Is China the World’s New Colonial Power?

[Stuttgart001]

"The denail of what Japan has done to Asian people"

CCP propaganda. CCP does not allow freedom of expression. What they say, the people believe and think, and there is no way to undo that.

A key difference between Japan and China is freedom of expression. It's the same difference that the US, Germany, France, Great Britain, and many other countries have with Japan. Freedom of expression. That means there is always going to be some people with different points of views. But regardless, the academically honest and sincere Japanese historians that look into the history and want to express sorrow for what Japan has done to Asia still conclude that 300,000 were not massacred in Nanking. It is an impossible figure. In 1937, when the Japanese Army was heading towards the walled city of Nanking, people were running away. The population of the city was dropping from 800,000 down to about 250,000 by the time the Japanese Army arrived. After Japanese forces have sealed off the city and occupied it for 6 weeks, there was still over 200,000 people in city. Even estimates by foreigners, such as John Rabe, that were in the city in the safety zone with the sheltered Chinese population also estimated about 50,000 killed.

Japan should apologize for what they did. Not for more than what they did. If a Japanese sincerely apologizes but with deep sense of understanding of what happened at Nanking, that it was about 50,000 massacred, then the CCP tells everyone in mainland China that all the Japanese are whitewashers and does not accept the apology and says 300,000 were massacred. But why believe the CCP, they don't allow scholastic honesty. They turned it into a political tool. It is impossible to resolve this history point because it is a political tool of the CCP that they will never relinquish and Chinese intellectuals are powerless to challenge it.

You think I was talking about Nanjing massacre.
Sorry. I was talking about out of number of massacres happened in China besides Nanjing.
How Japanese soldiers treated cizitens and war prisoners were famous in the whole world .
Japanese treated Chinese citizens everywhere the same brutelly.
Japanese solider even killed its own citizens when defeated.
Lots of events were recorded by westerners not CCP .
And the number 300000 was not given by CCP first, so pls stop the propaganda BS.
Ask Korean people whether or not Japanese denied what they have done.
Indeed,Japan should be worried about the rise of China ,given all he has done in the past.

 

[Zsari]

I think there is too much dependency on old history for trying to interpret current affairs today on your part. I'm going to skip a history of Japanese and American relationship, there's too much to say. But I will say that Japan likes the US today not because of old habit. But it is because Japanese are seriously concerned about Chinese expansion. And the very nature of the CCP China is something that Japan does not like at all. There are two main points. CCP's anti-Japanese propaganda and China's territorial claim on the Senkaku islands.

Check out the feelings of affinity Japan had with China over the course of history.

As can be seen, the 1980s were good. But when the Tianemen Square massacre happened, sentiment dropped. What followed through the 1990s was a raise of anti-Japanese propaganda, and it continued into the 2000s. Then in 2010, a Chinese trawler rammed a Japanese coast guard ship near the Senkaku islands.

And from there own, it just got worse and worse. China increasingly looking threatening. China always telling Japan to properly look back at history and to not become militant, as China's defense budget jumps and Japan's defense budget remains static, and China making massive bases in the South China Sea, and China holding a 2015 massive military parade that was supposed to "make Japan tremble". CCP Chinese blockheads have pincered a pacified Japan with a widening defense budget gap on the one hand and allegations about being militant and not properly respecting history on the other hand. The US did not have to do anything to get Japan on the US's side. Whatever gives the Chinese patriots the impression that Japan is just doing what America commands it is dead wrong, you can bet on it. Japanese feelings of affinity toward the US are at an all time high. Japan and the US fully committed to each other. Following is a graph about affinity towards the US.

Here's the full survey with the two graphs and lot's more information.
http://survey.gov-online.go.jp/h28/h28-gaiko/summary.pdf

Other countries such as India, Vietnam, and the Philippines have all steadily been building up defense relations with Japan in recent years. The building of defense relations is all stemming from fear from an overbearing China. A few of many examples if it happening which lead me to think that is the case. JMSDF have made a number of visits to the Philippines just in 2016..

And the JMSDF made their first visit to Vietnam in 2016 as well.

Japan and Australia have been developing defense relations as well, with the US. Again, the following all from 2016.

And there are more examples of India and Japan developing defense relations. All these countries of course want to keep on doing business with China, but they are all a little nervous about China's assertion in the South China Sea. Well of course, Vietnam and the Philippines have direct dispute with China in there.

With a very short reply to your long post, I think the other patriots of China on the boards speak otherwise to your views.

The fear of China in Japan is a fear of payback which is actually fanned by its government whose agenda is what's called "military normalization", and that is to be rid of its pacifist constitution by which it cannot develop defense relationship with any of the countries you named. If the Americans believe they have subdued the Japanese into eternal pacifism, you have not read any history.

 

[Jacob Martin]

You know a little about Chinese culture and philosophy .

In western world, jungle law always works , in China, there is no market for it .

Let me tell why, since China become a united and sole big empire in eastern Asia, the ruler of China began to pay more and more attention on ruling these vast land and numerous people than conquering remote infertile land .

In ancient, there are lots of small countries sustaining a relationship of tributary with China，which did not exist in Western world.

An emperor of China would get a higher evaluation by making people not suffer hunger and cold than conquering other races in China history book.

So pls do not use western way of thinking to analyse Chinese action.

There are two civilizations with huge amount of difference.


Pls tell me what kind of economic action is not Colonialism?

Not all economic interaction has to be exploitative by nature. In certain transactions, both sides gain proportionately, if not equally.

What we are discussing here is neo-colonialism - using modern concepts such as capitalism and free movement of labour and capital to subjugate a nation indirectly. The term has gained popularity due to the works of scholars who deal with issues faced by developing countries, namely, Kwame Nkrumah, Jean-Paul Sartre and Noam Chomsky. So the term has become associated with what developed countries have inflicted on developing nations - a combination of economic subjugation and political manipulation such as regime change.

Two of the most obvious economic aspects is extraction of raw materials and over-development of only those economic sectors that help in above-mentioned extraction. So people are very much aware of the fact that Western oil interests have manipulated Middle Eastern politics to retain control over oil, including the regime change whereby the Pahlavi dynasty was restored by removing a popular government in Iran. Also the way US multinational corporations have maintained control over smaller nations, example being the fruit industry and Central America.

So any criticism of the West for economic colonialism would be equally applicable to any other country that tries to do the same. If the economic model imposed on a nation is extraction and export of one or more raw materials, and infrastructure development narrowly tailored to help in that, then it is economic colonialism - it doesn't matter whether it is done by US or China.

As an example, let us consider the question of African debt. Many economists believe that the loans given by Western governments and multilateral agencies to African nations cannot be repaid, and since most of it was in any case towards neo-colonial subjugation so it should be waived off. Question is - do these parameters change simply because now China is doing the lending? And if one believes that loans aimed towards economic exploitation should not be repaid, then why would it not apply to China?

I gave this preface because it is not possible to simply answer the question you have raised without a framework. As for types of economic activities that are not colonialism, investment in human resources would be an example. Education, healthcare and research are capacity building in nature, as they help the people take care of their own needs. Of course that does not mean all such investment is not motivated or that all investment in other areas is colonialism, each individual example needs to be studied and analysed separately.

Which is why I am against blanket assertions that x or y is neo-colonial, without all the facts in hand on each case.

 

[iajj]

Not all economic interaction has to be exploitative by nature. In certain transactions, both sides gain proportionately, if not equally.

What we are discussing here is neo-colonialism - using modern concepts such as capitalism and free movement of labour and capital to subjugate a nation indirectly. The term has gained popularity due to the works of scholars who deal with issues faced by developing countries, namely, Kwame Nkrumah, Jean-Paul Sartre and Noam Chomsky. So the term has become associated with what developed countries have inflicted on developing nations - a combination of economic subjugation and political manipulation such as regime change.

