18 April 2005
Anti-Japanese violence or something more?
The headlines say it all. Recent anti-Japanese protests and semi-riots in China have caused much anger and concern in Tokyo. Indignant Japanese government demands for apologies from China have been rebuffed. Relations between an ascendent China and a stagnant Japan have never been more strained.
In an earlier post "Japan's repressed memory syndrome", it was pointed out that official refusal for an open and honest examination of Japan's wartime atrocities continues to create distrust and resentment not only in a newly nationalistic China, but also in other East Asian countries. In contrast to Germany's frank and earnest efforts in squaring with that country's past, the Japanese government's attitude is self-damaging.
Officially, the Bush regime, together with approving barks from its faithful Australian lap dog Howard, sees the US, Australia and Japan as the bulwarks of freedom and democracy (neo-con style) in Asia. However, the hidden agenda is to contain a China on the rise.
It's a hallmark of all three political administrations to be the world's greatest hypocrites masquerading as the greatest forces for truth, justice and the neo-con way. So, let's deal with each country in turn, to set the proper perspective.
Until the arrival of the Bush regime, the US had been regarded by moderates in Asia as the principle stabilising force in a region wracked by periodic wars and political unrest. Despite its well-known erratic changes of direction in foreign policy, America was traditionally regarded as well-meaning but naive at times.
But the world changed forever with the arrival of the Texas Ranger via a stolen presidency in 2000. Instead of being a global stabiliser, the US under Bush has now become the chief destabilising force throughout the world. Trashing a long cherished multilateral approach to problem solving, we are all familiar with the new unilateral war-mongering approach built on a foundation of deceit.
By the way, the illegal invasion of Iraq, unsanctioned by the UN Security Council simply emboldened China to pass its recent anti-secession law directed against Taiwan. For if it's perfectly acceptable for the US to invade a non-threatening country based on a pack of lies, then it's infinitely more acceptable for China to invade Taiwan to prevent it from seceding. At least China has far more facts to bolster its case for reunification by invasion than Bush did when invading Iraq to destroy mythical NBC weapons!
Now to Australia.
When the Australian PM, John Howard, made two notorious comments on two different occasions, he did so to boost his domestic political standing amongst his parochial support base. These two comments caused great consternation amongst his neighbours; which he promptly dismissed by saying he governs for Australians not Asians. Unfortunately for him and his country, they have come back to haunt him in recent times.
The earlier comment was that Australia saw itself as "deputy sheriff" to the US in the region, while the later comment was Australia would make pre-emptive strikes into neighbouring countries if it felt they posed a threat. Underlying these comments is a traditional sense of superiority over, and racism towards non-white Asia, Howard and his ilk have always harboured. This is not a harsh assessment of him at all.
As an aside, remember that he co-opted supporters of the Right wing anti-Asian ex-member of parliament, Pauline Hanson, into voting for him in 2001 and then again in 2004. In 1989, dear old Pauline claimed hysterically, that Australia was being "swamped" by Asian immigrants. At that time, Howard refused to correct her with facts but instead endorsed her inflammatory claims.
For the record, from the Australian government's own Bureau of Statistics data; in 1991, Australian residents born in East and South Asia (South Asia means India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka) comprised of a humungous 4.2% of the total population. Breeding and immigrating like rats, the East and South Asians grew to constitute a whopping 5.6% of the population by 2000. Now that's what I call being "swamped" by Asian immigrants.
Just think, by the year 2285, Australia will be positively over-run with 50% of the population being Asian! Howard and his ilk had better start building refugee boats to flee to the US now!
One wonders what Howard thinks about the 6.3% of residents from the UK and Ireland or the 12.5% from Europe including the former USSR? But maybe they're exempt because they look more like him! Perish the thought - how dare one insinuate that he's racist?
As for Howard's threat of pre-emptive strikes along the lines of Dubya's now patently flawed Iraqi model, he hardened his position by refusing to sign a treaty of amity and cooperation which the ASEAN countries, China, Japan and New Zealand have signed. He reserved the right to act unilaterally and militarily even though none of the countries in the region threaten Australia. Is this stabilising or destabilising?
It's within this context, that his recent attempts to gain an invitation to the East Asia summit have been rebuffed. And while Japan, as part of the US, Australia and Japan axis of neo-con folly, has supported Australia's inclusion in the summit, nobody else has supported Australia. After years of being told by Howard that he bows to nobody (except Bush), least of all, Asians, why would anyone want to help him contradict himself now?
So the message sent to Howard loudly and clearly, is simple. If you want to brag about your special relationship with Dubya and behave as though you're special, then you'll be left out in the cold, to remain special. And oh, by the way, you really should stand closer to the urinal. It's shorter than you think!
Now for Japan.
On the surface, the tiff with China is about school textbooks sanitising Japan's wartime atrocities. But as William Horsley's BBC article reports, it's symptomatic of a deeper problem in Japan. As observed in "Japan's repressed memory syndrome", the refusal to openly and honestly acknowledge and apologise for wrongs simply doesn't convey repentance.
So China and any other Asian country for that matter, would be perfectly justified in asking why Japan should be allowed a permanent seat on the UN Security Council over say, Germany. At least the latter has shown more contrition in a year than Japan has ever shown since WWII.
In geo-political terms, Japan is as alarmed as the US, at China's growing economic strength and international political clout. To put it simply, the number 1 (US) and number 2 (Japan) top dogs in the world economy want to remain so. They wish to defy the inevitable decline of their power, as it's always happened to other great powers throughout history, even though the tide of history runs against them.
The question for us is whether these two top dogs will step back gracefully as Britain has done, or will they continue to deny the inevitable and cause wars and misery in the process?
In an earlier post "Japan's repressed memory syndrome", it was pointed out that official refusal for an open and honest examination of Japan's wartime atrocities continues to create distrust and resentment not only in a newly nationalistic China, but also in other East Asian countries. In contrast to Germany's frank and earnest efforts in squaring with that country's past, the Japanese government's attitude is self-damaging.
Officially, the Bush regime, together with approving barks from its faithful Australian lap dog Howard, sees the US, Australia and Japan as the bulwarks of freedom and democracy (neo-con style) in Asia. However, the hidden agenda is to contain a China on the rise.
It's a hallmark of all three political administrations to be the world's greatest hypocrites masquerading as the greatest forces for truth, justice and the neo-con way. So, let's deal with each country in turn, to set the proper perspective.
Until the arrival of the Bush regime, the US had been regarded by moderates in Asia as the principle stabilising force in a region wracked by periodic wars and political unrest. Despite its well-known erratic changes of direction in foreign policy, America was traditionally regarded as well-meaning but naive at times.
But the world changed forever with the arrival of the Texas Ranger via a stolen presidency in 2000. Instead of being a global stabiliser, the US under Bush has now become the chief destabilising force throughout the world. Trashing a long cherished multilateral approach to problem solving, we are all familiar with the new unilateral war-mongering approach built on a foundation of deceit.
By the way, the illegal invasion of Iraq, unsanctioned by the UN Security Council simply emboldened China to pass its recent anti-secession law directed against Taiwan. For if it's perfectly acceptable for the US to invade a non-threatening country based on a pack of lies, then it's infinitely more acceptable for China to invade Taiwan to prevent it from seceding. At least China has far more facts to bolster its case for reunification by invasion than Bush did when invading Iraq to destroy mythical NBC weapons!
Now to Australia.
When the Australian PM, John Howard, made two notorious comments on two different occasions, he did so to boost his domestic political standing amongst his parochial support base. These two comments caused great consternation amongst his neighbours; which he promptly dismissed by saying he governs for Australians not Asians. Unfortunately for him and his country, they have come back to haunt him in recent times.
The earlier comment was that Australia saw itself as "deputy sheriff" to the US in the region, while the later comment was Australia would make pre-emptive strikes into neighbouring countries if it felt they posed a threat. Underlying these comments is a traditional sense of superiority over, and racism towards non-white Asia, Howard and his ilk have always harboured. This is not a harsh assessment of him at all.
As an aside, remember that he co-opted supporters of the Right wing anti-Asian ex-member of parliament, Pauline Hanson, into voting for him in 2001 and then again in 2004. In 1989, dear old Pauline claimed hysterically, that Australia was being "swamped" by Asian immigrants. At that time, Howard refused to correct her with facts but instead endorsed her inflammatory claims.
For the record, from the Australian government's own Bureau of Statistics data; in 1991, Australian residents born in East and South Asia (South Asia means India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka) comprised of a humungous 4.2% of the total population. Breeding and immigrating like rats, the East and South Asians grew to constitute a whopping 5.6% of the population by 2000. Now that's what I call being "swamped" by Asian immigrants.
Just think, by the year 2285, Australia will be positively over-run with 50% of the population being Asian! Howard and his ilk had better start building refugee boats to flee to the US now!
One wonders what Howard thinks about the 6.3% of residents from the UK and Ireland or the 12.5% from Europe including the former USSR? But maybe they're exempt because they look more like him! Perish the thought - how dare one insinuate that he's racist?
As for Howard's threat of pre-emptive strikes along the lines of Dubya's now patently flawed Iraqi model, he hardened his position by refusing to sign a treaty of amity and cooperation which the ASEAN countries, China, Japan and New Zealand have signed. He reserved the right to act unilaterally and militarily even though none of the countries in the region threaten Australia. Is this stabilising or destabilising?
It's within this context, that his recent attempts to gain an invitation to the East Asia summit have been rebuffed. And while Japan, as part of the US, Australia and Japan axis of neo-con folly, has supported Australia's inclusion in the summit, nobody else has supported Australia. After years of being told by Howard that he bows to nobody (except Bush), least of all, Asians, why would anyone want to help him contradict himself now?
So the message sent to Howard loudly and clearly, is simple. If you want to brag about your special relationship with Dubya and behave as though you're special, then you'll be left out in the cold, to remain special. And oh, by the way, you really should stand closer to the urinal. It's shorter than you think!
Now for Japan.
On the surface, the tiff with China is about school textbooks sanitising Japan's wartime atrocities. But as William Horsley's BBC article reports, it's symptomatic of a deeper problem in Japan. As observed in "Japan's repressed memory syndrome", the refusal to openly and honestly acknowledge and apologise for wrongs simply doesn't convey repentance.
So China and any other Asian country for that matter, would be perfectly justified in asking why Japan should be allowed a permanent seat on the UN Security Council over say, Germany. At least the latter has shown more contrition in a year than Japan has ever shown since WWII.
In geo-political terms, Japan is as alarmed as the US, at China's growing economic strength and international political clout. To put it simply, the number 1 (US) and number 2 (Japan) top dogs in the world economy want to remain so. They wish to defy the inevitable decline of their power, as it's always happened to other great powers throughout history, even though the tide of history runs against them.
The question for us is whether these two top dogs will step back gracefully as Britain has done, or will they continue to deny the inevitable and cause wars and misery in the process?
