The latest moves in East Asia’s maritime disputes take multi-prong approaches, meaning business as usual for all concerned.

JANUARY had been a busy month for Japanese policymakers, especially after December’s electoral triumph for “new” Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

Among Abe’s election promises was the pledge to protect Japan’s claims “on the outermost fringes of its territory.” Specifically, that meant the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands also claimed by China.

Heated rhetoric had been exchanged across the sea for months. Fishing boats and other vessels, even aircraft, from both countries have approached or entered the disputed waters.

On the face of it, Abe was just another uncompromising right-wing Japanese politician consumed by the country’s territorial claims while denying any wrongs committed by its militarist past.

That mainstream image of him made for punchier headlines, but it has become rather worn. Abe is not exactly a new Prime Minister; he was elected to office before in 2006.

He was then also seen as an LDP (Liberal Democratic Party) nationalist, an unwavering conservative and an unapologetic scion of imperial history. After all, he is the son of Japan’s influential LDP veteran, Shintaro Abe.

However, much of his tough image came from election campaign rhetoric and a firm stand on North Korea. His speeches and actions show far more pragmatism over China.

But Abe is also a politician. As relations with China plummeted last September over the islands dispute, his tone matched that of the most rabid LDP ideologue.

Result: a landslide election victory in December, with an edgier Abe said to “worry Washington” over how ties with China would develop.

But the record shows quite the opposite: a more conciliatory Japan quite distinct from the tougher tones in the Japanese media.

Thus one month after Abe’s resounding victory, Japan became proactive in patching up relations with China. A virtual procession of Japanese leaders has been visiting Beijing for talks.

In mid-January, former premier Yukio Hatoyama visited China. He met Chinese dignitaries and even visited the memorial to victims of the Nanjing Massacre.

Another former prime minister, Tomiichi Murayama, was in Beijing two weeks later. Murayama led a varied delegation on the invitation of the China-Japan Friendship Association.

The most significant visit of all was by Natsuo Yamaguchi, leader of the New Komeito Party, on Jan 22. Yamaguchi’s party is part of Abe’s governing coalition, and he was the Prime Minister’s envoy carrying a personally handwritten letter by Abe for new Chinese President Xi Jinping.

No less significant was Abe’s response to Yamaguchi’s visit. The Prime Minister said he drew encouragement from its success, echoing Xi in saying bilateral ties should continue to improve.

Among the many countries watching intently is the US. Apart from obvious geo­strategic interests, it has a defence treaty with Japan.

Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida was in Washington at the time. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton then expressed US opposition to any moves that undermined Japan’s “administration” of the disputed Islands.

Clinton’s remarks tellingly emphasised Japan’s administration of the islands, which is a fact, rather than any legal or historic claims to them. After that statement, the US apparently took a back seat, even absenting itself from some diplomatic gatherings.

The territorial dispute goes beyond official claims by Tokyo and Beijing or relations between them. It also involves Taiwan, a US ally.

NGO activists in China and Taiwan have lately coordinated their protest actions against Japan. On Jan 24, Japanese Coast Guard vessels stopped Taiwanese activists from landing in the disputed area.

The dispute has also strayed beyond the political and diplomatic spheres. It has had damaging economic consequences, particularly for Japan.

In Tokyo, Abe is practising what Beijing policy circles call a “dual-track approach”. That means maintaining a tough stand within Japan while keeping diplomatic channels with Beijing open.

The same approach is adopted by Philippine policymakers in their dispute with China over the Spratly Islands.

Domestically, Manila is “taking China to court” over the dispute, with China’s claims seen as unacceptably extensive in their geographical sweep.

The Philippines filed a case with the UN arbitrative tribunal, but even how that can proceed is disputed. Chinese sources say Beijing is unlikely to respond, but Philippine officials say China’s response is not necessary for the tribunal to proceed.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the UN will provide technical and professional support, but both countries must work out an agreement themselves. The tribunal’s decisions are binding but have no enforcement mechanism.

The Philippines hopes that declaring China’s claims illegal will trigger more decisive outcomes. Meanwhile, Manila is also keeping the door open to Beijing for talks.

China may now consider a dual-track approach as well. Some advisers in Beijing counsel “firm countermeasures” against action by other claimants, while strengthening relations with those countries.

Any settlement on the enduring maritime disputes may emerge long after any current politician’s term in office. Abe himself last served as premier for less than a year.

• Cyclone takes the heat for hot weather
• If you want to go far work early and hard on personal branding
• AirAsia X offers free tickets to any destination for initial public offering to retail investors
• Doc held for posing as cop to extort businessman
• Allianz aims for RM150mil in new premiums
• Couple upset over baby’s death
• Malaysia's I-Bhd and Thailand's CPN in mall joint venture with GDV of RM580mil
• From tomorrow, city cabbies can pick up passengers from KLIA
• Najib wants Chinese in Cabinet
• Todd was under treatment for depression, public inquiry told