The Power and Interest News Report — a new to me site that provides geopolitical analysis from an IR realist point of view, “leaving the moral judgments to the reader” — offers an analysis on Japan’s leadership and regional relations:
Nationalism has been rising in all three countries [Japan, China, Korea], and reversing this trend will require political capital from each country’s leadership. Business interests can be counted on to support further political integration in the region, but each country has powerful domestic constituencies eager to spoil this trend. In Japan, Abe will need to demonstrate tangible results before the 2007 elections if he hopes to hold on to the prime minister post. If he is unable to produce results before then, he may return to the Yasukuni Shrine in the lead up to the elections in order to shore up support from nationalist groups. This would have negative results for Japan’s relations with China and South Korea, and all three countries will be eager to avoid such an incident.
As far as foreign policy is concerned, this could be the nearest milestone to mark the future path of the Abe premiership. Thus, in order to not rock the boat, Abe will have to postpone constitutional reform (particularly the thorny issue of A9) until after the 2007 elections. But even then it seems to me that this is a one-way path leading to Yasukuni. The primary conundrum of Japan’s foreign policy lies in the acheiving of it’s own security (in the absence of a security guarator. ie. the US) within a regional paradigm in an unfriendly neighbourhood. This is a sort of face-off between realist self-interest and idealist internationalism.
PINR says that Tokyo will try “to calm Beijing’s concerns as Japan moves to bolster its defense capabilities.” Sure they will, but this isn’t a solution. Japan will only get so far until that invisble line is crossed (that line being drawn by the boundless nationalism on the Asian mainland). Barnett’s Asian NATO is a dream solution, in that it would fix the problem perfectly but only in a dream world. I argue that the best way to prevent outright regional war is for the US to maintain it’s Leviathanic presence until the foreign policies of both China and Korea mature enough to allow a more constructive debate over the security of individual countries in the region. It is either that or Japan is forced to balance the mainland by itself, abandoning its internationalism and increasing its national power (ie. by reforming/expanding its military). Being as pessimistic as I am, I think this route has only one destination. So while Abe is making nice with China he better be making nice with the US, which means getting more of his citizens supporting the US presence in Japan and NE Asia. Japan’s foreign policy really does start at home.
Get the RSS
Comments to this entry
subadei
November 21, 2006
10:26 pm
The sooner Japan gets the key to it's martial chastity belt the sooner the mainland can come to terms with a new militarily potent Japan the sooner real foreign diplomacy can be resumed. The Chinese aren't stupid. They'll maintain their rhetoric regarding a militarized Japan ad infinitum.
America's maintnence of a military umbrella is finite. We're twenty years past the end of the Cold War. At some point in time (especially as we move away from the stagnant UN sec. council conduct of foriegn conflicts and into a NATO reform of such) America will either be unable or unwilling to support large military elements in NE Asia.
My take, anyway.
lirelou
November 22, 2006
1:01 am
I agree in principle. One problem is that a continued U.S. military presence in Asia requires the consent of the majority of the population of the host nation. Within the democratic states, that consent, active of passive, constitutes the window of opportunity for basing U.S. forces in the region. Presently, it appears that this window of opportunity is fast slamming shut in both Korea and Japan. The obvious second problem is that U.S. forces, however large, are comparatively small given current U.S. military manpower requirements. The coming administration will be required to re-examine all U.S. deployments from a "what's in it for us" perspective. Under such conditions, drawdowns in non-combat overseas deployments must inevitably become the "bill payers", or the size of U.S. military forces must increase, with an ancillarynimpact upon the budget. As I read the tea leaves here in Seoul, both the path followed by the current administration, and the results of this past election, point to a reduction of forward deployed forces in Asia long before the foreign policies of either Korea or China "mature".