Two of the most obvious economic aspects is extraction of raw materials and over-development of only those economic sectors that help in above-mentioned extraction. So people are very much aware of the fact that Western oil interests have manipulated Middle Eastern politics to retain control over oil, including the regime change whereby the Pahlavi dynasty was restored by removing a popular government in Iran. Also the way US multinational corporations have maintained control over smaller nations, example being the fruit industry and Central America.

So any criticism of the West for economic colonialism would be equally applicable to any other country that tries to do the same. If the economic model imposed on a nation is extraction and export of one or more raw materials, and infrastructure development narrowly tailored to help in that, then it is economic colonialism - it doesn't matter whether it is done by US or China.

As an example, let us consider the question of African debt. Many economists believe that the loans given by Western governments and multilateral agencies to African nations cannot be repaid, and since most of it was in any case towards neo-colonial subjugation so it should be waived off. Question is - do these parameters change simply because now China is doing the lending? And if one believes that loans aimed towards economic exploitation should not be repaid, then why would it not apply to China?

I gave this preface because it is not possible to simply answer the question you have raised without a framework. As for types of economic activities that are not colonialism, investment in human resources would be an example. Education, healthcare and research are capacity building in nature, as they help the people take care of their own needs. Of course that does not mean all such investment is not motivated or that all investment in other areas is colonialism, each individual example needs to be studied and analysed separately.

Which is why I am against blanket assertions that x or y is neo-colonial, without all the facts in hand on each case.

this is actually an articulate post from an yindoo member.

a stupid bazi, ****, termed me a conspiracy theorist just recently. i am not; nor was sartre or chomsky. and i am going to say that many a neo-colonial enterprise in the wake of the cascade of african national movements in the 50s and 60s was conspiratorial in nature - and that chinese economic outreach in africa today is not.

this outreach may be designed by two economically unequal parties, much like the disparity between belgium and france and their like and their former colonial subjects six decades ago. and the terms and manner of the economic transactions between china and africa today may not drastically reduce that economic inequality. BUT we also observe a few crucial markers that delineate the gulf between american-european neo-colonialism in africa and sino-african economic partnerships. first, the latter are never designed to perpetuate that said inequality; second, china never aspires to craft and superimpose on the africans a political ideology or hegemonic thought system that assists in that perpetuation. third, while market forces do not favor all participants equally and african countries more often than not find themselves less equal when dealing with capital-rich trading partners in western europe, north america and now china, china stands out among the latter for being respectful and humble when a local market situation doesn't favor its bargaining position and doesn't "conspire" through subversive political tactics or blatant military coercion to accomplish its trade objectives. in truth, all african friends recognize the salience of these three points and see china in very different light from their abusive, former colonial overlords and neo-colonial media outlets like the times must frequently find isolated incidences of local discontent to fabricate a case of chinese "neo-colonialism"; such is the style and standard of the times and other liberal/neo-colonial media.

i also want to emphasize that the critique of neo-colonialism is a perpetual project. the perpetuality derives from its permanent openness and infinite self-reflexivity. in other words, a serious critic of neo-colonialism must decline to take up the self-deflating task of designing a non-subjugative, non-exploitative, and "capacity building" aid program that can free the continent from neo-colonialism. such a program is ineluctably a mirage, a coction of several evolving, deceptive neo-colonial fantasies of the most sinister nature prescribed most often by the most entrenched neo-colonial forces.

china is not one of them. china only steps in and makes a competing offer of financing or engineering in a competitive market situation where angloamericans and europeans used to dominate. chinese offers aim to compete against other offers on the plate, not to rectify a fundamental political and economic justice that historically was none of china's making, and china's behavior is purely market drive and shaded by neither neo-colonial machination nor self-congratulatory leftist guilt. and as i explained above, i don't believe china or anyone is capable of designing an economic program that can truly and forever overthrow the neo-colonial project, and certainly china must not be morally and diplomatically responsible for such a program. china offers the best deal, however unequal, africans can get on an open market of financing and technology. and china frames the offer in as simplistic, market-transparent terms as possible, in absence of any unspoken ideological, hegemonic agenda and without a hint of the threat of military force and political domination.

 

[Mangus Ortus Novem]

this is actually an articulate post from an yindoo member.

a stupid bazi, @Chinese-Dragon, termed me a conspiracy theorist just recently. i am not; nor was sartre or chomsky. and i am going to say that many a neo-colonial enterprise in the wake of the cascade of african national movements in the 50s and 60s was conspiratorial in nature - and that chinese economic outreach in africa today is not.

this outreach may be designed by two economically unequal parties, much like the disparity between belgium and france and their like and their former colonial subjects six decades ago. and the terms and manner of the economic transactions between china and africa today may not drastically reduce that economic inequality. BUT we also observe a few crucial markers that delineate the gulf between american-european neo-colonialism in africa and sino-african economic partnerships. first, the latter are never designed to perpetuate that said inequality; second, china never aspires to craft and superimpose on the africans a political ideology or hegemonic thought system that assists in that perpetuation. third, while market forces do not favor all participants equally and african countries more often than not find themselves less equal when dealing with capital-rich trading partners in western europe, north america and now china, china stands out among the latter for being respectful and humble when a local market situation doesn't favor its bargaining position and doesn't "conspire" through subversive political tactics or blatant military coercion to accomplish its trade objectives. in truth, all african friends recognize the salience of these three points and see china in very different light from their abusive, former colonial overlords and neo-colonial media outlets like the times must frequently find isolated incidences of local discontent to fabricate a case of chinese "neo-colonialism"; such is the style and standard of the times and other liberal/neo-colonial media.

i also want to emphasize that the critique of neo-colonialism is a perpetual project. the perpetuality derives from its permanent openness and infinite self-reflexivity. in other words, a serious critic of neo-colonialism must decline to take up the self-deflating task of designing a non-subjugative, non-exploitative, and "capacity building" aid program that can free the continent from neo-colonialism. such a program is ineluctably a mirage, a coction of several evolving, deceptive neo-colonial fantasies of the most sinister nature prescribed most often by the most entrenched neo-colonial forces.

china is not one of them. china only steps in and makes a competing offer of financing or engineering in a competitive market situation where angloamericans and europeans used to dominate. chinese offers aim to compete against other offers on the plate, not to rectify a fundamental political and economic justice that historically was none of china's making, and china's behavior is purely market drive and shaded by neither neo-colonial machination nor self-congratulatory leftist guilt. and as i explained above, i don't believe china or anyone is capable of designing an economic program that can truly and forever overthrow the neo-colonial project, and certainly china must not be morally and diplomatically responsible for such a program. china offers the best deal, however unequal, africans can get on an open market of financing and technology. and china frames the offer in as simplistic, market-transparent terms as possible, in absence of any unspoken ideological, hegemonic agenda and without a hint of the threat of military force and political domination.

Kind sir/madam,

What a powerful dissertation...nay... clinical analysis and retort!

The Chinese dialectics are very different now than they were in the days of Mr. Mao.

China wants to export products and services...long gone are the days when we found revolution exports to Africa or Albania... It is Win-win paradigm now.


Equality is far off...since, basically Human Condition is unequal.
We have to wait a very long time before, if ever, such a state can be achieved.

As I have said earlier in this thread... the entire OP is so sub par that it cant even be considered a propoganda piece. MSM is not only publishing fake news...but fake intellectualism as well.

Allow me to thank you for a razor sharp rebutal of OP.

Regards,

SPF

Age of Reason

 

[Jlaw]

You forgot Spratlys. You forgot your lethal aggression against Vietnamese fishermen. You forgot both sides were close to an armed confrontation during the oil rig crisis. You forget too many things. Blind?

Vietnamese deserve it for being a sneaky thief. I hope there will be another war with Vietnam in the near future to finish you guys off for good.

 

[Viet]

Vietnamese deserve it for being a sneaky thief. I hope there will be another war with Vietnam in the near future to finish you guys off for good.

You hope for a war with Vietnam? The likelyhood that to happen is close to zero. Unless there is a civil war broke out in Vietnam. The economy is in chaos. The khmers in Cambodia run amok and attack us. Thailand stages invasion in Laos, forcing us to intervene. You are infamous as weakling and coward, used to take opportunity attacking Vietnam when we face multiple threats inside and outside.

Your wish may come true with war with Russia. The Russians took large parts of China at last time. They may take the rest by next time.

 

[Place Of Space]

You hope for a war with Vietnam? The likelyhood that to happen is close to zero. Unless there is a civil war broke out in Vietnam. The economy is in chaos. The khmers in Cambodia run amok and attack us. Thailand stages invasion in Laos, forcing us to intervene. You are infamous as weakling and coward, used to take opportunity attacking Vietnam when we face multiple threats inside and outside.

Your wish may come true with war with Russia. The Russians took large parts of China at last time. They may take the rest by next time.

Nonsense off-topic typing, you idiot.

 

[Stuttgart001]

You hope for a war with Vietnam? The likelyhood that to happen is close to zero. Unless there is a civil war broke out in Vietnam. The economy is in chaos. The khmers in Cambodia run amok and attack us. Thailand stages invasion in Laos, forcing us to intervene. You are infamous as weakling and coward, used to take opportunity attacking Vietnam when we face multiple threats inside and outside.

The key point of Vietnam being punished by China in the past is that Vietnam always wanted to occupy the entire indochina penisula, which would be a glorious and great dream in Vietnam propoganda.

Your wish may come true with war with Russia. The Russians took large parts of China at last time. They may take the rest by next time.

When China was weak, we lost a lot, so Chinese sacrificed too much to be strong again.
The objective of being strong is not to revenge but to protect our interest and make our people live a better life .
PRC ,which's not that weak Qing Dynasty ,would never give up any territory .

 

[Viet]

The key point of Vietnam being punished by China in the past is that Vietnam always wanted to occupy the entire indochina penisula, which would be a glorious and great dream in Vietnam propoganda.

When China was weak, we lost a lot, so Chinese sacrificed too much to be strong again.
The objective of being strong is not to revenge but to protect our interest and make our people live a better life .
PRC ,which's not that weak Qing Dynasty ,would never give up any territory .

You are paranoid, seeing Indochina everywhere. We are not living in medieval times. No more. Do you think we will come to China and make you to slaves once we annex Laos and Cambodia? You don't know Vietnam is one of the smallest countries in SE Asia. We are smaller than Thailand, Burma and Indonesia? Why don't you fear them?

The multiple brutal invasions of Vietnam from the Han, Song, Ming, Yuan, Qing to communist China including in Paracels and Spratlys all because of your fear of Vietnam indochinese dream?

Chinese are funny people.

No in reality you act because of bottomless hatred.

Vietnam enjoys 300 years peace during the Le because we maintained military superiority over the Chinese army.

The only thing that matters.

Yes you know how it is if you are weak. The Russians took more lands from you than all islands in the SC sea combined.

 

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

Sorry. The geographic distance has no relationship with geographical discovery.
That's why most of islands of the oceans wasn't found by westerners not their island natives.
Anyway, there are clear records about these islands discoved and utilized by Chinese in China history book.

Anyone who feels unfair could just blame your ancestors who stayed at home or didn't record anything .


What you said about Japanese feelings of affinity toward the US and China just proved my argument.
The case Japan feels affinitive toward the US which controlls Japan in all aspects proved the nature of respecting strong power.
The denail of what Japan has done to Asian people and confession of what he has done to westerners is another evidence to prove Japanese nature .
Feeling no threat from a more anti-japan neighbor reveals what Japan cares about is the strength .
A weak China is Japan's favourite , which is obviously for Japanese interest .
For those nations who have disputes with China, China development is a threat or an expansion in their eyes .
To those nations who has traditional friendly relationship and common interest with China, China development is a goodliness and a gift.


