CHINAHOY

HOME

2013-September-25

Sino-Japanese Relations Call for Political Wisdom and Courage

 

By ZHU FENG

 

 ZHU FENG

is a professor with the School of International Studies, Peking University.

RELATIONS between China and Japan have deteriorated since September 2012, when Yoshihiko Noda’s cabinet decided to “nationalize” the Diaoyu Islands. The situation has worsened under Shinzo Abe’s administration. Upon taking office on December 26, 2012, Abe displayed extreme arrogance towards China over the Diaoyu Islands issue. The Abe government has taken the stance of “refusing to accept Chinese statements, refusing to sit at a negotiating table and refusing to accept Chinese suggestions to put the issue aside for future resolution.” Consequently, both countries are now obdurate in their respective arguments over ownership of the Islands, while their respective ocean surveillance ships patrol the same waters. Unless frank and serious talks between the two countries over the issue can be arranged, the current situation could well escalate to a crisis wherein it will be impossible to allay confrontations between their ships. Worse still, serious casualties as a result of such conflict could lead to war. Given this grave possibility, the two governments need to muster political wisdom and courage in solving the problem.

 

Where Is the Way Out?

China and Japan had bitter confrontations when the Koizumi cabinet governed Japan from 2001 to 2006 over Japanese ministers’ insistence on visiting the Yasukuni Shrine to honor Japan’s war dead, of whom several are class-A war criminals. They resulted in suspension of high-level meetings and dialogues between the two countries for almost four years. Despite this political row there was growth in bilateral trade between China and Japan during this period, from US $98 billion to US $220 billion, and also progress in social relations, with annual personnel exchanges amounting to 2.3 million.

Sino-Japanese relations during the Koizumi administration were hence described as “politically cold and economically hot.” Based on his campaign promises and the interests of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), the Koizumi cabinet maintained high profile visits to the Yasukuni Shrine. The purported intention was to express the “understanding of history by Japanese society itself,” and also to show that Japan would not succumb to Chinese pressure to confess and expiate its guilt. The Koizumi cabinet’s total disregard for China’s opposition reflected an immense change in Japan’s post-cold war period “China cognition.” Perceived as an archetypal pro-American government, the steadily enhanced and deepened Sino-American alliance during its five-year administration implied a strategic containing of China.

Since Shinzo Abe took office, confrontations between China and Japan are worse than during the Koizumi administration of 10 years ago. The threat to bilateral relations, however, has changed from that stemming from historical issues to territorial disputes. These relate to national interests and national security, and also to the sentiments of ordinary people. In the international system comprising nation states, territory and sovereignty are usually regarded as prime factors reflecting a government’s independence and ability to protect national interests. From the modern international relations perspective, territorial and sovereign disputes most affect and challenge relations between countries. The deterioration in Sino-Japanese relations during the Koizumi government, which has worsened since the Abe administration, signifies a change of factors. The simmering crisis does not, however, imply that this territorial dispute is out of control. It is the mutual political, diplomatic, security and public tension and distrust between the two countries that make the situation dangerous. Consequently, the tiny Diaoyu islands have become a powder keg that could potentially explode in an out-and-out confrontation between the two countries.

The dispute over the Diaoyu Islands has long been an obstacle to peaceful development of Sino-Japanese relations. In 1972, however, when the two countries formally established diplomatic relations, the two governments agreed on the principle of “shelving the dispute and leaving it for future solution,” doing so again in 1978, when the Sino-Japanese Treaty of Peace and Friendship was signed. The Diaoyu Islands issue did not hinder peaceful development of bilateral relations for a long period. The reason why it has ballooned into a stumbling block to Sino-Japanese dealings is the fundamental change of Japan’s strategy towards China since onset of the country’s rapid rise. Certain Japanese politicians and strategists regard the Diaoyu Islands issue as a touchstone for Japan to address the rising China in terms of policy, strategy and public opinion. According to this mentality, refusing to discuss or negotiate is regarded as the right way to deal with China.

 

Key to Sino-Japanese Relations

The Diaoyu Islands comprise five uninhabited islets of a total area of 3.6 square km. International observers say that the geographic location of the islands constitutes the root of the dispute, as there are believed to be rich oil resources in the surrounding seas. But this is only one aspect of the matter as I see it. In the late 1960s, the UN Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission issued a special report on oil and gas reserves around the Diaoyu Islands and nearby areas. But there has been no similar report in the 40 or more years since. Taiwan also claims sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands. Given the current situation where Taiwan and the Chinese mainland are amicably cooperating towards economic development, that Beijing is behaving aggressively vis-à-vis the islands and building the area into an important strategic site is clearly a rash, misguided conclusion.

There are two reasons why China must fight Japan over ownership of the Diaoyu Islands. First, history and facts show that the islands are China’s sovereign territory. Second, establishment of the international political system in East Asia after WW II was based on two important documents – The Cairo Declaration and The Potsdam Proclamation. Both clearly state that “Japan is to be reduced to her pre-1894 territory and stripped of her pre-war empire including Korea and Taiwan, as well as her recent conquests.” That is why the United States refuses to recognize that Japan has sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands, albeit recognizing that the islands are under Japanese control. Third, China is seeking a return to the “shelving of the dispute” consensus agreed to by both China and Japan in 1972, when Sino-Japanese relations were normalized, and later. In 1972, and for a long period after, the majority of Japanese administrations accepted the “shelving of the dispute” consensus. But this attitude abruptly changed in 2009. Most such administrations have since denied any basis for dispute over the islands, and closed the door to negotiations. The arrogance the Japanese government has displayed sabotages foundations that politicians from both countries have built for generations for the healthy development of Sino-Japanese relations. It moreover tarnishes the image Chinese people have until now had of the Japanese – one characterized by seriousness, persistence and respect for law.

The “shelving of the dispute” principle showcases the vision of former Chinese leaders such as Zhou Enlai and Deng Xiaping on Sino-Japanese relations. It also reflects strong determination on the part of the Chinese government and Chinese people to build a new post-war era of Sino-Japanese peace and friendship. But the Japanese side takes a different stance. In recent years, certain Japanese politicians have displayed paranoia about China’s rise, whereby they regard China as a “strategic threat.” This has prompted their decision to renege on the previously agreed “shelving of the dispute” principle and to refute the fact that the Diaoyu Islands are China’s sovereign territory by legitimizing Japanese control over them. China obviously cannot tolerate such aggressive action.

The Diaoyu Islands issue now constitutes an impasse in the development of Sino-Japanese relations. If the problem cannot be resolved peacefully, prospects for bilateral relations are both dim and riddled with critical factors. That the Abe government is using the Sino-Japanese conflict over the Diaoyu Islands to realize the prime minister’s campaign promise of “Japan’s return,” whereby an economically, politically and militarily strong Japan re-ascends to world power, is widely observed. Nevertheless, the change of attitude of the “re-ascending Japan” with respect to historical issues, including “comfort women” and instigating nationalism, is not a phenomenon the world likes to see or is willing to accept. It is commonly expected that the Abe government’s use of the so-called “China threat” as an excuse to amend the constitution and launch military expansion and war preparations will make a strategic confrontation between China and Japan inevitable.

 

Era of Cold Politics and Economy Imminent?

Since taking office, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has visited 17 Asian countries, proposing to each the building of a value-based alliance to contain China. It was with this in mind that Japan rushed headlong into the so-called territorial dispute over the South China Sea to provide military assistance to the Philippines and Vietnam. Domestically, the Abe government goes even farther. It has enhanced military deployment to islands off its southwest regions, purchased V-22 Osprey helicopters earmarked for the Okinawa airbase, and plans to build a marine corps of its own. It is moreover preparing to revise Japan’s National Defense Program (NDPO), enhance R&D in offensive weapons and openly seeks missiles capable of attacking “enemy bases.” Another dangerous move of the Abe government is that of trying to reinterpret Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution in such a way as to formally retain the “right of collective self-defense.” While busy with military expansion, the Japanese government stubbornly refuses to accept the territorial dispute over the Diaoyu Islands. All this has contributed to a deadlock in Sino-Japanese political relations.

The dispute over the Diaoyu Islands between China and Japan is a universally-recognized fact other than by the Japanese government, which insists that no dispute exists. This refusal may help Japan to portray China as an “invader” bullying other countries. But what might not have occurred to the Japanese government is that Sino-Japanese relations are important not only to the two countries but also to regional and world peace and stability. As the second and third economies in the world, China and Japan bear great responsibility in maintaining order, stability and prosperity in East Asia as well as the world.

Given the lingering crisis of the Diaoyu Islands, bilateral trade between China and Japan has suffered heavy setbacks. During the period of January to July 2013, total trade was 8.8 percent lower than in the same period of 2012, China’s exports to Japan having fallen 3.5 percent and Japan’s to China by 13.2 percent. It is hence expected that, unless the situation can be turned around, Sino-Japanese relations will enter an era of both cold politics and economy.

Therefore, this is the very moment when both Chinese and Japanese politicians must display political wisdom and courage. The Abe government, in particular, should frankly recognize the territorial dispute between China and Japan over the Disoyu Islands and return to the negotiating table to avoid worsening the situation. At the same time, dialogue channels at various levels between the two countries should be reopened to enable different views and suggestions to be heard. What both sides should bear in mind is that sincere mutual respect is the key to reestablishing healthy political and diplomatic exchanges between China and Japan.