Japanese prime minister Junichiro Koizumi's visit to the Yasukuni shrine has prompted criticism from other Asian countries, including China. However, China played a rather fuzzy role and shot itself in the foot by mishandling the matter. In the process, Beijing's behavior also reflected its complex emotions toward Japan.
Koizumi went to pay homage at the shrine on Aug. 13. On that day, Chinese vice foreign minister Wang Yi (王毅) summoned Japanese ambassador Koreshige Anami (阿南惟茂) and "made solemn representations," expressing strong indignation over the visit. Foreign ministry spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue (章啟月) noted that "Koizumi finally gave up [the plan to] visit the shrine on Aug. 15, the anniversary of Japan's World War II surrender, and also issued a statement reiterating [Japan's] admission of its history of aggression and its willingness for deep soul-searching."
The Chinese public was infuriated because the ministry's complaint was called a "representation" and not a "protest," and because of Zhang's words of acknowledgment.
Why did Zhang say what she did? When leaders of the three political parties from Japan's ruling coalition government visited Beijing on July 10, Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan (
This was equivalent to tacit consent for Koizumi's visit. Thus, Koizumi avoided the anniversary and Beijing thought it came out the winner in the tussle. But the outcome did not satisfy the nationalism fomented by Beijing.
Even though Beijing asked Japan not to make Tang's two conditions public, Tokyo leaked the information anyway, deeply embarrassing Beijing.
The Chinese foreign ministry scrambled to deny the Japanese media reports, calling them "totally groundless."
However, an official at the Japanese embassy in Beijing told reporters that, while he did not know about Beijing's proposal to the Japanese party leaders, he did know that Tang had told Japanese foreign minister Makiko Tanaka during her visit to Beijing that if Koizumi must go to Yasukuni, then he must steer clear of Aug. 15. Apparently, Beijing had long surrendered its trump card to Japan and yet kept its own public in the dark about it.
Fearing that the matter might spin out of control, Beijing hit back on Aug. 16 through the Hong Kong media, denying that Tang had raised those two conditions with Japan. Rather, the reports claimed that Japan made a three-point proposal to Beijing over Koizumi's visit -- including an offer to steer clear from the anniversary -- and that Beijing "resolutely rejected" the proposal.
But if the foreign ministry had already rejected the proposal, how could Zhang have acknowledged the fact that Koizumi had avoided the anniversary? Also, Japan's pro-Beijing foreign minister Tanaka would not have remained silent if Tang's remarks had been fabricated by the Japanese media.
To slough off its "treasonous" image and to divert public anger, Beijing was forced to mobilize a barrage of condemnations against Japan.
These following facts reflect Beijing's extremely complex sentiments toward Japan.
First, Japan provides long-term, low-interest loans to China. Japan is also China's biggest creditor. Beijing's corrupt officials will not give up their love of money in favor of love for their country. Their vitriol against Japan is only meant for local consumption. The recent escalation of tongue-lashing is not directly related to Koizumi's visit. After all, two previous Japanese prime ministers have visited the Yasukuni Shrine while in office. In fact, Beijing's anger had to do with recent calls by Japanese parliamentarians and think tanks to halt economic aid if China continues its military expansion.
Second, during his meeting with a delegation from the Japanese Socialist Party on July 10, 1964, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) rejected their apologies for wartime Japanese aggression. Mao claimed that Japanese militarism had brought great benefit for China, and that the Chinese Communist Party could not have come to power if not for the Japanese emperor. If Mao were alive today and got around to visit Japan, he might also visit the shrine.
Finally, Beijing objects to the revisions made to Japanese history textbooks, but it has engaged in revisions of its own. Beijing has even revised the memoirs of its long-time friend Lee Kuan Yew (
Beijing says Japan has never admitted to committing the Nanking Massacre, nor has it apologized or paid compensation for it. However, the Communist Party has put more Chinese to death than the Japanese ever did. Has the party ever admitted, apologized or paid compensation?
Upon seeing through its true nature, one understands that the Chinese Communist Party cannot be truly anti-Japanese. It can only make a few threats by staging "mass movements" when necessary. But if Beijing overplays nationalism, it will sooner or later shoot itself in the foot.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
Translated by Francis Huang.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS