Imperial Ghosts and the Rising Dragon: How a changing regional security dynamic has undermined Sino-Japanese relations

Source: Telegraph.co.uk
Intro   

Over the last few years there has been significant concern over increasing hostility between Tokyo and Beijing. The nationalization of the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands, Shinzo Abe’s controversial rhetoric, his desire to re-interpret the Japanese constitution, and a number of other factors have caused a degeneration of formerly amicable Sino-Japanese relations.

The rise of China as a major military and economic force as well as North Korea’s continued renegade activities have led to a significant alteration in the security framework of Northeast Asia. Japan has a right to dictate its own military policy to best secure its own national defense interests. However, Prime Minister Abe and other Japanese leaders should be hesitant to rewrite history while simultaneously seeking to reinterpret Japan’s pacifist constitution. In regards to China, Beijing should understand that actions such as America’s “Pivot to Asia” as well as Japan’s change in military policy are primarily a result of their own growing military capabilities.

Diaoyu/Senkakus

In my opinion, the nationalization of the Diaoyu/Senkakus was a major impetus towards the poor relations between Tokyo and Beijing that exist today. According to Chinese historical documents, the Diaoyu/Senkakus were used by Chinese fishermen for many years prior to Japanese annexation after the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-95). The United States took over administration of the islands following the defeat of Japan in 1945, and in 1972 returned them to the Japanese government. The dispute over these islands had remained dormant for several decades until 2012 when the former mayor of Tokyo, Shintaro Ishihara, moved to purchase the Diaoyu/Senkakus so that he might fully nationalize them. The government of then Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda preempted this deal by purchasing the islands with state money and nationalizing them, in an attempt to prevent the conflict from escalating into a diplomatic row between China and Japan. However, this move had the opposite of the intended effect, enraging Beijing and inciting a patriotic furor throughout China. Ever since, China and Japan have been in a naval chess match with each side using fishing, coast guard, and naval vessels to out-maneuver one another. Although the Diaoyu/Senkakus have played an important role in worsening relations between Tokyo and Beijing, many other factors are involved.

The consequences of Japanese nationalism

There is also concern over certain actions and statements made by the Japanese Prime Minister. Shinzo Abe seeks to re-interpret Japan’s pacifist constitution in order to allow for the Japanese Self-Defense Forces to come to the aid of allies that are under attack. In China, such revisions calls to mind Japanese wartime atrocities, for which they believe the Japanese have not fully atoned. Mr. Abe has also invited controversy by visiting the Yasukuni Shrine, which honors those who died in the service of the Emperor including convicted war criminals. As if to add insult to injury, he has also made remarks insinuating that Korean wartime sex slaves were not forced to serve Japanese soldiers, but rather volunteered to do so. Such distasteful remarks have been greatly criticized in Seoul and Beijing, and even Washington.

Certain components of the Japanese political establishment seek move past the discussion of Japanese wartime atrocities. It has been almost seventy years since the Japanese defeat, so this is fair enough. But Japan must fully atone for the actions of their ancestors rather than try to reinterpret history, as some (not all) politicians in Tokyo seek to do. Japanese leaders must resist the urge to use nationalistic rhetoric to galvanize domestic support at the expense of Japan’s relations with its neighbors. Controversial comments on Korean sex slaves and visits to the Yasakuni Shrine might be good for playing to Mr. Abe’s conservative political base, but it is highly detrimental to Japan’s image abroad.

Changing regional dynamic

The two elephants in the room are North Korea and China. North Korea now has nuclear capabilities and Chinese military power has been growing exponentially over the last decade, causing much concern across the region. Beijing recently announced it would increase military spending by approximately 10% this year to $145 billion USD. This significantly outpaces GDP growth, which was 7.4% last year. It is also the fifth consecutive year that Chinese military spending increases have been in the double digits. These changes have fundamentally altered the balance of the Northeast Asian security environment. In the hypothetical event of a major conflict on the Korean Peninsula there could be significant ramifications for Japan. For example, what happens if the North faces imminent defeat and threatens to use its nuclear option? Should Japan be constrained up by constitutional technicalities rather than seeking to protect its citizens? Tokyo should have the right to aid allies when they are under attack, if not engage in outright offensive actions (for defensive purposes). No other country faces such limitations on its military’s functionality. Japan should not be placed in a special category for crimes committed generations ago. Japan has proven that it is a responsible member of the international community, so they should have the right to dictate their own military policy as they see fit. Shinzo Abe seeks a limited reinterpretation of the Japanese constitution which would allow the Japanese Self-Defense Forces to provide limited support to allies that are under attack. In a world of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, nations can no longer wait for the fight to be brought to them and then enter the fray. By then it is too late. China has a nuclear arsenal of over 200 warheads (which it are currently undergoing upgrade and modernization) and it is predicted that North Korea has approximately ten (which they wouldn’t have if it weren’t for Chinese protection of the Kim dynasty), which could easily reach Japan. Tokyo does not seek a nuclear capability but rather the ability to aid allied forces that are under attack. It seems ironic that Beijing is so concerned. It is unfair to try and keep your neighbor weak while you yourself are militarizing at a faster rate than any other time in your country’s modern history.

Conclusion

Prime Minister Abe could do much to quell concerns in regional capitals by engaging in dialogue with regional heads of state rather than making controversial statements and visiting shrines for convicted war criminals. It is understandable that Mr. Abe must do certain things to pander to the conservative base that elected him, but is it worth risking Japan’s relationship with China and other neighbors who still remember Japan’s imperial past? In order to improve relations with its neighbors, Japanese leaders must cease making controversial remarks, emphasize that a changing security environment necessitates a new military policy, and quell fears of a resurgent Japanese militaristic Japan.

On the Chinese side, Beijing must understand that Japan is a sovereign nation and has a right to dictate its own military policy. It must also realize that nations in East and Southeast Asia do not fear a rising Japan, but rather a rising China. The American “Pivot to Asia” as well as Japan’s change in military policy is primarily a result of China’s own increasing military prowess. 
Peter Loftus is a senior at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.