The Need of Sino-Japanese Correspondence in the 21st Century: Is there an Empirical Validation ?

[Genesis]

There were many bloody, destructive incidents of conflict between Japan , Korea and China. And yes, pardon me for my weakness in the specifics of the Imjin Wars. To be honest, from my readings in past articles and journals on that 16th century conflict, it was doomed to failure. Tho I agree with many Japanese academics when they say that Hideyoshi was revolutionary because of his unifying power, having taken the necessary action to unify the waring clans of Japan. Before Hideyoshi came about, Japan was wrecked in a blood internal conflict vying for power and this 3 centuries of internal warfare is referred to as the Sengoku Jidai 戦国時代. When Hideyoshi came, he personally subjugated the clans and was then declared Daijo Daijin -- Imperial Chancellor.

The dynamic of Japan's feudal period was similar to the feudal period in Europe. There were too many military forces in Japan who were itching and also vying for power, despite the fact that they were already subjugated by Hideyoshi. So, in a meta-analytic view, Hideyoshi's decision to go into Korea was a necessity for Japan. And I mean this. Whether or not his military campaigns ended in failure or success, he had needed to do it so as to ensure that those Japanese Diamyos and their Samurais were to exert their militant desires somewhere else. Thousands of them died in war with the Imperial Ming Army and the Joseon Army. Those were thousands of men who would not war in Japan. So if i incur the wrath of some Japanese readers, i mean this in the most respectful way, that it was a necessity that the some 100,000+ Japanese warriors had died in that conflict.

After the collapse of Hideyoshi's ambition in Korea, the Japanese military command was so devastated by the conflict that it had compelled the ruling Daimyos to implement a closed door policy. Eventually the Tokugawa Shogunate took power , and ensured this 2 century-long closed door policy, something that the Chinese Ming Dynasty had also implemented. It was during these 200 years post-Hideyoshi Japan that the nation experienced a cultural renaissance, and for a long time the nation was at peace, bereft of internal conflict.

Something very similar to the European Crusades and post-crusader Europe. Well, to an extent.

that's been done many times in China reunifying the land and the Qin emperor did it under worse circumstances as did Song in terms of diversity.

Ming and Josen Korea also had this problem of too many generals and their desire for power. The first emperor and king did the same thing, eliminate them all. They were the communist purges before communism.

If you mean common identity, that still didn't exist, until Meiji.

Since you mentioned Europe, Otto I crushed rebellions, took their power, promoted burocrates and church based on loyalty and more, French king took nobles to Versailles, like the Tokugawa.

It can be done without the war, but at that period, Hideoshi was so arrogant with his power, that he think he can do anything. Much like the Spanish conquistadors in Philippines that thought 1000 men was enough to take China.

Nei hou ma

While the legacy of World War II has caused mistrust between China and Japan, the two countries are making efforts to build mutual trust through bilateral dialogue.

I think that some of the older generation in Japan have a psychological issue with China's Ascendancy, this is because during their life they were used to the idea that it was Japan that was the economic leader , power house of Asia-Pacific. This has changed in 2010 when China had surpassed, eclipsed Japan as the 2nd largest economy in the entire civilized world.

But to us younger generation of Japanese, we realize and accept this. There are segments in Japanese population that sees positives of China, and realize that China is not only the preeminent economic power in Asia, but also one that has formidable military capability.

Many factors favor close relationship between Tokyo and Beijing. China has huge economic and cultural potential, and enjoys broad-based support from the developing world. China's SCO organization is an example of this. Japan is a strong economic and technological power, and plays an important role among the industrialized countries. Therefore, Sino-Japanese bilateral cooperation and interdependence are not only beneficial for the two countries and the Asia-Pacific region, they are also significant for promoting global cooperation and economic development.

Japan , like China, is a changing equation. The older generation that had took part in the Great Pacific War are dying. My grandfather, for example, who was a veteran of the Imperial Navy , is part of the dying generation. The new generation of Japanese who are in their 20-30s age range are taking up roles in business, politics, academia -- and all have a different view of China. The China they know is not a nation that is underdeveloped, plagued with civil war. The China we see and have come to know is a rising Great Power: economic and military.

We Japanese cannot afford to perpetuate the China Threat Theory that was espoused by the post-war Japanese generation, whom are either dead or dying. The China Threat Theory will only foster a culture and sentiment of wariness of China and thus cause political legislature being passed that is anti-thetical to peaceful compromise, peaceful dialogue. Rather, Japanese political leadership must implement a "Comprehensive China Approach Theory", wherein both sides must tone down the rhetoric, must entice a language of inclusivity. It is clear that Abe's recent excessive China Threat speech that this doesn't work. Abe and Leaders who will take on the helm after him should continue a policy for Japan's normalization, increase international cooperation, but should be corrigible to working with China. Japan simply cannot afford to ignore China.

We must find it psychologically possible to accept that China is a Great Power in Asia-Pacific. And mechanisms should be invested to foster greater positive communication with China's people, and most importantly China's Leadership. Japan can no longer afford to implement a policy of black and white. I believe that by doing so, China and Japan can find many ways solve regional and international exigencies in the event it arises.

It will take time, we can wait, we would need to pass America in GDP first anyways before we do anything major. That's also about the time when Eastern China will reach the same living standards as Korea and Japan and the rest becomes developed as well, though on the lower end.

So let's all just calm down, relax and wait. Sometimes time is the best solution.

 

[Grand Historian]

There were many bloody, destructive incidents of conflict between Japan , Korea and China. And yes, pardon me for my weakness in the specifics of the Imjin Wars. To be honest, from my readings in past articles and journals on that 16th century conflict, it was doomed to failure. Tho I agree with many Japanese academics when they say that Hideyoshi was revolutionary because of his unifying power, having taken the necessary action to unify the waring clans of Japan. Before Hideyoshi came about, Japan was wrecked in a blood internal conflict vying for power and this 3 centuries of internal warfare is referred to as the Sengoku Jidai 戦国時代. When Hideyoshi came, he personally subjugated the clans and was then declared Daijo Daijin -- Imperial Chancellor.

The dynamic of Japan's feudal period was similar to the feudal period in Europe. There were too many military forces in Japan who were itching and also vying for power, despite the fact that they were already subjugated by Hideyoshi. So, in a meta-analytic view, Hideyoshi's decision to go into Korea was a necessity for Japan. And I mean this. Whether or not his military campaigns ended in failure or success, he had needed to do it so as to ensure that those Japanese Diamyos and their Samurais were to exert their militant desires somewhere else. Thousands of them died in war with the Imperial Ming Army and the Joseon Army. Those were thousands of men who would not war in Japan. So if i incur the wrath of some Japanese readers, i mean this in the most respectful way, that it was a necessity that the some 100,000+ Japanese warriors had died in that conflict.

After the collapse of Hideyoshi's ambition in Korea, the Japanese military command was so devastated by the conflict that it had compelled the ruling Daimyos to implement a closed door policy. Eventually the Tokugawa Shogunate took power , and ensured this 2 century-long closed door policy, something that the Chinese Ming Dynasty had also implemented. It was during these 200 years post-Hideyoshi Japan that the nation experienced a cultural renaissance, and for a long time the nation was at peace, bereft of internal conflict.

Something very similar to the European Crusades and post-crusader Europe. Well, to an extent.

The argument that Hideyoshi wanted to deplete the power of the daimyos and their samurai/ashigaru is incorrect,if that was the case he would have sent the Eastern daimyos over to die.

Hideyoshi's dream was a continuation of Nobunaga's ambition,he wrote a letter to King Seonjo expressing his beliefs that he was of divine birth and wanted to subjugate the Ming and transform Chinese society to a Japanese one.

Hideyoshi even had plans to retire in Ningbo and already made plans to grant Beijing and 10 provinces to the Japanese emperor and the rest of the lands were to be divided by his loyal damiyos.

While sources point out that lower ranking samurai such as Yoshino Jingozaemon believed that Korean peninsula was once under Japanese rule(harking back to the myth of Jingu) while the monk Genso Keitetsu argued that the invasion of Joseon Korea was divine punishment for the Mongol invasion of Japan.

If anything the daimyos that campaigned in Korea had more sense than Hideyoshi they received Shen Weijing's embassies and wanted to end the conflict instead of continuing it,while the Ming ambushed the hapless ambassadors that Konishi Yukinaga sent.

Ming and Josen Korea also had this problem of too many generals and their desire for power. The first emperor and king did the same thing, eliminate them all. They were the communist purges before communism.

In my opinion the Joseon had it far worse,it the way they treated generals resembles the corruption of the Song dynasty,while Ming generals had more leeway and actively campaigned while being theoretically overruled by civil officials.

 

[Huaren]

So let's all just calm down, relax and wait. Sometimes time is the best solution.

As in this case time is the best solution for China, rivals who cant keep out with growth of china would likely try anything they could to disturb the development of china, since that would be their only chance for the future.

 

[Aepsilons]

that's been done many times in China reunifying the land and the Qin emperor did it under worse circumstances as did Song in terms of diversity.

You're absolutely right. The Chinese Emperor Qin Shi Huang Di was definitely a first example of how one ruler could subdue and rule the vast entity that is Zhongguo. I remember reading about the absolute determination the Emperor Qin Shi Huang Di had in destroying old enemies, such as his decision to completely annihilate the Zhou. But i guess one can say that despite his brutal tactics, for the first time ever, China was unified. There is no way Japanese waring states period (Sengoku Jidai) can compare to the level of brutality and breadth that was the Chinese Waring States Period 战国时代. I mean, this period was happening even before the concept of a Japan was even birthed. So it is a reminder for many Japanese academics like myself that when dealing with China, we are dealing with an ancient entity.

Ming and Josen Korea also had this problem of too many generals and their desire for power. The first emperor and king did the same thing, eliminate them all. They were the communist purges before communism.

I agree. And I should also mention that the Joseon Kingdom owes its existence to the alliance it had with the Ming Dynasty, who upheld their end of the bargain and came to Joseon's aid. On multiple occasions.

Since you mentioned Europe, Otto I crushed rebellions, took their power, promoted burocrates and church based on loyalty and more, French king took nobles to Versailles, like the Tokugawa.

Very good examples. Thank You.

It can be done without the war, but at that period, Hideoshi was so arrogant with his power, that he think he can do anything. Much like the Spanish conquistadors in Philippines that thought 1000 men was enough to take China.

The nationalist in me would have [personally] wanted to have seen Hideyoshi conquer Korea, but the realist in me knows that it simply was not possible. A prolonged war with Korea meant a prolonged war with China. And Japan did not have the man power and economic resources to successfully defeat both Korea and China. Tho i admire the spirit of Hideyoshi's campaigns.

Much like the Spanish conquistadors in Philippines that thought 1000 men was enough to take China.

The Spaniards under Ferdinand Magellan, then later under Miguel Lopez de Legaspi, were able to conquer the Philippines so easily was because, unlike China - Korea - Japan, which were unified under one centralized government , the Philippines was not a unified or centralized state. They were composed of multiple regional princely states, based on the three islands of Luzon, the Visayas, and Mindanao. Plus, the native Filipinos did not have an ally to whom they could call for aid , which the Koreans had with China.

It will take time, we can wait, we would need to pass America in GDP first anyways before we do anything major. That's also about the time when Eastern China will reach the same living standards as Korea and Japan and the rest becomes developed as well, though on the lower end.

Sure, that is only bound to happen, in time.

So let's all just calm down, relax and wait. Sometimes time is the best solution.

Both our peoples need to learn to not let our passions, especially our nationalistic tendencies rule our minds. And find common ground.

The argument that Hideyoshi wanted to deplete the power of the daimyos and their samurai/ashigaru is incorrect,if that was the case he would have sent the Eastern daimyos over to die.

I agree with you, actually most Japanese academic sources would argue that the objective of Hideyoshi was the complete military conquest and control of Joseon, and eventually, also even Ming China. The observer in me can't help but find a meta-analytic view; finding some positives of our military catastrophe in Korea.

In my opinion the Joseon had it far worse,it the way they treated generals resembles the corruption of the Song dynasty,while Ming generals had more leeway and actively campaigned while being theoretically overruled by civil officials.

Agreed.

 

[Viet]

Wow, what a well-written article @Nihonjin1051.

As for me I do not believe the China threat theory holds any water. In fact we are the ones who are in a defensive stance, you don't see any country in the world surrounded by Chinese military bases, we don't even have any overseas military bases. We are the ones who are surrounded by US military bases in every direction.

And we only spend 1.4% of our GDP on defence, almost the lowest in the world, even though we have the largest population in the world.

Vested interests are hyping up the China threat, in an attempt to manage and contain our economic rise. I really do not know what they will say when we shift into a higher gear in the coming years.

any thought when you throw the fcking 9 now 11 dash line into trash bin?
do you seriously think we will buy this "peaceful" stuff?

some biases, well first, there's the invasion of Japan on Korea during Tang dynasty and the Korean three kingdoms, but Japan was primitive then and was easily brushed aside.

Then Hideoshi didn't collapse and thus the Korean war, but Korean war drained him and thus he collapsed. He was getting rocked on the seas and by the second invasion, he pretty much didn't make it too far.

To correct something else, WW2 left almost no scars on China, many, including my dad was surprised when the narrative was changed to find out the WW2 facts. China had long left those things behind, but there are other actors at work.

The shrine doesn't bother us so much as a war memorial, but it reminds us even today a nation of one hundred million is disregarding our feelings on sensitive matters. It especially irks us that the world order has us being the secondary nation. This is like US listening to Canada, I'm pretty sure the US leadership thought that was insane.

China and Japan needs to find a balance, we can divide Asia along with Korea amongst ourselves, and all expand outwards and let the chips fall where they may, or we are going to have to fight it out and see who's the strongest.

You still see the problems as Senkaku islands, I can tell you it is not. The islands and SCS is the last remaining reminder and proof that China was at one point beaten. China can easily give the island to Japan, if our objectives are met, you know what those are don't you.


Just as aside, Korea is as good as our ally, for the simple reason they won't ever admit they are weaker than Japan, they will concede to us, as we are a nation far bigger in size, but to you never seems to be the answer. I mean they won't go to war for us, but they also won't go to war against us, that's good enough for me.


The end question is how will Japan handle it when China regains our position as not only the undisputed nation in Asia, but challenging the world powers, which right now is just the US.

If present is any indication, not well.

Sounds arrogant, and maybe not the nicest post, but this is the problem before us, we can either solve it or ignore it.

what an arrogant poster

 

[Aepsilons]

Examining Intergovernmentalism in Northeast Asia: Shaping Distrust to Cooperation​

By: @Nihonjin1051 ​

I also wanted to note that Japan, South Korea and China have been exhibiting a growing interest in political and economic cooperation since the 1990s. Japan , South Korea and China were able to develop economic and political cooperation through the use of the concept of multilayered Intergovernmentalism.

I want to make it known that political and economic cooperation within the framework of Northeast Asia is absolutely possible if we refer to the literature regarding European integration. I would like to cite the two dominate schools that theories the European integration process which include: 1) Neofunctionalism and 2) Intergovernmentalism. There are existing dichotomies between Intergovernmentalism and Neofunctionalism.

Neofunctional processes emphasize that the high and rising levels of economic and technological interdependence, the spillover effects created by them, and the growing role of supranational institutions in the process of integration. Neofunctional approach espouse that any integrative action in one sector steps down actions in related sectors, and this integration process would create new problems that could only be solved by further cooperation. Therefore, the beginning of cooperation in high politics areas and eventually general integration would be achieved by a whole new entry of supranational entities. We saw this in Europe in the form of the six European states founded the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in 1951 and also the European Economic Community (EEC).

The second theory, the Intergovernmentalism Theory, identifies the heads of state and government as key central players. The theory states that regional integration can best be understood through series of bargains between the heads of government , which would then be supported by small ministerial and advisory board. The beauty of this Theory is that the heads are not enforced to accept any policies that would be considered unacceptable. This theory is based on the fact that decision making amongst the partners would be done by unanimous consent. The outcomes will converge on what political scientists would deem as “the lowest common denominator”. The reason why I think that China , Japan and South Korea can solve core interest issues through Intergovernmentalism is because it allows consensus agreement and direct communication with heads of state. Right now, Intergovernmentalism is perfect for Japan, South Korea and China because Northeast Asia has not yet reached the stage of integration as seen in the European context.

Reference:

Aminian, N., & Calderon, C. (2010). Prospects for Closer Economic Cooperation in Northeast Asia. Review Of Development Economics, 14(3), 417-432. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9361.2010.00562.x

Yoshimatsu, H. (2005). From Distrust to Mutual Interests?: Emerging Cooperation in Northeast Asia. East Asia: An International Quarterly, 22(4), 18-38.

Yoshimatsu, H. (2010). Understanding Regulatory Governance in Northeast Asia: Environmental and Technological Cooperation among China, Japan and Korea. Asian Journal Of Political Science, 18(3), 227-247. doi:10.1080/02185377.2010.527209

 

[opruh]

it would be wonderful if China and Japan leaves their differences behind and start cooperating more, this will be beneficial to a lot of people

 

[Indos]

Very good work, must read thread.

 

[mike2000]

well, its good reading such a nice article. But i hate to act as spoiler, since most of(if not all) the comments on here was largely positive towards each other bar Viet post.

However, we need to come back to reality...I don't see any China-Japan partnership/cooperation anytime soon, not for a longgggggg time. The level of hate they have for each other is too high, similar to Koreans towards Japan and vice versa.

The island issues/disputes makes matter even worse, and there is no visible solution in sight. So this brings in even more emotions when the territorial disputes flares up. Moreover most Asians will still rather have the U.S or even a Western country being the dominant power in Asia, since we dont have any territorial issues with any country in the region, and they still have a largely postive view of us than their neighbours/rival countries. Don't get me wrong, im not trying to be a white supremacists or whatever, im just making a point/saying what i have noticed during my many journeys/stay in Asia.

As for the saying that China rise is peaceful and would be considered as such, with all due respect this is simply naive and laughable. China may have as priority economic development(which i think they truly have for now) over military adventures or whatever, But that doesn't means they wouldn't be contained by the U.S/west or even Japan. Every rising power will always find the established power(in this case the U.S) on its way. Of course its normal, why would i cede my number 1 position to you without a fight/effort? I will try as much to slow you/bring you down as much as i can, using any means, it doesn't matter how dirty/illegal those means might be as far my objectives are met.

Its not just a China thing, its been the case for decades/centuries and will keep being the case in the coming years/decades. My country did it with the rise of Germany twice(which ended in a disastrous war for us and the world, benefiting only the U.S at the end.), we and France also fought for colonies all over the world,The U.S did same with the Soviet Union/U.S.S.R until it collapsed, the U.S even tried to do same with Japan when the yellow peril from the east was 'rising' and 'wanted to take over the world' during the 70s and 80s. So with China it won't be any different, im sure even Japan won't be happy to see China dominating Asia, so it will also try and do what it can to deny it this by any means it can. Even when/if India, Turkey, Brazil etc becomes too big and powerful tomorrow like China is then believe me U.S will also treat them the same way. It has nothing to do about democracy/allies/partners or whatever. It has to do with interests and supremacy. So don't expect everything to be merry like on this article.lol I cant say it enough, geo politics is never clean, its a dirty game, you just have to know how to play it. So don't expect all major powers to share resources together and live happily ever after.

 

[andy_hujian]

The Need of Sino-Japanese Correspondence in the 21st Century: Is there an Empirical Validation ?
View attachment 92732​

By: @Nihonjin1051, Ph.Dc, M.S. ​

I. The Historical Link between Japan and China

View attachment 92733

The history of Japan and China has is long as well as it is being intertwined through the economic trade, cultural transmission, political and philosophical influence. China has had a direct pivotal role in helping mold and form the early Japanese identity which stems back to the Chinese ancient text known as the Book of Later Han. In this text, Emperor Guangwu of the Han Dynasty provided a golden seal to the early Yamato Clan. In fact this golden seal is referred to In Japan as the King of Na gold seal, and is held in a museum in the Japanese island of Kyushu in commemoration of this ancient political link between both civilizations. During the 7th century AD, the Imperial Japanese Court had initiated what is known as the Taika Reform.

The Taika reform encouraged Japan to build embassies in China as a way to establish proper diplomatic and political rapprochement between the said two entities, and this allowed Japanese students to go study in China. These students that had spent time in China’s Imperial Court and Chinese schools of philosophies allowed them to absorb new information back to Japan. It was through the Taika Reform that Japan brought back teachings of Buddhism, bureaucratic reforms, architectural traits, urban planning traits as well as Imperial court customs – which were then integrated into Japanese culture. One important and lingering Chinese imprint into Japanese society and culture is in the written language; the Japanese Kanji system is based on the Chinese classical characters known as Hanzi. There is , indeed, a cultural and historical commonality.

II. The Dynamic of Japan’s Interaction with East Asia

View attachment 92734

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

-George Orwell
​

The above aforementioned quote by Orwell takes into consideration how the future is influenced by the past events, and this is a poignant quotation in context of the Japanese and Chinese Equation. The history between Japan and China stretches back over 2 millennia, with formal representation taking place during the beginning of the 8th Century A.D. when Japanese Embassies were created throughout China as well as vice versa.

The marked cross straits interaction between Japan and China was positive with only four militant events; the 12th century war with the Yuan Dynasty and the subsequent attempts of the Mongols to invade Japan, the second was the 16th century Imjin War wherein the forces of Japan under the leadership of Hideyoshi Toyotomi, who was appointed as Kampaku or the Imperial Chancellor and thus the personal hand of the Emperor of Japan. Hideyoshi, who was named Daijo-daijin (Chief Minister) , initiated the unification of Japan and then subsequent mandate to conquer Korea with the goal to acquire the prize of China. The demise of Hideyoshi had led to the collapse of the struggle to conquer Korea , forcing a general retreat of Japanese forces from the Korean peninsula back into Japan proper , and thus would begin a dormant and introverted closed door policy. The 19th century ended with a brutal war between Imperial Japan and Qing Dynasty China known as the 1st Sino-Japanese War, which lasted from 1894 to 1895. The last conflict between China and Japan was the 2nd Sino-Japanese War, which ended in 1945.

The war left deep scars in both China and Japan. The sensitivities of domestic politics in China regarding Japan’s 2014 Collective Defense Principle and re-militarization is historically driven. Japanese should be more considerate of these reactions by the Chinese and approach the issue with an attempt to understand the psychology of the Chinese side and refrain from a defensive posture when reading Chinese media reaction.

III. Approaching China from a Cooperative Position

View attachment 92735

It is important to focus on the positive developments, particularly when contrasting them with the tensions and the anti-Japanese demonstrations in China during the five years of the Koizumi era and also recently during the beginning of the Administration of Prime Minister Abe. In Japan there is a conviction that China very much needs Japan; be it to protect its foreign image as a peacefully developing country, to maintain its export and FDI-dependent economy, to reduce its energy consumption, to help cope with its environmental problems and that China is open to seeking compromise. Whether or not this is true or not, one thing that Chinese leaders and strategic planners should take into consideration is that Japan has a positive outlook towards China and maintains a policy of cooperation, eager almost, with China.

There are themes that Japan and China can both work on , ranging from Cross Straits Cooperation on Taiwan, addressing the claims in the East China Sea, as well as understanding and working with each other on China’s Ascendancy.

The disputes in the East China Sea are about the sovereignty of the Senkaku Islands (which is known by the Chinese as the Diayutai Islands) and the Exclusive Economic Zone between China and Japan, and the rivaling Air Defense Identification Zones of Japan and China. The solution of the EEZ issue between both countries is closely related to the sovereignty dispute as well as to an EEZ agreement between China and Kore and the ones with Japan and Korea, where there is rivaling claims in the norther part of the East China Sea. According to the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continent Shelf, there must be cooperation between the Governments of South Korea, Japan and China to declare the EEZ limits. In regards to the Senkaku Islands, Japan claims that there is no sovereignty dispute because it is in the comfortable position of having de facto control over them, which is refuted by China. Both countries also apply different principles to determine EEZ border between them. It is apparent that these issues are within the forefront of political contention between Tokyo and Beijing.

These issues just discussed have to be put in the context of the growing economic competition and political rivalry of the two countries. The phenomenal growth of China’s economy, which also owes a lot to Japan, had led to increased competition. While trade between the two countries in the 1980s was dominated by China selling natural resources and semi-finished products to Japan, trade is increasingly becoming an exchange of processed and manufactured goods, at an ever-increasing level of sophistication. Although Japan is still an important foreign direct investor in China, since the beginning of the new century, China had started, on a very modest scale, to invest in Japan. This is in order to acquire technology, brands, market access and marketing skills and includes the acquisition of distressed medium-sized Japanese companies. Both Japan and China have cross-straits vested interests within each other, ranging from domestic investment, which is now over $320 Billion.

China’s rise has undoubtedly presented new challenges to Japan and these have been articulated as part of the so called ‘China Threat’ discourse. That China threat debate is a broad term that generally refers to the popular academic discussions of the ways in which China posed potential risks to Japanese economic, security, and political interests. However, the discussion went beyond traditional military threat perceptions based on measurement of intentions and capabilities and encapsulated concerns about new uncertainties posed by China’s rapid development and modernization and how to respond to them.

To address these issues, Japanese leaders are now espousing Sino-Japanese policy consultation and coordination as a way to preserve regional peace and stability, such as in the Korean Peninsula, and as a way to abate any tensions between both countries’ EEZ claims and ADIZ claims. The contention is surmountable. We have to remember that in October 1992, Emperor Akihito of Japan had visited China, suggesting that the mistrust between China and Japan is surmountable and that the legacy of the past can be transcended by the two countries’ common interests. It is also important to recognize the special importance that Japan has attached to its relationship with China, despite the vagaries of politics. This said, development of greater rapprochements between Japan and China in the Taiwan issue, and economic commonalities will benefit both sides. The expected communication between China’s Xi Jinping and Japan’s Shinzo Abe will present opportunities for both sides to address common interests, as well as initiate mechanisms that will allow both Japan and China to find solutions to areas of disagreement.

Works Cited


​

Cheng, J. (2003). {Chinese-Japanese Relations in the Twenty-First Century}. Journal Of Contemporary Asia,

33(2), 279-282. ​

Drifte, R. (2009). The Future of the Japanese-Chinese Relationship: The Case for a Grand Political Bargain.

Asia-Pacific Review, 16(2), 55-74. doi:10.1080/13439000903371668​

Rose, C. (2010). 'Managing China': risk and risk management in Japan's China policy. Japan Forum, 22(1/2),

149-168. doi:10.1080/09555803.2010.488950​

Shuja, S. M. (2000). Tokyo-Beijing relations in the new millennium. Contemporary Review, 277(1618), 257-263.

Yoo, J., Jo, S., & Jung, J. (2014). The Effects Of Television Viewing, Cultural Proximity, And Ethnocentrism

On Country Image. Social Behavior And Personality, 42(1), 89-96. ​

杉浦//康之. (2009). 中国の「日本中立化」政策と対日情勢認識--日本社会党の訪中と日本国内の反米・反岸闘争

の相互連鎖(1958年6月～1959年6月). 近きに在りて, (56), 51-67. ​

@Chinese-Dragon , @Genesis , @ChineseTiger1986 , @LeveragedBuyout , @kalu_miah , @andy_hujian , @pokdo , @Red Mahura , @vostok , @BoQ77 , @Viet , @Peter C , @IsaacNewton , @dlclong @WebMaster , @Horus , @Slav Defence , @FaujHistorian , @Luftwaffe , @Indos , @Mugwop , @scorpionx , @nair , @sandy_3126 , @Ahmed Jo, @Kaan , @atatwolf , @asena_great , @Sinan , @Ravi Nair , @LeveragedBuyout , @Chinese-Dragon, @Joe Shearer , @vostok , @mike2000, @charon2, @flamer84 , @xxxKULxxx , @al-Hasani, @Hazzy997 , @Mosamania , @Arabian Legend , @JUBA, @Timur, @xenon54, @kalu_miah , @UKBengali , @BDforever , @Azeri440, @Europa , @DESERT FIGHTER, @AZADPAKISTAN2009 , @idune , @eastwatch , @500 , @tonyget , @tranquilium, @Chinese-Dragon , @Zero_win, @Cossack25A1 , @JayMandan , @Viet , @xesy , @Battle of Bach Dang River , @somsak , @Indos , @Brainsucker , @madokafc , @Cossack25A1 , @JayMandan , @BDforever

You may consider studying political science.

 

[cocooned123]

A good article worth to read

 

[DMF]

The history problem between China and Japan is not the real problem, in the late 1970’s and 80’s, the relation between the two countries were very good, but how come the history even become more hot with the time passes by?

Japan is under the occupation of the USA, must carry out the duty to contain China. You can see how Japan has to side with the USA to sanction Russia right now, this is clearly against Japan’s own interests, but Japan has to do it.

China needs peaceful time to develop the country in all fields, a good relationship with Japan is good for China, a bad relation with Japan also not bad for China, any way China is the one mostly benefited in this world order, after 20 or 25 years of time, maybe China will have a very good relationship with Japan again, but Japan does not have a independent foreign policy, so when ever Japan feels uncomfortable with a foreign country, Japan can’t blame the other countries.

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

@Chinese-Dragon @Nihonjin1051

Fascinating discussion, gentlemen. One possibility that should be considered is for China to take a more active diplomatic role in binding Asia to its own system. The SCO has always seemed like a tangential distraction to me, especially since its members, as far as China is concerned, do not or cannot help China secure itself, either militarily or economically. Russia's value to China is in the resources it can provide, but otherwise, the non-China SCO members are military and economic dwarves. They can neither help China, nor can they be firmly bound to China since they also need access to the West for their own development.

Therefore, from the perspective of China's long-term goals, I would propose the following program:

1). Lead the creation of an East Asian Free Trade Agreement between China, Korea, and Japan to mirror NAFTA, and thus create an embryonic trading bloc to rival ASEAN, NAFTA, and the EU.

2). Propose to Japan the creation of a "Truth and Reconciliation" committee, modeled on South Africa's, to research and delineate an agreed-upon version of history that would be incorporated into all three countries' school textbooks. This would finally put to rest the "textbook wars" and help these countries finally put their history in the past, and enable a more forward-looking approach.

3). Set up a joint governmental research fund (again, with both Japan and Korea) to promote joint R&D between the universities and corporations of East Asia.

4). Propose a formal status-quo agreement with Japan, whereby disputed territory will be mutually recognized as such, but status-quo administrative facts on the ground will not be challenged for, say, 30 years in the hope that friendlier diplomatic relations in the future would facilitate a diplomatic solution. This would be backed by a joint sovereign wealth fund, administered by a neutral third party (the UN?), and sufficiently large that it would serve as effective collateral if either of the parties broke this agreement--i.e. an M&A-style break-up fee.

And so forth. Soon enough, the "Asia for Asians" or "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" or whatever you would like to call it will naturally take shape. It may lead to more formal arrangements like the EU, or perhaps it will not, but it would likely de-escalate the military tensions, and allow the populations of each country to see the tangible benefits of such a settlement.

China is uniquely positioned to initiate a project like this, and it would simultaneously elevate China's status and secure its neighborhood. Japan would be able to put aside its fear that someday China would seek revenge. It would provide Taiwan an opportunity to more closely integrate with China, while still claiming it was able to maintain its autonomy. And who cares what Korea thinks? (kidding, kidding)

Is this a possible scenario, or is it pure fantasy?

 

[mike2000]

@Chinese-Dragon @Nihonjin1051

Fascinating discussion, gentlemen. One possibility that should be considered is for China to take a more active diplomatic role in binding Asia to its own system. The SCO has always seemed like a tangential distraction to me, especially since its members, as far as China is concerned, do not or cannot help China secure itself, either militarily or economically. Russia's value to China is in the resources it can provide, but otherwise, the non-SCO members are military and economic dwarves. They can neither help China, nor can they be firmly bound to China since they also need access to the West for their own development.

Therefore, from the perspective of China's long-term goals, I would propose the following program:

1). Lead the creation of an East Asian Free Trade Agreement between China, Korea, and Japan to mirror NAFTA, and thus create an embryonic trading bloc to rival ASEAN, NAFTA, and the EU.

2). Propose to Japan the creation of a "Truth and Reconciliation" committee, modeled on South Africa's, to research and delineate an agreed-upon version of history that would be incorporated into all three countries' school textbooks. This would finally put to rest the "textbook wars" and help these countries finally put their history in the past, and enable a more forward-looking approach.

3). Set up a joint governmental research fund (again, with both Japan and Korea) to promote joint R&D between the universities and corporations of East Asia.

4). Propose a formal status-quo agreement with Japan, whereby disputed territory will be mutually recognized as such, but status-quo administrative facts on the ground will not be challenged for, say, 30 years in the hope that friendlier diplomatic relations in the future would facilitate a diplomatic solution. This would be backed by a joint sovereign wealth fund, administered by a neutral third party (the UN?), and sufficiently large that it would serve as effective collateral if either of the parties broke this agreement--i.e. an M&A-style break-up fee.