I am afraind your greatgrand parents would not be qualified to be colonisers who usually brought swords and guns to clean the natives, which we Chinese are no good at .

i used 'colonisers' because the context here as exerted by the few people(e.g Indians)in this thread is is projecting the impression that Chinese are neo-colonists. Thus, im just playing along with the game being setup here.

Of cos my greatgrandparents and the rest of the coastal Chinese that that came to Southeast Asia never had the intention of conquest. On the contrary, the Chinese are highly adaptive to new surroundings- contributing to these new lands in numerous ways, which is why with the exception of Laos and East Timor where very few Chinese ever went, virtually all the SEA economies are controlled by the Chinese people in these countries.

In SEA, ethnic Chinese are always higher in social status than the natives . Chinese women are largely beyond the reach of native men(unless you are very rich) and are often the object of their fantasy- simply because they(Chinese women) are fair-skinned, have delicate neotenised mongoloid features and are unobtainable, while Chinese men are often sought after by native women(Pinoy, Malay, Thai, Bamar, Khmer and Vietnamese who themselves already have a close genetic relationship with the Chinese), due to being associated with higher social status, having neotenised mongoloid features, fair-skinned- just by being Chinese.

The above sounds like a typical 'Sino-superiority' rant- but go take a look or maybe spend a couple of years in any SEA societies. Interact with the people there and observe the class strata there and and come to your own conclusion whether it's true.

Anyway, my point is the Chinese are always welcomed by SEA entities- by choice or not- simply because they need the former to be there.

 

[Jlaw]

Do you think we will come to China and make you to slaves once we annex Laos and Cambodia?

lol. wake up, you're having a wet dream again!

 

[Stuttgart001]

You are paranoid, seeing Indochina everywhere. We are not living in medieval times. No more. Do you think we will come to China and make you to slaves once we annex Laos and Cambodia? You don't know Vietnam is one of the smallest countries in SE Asia. We are smaller than Thailand, Burma and Indonesia? Why don't you fear them?

The multiple brutal invasions of Vietnam from the Han, Song, Ming, Yuan, Qing to communist China including in Paracels and Spratlys all because of your fear of Vietnam indochinese dream?

You have no idea about the tributal system.
In empire times, China empire has the obigation to help its tributaries including Vietnam Kingdom.
If Vietnam invaded China's tributaries, China has to do their favor to save them.
In contrast, China would help Vietnam, if Vietnam was invaded by others ,one of which was French Third Republic .

There is no fear existing . US launched the strike at Iraq in 1991 ,not because US was afraid of Iraq .
Vietnam used to be stronger than other indochina nations , which gave the ruler of Vietnam confidence and ambition to conquer the entire indochina penisula.

The other reasoms

Chinese are funny people.

No in reality you act because of bottomless hatred.

Vietnam enjoys 300 years peace during the Le because we maintained military superiority over the Chinese army.

The only thing that matters.

I don't want to judge the might vietnamese millitary force, cause everyone except for Chinese and Vietnamese would be more neutral on this issue.
All I want to say is there are too many weak and small tributaries around China did not send some governer to rule them nor rob their weath nor monger their people as slaves.
For Vietnam, China empire used to support the king of Vietnam to counter the usurper many times, which was recorded as the invasion of China by the successful usurper in Vietnam historybook .
There were some exiled king of Vietnam even dying and buried in China, which you would never hear from your historybook.

Yes you know how it is if you are weak. The Russians took more lands from you than all islands in the SC sea combined.

OK.Just live in your dreams .
I don't want to comment on your nonsense .
These small nations of eastern Europe and middle Asia should care about their lands more than China.
PRC would not give up its territory to anyone ,neither Russia nor Vietnam.


In 1960s, every Chinese thought of Vietnamese as brothers ,Vice verse.
Then all of a sudden, both sides are full of bottomless hatred.
Is it ridiculous ?
Nationalism is a perfect tool used by the ruler to transfer inner contradicts.
You need to learn more except from your own books.

 

[Suika]

You think I was talking about Nanjing massacre.
Sorry. I was talking about out of number of massacres happened in China besides Nanjing.
How Japanese soldiers treated cizitens and war prisoners were famous in the whole world .
Japanese treated Chinese citizens everywhere the same brutelly.
Japanese solider even killed its own citizens when defeated.
Lots of events were recorded by westerners not CCP .
And the number 300000 was not given by CCP first, so pls stop the propaganda BS.
Ask Korean people whether or not Japanese denied what they have done.
Indeed,Japan should be worried about the raise of China ,given all he has done in the past.

You're missing the point. It's the intentional disagreement over history as to what happened that makes it impossible to resolve the historical issue. Even if Japanese recognize and apologize for all the brutality they did during the war including the chemical and bio weapons, all the slaughtering, the CPP will still say "not good enough, that ultra-rightist denies it fully so they still deny history". It's no use. Japan is a country of freedom of speech. There will always be a tiny percent that outright denies Nanking or other atrocities. But should not force people to believe something. So it is not fair for CPP to point the finger at the few ultra-nationalists and smear the whole country. Chinese people probably don't understand this because they probably expect the government to force a belief about the war. And yet, even if the Japanese government was to issue more detailed and specific information in accordance to what really happened, it will include a portion saying that about 50,000 were massacred. To such statements, then the CPP announces that the Japanese are white washers and thus never accept statements of apology. It can't be resolved because the CPP won't forgive and continues to use the history as a political tool. If the CPP would recognize an estimate that 20,000-100,000 were slaughtered at Nanking, then the historical issue can be resolved. But they intentional keep disagreement on history alive to use it as a political tool. So it doesn't matter if Japanese include all the other horrible things of war that they did. CPP never accepts apology and never puts the issue at rest.

And even at that, the Japanese ought to still be able to visit the Yasukuni Shrine for their war dead without always being criticized. Every time Japanese politicians visit the shrine, CCP says that Japan fails to recognize the wrongs that it did. That's separate. Yasukuni Shrine is for Japan's war dead and enemy or not to the Chinese, they still ought to have a place for remembrance as they fought for Japan in the age when the Europeans were colonizing everyone else. Should the Japanese have been a loser instead like all the others in Asia or in Africa and be colonize. They did not create that era of imperialism. It came upon them, so they competed for survival, so visiting Japanese war dead should not be criticized. But CCP combined the visits with Japan's so-called "white washing".

Never trust the CCP.

 

[Viet]

You have no idea about the tributal system.
In empire times, China empire has the obigation to help its tributaries including Vietnam Kingdom.
If Vietnam invaded China's tributaries, China has to do their favor to save them.
In contrast, China would help Vietnam, if Vietnam was invaded by others ,one of which was French Third Republic .

There is no fear existing . US launched the strike at Iraq in 1991 ,not because US was afraid of Iraq .
Vietnam used to be stronger than other indochina nations , which gave the ruler of Vietnam confidence and ambition to conquer the entire indochina penisula.

The other reasoms

I don't want to judge the might vietnamese millitary force, cause everyone except for Chinese and Vietnamese would be more neutral on this issue.
All I want to say is there are too many weak and small tributaries around China did not send some governer to rule them nor rob their weath nor monger their people as slaves.
For Vietnam, China empire used to support the king of Vietnam to counter the usurper many times, which was recorded as the invasion of China by the successful usurper in Vietnam historybook .
There were some exiled king of Vietnam even dying and buried in China, which you would never hear from your historybook.


OK.Just live in your dreams .
I don't want to comment on your nonsense .
These small nations of eastern Europe and middle Asia should care about their lands more than China.
PRC would not give up its territory to anyone ,neither Russia nor Vietnam.


In 1960s, every Chinese thought of Vietnamese as brothers ,Vice verse.
Then all of a sudden, both sides are full of bottomless hatred.
Is it ridiculous ?
Nationalism is a perfect tool used by the ruler to transfer inner contradicts.
You need to learn more except from your own books.

Provide proof that Chinese tribunal system is a military alliance like NATO or Wasaw Pact! Give me the paragraph in the treaty!