In Japan, there is a decent amount of buzz over the leaked Diaoyutai or Senkaku video taken by the Japanese coast guard. Here is Japan Time’s report (“China ‘concerned’ over YouTube video; Tokyo probes Senkaku ship collision upload“) and China’s reaction (“Video cannot conceal Japan’s illegal actions“).
The video is very sensitive in Japan, and according to the Japan Time’s article, there likely will be some sort of criminal investigation over the leak. Bear in mind, even their lawmakers are exposed only to edited clips, as the article said:
On Monday, a limited group of lawmakers from the ruling and opposition parties were allowed to view six minutes and 50 seconds of edited footage taken by the coast guard.
If you had just viewed the video, at first glance, it appears the fishing boat purposely ram into the Japanese coast guard vessels. But look carefully at the initial collision and pay attention to the Japanese vessel’s trail; it appears the coast guard ship had encircled the fishing boat to block.
As for the second collision, it is very difficult to tell. The key is to look at the water trails left by the ships. The trail that is most aggressive is the one that is least straight.
Of course, I am no expert. The video itself is edited. So far, the Japanese government have refused to share the entire 45 minutes [update, according to this Japan Today article, several hours] with the Chinese government. Even the six minutes and 50 seconds shown to her own lawmakers were edited.
The bottom line for me?
If the video itself proves that the Japanese coast guard ships were more at fault, that would be a big blow to the Japanese government position over this specific collision.
This is what the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said:
“I would like to reiterate that the Japanese patrol boats had disturbed, driven away, intercepted, surrounded the Chinese fishing boat, which led to the collision.”
Anyways, it is obvious the “pro-China” perspective is going to interpret the video as I have. It is obvious the “pro-Japan” camp is going to interpret the video exactly as reported by the Japan Time’s article.
At the end, this incident will come to pass. The bigger issue is still to find a solution to this dispute over the islands. Both governments will have to work hard to ensure citizens on both sides remain calm.
As we have written in the past over this issue – there are vested interests in seeing this incident spiraling downward. The governments will need to manage against that.
Allen says
I just fired my trusty time machine 2000 and took myself back in time. There is no doubt whatsoever that the Japanese tried to ram the Chinese fishing boat – the problem was that the Japanese boat mistimed badly, with the Captain misjudging how slow the Chinese boat actually was, thus overshooting the Chinese boat, the offending Japanese ship then got rammed by the slow Chinese boat instead … needlessly causing this International incident.
That’s my attempt at entertainment for the week… 😉
xian says
Bah, Asian unity set back decades over minor conflict…
Chops says
Next time, there could be a flotilla of Chinese boats heading towards the islands,
and the Japan Coast Guard would have to call in the navy.
r v says
1st, maritime and navigation laws say the SLOWER vehicle (the Chinese trawler) has the right of way.
2nd, they were not “rammings”, as they were more “bumps”.
There were hardly any dents, even on the Chinese vessel. (It’s not like the fishing boat is made of depleted uranium shards, designed to shred a poor coast guard ship, at a Kamikaze speed.)
silentchinese says
The JCG ships has GPS aided steering and pump jet propulsion.
They can go 30+kts , turn on a dime, or stop hovering above a single coordinates point in rough seas.
they can do circles around the trawlers.
most likely that JCG ships gave chase to the Chinese trawler, and made sure they were in Diaoyudao territorial waters, and then cut the trawler off. manufactured incident.
r v says
In analysis of the video, one must remember the point of view of the camera.
From the JCG ship’s point of view, the Chinese trawler hit it.
But the JCG ship wasn’t standing still. It was moving along side the Chinese trawler and overtaking it in speed. Which means, it cut the slower Chinese ship off.
The wake of the 2 ships seem to also indicate that.
YinYang says
@r v,
Exactly.
I think the videos actually are incriminating for the JCG, and that’s the reason why the Japanese government has thus far refused to release it. If it were the other way around, they wouldn’t let the Chinese captain go.
If we look from Japanese ultra-nationalist perspective, they view JCG’s harassment of the fishing trawler as “just.” The videos fit that mold of thinking. But the Japanese government is smarter than that. Hence the leak is an issue.
Jeff says
Are you guys even watching the same video?
#1 The Chinese vessel is clearly making a turn to port for at least 16 seconds with no attempt to turn away. They are obviously attempting to collide with the JCG vessel.
The Japanese ship would need to accelerate greatly and make a sharp port turn to avoid but would risk taking a direct hit to the stern which might expose the propellers to damage.
#2 The Chinese vessel is traveling straight for about 18 seconds and makes a sharp turn to port in order to collide with the Japanese vessel.
Again in order to avoid the collision they would have been forced to expose their stern or accelerate a great deal and I doubt they would be capable of such a turn.
In these videos the Chinese vessel is clearly intending to strike the Japanese ship and had every opportunity to avoid a collision and in fact had it not changed direction towards the JCG ship in both cases would not have collided at all.
Now what the rest of the video shows is entirely speculative but there is probably a lot that went on to instigate this incident from both sides.
wuming says
Probably somebody already pointed that out. The Island is called Diaoyu, while Diaoyutai is a compound in Beijing for visiting foreign dignitaries.
Allen says
@Jeff,
I don’t dispute your observation – but it proves nothing. I myself don’t think the video proves anything, hence comment 1.
Nevertheless, I will respond.
Your making a call based on this video along is like the police who tries to exonerate himself killing a man by a video showing a man twitching right before he was skilled. Was the man attacking or was the man simply twitching? You can’t make the call based on the short segment alone.
Same here – in viewing the video, you must have seen the large arc of water trail left by the Japanese vessel. Why has the Japanese vessel, which is clearly much more superior circling the Chinese ship – and on such tight (and unsafe) circles? For whatever reasons, the Japanese vessel chose to get /stay close to the slow Chinese ship in a way that is according to maritime customs offensive and menacing.
The Japanese vessel may very well have easily be harassing the Chinese ship the last 45 minutes with the Chinese ship finally able to bump the Japanese vessel when the Japanese vessel made a tactical error in his circling pattern. That final punch back in response to a series of harassing maneuvers is not at all uncalled for.
Of course, there could be something wrong with the controls on the Chinese ship at that moment also ….
Also – why is the full video requested to be taken off but not the short video? Why do the Japanese gov’t consider only the long video state secret? What are they trying to hide?
Who knows. Want to buy my trusty time machine 2000?
HermitCrab says
I heard that the complete 40 some minutes was leaked. This guy has a 6 or so part video that may be it… if you dont mind his obvious… goals… shall we put it… then you can view all 6 parts and analyze the wake of both ships as best you can. Unfortunately you cannot see from the trawlers POV for better shot of the patrol ship’s wake
http://www.youtube.com/user/k0418mc
raffiaflower says
allen got so many reasons for Chinese boat ramming Japanese vessel.
But the best one yet comes from the Economist: the writer claims that the Chinese captain is….Drunk!!!
lol!
Level3 says
Of course, the video shown is edited perfectly. It does not show the billows of black smoke from the Chinese ship when they go from idle engine to full engine power.
From a full stop, to accelerating in order to purposefully ram the Japanese ship. It is obvious when you see the engine exhaust smoke. But you cut that part out.
Why did you cut off this important part of the video that proves the Chinese captain deliberately accelerated to ram the Japanese? Gee, I wonder.
If you think I’m lying, then post the entire 60 seconds of video before the first ramming. Prove me wrong. I dare you.
momo says
给 前原诚司封信- 小桃 游 三 岛
ogenki, maehara-san!
guess what? I’ve been island hopping!! not those wish-you-were-here places like Bali or Okinawa!
Really hot spots….Nansha, Diaoyutai and Kunashiri!
I even brought you omigaye! Here..eggs from seagulls dat rested in my big geisha hair! Talk about eco-tourism, ne?
Nansha/Spratlys
Besides clueless birds, I was elbowed by Viets, Filipinos, Bruneians, Malaysians, and Taiwanese compatriots, all fighting for the best beach spots.
Rowdy, but coming alone fine – even our bikini sun tans! – when trouble appeared as a bossy blonde.
It was your fairy godmother Billary!
Something like Angie Dickinson from re-runs of the Policewoman TV series.
All she needed was Eddie Murphy as sidekick but at a pinch, lame duck Obama will do.
So Billary Dickinson kicked everyone in line and loudly announced a power vacuum in Southeast Asia since Imelda Marcos exited the mining industry.
Not that rare earths dust-up, Maehara-san!
Mining a la Imelda, the joke claims, is going `mine, mine, mine!’ at everything you see and want.
Billary likes the colonial tradition, so she mined all Southeast Asia on the spot; yup, now it’s SEA to shining sea!
Her plan is to protect us little people from getting stomped by a 800lb gorilla. So she’s channeling Fay Wray too?
What a multi tasker, with a line to sell in shaky rifles, vintage missiles, tainted beef and price-y Washington apples.
Say no and she will give a free sample of a colour revolution.
Diaoyutai
What the fish! Lonely Planet does not have a travel guide to these historic Chinese islands!
Luckily that leaked video is such an exciting guide to watersport activities around DYT!
I had heartpounding thrills in a Hollywood-style re-enactment of the boat chase between Chinese prey and Japanese hunters!
I even hear that a LDP-backed company will soon offer high-speed reality races – with price-differentiated options of collision and non-collision!
I can’t wait! Maehara-san, when the rancour between neighbours blows over, hordes of mainlanders will swarm DYT for the fun and intrigue!
A boost to the local economy!
It will be biggest Chinese invasion since that landlubber Kublai Khan tried to paddle across to Japan with his flaky fleet.
But don’t expect another kamikaze to send them packing home this time.
Maybe fairy godmother’s helpers can conjure up a perfect storm. Or they have already tried?
Kunashiri
I can see why you pine to have the islands back. Kunashiri is so pretty.
But Dimitri says he won’t return a rock. Not even a blade of grass. Nyet, nyet, nyet!
Though he’s forgiven you for calling the Russian presence `an illegal occupation’ when you were Land Minister.
His visit was a BIG hint to everyone that the maritime province and islands are Russia’s seafront view of the Pacific, all the way south to Straits of Malacca.
He will blast out of the water anyone who blocks his view or right of passage through his backyard.
NOBODY messes with the Russians, Maehara-san, nobody.
Dimitri was talking to me between mouthfuls of steak tartare. I could only munch on daisies, listening in fear and admiration.
But Russians can also be so hospitable. After lunch, Dimitri himself took me on an island tour before the afternoon ended with vodka in coffee and karaoke in his music room.
His gaze firmly fixed on the shimmering Pacific and beyond, Dimitri sang beautifully his favourite Barbra Streisand song: On A Clear Day You Can See Forever.
bisous!!
HermitCrab says
@Level3
Level3, maybe you should go to the YOUTUBE ACCOUNT HOLDER and ask him or her that question as yinyang has no access to either the real video nor the account holder’s copy for him to “perfectly edit”… I doubt he is the owner of that account and he can correct me if I am wrong
though I feel the account-holder (assuming still it is not yinyang) would be just as confused on what you are trying to state as we are especially since his/her motives are probably similar to yours as most video posters and commenters are screaming foul at the video taken by a JSD naval personel which Japan kept for some time and then shown a short 6-7 minute clip to selected individuals… which was so not edited by the way.
PS. Ive posted what I think is an account holder who has the full video put split into multiple parts if you are still upset that this one you see on the blog is “edited into a anti-japan stance”. Check my post 2 posts back from this one.
HermitCrab says
edit:
“Check my post 2 posts back from this one.”
make that skip 3 post back from my reply to Comment post 11. momo posted while I was replying.
xD
YinYang says
Thx for the link, HermitCarb. Look at video #6 in the link you provided:
http://www.youtube.com/user/k0418mc
It looks even collision #2 is now apparent the Japanese coast guards fault. The Japanese ship sailed towards the fishing trawler and made a sudden turn to block.
The video I’ve embedded in the post is here (from an anti-China, pro-Japan Youtuber):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVVM2AmvD5U
HermitCrab says
I cannot say for sure who deliberately did what. On one side, we know that the Japanese naval ships wanted to catch the trawler and the trawler captain would not go down without resistance. Seeing him purposely “ramming” the guards is not unbelievable. Trust me, I’ve seen enough “bad/angry drivers” that are Chinese (sorry for the stereotype haha- but im guilty of it myself) so “pissed ship captain” not doing the smartest of moves isn’t out of the league. On the other hand, the Japanese had the more maneuverable ships and absolute control of the camera(s) and what was said on it. There is no doubt in my mind that it is also not unbelievable that they would use those advantages to set up a difficult and provoking incident for the trawler and film a “vicious ramming incident” as propaganda. It isn’t the first framed incident the Japanese has done and nor was it the first time the Japanese naval ships “assaulted” fishing vessels in the area (i.e. recorded collision vs. a ship from Taiwan).
I could only say however that I like fighting fire and with fire and that we could have gain a bit of moral “high” ground (something the west likes to take a lot) if the captain was detained without resistance and THEN the japanese decided to announce they are going to put him on trial for evading arrest from the disputed island area. I understand the “west” will still be in favor of Japan and see China as a bully. Unfortunately for us, provoked or set-up or not, there was a collision and unless the rumored “2 hour” version of the video leaks… we may not have enough details as to who provoked who… which still doesnt change the (main) issue of: who has the right to be there in the first place?
Anyway, we shouldn’t point fingers at who is wrong and who is right because IMO (and certain others) we still do not have enough to conclude (and aside from winning the blame-game, it still doesnt solve the issue it dug out to surface again). I think what the government can do is provide cameras to all fishing vessels planning to fish in that area and have them record what happens. However, how to get the film to land after arrest is a problem… and im not sure if “live stream” cant be jammed by the Japanese either. Had the trawler also had filmed from it’s POV, we have something to really work with.
YinYang says
Here is an analysis from blogger Sun Bin (based on whatever partially leaked video footages he has managed to obtain):
“Which ship has made a change in direction before the collision of Mizuki and Minjinyu 5179”
HermitCrab says
Ive actually already read that. Sadly that is the only “more detailed” analysis out there aside from blurps in some of the news stories in HK, CN, or JP (at least from my lazy Googling and Binging). Even he (I will assume Sun Bin is male) states it really concludes nothing definitely about the intentions of the captain. Only those with access to him can ask him that in person- and if you have a mind-reading machine, even better (heard japan was working on something that can “read/display a person’s dream”). It can only attempt to debunk if Japanese naval vessel had no fault whatsoever; however, the Japanese public is not much different from the other masses in China or USA and will likely trust in their own and justify any “aggression” as they were attempting to catch the “criminal”. Which goes back to the issue at hand- who has the right to go there/enter there. This in any form goes back to the Diaoyu/Senkaku territorial dispute between China (PRC and ROC) vs. JPN+USA and one must not forget the USA part of the equation ever. It was they who gave administration to Japan without consulting either the ROC or PRC. That is the problem at hand IMO and therefore I cannot say that we can work this out with Japan only (as in I look at it either way China will have to confront USA- not just because USA is world’s policeman and wants to be involved).
The leaked video Sun Bin used is either the same 6 part video that was on the link I posted (they were uploaded by various users but should all be rather similar) and/or including other videos from other perspectives. I also heard of a 8 Part video but those only add up to less than an hour. There was a rumor from one of the Japan Times article (you can find via ref. on Wikipedia about this island dispute) that the rumor was the whole recording was supposed to be 2 hours or so. The videos uploaded all over youtube also looks “edited” at least it isnt continuous nor does it show the clear part where the camera was clearly cut off or turned back on by the person controlling the camera (atleast not the one I linked).
Level3 says
@Hermit crab,
I am aware now that the Youtube video is not controlled by this blog, HOWEVER, the choice of video is.
The linked video is cut to not show the Chinese ship gunning its engine, black smoke starts to billow from its smokestack, it seems to go mostly straight, and if there is any turning it is slightly to port to better hit the JCG ship instead of avoid it, and the ship is obviously accelerating from idle to ram the JCG boat in the first collision.
This is why pro-China bloggers love to focus on collision #2 only. It is a side swipe, so you can blame either side. Put in context with the first collision, it is clear the Chinese boat is doing the ramming. The first collision is very obviously intentional, and the sudden change in speed, the 90 degree angle, make it indisputable (though that never stops Chinese, after all, they are afraid to speak the truth, their families might get sent to a re-education centre or shot).
I love the internal contradictions.
They say the first colllision is because the JCG ship is clumsy.
Pro-Chinese say the first collision was “caused” by the JCG trying to ram, but overshooting the mark and missing, and then the Chinese ship “couldn’t avoid” hitting the back of the JCG ship.
But the second collision is because the JCG ship is “more maneuverable”? And again the Chinese pirate “couldn’t avoid” hitting the JCG ship?
So the JCG ship is slow and clumsy, but then fast and maneuverable. LOL!
Just like Japan is “evil and imperialist”, yet they released the ship and the crew immediately, and then the captain. They could have just shot them all and sunk the ship. (They’ve done it before with North Korean drug smugglers.) Oh, and Japan STILL sends billions of yen in aid to China. How evil! 😉
Choose one story and stick with it!
I feel sad for Chinese not being able (or not being allowed) to discuss things truthfully. Someday you will be free, though. Someday…
Though it doesn’t explain non-Chinese who take the anti-reality side. What’s your excuse?
HermitCrab says
“I am aware now that the Youtube video is not controlled by this blog, HOWEVER, the choice of video is.”
True. Just like how one can watch NHK (Japan) only to see certain clips and pictures they like most played over and over or difference between POVs and spins from Al-Jazeera vs. IBA News or differences Russian and French news. Most of us here have enough sense and internet savvy enough to at least see the youtube PAGE where the video is from. The user has multiple videos as well as similar video videos suggested to the right column. I also posted a link to the 6 part video from another user. So really it is not something unexpected nor something to throw tantrums about. To me, it all evens out.
“he linked video is cut to not show the Chinese ship gunning its engine, black smoke starts to billow from its smokestack, it seems to go mostly straight, and if there is any turning it is slightly to port to better hit the JCG ship instead of avoid it, and the ship is obviously accelerating from idle to ram the JCG boat in the first collision.”
The video linked is from the user SankeiNews of Youtube who is supposedly not a pro-PRC user. If the video he uploaded was cut, there is nothing we can do to change it. In fact, most of the leaked videos uploaded on Youtube are ALL CUT into pieces to get uploaded. Not to mention what we see now (44 min leaked videos) Are not the whole video anyhow- they have been edited already. The whole recording remains unleaked and was rumored to go on for 2 hours. The blogger linked 1 video from Senkei. Maybe he should have linked all 6-7 parts on the page (assuming they too were uploaded by Senkei saving me from posting my links). I can understand that. But I think you know he did not cut any of the video himself. He only picked ‘video 2’ to get displayed – which may be what you are crying foul over… You do not type clear enough for me to understand you fully in some sentences. Especially your first post.
“The first collision is very obviously intentional, and the sudden change in speed, the 90 degree angle, make it indisputable (though that never stops Chinese, after all, they are afraid to speak the truth, their families might get sent to a re-education centre or shot).”
Hong Kong (where the media access is not restricted as the mainland), Taiwan (also has free media), and those of the Mainland have had ships harassed by the Japanese Naval Fleet. The people there do not need to be under threat of “re-education” to support their nation on this matter; just like how many Japanese will take the spoon-fed information from their own media without further research. For the Chinese, this is not ultimately a issue of who rammed who, but who had the right to be at the Diaoyu/Senkaku area. I will explain more on this towards the end. But keep in mind that the Japanese government has staged events before and they were caught on video ramming a vessel from Taiwan a while back- which is probably why they thought to bring along a recorder this time.
“I love the internal contradictions.
They say the first colllision is because the JCG ship is clumsy.
Pro-Chinese say the first collision was “caused” by the JCG trying to ram, but overshooting the mark and missing, and then the Chinese ship “couldn’t avoid” hitting the back of the JCG ship.
But the second collision is because the JCG ship is “more maneuverable”? And again the Chinese pirate “couldn’t avoid” hitting the JCG ship?
So the JCG ship is slow and clumsy, but then fast and maneuverable. LOL!”
1. I have never heard someone say the japanese naval vessel was “clumsy”. ‘Reckless’ may have been the word used… but not “clumsy”
2. I have only seen a picture from another blog that draws out what one thinks may have happened. This was before any video was released and before the captain was released so it was all assumptions- which I ignored. So on your statement of “pro-chinese” claims I cannot verify. What I do know is that the argument is the Japanese Naval Ship was likely attempting to use their numbers (there was more than one) to force the trawler to stop. This would be done by cutting it off and sandwiching it with another ship on the other side. I will explain more on why this is a problem later below.
3. About “Contradictions” between ‘clumsy and slow’ vs. ‘fast and maneuverable’. That isn’t a contradiction really. Here is the deal: The Chinese Trawler was a ‘crappy’ ship. It does not have the ability to turn as tight nor accelerate and slow down as quickly. I doubt it has higher top speed than any coastal patrol or naval ships. The Japanese ship on the other hand was more maneuverable. Sudden acceleration and deceleration along with fast turns is within its capability. Do you get it now? One can travel slowly on purpose, fast on purpose, and turn at x-radius on purpose- more so than the trawler is able.
So let me make things more clear on my view which is shared by some others.
*
1. The Chinese trawler did ram into the Japanese ship. There is no question about the collisions. I also don’t doubt that the Captain was pissed/angry enough to ‘let em have it’.
2. The Japanese ships were attempting to stop the trawler and therefore maneuvered aggressively. They had the option to position themselves in a certain way and they did it so that if the trawler did not stop, there would likely be collision or very close calls.
3. The captain had no intention of stopping. He was chased from a area he believes he had a right to be in and considers the maneuvers harassment.
4. The Japanese naval ships had no intention of giving up chase. As far as they are concerned, they are chasing a trespasser and possible criminal.
*
So the issue is not who hit who but who had the right to be there. This ultimately circles back to the Diaoyu/Senkaku territorial dispute. Many of us know that when a military vessel calls for you to yield, you are supposed to yield- or risk indeed of being shot at. However, because of the territorial dispute, the captain and Chinese in general do not acknowledge such conforms there. On the other hand, Japan will enforce them. In the meantime, the USA knows they gave administration right to Japan without consulting PRC or ROC bakc then but does NOT take a position now on who the territory actually belongs to (aka. fence straddling) due to interests in those countries- I would suspect.
PS.
“Choose one story and stick with it!
I feel sad for Chinese not being able (or not being allowed) to discuss things truthfully. Someday you will be free, though. Someday…
Though it doesn’t explain non-Chinese who take the anti-reality side. What’s your excuse?”
When people discuss things “truthfully”, they are simply explaining the perspectives they hold (as opposed to explaining a perspective they do not hold when). To find out the truth about the events – or rather get close to it as possible – require one to look at multiple sources (news, editorials, opinions, blogs, etc.) for a collection of details. It also requires knowledge of the subject or access to such knowledge- such as a library, research papers, eye-witness accounts, video/pictures, and/ or experts, etc. And then you must examine and validate the information for yourself. Therefore, we hit a contradiction on your statement because “discussing things truthfully” does not mean (in fact right now I dare say ‘does not EVER mean’) “choose one story and stick with it”. If you really care, you have to put a lot of effort into it and NOT BE SPOON-FED INFORMATION by the media (state controlled or producer controlled). If you believe the one story you believe is flawless and the truth while all others are in “anti-reality” world, then you are no better than the “pro-Chinese/Chicom netizens/ etc.” you seem to despise so much. This is especially so for those in “free” countries. Just being in a free country does not mean you automatically inherit the “truth”. So I will end with something you said to all those who “take the anti-reality side”:
What’s your excuse?