands situation.
Aug 31st, 2013 - 05:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
GeoffWard2
The message that the Japanese take from the Falklands of 1982 is that if you don't overtly show your determination to defend, than you are seen as offering up the lands as a gift to those wishing to take it.

But it gets progressively more costly to both parties as more and more resources are thrown into protection and threat.
It easily gets out of hand when the paradigm becomes 'national pride'.
Aug 31st, 2013 - 06:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
ljb
“”According to Japan Daily News, Aso told the parliamentary in Yokohama that Britain failed to inform Argentina that it was deploying forces to the Islands to protect it and as a result, Argentina invaded the Falklands,“”

Not quite true. Argentine knew there were Royal Marines on the Falklands, they knew the Falklands were British, and they still invaded. The invasion had nothing to do with land dispute, but had everything to do with hiding the domestic situation in Argentina. A bit like now.
Aug 31st, 2013 - 08:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Britworker
@3
Do you seriously think we won't relinquish sovereignty due to national pride? We have a duty to protect the Islands and the British subjects which live there, it isn't a choice for the UK. They have as much right to be British in the Falklands as I do in Manchester and we should both expect the same protection.
Colonialism is long gone, all that matters is self-determination.
Aug 31st, 2013 - 10:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Conqueror
@5 It's very important to remember that Gibraltar is a UN “trust” territory. Gibraltar is the same. In each case, Britain is the trustee. I can't find any indication that handing the territory to another state is an acceptable course of action. The trust territories are to be guided to self government. It's right there in Chapter XI. Incidentally, taking a look at Article 74, it appears that argieland is in breach of the Charter. Anyone surprised?
Aug 31st, 2013 - 10:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Pete Bog
I can see something in what the Japanese say. The planned withdrawal of Endurance in 1982 by arse brain Knott and the failure to suggest 'if you invade, this will happen,'( as opposed to the leaked info in 1977 of a sub and Alacrity et al around the South Atlantic, which cancelled a planned Argie invasion), encouraged the Argentines to invade.
But there is a difference in the situations as the Argie claim is the product of an over active imagination and bullsh1t unproved by history.
Aug 31st, 2013 - 12:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Briton
If you do not learn from past mistakes,

You are prone to repeat them,

We won’t make the same mistake over the Falkland’s,
Let’s hope we don’t make the mistake in Gibraltar, only then to be repeated..
Still,
The way Spain is dropping,
Perhaps Britain could end the problem and just buy it…lol.
.
Aug 31st, 2013 - 03:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
brasherboot
The Chinese hate the Japs for the rape of Nanking and other war crines like Unit 731. Worse still the Japs are in denial. They will use an example of a legitimate British defence for their own purposes and to enhance their self image to try to legitimise their longer term issues with China.

Make no mistake until Japan somehow mitigates its war crimes against China the propensity for economic/military friction is high.

Whereas Argentina is an aggressor with no teeth, no legitimacy and weak - now and long term.
Aug 31st, 2013 - 08:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
RICO
People assume that the Argentines are cowards but to be fair to them they had a military force of over 100,000 so they held back by only using 10,000 troops with air support, armour and heavy weapons to attack an island of unarmed civilians and 40 marines with small arms. So back then they were much braver than they are now.

Now they have 70,000 military personnel in their Army and their entire government and military forces were left a quivering yellow wreck when they heard Prince William was bringing his unarmed search and rescue helicopter to the Islands. They feared he was coming in the uniform of the conqueror to invade the whole of South America.

So in 1982 10,000 Argentine soldiers were needed to defeat 40 British Marines, by the 21st C, 70,000 Argentine soldiers were insufficient to defend against one unarmed royal. Their cowardice is growing.
Sep 01st, 2013 - 10:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Pete Bog
@10 The sigh of relief in Argentina by their armed forces when William flew home must have been accompanied by cheers as they celebrated not having to fight him. Judging by the way he put his Sea King hovering just above some rock pools in July at Shell Island-waiting to fly a lad to hospital-showed some great flying.
Sep 01st, 2013 - 05:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Martin Woodhead
Most of a Japan knows very little about its behaviour During WW2 due to the cold war and the US needing a reliable base hence its politicions coming out with utterly stupid stuff.
Not that the japanese people didnt suffer for their own idiotic military junta burned en masse by incendary raids straved by blocade and even japenese soldiers were treated by thier own side little better than the POWS
Sep 02nd, 2013 - 05:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!