Having lived in Japan for some time, I feel that I understand how the Japanese government is less than perfect.
And after taking many history courses at my Japanese university, I have seen first hand how many Japanese feel about the textbook and other problems.
Which brings me to my point. After the anti-Japan demonstrations -- or riots -- began, I started to think about how many of the Chinese students I have met have very different memories to mine, and I began to wonder if the history taught in China, like that taught anywhere else, was less than complete in a few areas.
With the recent outbreaks in China against Japan, I started to wonder why the Chinese government and people have hard feelings toward Japan over disputed islands.
Is it not true that South Korea, North Korea and Taiwan also claim ownership of these islands?
And why has China not made any complaints until recent years? China, which preaches the status quo on the Taiwan issue, is doing anything but that and trying to drag Japan into a long legal battle over an issue that has been ignored for nearly 50 years.
I suspect that China's recent interest in the islands was sparked by the discovery of oil. I would like to know why China has not said anything to any other nations about these islands.
I would also like to say that I agree with Japan on protecting Japanese people and interests in China. It is clearly China's responsibility to defend the Japanese embassy in China, and it seems fairly obvious to me that China is doing nothing to protect it.
What would China say if Japanese civilians started to attack the Chinese embassy in Tokyo?
What would China say if Japanese citizens took to the streets in protest every time a Chinese person in Japan committed a crime?
I'm thinking of events that took place two years ago where two Chinese students studying in Japan murdered their teacher and their teacher's family in an attempt to gain bank-account information, and how not two weeks goes by without something on the news about a Chinese student committing a violent crime either against another student or a Japanese civilian.
I do, however, agree with Asian nations seeking compensation from the Japanese over the atrocities committed during World War II, and I feel that most Japanese citizens do too.
However, I disagree with the way China and other nations are going about this.
The ordinary Japanese public did not commit the crimes, and the Japanese government did not commit the crimes either. The Japanese Empire, no longer in existence, committed those crimes, and neither Japan nor its people should have to pay for them.
Instead, I feel that these attacks should be aimed at what remains of the empire -- the emperor.
If groups were to seek compensation from the emperor, I feel that they would receive more support from the world, and from Japanese people themselves.
Darin ten Bruggencate
Japan
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS