Af if to supplement my blog yesterday, the Asahi newspaper of today, 31 October, published a full--page interview of Prof.R.P.Dore, a veteran of the socio-economic change of modern Japan, mainly on the current Japan-China relations. I remember the days when Dore made long visits to Japan and her villages, at least seven of them, and his studies of those villages were consolidated into his monumental Land Reform in Japan. I had an opportunity of accompanying him to two of them, in different Prefectures, as a humble research assistant. At one of them, in response to the locals' request he gave a talk on Britain in fluent Japanese. It was in the mid-1950s, and the villages were still full of young men and women. I recall that a learned, if not educated, middle-aged man asked him on the Fabian Society.
Back to the interview, it seems Prof.Dore this time came from China. He had been invited by the Japanese Ambassador there, but it was on 18 September, the day when the Japanese army went into action in the Northeast of China in 1931, ultimately to build a puppet government there, and it was impossible to approach the Embassy because of the crowds of demonstrators.
Dore says that his Chinese friends, who are all knowledgeable on Japan, still feel betrayed by Japan on the Senkaku islands. The Japanese government has refused to talk with China saying that there is no territorial issue between the two.
I agree the Japanese must admit that there is an issue, and talk about it with China, seriously and sincerely. But I think Dore's friends are wrong if they feel betrayed. China has not put a claim to those islands till recently, till they suddenly came to know that the area is resource-rich. Such a huge country 11 times bigger in population and 27 times bigger in land-space than Japan! Therefore I called her expansionist yesterday.
China, or for that matter South Korea on Takeshima also, says that the islands in question are mentioned in old literature/documents. I do not think that is a valid claim. If we have to go back centuries to determine who are today's legitimate owners, then who belongs to, for instance, the US? They belong to the native "Indians". All the borders of Europe should be redrawn in accordance with, say, the Treaty of Westphalia. What about Russia, Africa, Middle East?
China also says the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-5 was the beginning of Japan's invasion of China. It is perfectly true. The War, which came after the 300 years of peace for Japan(practically no external war and no internal war in the period) was the start of the continuous wars till 1945. But it is wrong to apply this to the Senkaku saying that they were also taken away by this war.
What is exciting is that Dore mentioned the Opium War and said that for the Chinese that was the beginning of the pressure by the white people, China's ultimate opponent in their view is not Japan but the US, and they are suspicious of the Japan-US military alliance from that angle. I would like to add that if so China should withdraw from military conversations with the US and Japan, and for that matter with South Korea and Russia. She should show that she is not threatening her neighbours, which is an act becoming to a UN permanent member.
In order to utilize the resources in the area in question, Prof.Dore says that something like East India Company should be established with monopolistic rights concerning the matter. The Opium War, the East India Company, it is as if the Pax Britannica could still be useful in facing today's problems. Or, is it their common understanding?
Prof.Dore's forthcoming book seems to focus on Japan's attaining independence of the US. It is a very valid question. I hope he would present the valid answer as well.
Back to the interview, it seems Prof.Dore this time came from China. He had been invited by the Japanese Ambassador there, but it was on 18 September, the day when the Japanese army went into action in the Northeast of China in 1931, ultimately to build a puppet government there, and it was impossible to approach the Embassy because of the crowds of demonstrators.
Dore says that his Chinese friends, who are all knowledgeable on Japan, still feel betrayed by Japan on the Senkaku islands. The Japanese government has refused to talk with China saying that there is no territorial issue between the two.
I agree the Japanese must admit that there is an issue, and talk about it with China, seriously and sincerely. But I think Dore's friends are wrong if they feel betrayed. China has not put a claim to those islands till recently, till they suddenly came to know that the area is resource-rich. Such a huge country 11 times bigger in population and 27 times bigger in land-space than Japan! Therefore I called her expansionist yesterday.
China, or for that matter South Korea on Takeshima also, says that the islands in question are mentioned in old literature/documents. I do not think that is a valid claim. If we have to go back centuries to determine who are today's legitimate owners, then who belongs to, for instance, the US? They belong to the native "Indians". All the borders of Europe should be redrawn in accordance with, say, the Treaty of Westphalia. What about Russia, Africa, Middle East?
China also says the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-5 was the beginning of Japan's invasion of China. It is perfectly true. The War, which came after the 300 years of peace for Japan(practically no external war and no internal war in the period) was the start of the continuous wars till 1945. But it is wrong to apply this to the Senkaku saying that they were also taken away by this war.
What is exciting is that Dore mentioned the Opium War and said that for the Chinese that was the beginning of the pressure by the white people, China's ultimate opponent in their view is not Japan but the US, and they are suspicious of the Japan-US military alliance from that angle. I would like to add that if so China should withdraw from military conversations with the US and Japan, and for that matter with South Korea and Russia. She should show that she is not threatening her neighbours, which is an act becoming to a UN permanent member.
In order to utilize the resources in the area in question, Prof.Dore says that something like East India Company should be established with monopolistic rights concerning the matter. The Opium War, the East India Company, it is as if the Pax Britannica could still be useful in facing today's problems. Or, is it their common understanding?
Prof.Dore's forthcoming book seems to focus on Japan's attaining independence of the US. It is a very valid question. I hope he would present the valid answer as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment