Even before the tension generated by China's "Anti-Secession" Law has settled, Beijing is at odds with another neighbor. It has initiated a succession of anti-Japanese activities to protest history textbook revisions and Tokyo's ambitions to become a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Tens of thousands of people have protested outside Japan's embassy, burnt Japanese flags and damaged Japanese businesses. Tokyo has protested to China, but there is no sign of the anti-Japanese mood abating.
Beijing usually takes a hard line with demonstrations and unauthorized assemblies, and the fact that the protests have reached a point where even the Japanese embassy is threatened has led the Japanese media to suggest that these demonstrations have tacit government approval.
Why does the Chinese government tolerate these protests? Beijing is using the situation as a valve to release tensions over political and economic issues. The textbook revisions and the visits by Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi to the Yasukuni Shrine are being exploited to this end. So is the constant friction over rights to Siberian oil, shipping lanes in the East China Sea, sovereignty over the Diaoyutai and the operation of the Chunxiao gas fields west of Okinawa. It is all just a means of diverting attention away from domestic issues.
Since taking power, Chinese President Hu Jintao (
Another major reason is China's economy. As the economy booms, the income gap between rich and poor is widening. Meanwhile, a flood of foreign capital has aggravated competition between domestic and foreign-owned companies. China has become Japan's largest trade partner, but with their financial resources and experience, Japanese companies are putting enormous pressure on Chinese enterprises. With the survival of Chinese enterprises at stake, in addition to traditional historical resentment, Japanese businesses become the first targets when China wishes to express its dissatisfaction or launch boycotts.
The two countries have a close political and economic relationship, but at the level of public opinion, they are uneasy partners and suspicious of one another. A conflagration may break out if hatred is cultivated. Therefore, even as the Chinese government allows its public to vent their emotions, it also worries that it may lose control over nationalistic fervor. There is always the risk that public protests could turn into a movement similar to the 1989 Tiananmen Square rallies. This is why Beijing has made some attempts to cool down the anti-Japanese rumblings.
Such an upsurge of anti-Japanese nationalism will necessarily rouse Japanese nationalism. China's and South Korea's joint protests against Japan have made Tokyo feel isolated and threatened. This is likely to make it more determined to secure its security relationship with the US. Japan's rearmament, therefore, seems inevitable.
With the expansion of the Sino-Japanese conflict, Taiwan's security and regional stability could suffer. Taiwan and Japan are both threatened by China. Washington and Tokyo have noted their concerns over Taiwan and the Taiwan Strait in their joint declaration on security. However, recent incidents, such as the Anti-Secession Law and Taiwan Solidarity Union Chairman Shu Chin-chiang's (
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath