Historians from China and Japan -- 10 on each side -- were to meet yesterday in Beijing as a follow-up to an undertaking by their governments to improve relations through shared historical research.
This came in response to cooling ties between the two governments over former Japanese prime minister Junichiro Koizumi's visits to the Yasukuni shrine and other symbolically offensive actions and statements by Japanese politicians and educators.
The sight of academics sitting around a table talking about history may lead some to believe that detente is on the way, but in truth it is hard to see the political or scholastic point of any of this.
Japanese atrocities in China before and during World War II are well documented. As a free society, Japan's liability for war crimes and exploitation of "comfort women" are regularly and publicly canvassed, if not always to the satisfaction of litigants or the Chinese government, or indeed, to other Asian and Western victims of Japanese cruelties more than six decades ago.
There is, however, a stink of hypocrisy on the part of the Chinese here, and this, together with the absurd assumption that the Chinese historians will present their cases as independent experts, suggests that the meetings will offer no political solution, much less a scholastic one.
Ever claiming to be the wronged party, China regularly displays considerable discomfort at the prospect of the airing of its own ample amounts of dirty laundry -- in particular laundry that was soiled in the last two decades. The interesting thing about this is that in both cases -- Japanese wartime butchery or Chinese postwar demagoguery -- the victims have almost all been Chinese nationals. This nasty little fact speaks volumes.
Japan's problem is not that these histories are unwritten; it is that the politics of school curriculums shield Japanese students from unpalatable truths about Japanese conduct in the region and from the reasons why Japanese nationals are held in suspicion by many older people from countries that were occupied by or fought against the Japanese.
China's problem -- or, better expressed, the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) problem -- is that it uses history as a weapon against Japanese arrogance and insensitivity while pretending that it has no responsibility for the millions of Chinese who were exterminated by people hailed as national icons by these same historians. With such double standards in play, what possible space can there be for rigorous intellectual discussion?
As an example, ill-fated Straits Times reporter Ching Cheong (
Ruled like a colony for much of its modern history, Taiwan is the only third party in the region to have been molested by both of these countries, and yet harbors attachment to both. Taiwanese historians who might be hoping for some degree of parity in all of this diplomatic maneuvering among Chinese and Japanese academics should expect to come away disappointed. Certainly, these historians should not be expected to deliver a consensus on how both countries treated Taiwan -- and even if they did, it would most likely be worthless.
But this is just what one should expect when historians act in the service of disingenuous governments that trade in populist stupidity.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry