Now this really is total war by other means

Those canny fellows at NightWatch had a very pertinent commentary concerning the Sino-Japanese dispute over the Senkaku Islands - no, me neither, but it concerns some specks of Islands in the South China Sea which the Japanese 'own' and the Chinese think they own.  It's a bit like the old Schleswig-Holstein Question of which Lord Palmerston remarked:

“The Schleswig-Holstein question is so complicated, only three men in Europe have ever understood it. One was Prince Albert, who is dead. The second was a German professor who became mad. I am the third and I have forgotten all about it.”

Thus it is with the Senkaku Islands but the fact is that there has been a steady rise in tension between the two countries which is not helped by memories of WWII and the murderous cruelty of the Japanese army in China.  So far the tensions have expressed themselves in economic terms with mutual boycotting of goods and according to my 'NightWatchmen', both have suffered but crucially the Japanese have suffered the most:

The key point is that global economic integration magnifies the consequences of international disputes. Interdependency means both sides seriously suffer economically, although security incidents result in no casualties. Japan might have sustained a .5 per cent decline in GDP in the last quarter of 2012, essentially because of Chinese hostile, nationalistic responses to the islands dispute.

Both sides got hurt, but China can absorb the consequences more than Japan.

Another shrewd insight was offered which I do hope 'the cousins' have noted and underlined:

Another key point is that the dispute shows how the Chinese fight in every kind of battle space - at sea, in the air, on the land, in cyber space in international political space and in economic space. Total warfare means total to the Chinese. They are experimenting with that in the Senkakus dispute.

My emphasis was apropos my previous comment on our apparent lack of ability in this field. 

Comments

[JK]

Glanced at your archives David, but since I couldn't recall the title I reckoned to just log-in and retrieve it:

"The Paradox of China's Naval Strategy is republished with permission of Stratfor."

[JK]

I noticed the Japs're debating whether to order their airforces to fire warning shots in the immediate vicinity of the Chinks (sorry, no link readily at hand - I s'pose one could check the Jap press):

"Understanding the China-Japan Island Conflict is republished with permission of Stratfor."

David? I kinda wish you'd not post on these things - I called in sick a couple weeks ago and until just very recently, nobody'd bothered to ask me to do anything.

[David Duff]

Glanced at my archives, did you, JK? Well, you're a very naughty boy, you shouldn't be looking! I'll check your links later.

[Jimmy Glesga]

JK I thought the Japs had demilitarised!

[JK]

Well Jimmy, the Jap's have been left with Self Defense Forces and given their "usually accustomed to be depended on US carriers" are all undergoing refit [with the exception of the USS Stennis currently near Oman] + the newly elected Jap government - the definition of "Self Defense" might soon come to be extended.