The Law of Unintended Consequences has been operative once again, this time in the intense Japanese reaction to several weeks of Chinese demonstrations against Japan, some of them violent. In a word, the eruption in China has backfired in Japan.
Ten days of conversations with Japanese government officials, diplomats, business executives, military officers, academics, journalists and private citizens in Tokyo and Kyoto have turned up a deep-seated anger against China that is likely to be long-lasting.
Moreover, many Japanese have added a disdain for South Korea due to what they see as Seoul's echo of China's anti-Japanese posture, always an easy position for Koreans to take because of Japan's 35-year occupation of Korea that ended in 1945.
"They have gone over to the Chinese side," a Japanese diplomat said with a wave of his hand.
For the US, the antagonism between China and South Korea on one side and Japan on the other has confronted the Bush administration with a dangerous dispute that could corrode the US' power in East Asia if the antagonism gets much worse.
So far, the administration, consumed with the war in Iraq, seems to have ignored the issue even though the US has security treaties with Japan and South Korea and has been seeking working relations with China to cope with North Korea's nuclear ambitions and to assist in the war on terror.
The China question is pervasive in Japan. The press and television news have been filled with discussions of how Japan should respond. Popular weekly news magazines have carried a flock of special reports and almost every conversation, no matter how casual, quickly turns to China's anti-Japanese stance.
Even a sushi chef in Kyoto got into an animated discussion late one evening after most of his customers had left.
"The anti-Japanese uprising in China," he said, "does not serve the interests of either China or South Korea or Japan."
Many Japanese think they can do nothing to persuade the Chinese and Koreans to relent. They point to 18 or 20 apologies for World War II, including the recent one by Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, and to US$30 billion in economic aid that has helped to build China's industrial infrastructure. Japan has extended similar aid to South Korea, but has failed to get credit for it in either case. Now the Japanese seem to have given up.
"No matter what we do, the Chinese and Koreans will always demand more," is a common refrain.
One diplomat said: "The Chinese and Koreans have been educating their people for more than a generation to hate Japan. It will take another generation to undo that."
The demonstrations, including rock-throwing assaults on Japan's embassy in Beijing, were evidently intended to intimidate Japan into diplomatic submission. Instead, the Japanese have become defiant.
"Among my friends, the general feeling is `enough is enough,'" a musician said.
Chinese protesters last month and early this month carried scores of placards demanding that Japanese reflect on their country's invasion of China during World War II. Instead, the Japanese asserted that the Chinese themselves were guilty of millions of deaths during the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution of the 1950s and 1960s.
The protests, encouraged by the Chinese government, were intended to force Japan to give up its campaign to become a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Instead, Japan is seeking international support. India, Germany, Brazil and Japan have jointly asked to enter the Security Council, which complicates China's opposition. The Chinese rallies, during which the police did not intervene, were intended to drive a wedge between Japan and the US. Instead, said another Japanese diplomat: "We must do everything we can to strengthen our alliance with the United States."
The Chinese intended to dissuade Japan from building up its armed forces and becoming a "normal nation." Instead, they have accelerated moves to revise the famed Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, the "no-war clause" that forbids Japan from using military power.
China intended to dampen speculation that Japan, alarmed by North Korea's nuclear ambitions, might go nuclear.
"I don't believe we should have nuclear arms," a scholar said, "but we should consider it."
Some Japanese said the way to prevent Japan from acquiring nuclear arms would be for the US to reiterate its commitment to Japan's defense, including an explicit pledge to retaliate if Japan were to be attacked with a nuclear weapon. To be effective, said a strategic thinker, such a pledge should come from US President George W. Bush.
Richard Halloran is a writer based in Hawaii.
The Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercises, the largest naval exercise in the region, are aimed at deepening international collaboration and interaction while strengthening tactical capabilities and flexibility in tackling maritime crises. China was invited to participate in RIMPAC in 2014 and 2016, but it was excluded this year. The underlying reason is that Beijing’s ambitions of regional expansion and challenging the international order have raised global concern. The world has made clear its suspicions of China, and its exclusion from RIMPAC this year will bring about a sea change in years to come. The purpose of excluding China is primarily
War in the Middle East, global terrorism and the Ukraine war pose significant threats to the global economy. However, according to Global Guardian, a leading security solutions firm, a conflict between China and Taiwan would cause the greatest disruption since World War II. Its Taiwan Shock Index (TSI) analyzes the potential global impacts of such a war. Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) rhetoric about rejuvenating the People’s Republic of China heavily emphasizes “reunification” with Taiwan. Experts differ on when this might happen. Some point to 2027, the centenary of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA), as a symbolic and strategic milestone. Others
In 2010, while speaking to a Taiwanese group in California, I was asked during a question-and-answer session: “What do you think of Confucius Institutes?” Confucius Institutes had been gaining popularity at the time, but despite that, my answer was quick and to the point. “Beware of them, they are Trojan horses.” Few grasped the implications, yet now, more than a decade later, the US Government Accountability Office has finally woken up to the danger they pose. There are barely five institutes left where once there were more than 100. A few years later, in a different discussion with Pavel Suian, a former Romanian
Midnight on Monday marked the 27th anniversary of the handover of Hong Kong from British to Chinese sovereignty. Under the terms of the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration, an international treaty lodged at the UN, China promised that Hong Kongers’ way of life would remain unchanged for 50 years and the territory would have “a high degree of autonomy” under the so-called “one country, two systems” framework. Beijing’s crushing of the 2019-2020 anti-extradition law protests and imposition of the National Security Law in 2020, overriding even the pretense that Hong Kong’s autonomy would be respected, is a profound reminder to Taiwanese —