When
the world's second biggest economy and its third biggest economy rattle their
sabres at each other, I think it's probably time for the rest of us to take
notice.
China
and Japan are growling at each other again, and as both countries are in the
midst of what could be profound political changes, the risk of miscalculation
is worryingly high.
They're
arguing over a group of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea, north-east
of Taiwan and west of the Japanese island of Okinawa. Both China and Japan have
claims that go back a long way into history -- and both governments see the
islands as a symbol of their sovereignty and of their regional power.
(It
is not exactly irrelevant, of course, that the islands are close
to strategically important shipping lanes, and the waters around them offer
rich fishing grounds and are thought to contain potentially lucrative oil
deposits -- this isn't only about politics and
pride by any means.)
Japan
calls them the Senkaku Islands and has controlled them since 1971, when they
inherited them from the US, which had administered them since 1945. (Japan had
originally annexed them in 1895 and the Americans gained control when Japan
surrendered at the end of the Second World War.)
China
calls them the Diaoyu Islands and says they've been part of China since as
early as the 14th century and were ceded to Japan as part of Taiwan only after
the first Sino-Japanese war. So the Beijing view is that when Taiwan was
returned in the Treaty of San Francisco in 1951, the islands should have been
returned as well.
(Oh
yes, Taiwan also claims sovereignty over the islands -- but for now seems
content to sit out the current dispute.)
This
isn't the first time that Japan and China have faced each other down over these
islands. Just two years ago, Japan seized a Chinese trawler that had collided
with two coastguard vessels close to the islands, sparking a nasty diplomatic
row.
This
time, it's getting nastier. There have been huge anti-Japan demonstrations in
several Chinese cities (this, remember, in a country where demonstrations
generally don't happen unless the government wants them to), and many Japanese
companies in China have had to shut down for fear of being attacked.
Two-way
trade between China and Japan totals something like $345 billion -- that's not
chicken feed, and however hot the diplomatic waters might get, each side knows
that their economies need that trade to continue.
But
here's the worrying thing. According to a poll carried out by Reuters, more
than 40 per cent of Japanese companies see the current dispute as likely to
affect their business plans. (And this is a poll that was carried out before
the most recent protests.) If that means a big drop in Japanese investment in
China, both countries will suffer.
And
then there's the politics. The Japanese government has been keen to stay on
good terms with Beijing, but it's not a popular stance, and more radical groups
have been pressing for a tougher line. The current row stems from a plan by the
controversial governor of Tokyo, Shintaro Ishihara, to buy the islands --
that's when the government stepped in and bought them instead, to stop him
getting his hands on them.
If
the ruling Democratic Party of Japan loses the election that's expected within
the next 12 months, it will in all probability be replaced by the more
hard-line Liberal Democratic Party, currently in the throes of a party
leadership campaign in which the disputed islands have been a major issue.
As
for China, the Communist party is on the brink of a major leadership change,
and is only too aware of the political dynamics in Japan. So they may be
calculating in Beijing that now is likely to be the best chance in quite a
while to get what China wants.
And
of course all Chinese know their history: how Japan occupied Manchuria in 1931
and invaded the rest of China in in 1937, and the story of the Nanking (or
Nanjing) massacre in which anything up to 300,000 people were slaughtered. The
Chinese think the Japanese still harbour imperial tendencies; the Japanese
think the Chinese are building a new empire (admittedly of the 21st century
variety, which thankfully involves far fewer wars and far fewer deaths).
A
complicated dispute a long way away? Well, yes. But add to the mix US interests
in the Asia-Pacific region -- the defence secretary Leon Panetta has been in
the area all week -- and you have a pretty toxic brew.
Get
a map out and see exactly where the islands are. You'll soon see why they matter
so much to both Japan and China. And when you chart the routes that all those
container ships from China use, bringing TVs, computers and smartphones to
their impatient customers in the West (yes, sorry, that probably does mean
you), well, you'll also see why it's not just a complicated dispute on the
other side of the world.
2 comments:
Thank you for clarifying the situation in a post we can all understand. Of course, of course...mineral deposits.
Sorry that you're retiring. Here in the US, you have been one of the few radio voices of sanity in an increasingly surrealistic world.
Well, here's wishing you the best of luck!
Post a Comment