somsak
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2014
- Messages
- 1,320
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Truely beyond Ph.D level works! Cheers @Nihonjin1051
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think that it is , indeed, very important that the nations in Asia implement a pragmatic approach to working with each other, and finding ways (sometimes even create mechanisms) to bridge differences. One thing that I have been following recently are the relations between The Republic of India and the People's Republic of China. When China's President Xi Jinping visited India, both Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi talked about energy requirements, increasing bilateral trade, talked about India's plans for a high speed rail, and a consortium of infrastructure projects that China has expressed desire to helping India with. This century points to the direction of India and China because both are the 'Asian Giants'; both having the largest populations in the world, both having large and growing economies. So when the reports came out (here in PDF) about the border situation in Chumar , both leaders tried to continue with business plans while also dealing with security issues responsibly.
Japan should learn from China and India's pragmatic approach in cross-border issues. I mean, i know that there was a conflict between China and India in 1962, but since then, there really have been no major cross-border shellings recently. I am impressed that both border forces hold annual tent meetings and both are restrained. I think that is something the Japanese military leaders of the JSDF should consider -- to see that Chinese side are willing to compromise and hear the other side out. Just as how China and India have direct military contact and communication; I believe that the JSDF (Japan Self Defense Force) and the PLA Military Command should also have direct military communication. This way damage control measures can be implemented quickly in the event of unnecessary exigency arises. It can be controlld on the spot. And prevent media or extremists groups to use this to flame public agitation.
I agree with you completely, @scorpionx. Development must be emphasized. Common differences can be worked out.
A dissertation on Sino-Japan relations must consider volumes of historical,ethnic, economic and strategic realities and factors. Let me place some, and only some, of these:
a. From the last half of the nineteenth century till the WW II, Japan had sought to emerge as a great global power. She had indeed become a major power. But today, as Japan looks on, China, her historical rival and even arch enemy, has become a super power. Obviously there would be some heart burning in Japan.
b. Post WW II Japan has been a global economic power for which remote controlling Western MNCs and International Banks must take the major credit. These players had correctly identified in the Japanese society discipline and obedience to authority which they utilized to the fullest. However, in this century Japan has been loosing ground to Korea and China. Today both have overtaken the Japanese economy. That Korea, a subjugated serf and China also treated mostly as a colony, should move ahead of Japan is also an unpalatable truth to the Japanese.
c. China was an occupied colony of Japan in most parts. All major powers had divided China and major cities in parts for exploitation of resources and manpower. (Panama Canal was built by largely Chinese labor. They called them Collies.) Today China is a truly sovereign nation and a super power. On the other hand Japan has remained an occupied nation since WW II. Japan cannot pursue an independent foreign policy. Her defense and economic affairs are tied to the Americans. It will take centuries for the world, specially S E Asians, to forget Japanese atrocities in WW II and a hundred years prior to that. Japan's imperial/colonial addiction had led to the creation of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. It is difficult to believe this addiction will not re-appear. In contrast China does not have a history of being a colonial power. Any expansions or conquests took place only in the peripheral regions.
@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?
south china morning post?
seems they are really serious about the relationship this time.
i'll wait for more positive narrative like this and then hopefully, they'll have some sort of game-changing agreement together....
i guess it's an east asian thing. we always have months or even years of 'narrative building' before something huge actually happen. hope they can do something big, reconcile historical issue or settle the island dispute....let's just be patient....I really was impressed, shocked to see this article from SCMP --- since the outlet used to lambast relations with Japan. Perhaps, just perhaps, they are showing some of the feelings of Chinese people regarding relations with Japan --- currently. If so, then its great. A lot of Japanese news outlets are also saying the same things ---Importance of China, Mending relations with China is national interest of Japan and Northeast Asia. Well, i'm happy. Cooler heads i guess win the day.
i guess it's an east asian thing. we always have months or even years of 'narrative building' before something huge actually happen. hope they can do something big, reconcile historical issue or settle the island dispute....let's just be patient....
I know I'm a bit late comer but it's a good disucssion and I'd like to join.
Emergence of an EU type partnership in Sinosphere or a more broad partnership like ASEAN + 3 might not be possible as easy as it sounds. And it's not just about the past problems. If Germany and France can solve their problems (They have fought for almost two centuries : First France invaded Germany -Bonaparte era- than Germany invaded France in 2 world wars) surely the regional countries including Japan and China can solve their historical problems and create a somewhat uniform culture and world view.
However such partnership creates a huge power struggle.
Let's analyze the power structure in EU;
Leader Country : Germany
Potential Alternative Leaders / Equal Partners / Balance Factors: France and UK
Senior Developed Partners (Population > 30 million and GDP per capita > 30000$) : Italy, Spain
Senior Developing Partners (Population > 30 million and GDP per capita < 30000$) : Poland
Junior Developed Partners (Population < 30 million and GDP per capita > 30000$) : Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, Austria, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Luxembourg
Junior Developing Partners (Population < 30 million and GDP per capita < 30000$) : Romania, Greece, Portugal, Czech Republic, Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Croatia, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Cyprus, Malta
So as you can see we have very nice power structure. Everything is balanced like pyramid. If France and UK doesn't like policies of Germany they can challenge. If Italy or Spain has something to say it will be well respected as a senior partner but will have limited effect when actually implementing it, however if Italy convinces Spain and both demand the same thing they will have broad effect when implementing it (Look at total population and total economic size). If 4-5 junior developed partners make a lobby and unite behind an idea they can also challenge Germany (Again look at economic size and population). So despite being the leader, Germany is definitely not omnipotent.
Now lets have look at ASEAN + 3;
China, Korea (hopefully a unified one), Japan, Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand, Singapore, Vietnam, Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos, Brunei
Now let's have a look at the power structure here;
Leader Country : China
Potential Alternative Leaders / Equal Partners / Balance Factors : Japan????
Developing or Developed Senior Partners (Population > 500 millions) : None
Developed Junior Partners : Brunei, South Korea, Singapore
Developing Junior Partners : The rest
As you can see, even if the rest of the union unites against China in some policy they won't be able to counter balance it. The union will simply turn into Chinese hegemony which will annoy mostly Japan (since it would definitely seek an equal partnership in leadership of such a union) and also the rest of the countries in different tones. The question marks near Japan indicates that, Japan will have no power (in terms of size) to counter balance China in such a union.
However there is a magic formula to overcome this problem : India.
If India joins this union as a similar sized country with China, it will become the necessary factor for counter balance. If the rest of the union has problems with Chinese policies the only thing they should do is convincing India. And I'm sure India will be happily convinced and form a check&balance system against China.
A healthy union (just like human organizations) needs leaders and potential leaders. A single sided union/organization will just evolve into an hegemony which the rest of the group would not accept.
@Nihonjin1051 what do you think about that?