@Nihonjin1051 I almost forgot to mention in my previous post here that your views on the Japanese foreign policy and Japan-US relations prompted me to alter my perception of Japan's foreign policy in the long run. I do hope that Tokyo, along with China and Korea, will play a constructive role in defusing, not exacerbating the conflicts in the Middle East.
I've got one question to you and
@Lure as this is about Turkey. Since I have misgivings about Ankara's foreign policy and its stance towards the Kurds and given the fact that Turkey and Japan maintain cordial relations to each other, do you believe that Japan has some kind of leverage over Turkey? In the view of the facts that Japan is in the process of building both economic and political cooperation with Iran and that a rapprochement towards Russia is not ruled out in spite of anti-Russian sanctions in place, the Kuril Islands dispute and pressure on the side of Washington, this is an interesting question to my mind.
Japan understands the multipluripotency of inter-regional dialogue through multifaceted rapproachment processes that includes (and is not limited to) local government exchanges, academic level exchanges, cultural studies exechanges, inter-ministerial level exchanges, as well as direct security level dialogue. This is true in fact for Japan , as a case study basis, and how the country operates to better understand the ground realities in Syria, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Turkey, Iran and the rest of the Gulf States. Due to cultural diversity in these countries and the limited cultural similarities Japan has with these nation states and region, Japan utilizes Israel, Turkey, and specifically Jordan as a conduit upon which Tokyo can have a religious-sensitivity understanding of human rights groups, educational groups as well as an understanding of the political climate in the SLSITIGSI (Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Turkey, Iran, Gulf States, Israel). Specifically this can refer to any political changes involving the different political parties in each individual country, new security exigencies i.e rebellion, insurgencies, border destabilization, human trafficking, population diversion et al.
Now in regards to your question about this unique inter/intra regional collaborative framework between Japan and Turkey, then yes, i would say that there is some kind of influence Japan has with Turkey. In fact for a particular example of how Japan and Turkey bridge cultural millieu is through agencies such as the
日本トルコ文化交流会 (Nihon Toruko Bunka Kouryuukai), which means
"Japan Turkey Cultural Dialog Society". This organization is tasked with a unique and special purpose:
"Promote cultural exchange and dialog to strengthen bridges between Turkish and Japanese societies. Promote understanding and respect of both cultures through common and different values. Cultivate friendship through cooperation. Identify and propose solutions to common social problems. Organize activities in cases of disaster and crisis in both countries."
Organizations such as these are the kinds of conduit upon which our government agencies can have an over-arching influence in not only political lines, but through the grassroots level , which seems to be quite effective in dispensing and disseminating points through this part of the world. Incidentally we have to understand that countries in the Near East such as SLSITIGSI tend to value information spread through word of mouth, a trait of mostly Muslim dominated societies , which places special emphasis on person to person information sharing. Where there is special emphasis on grassroots level -effected change than on the trickle-down paradigm that more Confucian-based societies (such as Japan, China, Korea) are used to. Ultimately the theme of communication and understanding the different methods and efficacies of communication techniques as it applies to nation-state foreign policies (in context to the application of Japan, Korea and China) in the region.
In fact if you study how Japan operates, you will notice that both China and Korea also utilize the same methodology , by focusing on intergovernmental as well as inter-agencies to facilitate understanding and effecting grassroots-level dissemination. Specifically in regards to China, China (The People's Republic) actually utilizes the CPAFFC as the conduit to conduct thorough change. This stands for :The Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries (CPAFFC).
CPAFFC a national people’s organization engaged in people-to-people diplomacy of the People’s Republic of China. The aims of the Association are to enhance people’s friendship, further international cooperation, safeguard world peace and promote common development. On behalf of the Chinese people, it makes friends and deepens friendship in the international community and various countries around the world, lays and expands the social basis of friendly relations between China and other countries, and works for the cause of human progress and solidarity. It implements China’s independent foreign policy of peace, observing the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, while carrying out all-directional, multi-level and broad-area people-to-people friendship work to serve the great cause of China’s peaceful development and reunification and contribute to the building of a harmonious world of lasting peace and common prosperity.
In regards to the issue of the Kurds , particularly their quest for an independent Kurdistan ---- this is an area that Japan (as well as Korea and China) will work with Turkey and the rest of the international community. This is, of course, a sensitive issue because Kurdish communities actually are base of operations where Japan, China, and Korea to disseminate relief aid, medical aid, as well as security aid in battling not only ISIS, but also in securing the vital Kurdish-controlled oil fields and gas depots in Northern Iraq, parts of Syria. I believe that Japan understands very well the unique relationship Kurds have with Turkey and also the longing in Kurdish communities to establish an independent and free Kurdistan, which actually if you analyze the regional map of the MIddle East actually encompasses large parts of present day Turkey, Iran Syria and Iraq:
So in the geopolitical and geosocial , geocultural paradigm of nation state operational dialectics, we have to understand that a radical creation of Kurdistan will disrupt regional balance and is actually antithetical to the national objectives of not only Turkey, but also Syria, Iraq and Iran. So considering that, we must understand that Japan will maintain a non-interventionalist role in this region by fomenting and directly supporting the genesis of a Kurdistan because that would in part jeapordize Japan's thorough and webbed relationships with the SLSITIGSI. Cooperation will remain of humanitarian role, as well as economic role, which has always been the backbone of Japan's progressive, developmentalist foreign policies around the globe. I believe that China and Korea will maintain this similar agenda, given the geopolitical realities on the ground.
Ultimately, this is a unique and amazing puzzle we (NEA) must understand and work with.
Regards,
Kenji
"Nihonjin1051"
( By the way
@Arryn , i sincerely apologize for my late reply to you and other members active in this thread -- i had been preoccupied with work and meetings. Thank you for your understanding, my dear friend.)
I learn a lots in this forum. Before I joined, I hated the Japanese government and afraid of the remilitarized Japan, but I now realize this normalization is indeed a push for Japan to be more independent. Not to mention, I had never thought about the union among the Chinese, Japanese and Korean, this really opens my eye and makes me reconsider our future path with them. I believe that if more people share the same view, which we East Asian can build an union as successful as other unions in the world, then East Asia will be more peaceful and forgiving. I know this will not be a easy task, but this is our final task before the fully revival of our East Asian nations.
This is ultimately the most basic , crucial aspect of any relationship , my friend. Dialogue. Continuous and productive dialogue is what builds and revitalizes any relationship. Japan , as a country that is bound to China to the hip , figuratively and historically speaking, needs to further develop stronger and bolder dialogue with China, as well as Korea. Despite Washington oppositions. Ultimately in any power equation, the weakest link will be eroded. An important take home point for you and others --- that even despite political differences between Beijing and Tokyo (in the current), still, both nations and peoples strive to have a better understanding of each other. There is a romantic symbolism of China in the minds of every Japanese (even the most diehard patriot) , the lure and the ideation of China. She is , to our psyche, is the origin, the beginner of our civilization. And ultimately it must be our duty to join with that...source, again.
We must remember and put to context our nation interaction on the millenial level. Japan and China are not "neocolonial" states that were created upon the ashes of the collapsed european imperial system. Japan and China are not inventions that were created after the 'White man's burden'. Japan and China have had relations for nearly 3 whole millenia. That is -- we are ANCIENT. And we must understand the unique nation specific model upon which we operate.
To these neocolonial states --- 50, 60 years may seem a long time (as it is how long they existed as a nation), but to Japan and China , 50 or 60 years is but a blink of an eye. Only a turn of a page in a chapter of ancient , continuous civilizations such as ours.
I can assure you he is not the only japanese i know who advocate for greater East Asian union. 2 years ago we had exchange student from the university of Osaka. She did research about the European Union. When she found out i was chinese, she talked to me about the possiblity of the Union of East Asian states, like the European Union. I would feel uncomfortable to talk this kind of topic with non east asian, but with her i could discuss the pros and cons of such union. Not to mention i had a japanese classmate who was wondering why there was no such thing as Union of the East Nation like the European Union.
What i wanted to say is that the concept of East Asian Union is not new. It lives among some east asian (scholars). The difference is that the discussion is not always public.
I'm glad that you were able to discuss with your friend from Osaka U. Yes, in fact, for many Japanese academics who do study abroad, a great many of those are fans of East Asian Integration, in fact. Many Japanese scholars who study abroad usually tend to do study abroad in China afterwards to get a better understanding of the political science in China. Tho if i am to draw from my experience in my sabbaticals in Hong Kong U, and Tsinghua U --- the Chinese academics that i had a pleasure to call my friend and co-learners -- tend to share similar thoughts on politics with me. In fact I would even credit some of my own views (that i now hold) to some of the things I learned actually in Tsinghua University. By the way --- Tsinghua University --- an amazing place to study in if you ever get the chance.
Scholastic relationship tends to transcend political differences. This is what we have to understand --- politic is usually semi-static for a particular time period, but will ultimately change according to new research and breakthroughs in cooperation. Academics in China , as in Japan, remain level headed and discourse on realistic and future events through publications, which in turn influence policy makers in government. So there is actually a relationship, albeit indirect, in how academics influence politic.....
All these countries share the unique confucius system, ancient history and tradition that still survive until today. This unique traits are what make East Asia special. Each of us grow up with these traits and proud of it,concious or unconciously. To tell non east asian about this features is useless. They cant nor would they understand it. Now imagine these 3 countries formed an Union of East Asia. Nothing would be impossible. Sky would be the limit, hmm by second consideration, i would say, universe would be the limit. I, personally would call this Union of East Asia as The Greater East Asia.
I agree with you my friend. If we also try to peel the layers of the Onion (referring to America here), we tend to see that in all the existential wars America was involved in (and led to her either utter humiliation or loss) , we notice that it has been East Asia.
- America was attacked by the Japanese Empire, and forced to fight (to the death, per se) against the Japanese Armed Forces. In fact the US Marines became a force due to the necessity to battle Japan's island defenders throughout the pacific -- the war between Japan and America was deeply racial and the US propaganda machine deeply showed the visceral hate towards Japan, which it had perceived as a tiny island country to dare attack America and put up such a stiff fight despite overwhelming odds.
- America's experience in the Korean War (which it had been forced to fight against the Chinese PLA) saw their troops being pushed back from Pyongyang to the 38th Parallel against the Chinese Human Wave Tenacity in that war (a larger version, albeit similar, to Japanese Banzai Charges that was common in the 2nd World War the Pacific). Again the theme of fanaticism.
- In Viet Nam, another East Asian entity state, was able to resist US bombardment, and forced a 500,000+ strong US Army presence in Viet Nam to abandon by 1974.
Compared to other nation states that America fought , it did not experience existential threat or such a thorough threat to its power projection as compared to East Asia. America fought Japan, Korea, China individually and at each time, had been stretched to their limit (domestic support at home collapsed, and their mobilization process was also called to question and required the logistical line to be protected). Now, can you imagine when Japan + Korea + China are together? Trust me, not even the full might of the US or any other supranational organizational entity can really challenge such a union. A unified Northeast Asia (Greater China, Japan, Unified Korea, +/- Viet Nam, Mongolia) would literally be the center of the world. Now imagine the Silk Road and the Maritime Silk Road , the role of AIIB, ADB, SCO, --- it seems that it will be an East Asian dominated global order , not west.
I don't like immigrants from Africa or the West, it's not my biased opinion, I just don't like them. But if it's Koreans, Japanese or Vietnamese, I'm OK.
I agree with you in principle, and that just reflects the relative homogeneity of our societies. I don't want to sound racist or unpolitically correct, but I would not want Japan , Korea nor China suffer the kinds of demographic collapse that Europe is experiencing now. No, that cannot, that MUST never happen in China, Korea and Japan.
Japan and Korea unified, the problem is CAN Japan and Korea do that?
It seems that you probably are limited in your understanding in the ancient history and ancient political dialectics between East Asian civilizations. I can understand because you are an Indonesian and your access to deep Korean and Japanese histories is limited to what is western-sanctioned agenda history. But any Japanese and Korean college historian can agree that the framework to build upon was the relationship through the
新羅 model. In fact during the 7th century , the most dominant power in Korea at the time was the Kingdom of Shilla , which the Yamato civilization in Japan referred to as 'Shiragi'. Anyways, during this time there was immense , close relationship between Tang Dynasty China, Shilla-dominated Korea and Yamato Japan. Immense , productive relationship. In fact this would continue for almost another millennia.
Anyways, the idea of deep cooperation framework based on that Tang-Shilla-Yamato relationship is the goal. United, yet autonomous.
Take this as a historical lesson for you for the day. There is much more to Japan, China and Korea besides the "Imjin War" and "Sino Japan Wars". We are referring to a time frame of deep cooperation that is over 3,000 years. Kindly ponder on that ... reality. And the total breadth of our
millennial relationship.
