Chinese government announced the establishment of the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone on November 23. Ma Jun underscores the political implications of the new Chinese ADIZ in terms of national security, international rules and Sino-Japanese relations.

Washington's maladroit handling of China's newly announced Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) unnecessarily muddies the waters and raises tensions over the East China Sea. Rather than reacting calmly in a diplomatic manner, the US immediately militarized the situation by sending B-52 bombers into China's zone.

The setup of an Air Defense Identification Zone in China’s East China Sea has caused tensions with Japan and the U.S. However, the setting up of such a zone is not outside of China’s right as an international state. The U.S. and Japan, who have AIDZ of their own should respect this as they work with China to reduce tensions.

The Obama administration is eager to dampen the tensions in the East China Sea. With the dangers of miscalculation too high, Richard Weitz states that the disputed islands are hardly worth a war.

China’s move of the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) has aroused strong reaction from a number of countries, including Japan and the US. It seems that China will cast more shadow on its relationship with neighboring countries and will be in new trouble in building the special relationship with the US. However, it is likely to turn out that the ADIZ works and China’s bottom-line thinking behind the zone proves to be effective, writes Su Xiaohui.

Are warnings of the US provoking a war between China and Japan warranted? Ma Shikun examines the facts and lays out why current tensions warrant understanding and collaboration to ultimately avoid conflict.

The Chinese Ministry of National Defense issued a statement on Saturday on establishing the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ). This new action complies with China's laws and has precedents to follow in the international community, writes Luo Yuan.

A November 1 article written by the Wall Street Journal has been the cause of some concern for those who follow US-China-Japan relations. While the US has maintained its position of “neutrality,” China is concerned about its own security as well as that of the region as Japan’s nationalistic leaders continue to pursue more active military and foreign policies.

Japan is making provocative statements on the issue of the Diaoyu Islands and questioning the Chinese position, writes Xue Junying.

Both sides on the Korean Peninsula should realize that neither could destroy the other, and that it is necessary to continue this confrontational peace based on reciprocity and balance, write Shuang Shi and Xiong Lei.