And so forth. Soon enough, the "Asia for Asians" or "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" or whatever you would like to call it will naturally take shape. It may lead to more formal arrangements like the EU, or perhaps it will not, but it would likely de-escalate the military tensions, and allow the populations of each country to see the tangible benefits of such a settlement.

China is uniquely positioned to initiate a project like this, and it would simultaneously elevate China's status and secure its neighborhood. Japan would be able to put aside its fear that someday China would seek revenge. It would provide Taiwan an opportunity to more closely integrate with China, while still claiming it was able to maintain its autonomy. And who cares what Korea thinks? (kidding, kidding)

Is this a possible scenario, or is it pure fantasy?

LOOL Im afraid its pure fantasy bro. So you think Japan will alow China to take the initiative and be some sort of leader In Asia? lool Nope never. Moreover, Japan is firmly allied with the U.S, not only Japan but most of Asia as well. So from where will China find members that will cooperate with it the said projects you mentioned?lol
This is without taking into consideration the U.S reaction to such a project/agenda. The U.S still has by far the largest influence/Leverage in Asia, So it will rightly block any such moves by China to establish such projects. As for 'Asia for Asians', with all due respect, i cant help but laugh.lol More like Asia for the U.S.
Afterall, even countries who asked the U.S to leave like the philippines are now inviting the U.S back in, Vietnam is also considering such an option in future, Japan and south Korea have been so for decades, Australia just signed one with the U.S, Singapore has allowed U.S planes to some of its facilities since the 1990s, Malaysia is considering following suite, Guam ,military relationship with Taiwan, then theres Diego Garcia base in Indian Ocean, bases in Pakistan/afghanistan etc The U.S is virtually Omni present in Asia. So to dislodge it from this region will be a hugeeeee task, which i dont see happening in this century, since most of these countries don't have any issues with U.S presence/dominance in their respective country/region, contrary to China which they instead see as the main threat. Call it the effect of 'western propaganda' all you want, but that's politics, dirty tricks are allowed as far as furthering your interests are concerned.

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

LOOL Im afraid its pure fantasy bro. So you think Japan will alow China to take the initiative and be some sort of leader In Asia? lool Nope never. Moreover, Japan is firmly allied with the U.S, not only Japan but most of Asia as well. So from where will China find members that will cooperate with it the said projects you mentioned?lol
This is without taking into consideration the U.S reaction to such a project/agenda. The U.S still has by far the largest influence/Leverage in Asia, So it will rightly block any such moves by China to establish such projects. As for 'Asia for Asians', with all due respect, i cant help but laugh.lol More like Asia for the U.S.
Afterall, even countries who asked the U.S to leave like the philippines are now inviting the U.S back in, Vietnam is also considering such an option in future, Japan and south Korea have been so for decades, Australia just signed one with the U.S, Singapore has allowed U.S planes to some of its facilities since the 1990s, Malaysia is considering following suite, Guam ,military relationship with Taiwan, then theres Diego Garcia base in Indian Ocean, bases in Pakistan/afghanistan etc The U.S is virtually Omni present in Asia. So to dislodge it from this region will be a hugeeeee task, which i dont see happening in thsi century, since most of this countries don't have any issues with U.S presense/dominance there, contrary to China which they instead see as the main threat. Call it the effect of 'western propaganda' all you want, but thats politics, dirty tricks are allowed as far as furthering your interests are concerned.

I would not claim that this scenario would emerge immediately, but we need to coldly examine reality: China is ascendant, and the US is stagnating. China can focus on Asia, while the US must put out fires all over the world. China-Japan trade volume dwarfs US-Japan trade volume.

If the situation continues as is, by definition, this realignment cannot take place. But just as the US surrendered some power in order to create a US-centric world order (UN, IMF, World Bank, WTO, etc.), it is not inconceivable that one day China will feel strong enough, and secure enough, to do the same. And it's likely at that point that China will tower over even the US economically, which will make China's gravitational pull irresistible. What are now US satellites will become Chinese satellites, out of sheer economic necessity.

I even started a thread called The Road to War (Part III) to track the early indications that this is happening. Witness the American struggle to bring our allies (including Japan) on-side to enforce sanctions against Iran, which look like they will imminently crumble. Observe the European resistance to implementing severe sanctions against Russia, because they have no alternative to Russian oil and gas.

I can imagine the scenario I posted above because the US world order is already in its sunset. It is no longer a question of whether the current security order in East Asia will be maintained, because the US is already strained to the breaking point. My question, directed at @Chinese-Dragon and @Nihonjin1051 , was whether circumstances would dictate a Glasnost/Perestroika between China and Japan in the wake of these changes, or if the vacuum left by the US would create further hostility and instability. @andy_hujian hinted at this in discussing the Chinese perception of America's role vis-a-vis Japan (instigator or suppressor).