Japan Probe -Japan News & Culture Blog » Blog Archive » News for November 22, 2006
November 22, 2006
3:33 am
TDL
November 22, 2006
3:53 am
Regards,
TDL
Curzon
November 22, 2006
4:16 am
For Japan, the so-called "remilitarization" and talks of changing the constitution ignores the fact that defense spending has been on the decline for years. Resurgent nationalism is pretty much fantasy, notwithstanding occasional visits to Yasukuni by the former PM and a few alarmist reports by Tokyo-based correspondents for a few western papers.
There are plenty of signs that China has passed its nationalism zenith. Relations with Japan are on the mend, and Beijing appears to be more proactive in pressuring North Korea. Defense spending continues to climb, and its worrisome to many, but I think China's future democratization poses more of a threat than its defense spending.
Why do I think that? South Korea. That's the only country of thre three where nationalism (not its defense spending) poses a real threat to neighbors, in the sense that fanatics have hijacked the democratic process and could force the hand of policy.
TDL: Wikipedia. And our archives.
Younghusband
November 22, 2006
5:50 am
It is true that the past four years (since 2002) it has gone down in terms of yen, but in constant 2003 USD spending trends have seen a fairly constant increase until 2003. Only 2004 and 2005 were down (due to Koizumi's budget reforms), but FY2006 is looking at a 1.2 increase.
In the long run it has stayed a pretty constant — if small — increase. When they abandon their principle of 1% of the GDP then people will have something to worry about.
In the meantime, rather than looking at just cash (which they have lots of regardless), we should be looking at changes in procurement. If I can find some stats I will post them. I "have seen":http://dfn.dnmediagroup.com/story.php?F=1069707&C=asiapac the following, but I am not sure what the latest word is.
* Patriots and SM3s (for intercepting missiles)
* a helicopter carrier
* a mine-sweeper
* submarines
* six F-2 fighters
* 11 tanks
* 20 helos
Younghusband
November 22, 2006
5:59 am
"*U.S. to propose NATO partnership with Japan, S Korea, Australia*":http://www.japantoday.com/jp/news/391233
First steps to try and pull Korea out of China's orbit and make it and Japan stand with the Pacifics other major security exporter?
sunbin
November 22, 2006
11:02 am
Now that the UNSC application was stalled, China just needs an excuse to go back to normal.
2) to lirelou's point on "a continued U.S. military presence in Asia requires the consent of the majority of the population of the host nation (which is a democracy)", i would compare that of Japan/Korea to that of Taiwan.
the difference in attitude towards US presence from the populace is a direct reflection of "perceived threat".
Taiwan wants US 'protection"
Korea/Japan wants US "protection" during the cold war but not any more now because the people perceive no threat today (or feel that they are strong enough to defend themselves) -- which is quite true since Nork is much weaker compared with SK now, and without USSR, Japan is really under no threat at all (PRC has not the power nor the will nor the intention to invade Japan)
sunbin
November 22, 2006
11:15 am
One point to notice is that at 1% GDP Japan's spending trumps that of its neighbors combined until this millenium (actually 2003 or so), when PRC and SK catch up on GDP. Japan's military is also much more professionally trained and efficient (core competence tracing back to the WWII era).
sunbin
November 22, 2006
11:24 am
I think everybody would agree except the Japanese.
I would imagine the Japanese would like something belong to themselves if they can (it always feels inadequate if you relies on someone else -- esp this someone fought and defeated you years ago) -- they couldn't when USSR was there but now they really perceive no real (immediate) threat and hence less need for US presence. With PRC's growing economic power, there may be concern for Japan in future but I guess the Japanese are
1) comfortable that they can cope with it themselves
2) the international relationship in really less militant these days
as for PRC, i would think they would also agree with YH --- with one caveat, Taiwan. i.e. the US presence is an obstacle for its will to 're-unification' with Taiwan. Otherwise, it would actually welcome US military in Japan and SK.
p.s. I was never able to make the blockquote work.
Curzon
November 22, 2006
11:59 am
Funny to hear you say that since even China admits its "Yasukuni strategy" has been a failure, and the (feigned?) outrage of the PRC over Yasukuni has probably done the rightists in Japan more favors than any domestic interest ever has -- not Yukio Mishima, leftist teachers unions, Zainichi pro-DPRK groups, or the black bus brigade.
sunbin
November 22, 2006
4:35 pm
i don't really think China has a 'yasukuni strategy' or that it succeeded or failed. it simple reacts to what the PM in japan does. reacting is not a strategy. i always do not know if this helps the rightist in japan -- i think there are many reasons for japan's revival of nationalism, and such revival is natural, with ot withour china as a neighbor and independent of what china does. But then of course, the rightists demonstrate an extreme version of nationalism, which IMO feeds more on territorial dispute and other things than china's objection to yasukuni.
sunbin
November 22, 2006
4:38 pm
Two Cents
November 23, 2006
6:47 am
As a Japanese, I have to disagree with you. Japan knows it cannot defend itself on its own. Our forces can only withstand the first blow and hold out for maybe 2 weeks against any major attack. From there, the JSD forces will rely on US assistance. Many Japanese feel that Okinawa is suffering from an unequally heavy burden of having US troops stationed on their islands, but at the same time, the majority of the Japanese feel that the US troops are necessary. Just last week, Okinawa has chosen a governor who supports US presence.
As for the threat from China, it is recognized by our politicians in the LDP and they are taking steps (being friendly to the US) to insure our country's survival in case it does happen. It's one thing for a civilian to say, "The threat from China? Our economic ties have become so deep there can be no war," but for politicians to act in that line would be simply foolish. Besides, prior to WWI, economic ties between European countries were at an all time high, but that didn't stop the war. Japanese politicians have not forgotten how China took effective control of an island belonging to the Philippines after the US troops withdrew.
Younghusband
November 23, 2006
4:36 pm
I could not disagree with this more. I think it is pretty obvious that Japan's rising nationalism has a direct link with Chinese actions. Of course, it isn't the _only_ reason, Korean anti-Japanese demonstrations regarding textbooks certainly did contribute. Russian land claims and the killing of Japanese fishermen did too. Japan's rising nationalism did not happen in a vacuum.
Furthermore, Chinese sabre-rattling has helped the nationalists in Japan immensely by giving them ammunition. The nationalists have long claimed that a rising China a threat. Seeing Chinese protestors in the streets rioting at soccer games and burning Japanese-brand stores has finally allowed the public to see the perspective of the nationalists. Having China catch up to Japan in defense-spending, without being transparent about it, only makes the public more suspicious and more willing to defend its homeland, which translates into nationalism.
I am still trying to dig up some stuff on recent/planned acquisitions, but with everything going on here (academic work, moving, visa applications, etc) I am a little buried. Stay tuned.
sunbin
November 23, 2006
5:03 pm
of course events lead to each other. the same can be say abouyt Japan's Yasukuni/textbook issues fueled the demonstration in china 1.5 year ago. but fundamentally there is a desire in some of people, in japan, and also in its nerighbors
@2c
you are speaking like a LDP politician:) i am talking about those who are not necessarily in sync with LDP or the rightist. but i do recognize there are significant % of the people who are in sync with the govt. this is true for china as well...
subadei
November 23, 2006
5:24 pm
Aceface
November 23, 2006
11:52 pm
If there is one reason that Japanese support
U.S base in Japan,It will be the PRC.
Since we do not wish Chinese to decide
what we agree or disagree.
I do not recall the relation between
Tokyo and Beijing was any warmer
during Murayama and Hashimoto
than it is now.
During Murayama days China practiced
nuclear test despite the continued plea from
the socialist PM
Hashimoto was shocked to see missile test
being practiced right in front of Japanese waters
during Taiwan electoral crisis and He himself was accused
of being caught in the honey-trap by chinese intelligence.
sunbin
November 24, 2006
12:09 am
i do not think china's nuclear test (it was getting on the last train before the ban) has real impact on sino-japanese relationship -- at least china do not think it has anything to do with japan (it has been doing it since 1964). e.g. did USSR conducting nuclear test in 1984 damaged its relationship with Japan, or has Japan at mind at all?
same can be said about the missile test on Taiwan strait. it was not on japan water, not even on the disputed area. and everybody know that it is about taiwan, and has nothing to do with japan -- well except the rightist who still dream of the imperial days and of taking possession of taiwan.
Two Cents
November 24, 2006
5:34 am
While I agree with you on the nuclear test, I have to disagree with the Taiwan Strait missile firing. The former, unlike the big protest against the French testing which led to boycotts on French wine, was not taken up much by the media. The Taiwan Strait missile firing, however, was an incident that mainstream media could not ignore, and they did report on it. It shocked many Japanese that China would forcefully threaten a country (though not officially recognized by the Japanese government, most people think it's just that) which is functioning just fine without Chinese interference. It made many doubt the "trust in the good will of your neighboring nations" clause in our constitution. However, at the time, I do not think it resulted in a major shift in Japanese emotions towards China.
The two incidents that had a major impact on Japanese attitude towards China was the Tianmon and anti-Japanese riots. Before Tianmon, nearly 80% of the Japanese would reply that they had a positive feelings towards China. (Remember NHK's Silk Road series that totally ignored the problem of Uyghur and Tibet?) After Tianmon, people with positive feeling towards China dropped to about 50%. Then, with the riots, it fell to an all-time low of 30%. I don't think it will recover very soon. Between Tianmon and now, private transactions between the Japanese and Chinese have increased dramatically, but survey results basically kept the 50% line and never recovered.
I think the sudden shift in emotions came as a shock to Mr. Wan, the Chinese ambassador, who was initially making very arrogant statements on how Japan should improve its relations with China. Then, he found out that most of the panda-hugging politicians had lost their power, and that even the mainstream media were not there to come to his support. He has since toned down, and I'm willing to bet he sent a report to Beijing saying "our strategy has backfired."
Aceface,
I think relations between China and Japan were significantly warmer than they are now during the Hashimoto and Murayama days. During the Koizumi days, you saw many of the pro-Chinese politicians fall and saw the complete demolition of the socialist party. The latter was due to Kim's admission to the abductions. There were probably many incidents that changed the outllook on foreign and military policy of the average Japanese, but I think in 20 years, it will be clear that Sept. 17, 2002 was the turning point for Japan.
Ace
November 24, 2006
10:39 am
I do believe what the leaders do or say will affect the
relationships between Japan and PRC.
I did't support Yasukuni visit by Koizumi and
I believe it did damaged our reputation and interest
in the region.
About the nuke test,It certainly did a great impact
to our view of PRC.Since it was precisely because of the
not-your-business attitude of Beijing when the Sino-Japan
summit brought this topic on agenda.
We have a legitimate reason to think this is a Japan related
business since our tiny islands are in the range of your missiles
and our concern was not met with sympathy from Jiang
Back in '84 when USSR was still the big boy in the block,
we were also very concerned with the SS-20 trasffered from
Europe to Siberia.and Nakasone administration decided
to spend the record breaking high defence budget that
surpassed the magic number of GNP1%.
And about Taiwan crisis ....We asked through the embassy
where exactly in the East china sea these missile launches since
if you get know the area of launch then you will know in
advance where you shouldn't fly or send fishing vessels.
and normally you get some kind of the response from your
counterpart and get information to avoid any mishaps.
Well... we couldn't get ANY info from Beijing.
All the fishing vessels in Yonagunijima ,which locate right
near Taiwam had to stop fishing in the area during the election.
So now you might agree with me that Japan has a few good
reasons for Yanks to stay in Japan,
Sonagi
November 24, 2006
3:37 pm
"sunbin,
As a Japanese, I have to disagree with you. "
Why do you have to disagree on the basis of your nationality? Your nationality is irrelevant. Facts speak for themselves.
Aceface
November 25, 2006
2:33 am
I wouldn't call the Murayama-Hashimoto days Sino-Japanese
relationships any WARMER,it was not HARSHER than it is now.
Economicaly many felt there are things happening that China is not a heaven for Japanese firms.copy right theft,unreliable laws,events like jingoistic "consumers"boycotting goods,
and anti Japanese riots and SARS.I wouldn't blame they have second thought about moving thier factories to Vietnam or elsewhere,although they are calling it diplomaticaly China+one strategy.
It is natural to me that a democratic society (even a flawed one like Japan) do not entirely trust the authoritarian one.
And on emotional side,do Japanese hate Chinese in any sense that Chinese hate Japanese? Chinese in Japan are now nearly
taking the niche of the Moroccan's in the Netherland.You don't have to be a fan of Ishihara Shintaro to admitt this.But a lot of
citizen are very patient about Chinese.I don't know whether this is a virtue or vice but warm feeling and guilt mentality to China is alive and well and Beijing can always exploite this for their short term agenda.
Sonagi:
I think not only nationality but ethnicity of being Japanese is
veryimportant when you talk about China or Korea do not you think?
I mean take a look on Norimitsu Onishi of NYT's articles and the speeches of the congressman Mike Honda(dem)of California.
They are VERY much aware of their ethnicity when they
talk about such issues.(I'm on your side not one of THEM! is the
required attitude to avoid any harassment from asian american community I think.)
So I would say Two cents just made himself clear not where he
stands but who he is.
Two Cents
November 25, 2006
3:23 am
But sunbin says that:
>I think everybody would agree except the Japanese. I would imagine the Japanese would like something belong to themselves if they can
My response was to this part, which I believe, my nationality does have meaning.
Two Cents
November 26, 2006
8:09 am
I think you must have been more politically-minded than I was back then. I have asked my husband if he remembers the Chinese nuclear tests, and he also said, "Not the French one?" However, 10 years ago, any Japanese politician making "insensitive" remarks on history concerning China or Korea pretty much lost his post. Today, such remarks do fuel some fire, but they get supported as well. I do think that it is a big change, and such outward changes reflect the transforming trend of the public opinion. As you say, the Japanese do not display the kind of "kill 'em-off" hatred" like the anti-Japanese riots in China. It's more a "I-don't-trust-them" feeling.
>warm feeling and guilt mentality to China is alive and well and >Beijing can always exploite this for their short term agenda
I disagree with you on this part. Beijing is toning down its anti-Japanese rhetoric, mainly because it has created a monster in its own country that may go out of control any time. I have no doubts about that. But at the same time, their anti-Japanese attacks are beginning to lose effect in Japan as well, mainly because they overdid it, and also, the spread of the Internet made available information that the mainstream media never put out. Ironically, the anonymous nature of the Japanese Internet community made its users become more critical of whatever they read, and the same level of prudence came to be exercised on contents released by the mainstream media, which most were totally unprepared for. In the past, in Japan at least, the msm had a monopoly on disseminating information. They are beginning to lose it. Msm like Asahi may try to pump up guilt as they have done before, but it seems to me that fewer and fewer people are willing to buy it.
sunbin
November 26, 2006
9:41 am
the only difference is probably about taiwan. it is really not the same as 'another country' such as korea or japan
2. china announce the area of missile testing a couple day before. it was north of keelung(jilong), roughly mid-point between keelung and the disputed diaoyu island.
@aceface, where did you hear about the 'refuse to clarify location' rumour?
Aceface
November 26, 2006
10:34 am
Where did I here these "rumors"?
From the very same rightist whom you've mentioned
in the previous post who "still dream the imperial days
and of taking the possession of Il Formosa"!
To make fact straight many "rightist" nowadays
want Taiwan to own Japan and not the other way around!
Lee teng hui for PM, perhaps?
"North of Keelung "was not enough of the info for fishermen
in yonaguni had expected I think.
Two Cent:
Well all I can say is I have to disagree with you on current
state of Japanese conscience and media coverage on China.
Funny I thoght you were man of my age for no reason!
sunbin
November 26, 2006
5:23 pm
Aceface
November 27, 2006
11:21 am
O.K I'll stop taking "the rightist" words at face value from now.
Thanks for enlighten me.
Everyone in Japan sould have been impressed with the message coming out from the court of the middle kingdom.
"missiles shall be launch at the explicit-area-drawn-on-the-map, So you shall all remain sit tight "
But Comrad Sunbin, I am afraid you are not getting the whole
picture of what we are worrying about.
The point is shooting missile is a very offensive way to tell the
political message and you can't blame neighbors for being
frightened and interpret the motivation based on the worst case senario.
Frankly speaking ,we found it was rather an uncivilized action.
and was not amused.
We felt that China is using it's muscle to anyone who do not
obey their wish.and a lot of chinese pundits (like yourself) who are informed about outside world seem to find it a justified action is pretty disturbing.
I mean why do you support Beijing jeopardizing a functional
democracy in Taiwan? and any attempt to take side on Taiwan
get verbal assault in the most pejorative way?
P.S
And you know despite the fact it was intended to be launch on
an-explicit-area-drawn-on-the-map.The missile was still made
in china.It could've hit my backyard.
Two Cents
November 28, 2006
12:36 am
I have heard born-again rightists (those on the net, not those on black trucks) praising Lee Lee Teng-Hui and wishing that he were Japanese so he could be our PM. However, I have never come across any statements for me to come to the conclusion that "many 'rightist' nowadays want Taiwan to own Japan." Rightists want Japan to be run by the Japanese, and Taiwan by the Taiwanese, or so I thought.
The Taiwan missle incident made clear the deep gap lying between how China operates and Japan does (and the democratic countries). I read an interesting comment by Mr. Okazaki, a former diplomat, which said that "Ironically, China forever lost its justifiable claim on Taiwan the moment it pressed that button." I think so, too. If China has to threaten Taiwan at gunpoint to force her to make a democratic decision to come back, then you know China is in the wrong.
sunbin
November 28, 2006
2:47 am
2. i do not agree with the missile exercise. but the point is that china made it clear (and we honestly believe this) that the way PRC treats the island of taiwan is different than it will treat a soveriegn nation it recognizes, such as korea or japan.
if you really want an analogy, the Confederate was a democracy, and Lincoln made war to re-unify the USA. There is only small difference between the Taiwan issue and that of American civil war.
Aceface
November 28, 2006
8:01 am
Off course you'd never came across with the rightist
"who want Taiwan to own Japan" I meant it as a joke.
Just like Sunbin was joking about the existence of the
Japanese rightist who wants Taiwan recovered.
(or perhaps you weren't joking,were you,Sunbin?)
These oldtimers don't even understand the difference
between KMT and nativist independent.
I guess Lee's reputation was some what dameged by
the fact that Japan's Taiwan lobby had been traditionary
rightist of counterreactionary nature.and that scare off
many intellectuals of whom traditionally belongs to
pro-Beijing camp.
I think Lee is a great political figure whose class matches
for Vaclav Havel and Lev Walesa.
So It is a sort of tragedy that he became a hero of
China hater in Japan and disgusted by Chinese as
Pro-Japanese.
I wouldn't say China lost It's justifiable claim to Taiwan
as Ambassador Okazaki claims.
Because even though the opportunity of the unification
in the near future had diminished ,Beijing seemingly
understand what it takes for unification with Taiwan is
the battle for the hearts and mind of the resident of the
island.not the saber rattling.
If the opinion of Taiwan choose the unification by their
free will,we simply acknowledge the reality and wish them
all the best.
We simply cannot see a democratic institution gets black-
mailed by outsidal power.If US-Japan alliance sit through
this happening than the spirit of alliance will be dead within
days.
Sunbin:
We know as the fact and acknowledge the status of Taiwan
as a part of China and not the soveriegn nation.
But I don't find Abe Lincoln-Hu Jintao analogy fits this case.
PRC maybe a People's republic but it ain't democratic one,
but Taiwan is ,and that was what ol'Abe was representing.
Confederate was a semi-autocratic nation,run by the oligarchy which is to my eyes resembles PRC.
Just as ol'Lee Teng Hui says PRC must democratize before
any serious talk of unification.I think.
P.S
I apologize for being rather rude in the previous comments.
you were more coolheaded than I was.
sunbin
November 28, 2006
4:01 pm
i am just going to say that thing are more complicated (just like the fact that the american civil war analogy bears many difference as you pointed out), for example
1) consider taiwan before 1990, it was not a democracy (it was actually a rather harsh dictatorship not unlike that of pinochet's chile), how would that change your argument or conclusion?
2) if china becomes a full democracy, and then people voted to move the army across the strait, how does that (not) change the lincoln analogy?
i think there is enough exchange and there are differences now. you can have your last word.
Jing
November 28, 2006
6:27 pm
Aceface
November 29, 2006
4:40 am
Ｈï½”°Ã¯Â½“ï½”?ï½Â?ï½'ï½”°Ã¯Â½Æ’ï½Â?ｌ ï½Â?ｎï½Â?ｌï½Â?ï½”¡y is a tricky things.
Because nothing happens in the world is same thing.
Japan has been told like act like Germany or be like
Britain of Asia.And these always cause internal debates.
But since they are not done in English,they never go out
of the county's boundary.
Europe can have more fruitful devate on regional issues
without misguided by wrong historical analogies,hence
1)less cultural linguistic barrieers than Asia
2)has more mutual common values
3)less income gap
4)more transparency on government act
5)regional securities exist
6)and widely accepted mutual goals
along with them the regional powers wouldn't run amock like
tales of three kingdom kind rivalry
I answer your question
1)
I think it was equivalent to Pinochet Chile with one great
exception.
Pinochet was anti communist.While Jiang Jie Shi and
his regime was not only against communist but also
against nativist taiwanese who rightly want to rule
their island by themselves and not to mock
into quixotesque recovering continent ventures.
The end of martial law in 87 ended all that.
When Pinochet lost his grips to the power, democracy
recovers in Chile and he is now under house imprisonment.
Lee Teng Hui imprisoned no one for oppression
during KMT rules,
Difference in two is,
Chile:
there was a lot of ousidal help from democracies to have
Pinochet get prosecuted.
Exile Chileans,Spanish prosecutor and Uk court etc.
Taiwan:
Since he too was a KMT member at the time and because
the regime is based on transstrait relations
it cannot be deconsturct only by democratization but
it's independence from continent.
For Taiwan the help like Chileans are nonexistent.We listen to Beijing's voice for the resolution of Taiwan issues and not from
Taipei.Influential media and China watchers favors PRC
over Taiwan since they fear not only losing Beijing's favor
but onslaught of ordinaly Chinese both in and out of China.
This is funny thing,since china watchers do talk about accusing
human right issues and the prospect of democratizing PRC
which to my eyes would not occur in my life time
Since Chinese are interested in the pursuing of the greatness
of their nation than democracy.and outsidal interference will
met with hostility from ordinary people and due to the vast size
of PRC, it's effect is limited.
2)
And Sunbin, Do we have to continue with Lincoln analogy?
President Chen :
was born in a small hut
was a lawyer
got shot by a political opponent.
and these elements in his life have more or less resembles
that of the bearded one.but then again I would find it difficult
to fit U.S civil war era analogy with if-China-gets-full-democracy-can-we-start-the-war-with-Taiwan hypothesis.
If China became democracy and start a war with Taiwan for
unification,the best analogy will become Hitler's annexations
of rhineland and Austria.or perhaps that of Japan's Korea,or
Manchuria.(Yes,JNazism and Japanese Militarism were the
product of psedo or quasi democracy)
You can also chose Dubya's Iraq gambit if you like.
But not with Lincoln'snoble battle against slavery.
ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » CA Post Updates
December 3, 2006
12:15 pm