As the U.S. repositions its military forces to assume a great role in the Western Pacific, the state Department has taken a position to defend the contested Senkaku islands, which most Americans have never heard of. f the U.S. does not stay out of this dispute, then there is certain to be at least one aggrieved nation, and the era of U.S. diplomatic pressure and “gunboat” diplomacy belong to another era. Those few in Washington with a historical memory might recall that in 1853 an American naval flotilla forcibly opened up Japan to western trade. This section will be inclusive of the brief overview of the overall paper, including the key arguments throughout the paper and the aim of the same. This section will also raise certain questions that have led to the formulation of the paper and the whole issue of U.S’s interfere in the Diaoyu / Senkakus islands.

1. 1
The puzzle of U.S‟s interfere in the Diaoyu / Senkakus islands
by
Student‟s Name
Course Title and College‟s Name

2. 2
ABSTRACT
As the U.S. repositions its military forces to assume a great role in the Western
Pacific, the state Department has taken a position to defend the contested Senkaku
islands, which most Americans have never heard of. f the U.S. does not stay out of
this dispute, then there is certain to be at least one aggrieved nation, and the era of
U.S. diplomatic pressure and “gunboat” diplomacy belong to another era. Those few
in Washington with a historical memory might recall that in 1853 an American naval
flotilla forcibly opened up Japan to western trade.
This section will be inclusive of the brief overview of the overall paper, including the
key arguments throughout the paper and the aim of the same. This section will also
raise certain questions that have led to the formulation of the paper and the whole
issue of U.S‟s interfere in the Diaoyu / Senkakus islands.

3. 3
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: The puzzle of U.S’s interfere in the Diaoyu / Senkakus islands ...........5
Introduction ................................................................................................................5
Pervious literature on US's policy towards diaoyu / senkakus islands dispute ..........5
The academic and practical importance of U.S attitude towards the Diaoyu/Senkaku
s islands ......................................................................................................................7
Chapter 2: Methodology..............................................................................................7
Chapter 3: Theory and Hypothesis ............................................................................8
Chapter 4: Case Study of U.S's interfere in the diaoyu/senkaku islands dispute..8
The context of the US-Japan treaty of mutual cooperation and security ...................8
The US - Japan joint military exercise .......................................................................9
U.S's policy towards China ......................................................................................10
Prediction of America's behavior in the future.........................................................11
Chapter 5: Conclusion...............................................................................................12
Chapter 6: References ...............................................................................................14

4. 4
Acknowledgements
This thesis would not have been possible without the guidance of (Professor‟s Name).
I'm deeply grateful for their multiple readings of the thesis and their critical advice on
ways to advance this work further. I'm very grateful to (Other Professor‟s Name) and
my classmates in the college for all their helpful suggestions on the paper during the
formulation of the paper.

5. 5
Chapter 1: The puzzle of U.S’s interfere in the Diaoyu /
Senkakus islands
Introduction
In the modern era of state sovereignty, territorial disputes are a leading source of
conflict and violence in the international system. States have gone to war more
frequently over territory than any other issue. Although territorial disputes are usually
bilateral conflicts between two states, they play an important role in trilateral relations
among the United States, China, and Japan. China and Japan contest the sovereignty
of the Senkaku (Diaoyu) Islands in addition to maritime rights in the East China Sea.
The United States is an important actor in the China – Japan disputes, especially the
conflict over the Senkaku Islands, because the 1960 alliance treaty obliges it to aid
Japan in defending the territory under its administration.
As issues that are prone to elicit violence, territorial disputes are also an obstacle to
deepening cooperation among states in other arenas. As territorial disputes bear upon
the most vital of national interests – sovereignty - they are held to reflect a state‟s
intentions and ambitions. In trilateral relations, escalation of the Senkaku dispute
could pose a severe challenge to future cooperation among the three states by pitting
China against Japan and the United States1
. Even in the absence of armed conflict
over the land being disputed, tensions over the Senkaku Islands are likely to limit
cooperation in other ways, highlighting mutual concerns about long-term intentions
and ambitions.
This section will offer a brief introduction of the topic, highlighting the key issues and
the reasons behind the same.
Pervious literature on US's policy towards diaoyu / senkakus islands dispute
The potential for the polarization of trilateral relations flows from the structure of the
Senkaku dispute. In this conflict, China is what international relations scholars would
term the “challenger” or “dissatisfied” actor. This does not mean that China overall is
1
Fearon, J. 2009, Bargaining, Enforcement, and International Cooperation, International Organization,
vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 269–305.

6. 6
a revisionist actor in the international system. What it does mean is that China seeks
to change the status quo in this particular dispute. Although China claims sovereignty
over the Senkakus, it does not exercise effective authority over the islands, which
Japan has administered since 19722
. Conversely, Japan is the “defender” in the dispute
because it controls all of the territory in question.
Despite the potential for armed conflict, the dynamics of the Senkaku dispute present
a puzzle for scholars of territorial disputes and policymakers in the region. Although
China and Japan have formally contested the Senkaku Islands since 1970, neither side
has used force. Indeed, given the strategic and economic value attached to the islands
and periods of tension in the broader China-Japan relationship, the absence of armed
conflict or even tense military confrontations is nothing short of remarkable. At the
same time, the two sides have yet to engage in any serious effort to resolve the
dispute. Instead, both sides have adopted what could be best described as a delaying
strategy that defers settlement to the future.
Within the study of international relations, scholarship on territorial disputes provides
little guidance about the sources of delay in these conflicts. Instead, scholars have
focused their attention on decisions to either escalate and use force or compromise
and settle these disputes, as these choices are the most consequential ones that leaders
can make3
. To explore why leaders adopt a delaying strategy instead, this chapter
examines the sources of stability in the Senkaku dispute. In particular, it seeks to
identify those factors linked with the absence of escalation as well as the absence of
compromise. It has been found that the US-Japan alliance has deterred China from
using force in the conflict, while active dispute management by both China and Japan
has limited the potential for escalation. At the same time, paradoxically, the perceived
value of the islands and the limited benefits to be gained through compromise create
strong incentives to avoid efforts to settle the dispute.
2
Pan, Z. 2009, Sino-Japanese Dispute over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands: The Pending Controversy
from the Chinese Perspective, Journal of Chinese Political Science, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 398-412.
3
Holsti, K. 2013, Peace and War: Armed Conflicts and International Order, Cambridge: Cambridge
University.

7. 7
This section will offer the information on the pervious literature on US's policy
towards diaoyu / senkakus islands dispute.
The academic and practical importance of U.S attitude towards the Diaoyu/Senk
akus islands
Different theories of international relations (IR) offer a number of plausible
competing explanations for US‟s interfere in the Diaoyu / Senkakus islands. A
territorial dispute is a conflict between two or more states over the owner-ship and
control of a piece of land. In the study of international relations, these conflicts
include disputes over land borders as well as islands and other maritime features, such
as coral reefs that lie above the high-tide line4
. By contrast, a maritime sovereignty
dispute is a conflict over exclusive rights to bodies of water, especially exclusive
economic zones (EEZs) as defined by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS). Apart from internal waters, however, states do not enjoy full sovereign
rights in maritime areas under their jurisdiction, as they must permit vessels from
other countries freedom of passage and transit5
. Maritime sovereignty thus is weaker
than territorial sovereignty. As a result, maritime conflicts are less volatile than
territorial disputes and, specifically, less likely to block or prevent cooperation among
the United States, China, and Japan.
Chapter 2: Methodology
The exploratory case study will be utilized to gain a better understanding of the
interference of US in the Diaoyu / Senkakus islands. Basically, a case study is an in
depth study of a particular situation rather than a sweeping statistical survey. It is a
method used to narrow down a very broad field of research into one easily
researchable topic. Whilst it will not answer a question completely, it will give some
indications and allow further elaboration and hypothesis creation on a subject.
4
Gries, P. 2010, China‟s „New Thinking‟ on Japan, China Quarterly vol. 183, pp. 831–50.
5
Vasquez, J. 2007, War Puzzle, New York: Cambridge University Press.

8. 8
Chapter 3: Theory and Hypothesis
Following are the key theories that will be the base of the formulation of hypothesis
for the concerned topic:
 Return to Asia strategy
 Maintain U.S dominance in blue water
 Economic interest
Each of these will be utilized in this section to make the reader well aware of the
hypothesis that will be answered and examined throughout the paper.
Chapter 4: Case Study of U.S's interfere in the diaoyu/senkaku island
s dispute
The context of the US-Japan treaty of mutual cooperation and security
The Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan
was first signed in 1952 at the San Francisco Presidio following the signing of the
Treaty of San Francisco (commonly known as the Peace Treaty of San Francisco) at
the San Francisco War Memorial Opera House. Then, the Security Treaty was later
amended further on January 1960 between the US and Japan in Washington.
When the Treaty was first signed, it contained amendments that permitted the United
States to not only act for the sake of maintaining peace in East Asia, but also
permitted the United States to exert its power on Japanese domestic quarrels. The
latter part mentioned has been deleted in the revised version of the Treaty. In the
amended treaty, articles that delineate mutual defense obligations, the US obligations
to pre-inform Japan in times of the US army mobilization were included to alleviate
unequal status suggested in the treaty signed in 19526
. The treaty established that any
attack against Japan or the United States perpetrated within Japanese territorial
administration would be dangerous to the respective countries' own peace and safety.
6
Yu, P. 2010, Solving and Resolving the East China Sea Dispute: Beijing‟s Options, Korean Journal of
Defense Analysis, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 105–27.

9. 9
It requires both countries to act to meet the common danger. To support this
requirement, it provided for the continued presence of U.S. military bases in Japan.
The treaty also included general provisions on the further development of
international cooperation and on improved future economic cooperation7
. This treaty
has lasted longer than any other alliance between two great powers since the 1648
Peace of Westphalia. The treaty had a minimum term of 10 years. However, it
provides that it will remain in force permanently unless one party gives notice that
they wish to terminate it. Upon such notice, it is meant to terminate one year later.
The US - Japan joint military exercise
The US and Japanese soldiers have been engaged in a joint training exercise along the
coast of California and other location that simulates invading islands captured by
enemy troops. Many of the practitioners consider these military exercises as a thinly
veiled warning to China not to land forces on the Diaoyutai Islands8
. An article in the
New York Times even stated “Memo to Beijing” which means be forewarned. Called
“Exercise Iron Fist,” the training is a part of a nine-year-old program, but the latest
event was especially significant considering current tensions in the East China Sea.
The Diaoyutai Islands have been at the center of growing political hostilities as a
result of conflicting sovereignty claims by Japan, China and Taiwan.
Annual training exercises with the Japanese help both of the militaries develop
capabilities and skill sets essential to providing increased international security and
improved prosperity. These closely integrated exercises made the US and Japanese
forces more familiar with each other‟s capabilities and better able to respond “quickly
and effectively” to future crises. The exercises feature amphibious landing operations,
fire support and forward observation, amphibious reconnaissance and advanced
marksmanship.
7
Goldstein, A. 2010, Rising to the Challenge: China‟s Grand Strategy and International Security,
Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
8
Lind, J. 2014, Pacifism or Passing the Buck? Testing theories of Japanese Security Policy,”
International Security, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 92–121.

10. 10
U.S's policy towards China
The U.S.A. did not have a relationship with China for over thirty years and it was
President Nixon that resumed friendly relationships between the two countries. Many
of the policies between U.S. and China are the results of resuming trade and
diplomatic relationship after thirty plus years. China and the U.S. have had far more
serious disputes than the U.S. and Japan. There were some that wanted the U.S. to
invade China following the conflict between North and South Korea and the Korean
debarkation line was agreed upon.
The trade policies the U.S. has with China would naturally be different than with the
Japan simply due to the size of the Chinese economy9
. Just as the trade policies China
has with the Japan are quite different than the ones they have with the U.S. due to the
size of the U.S. economy.
The U.S. imports more of China's exports than all other countries combined. It is for
that reason the Chinese Government is so eager to help the U.S. through the present
financial crisis. They are doing it out of necessity, not admiration and respect for the
U.S. The Chinese cannot afford to loose the lucrative U.S. market that supports their
9% yearly growth.
The U.S. is aware that from 2009 until 2025 there will be a gradual change in the
world economy and most likely the economic giants by 2025 will be China, Russia
and even possibly Brazil. The U.S. has begun to prepare for that economic power
change. Preparation includes close attention to policies between the two countries.
Moreover, China and the U.S. both have nuclear warheads, both have missiles capable
of reaching each other shores, and both have sizeable militaries with the Chinese
having far more military personnel. This would call for different policies between the
two countries. Both countries contribute heavily to environmental problems. China is
the largest polluter of all countries. It would only be natural that eviornmental issues
between the two countries would have to be connected to trade policies between the
two countries. The fact that China ignores International Standards when it comes to
9
Fravel, M. 2008, Strong Borders, Secure Nation: Cooperation and Conflict in China‟s Territorial
Disputes, Princeton: Princeton University.

11. 11
pollution means they can operate their factories for far less money and puts the U.S. at
a disadvantage.
Prediction of America's behavior in the future
On 30 July 2013, United States Senate unanimously approved a resolution
condemning China's action over the Senkaku Islands. The Resolution titled "SENATE
RESOLUTION 167--Reaffirming the strong support of the united states for the
peaceful resolution of territorial, sovereignty, and jurisdictional disputes in the asia-
pacific maritime domains", referring to the recent Chinese provocations near the
Senkaku Islands, condemns "the use of coercion, threats, or force by naval, maritime
security, or fishing vessels and military or civilian aircraft in the South China Sea and
the East China Sea to assert disputed maritime or territorial claims or alter the status
quo."
In 2014 United States Pacific Commander Samuel J. Locklear said that he did not
have sufficient resources to carry out a successful amphibious warfare campaign
should the dispute lead to a war. In April 2014 the United States will begin Northrop
Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk patrols of the seas around the islands.
On 23-25 April 2014, Barack Obama President of the United States state visit to
Japan and held a summit meeting with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. President Obama
expressed the commitments of Article 5 of Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security
between the United States and Japan covers all territories under Japan‟s
administration, including the Senkaku Islands in joint press conference and assured by
U.S.-Japan Joint Statement. Barack Obama is the first president of the United States
mentioned on Senkaku Islands covered under Article 5 of Treaty of Mutual
Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan.
This section will include the information of the outlined case studies with the use of
relevant literature.

12. 12
Chapter 5: Conclusion
Both sides should continue to focus on functional issues, such as cooperation over
energy and fishery resources. In essence, such cooperation decreases the economic
importance of the islands. Second, even if the question of sovereignty cannot be
resolved, the importance of resolving the question of maritime rights itself can be
reduced. In this regard, the consensus agreement between China and Japan over the
development of petroleum resources in the disputed East China Sea is noteworthy.
Although the agreement explicitly did not address the question of sovereignty, it
established a framework for joint exploration and production activities by oil
companies from each side. In this way, the agreement reduced the imperative for
settling the question of sovereignty by providing an alternate means to develop
resources in the area and offers a creative approach that could be applied to the
Senkaku dispute. Third, both sides should limit their presence in waters near the
islands. China should refrain from conducting overflights of the islands that would
enter into Japan‟s Air Defense Identification Zone and result in Japan‟s scrambling of
fighter planes to intercept them. China should also bar its vessels, naval or civilian,
from entering the territorial waters around the island, an action that will only provoke
Japan and escalate the dispute. And although Japan administers the islands, it should
not seek to develop them, especially for military use.
Regarding the prospects for trilateral cooperation, several points should be noted. So
long as delay and the avoidance of escalation remain the preferred strategy for both
sides, the presence of the dispute itself will not block or prevent cooperation in other
areas. At the same time, active management of the dispute must continue so that it
does not become an issue that polarizes the trilateral relationship into two camps.
More generally, the presence of the dispute reveals the limits to trilateral cooperation.
Given the fundamental conflict of interest over the question of sovereignty, the
dispute itself cannot be settled within a trilateral framework. As a zero-sum conflict,
where one side gains or maintains territory only at the expense of the other side, it is

13. 13
unlikely that common interests will emerge over territory in the trilateral relationship.
Instead, trilateral security cooperation is most likely to materialize over security issues
such as North Korea, where all three sides may share more common interests.
This section will conclude the overall paper and will highlight the key arguments
discussed regarding the interference of US.

14. 14
Chapter 6: References
1. Fearon, J. 2009, Bargaining, Enforcement, and International Cooperation,
International Organization, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 269–305.
2. Fravel, M. 2008, Strong Borders, Secure Nation: Cooperation and Conflict in
China’s Territorial Disputes, Princeton: Princeton University.
3. Goldstein, A. 2010, Rising to the Challenge: China’s Grand Strategy and
International Security, Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
4. Gries, P. 2010, China‟s „New Thinking‟ on Japan, China Quarterly vol. 183,
pp. 831–50.
5. Holsti, K. 2013, Peace and War: Armed Conflicts and International Order,
Cambridge: Cambridge University.
6. Lind, J. 2014, Pacifism or Passing the Buck? Testing theories of Japanese
Security Policy,” International Security, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 92–121.
7. Pan, Z. 2009, Sino-Japanese Dispute over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands: The
Pending Controversy from the Chinese Perspective, Journal of Chinese
Political Science, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 398-412.
8. Vasquez, J. 2007, War Puzzle, New York: Cambridge University Press.
9. Yu, P. 2010, Solving and Resolving the East China Sea Dispute: Beijing‟s
Options, Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 105–27.
40-45 more relevant references will be added.