 |
 |
Angry Chinese Blogger:
The news and views about China that the big media can't, or won't, tell you The is no single truth Menu: Home |
|
Entries By Country
   |
5000 years of misrepresented history?: East Asia tells China to 'put its house in order'
March has not been a good month for the image of Chinese history. both Japan and Korea lhave aunched scalding attacks on the accuracy of China’s history books and museums, calling on the Chinese government to cease state sponsored distortions of their respective histories, and to adjust its stance to match internationally accepted norms of accuracy and content for the portrayal and teaching of events in history.
Korea
The Korean Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development has announced that it is to take action against China after it repeatedly breached agreements between the two countries under which Beijing was to stop including sections of pre modern Korean history inside as its own, and to stop incorrectly portraying pre modern Korean territory and peoples as being Chinese.
The Korean complaint against China centers around Beijing’s long standing integration of the history of the kingdom of Koguryo, a precursor to modern Korea, into China’s own, an integrations which was described by Koreans as being a "Systematic adulteration of historical facts".
Flying in the face of internationally accepted historic norms, China commonly calls the kingdom an integral part of China, referring to its rulers as an ‘ethnic regional government’ that was subservient to the greater Chinese capital and to the Emperor, and its territory as being an historic component of greater China.
South Korean scholars have even taken the rare step of seeking cooperative exchanges with North Korea in order to gather together records to use to counter Chinese distortions of Koguryo’s history.
Representations by the South Korean government have been made with the support of the Koguryo Research Foundation, a group specializing in the history of Koguryo.
The Dispute
Though Korea’s dispute with China, over Koguryo, has been long running, the issue came to the political forefront in April 2004, when a website belonging to the Chinese Foreign Ministry integrated Koguryo’s history with China’s own history, and unceremoniously ‘removed’ the kingdom’s sovereignty. When the Korea government called on Beijing to amend the website, Chinese officials deleted all of the sites records regarding Koguryo, and removed all material regarding the Korean peninsular prior to its liberation from Japan instead of publicly displaying records sowing Koguryo existamce outside of greater China.
In August 2004, Beijing made a 5 article declaration in which it pledged to cease distortions of pre modern Korean history. China however breached this pledge in September of that year, when it published an international journal article which again integrated Koguryo’s history into China’s, and ‘removed’ the kingdom’s sovereignty.
The journal was made available in both English and Chinese, and was published in 180 countries.
Koguryo
Koguryo was a precursor kingdom to modern Korea and existed between the years 37 B.C. to 668 A.D, it covered a sizable portion of Northern Korea as well as stretching hundreds of miles into what is now north east China.
Heilongjiang, Jilin, and Liaoning provinces, all currently components of greater China, were once part of the Koguryo Empire.
The existence of Koguryo directly contradicts China’s claim to have 5000 years of uninterrupted history, and runs contrary to official claims over China’s historic territorial integrity by showing that large tracts of modern China were once sovereign states over which Beijing held no claim.
Japan
As Korea made its representations to China, over distortions of pre modern Korean history, Machimura Nobutaka, the Japanese Foreign Minister, called on China to correct exaggerated, misleading and in some instances, falsified, displays in the museum that records the Chinese account of Japan’s atrocity laden occupation of China during the early twentieth century, and to begin using internationally recognized standards of language and accuracy during the teaching and displaying of Sino-Japanese wartime history.
| "I have proposed an improvement on the state of China's history education," Machimura Nobutaka, foreign Minister, Japan | |
Foreign Minister Machimura’s comments come soon after Yamatani Eriko, a lawmaker with Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party, called on China to put right factually incorrect exhibits in the Museum of the Anti-Japanese war in Beijing, which is dedicated to the war between China and Japan, and follow recommendations that future financial aid, provided to China by Japan, should be made on the condition that the Chinese government takes measures to bring its presentation of Japan, and the Japanese people, into line with the realities of twenty-first century Japan.
Machimura’s comments come as Nationalists in China are being accused of stoking anti Japanese sentiment in order to gain support from middle class citizens who feel cheated, because they are unable to achieve the quality of life of their Japanese and American counterparts, and to distract the wider citizenship from issues of internal reforms, rural unrest, and increasing restrictions being place on freedom of speech, in China.
A Koizumi Trademark
While unstressed, and not made formally through direct diplomatic channels, Machimura’s comments mark a divergence from Japan’s usual political stance of preferring closed door discussions and public silence. This divergence from the traditional Japanese style of politics has been a signature of the Koizumi administration in recent years, much to the fury of Chinese officials, who are increasingly finding themselves faced with cold rebuttals and facts instead of traditional Japanese silence.
A prime example of this change in stance was when the Koizumi administration called a rare maritime alert after a Chinese submarine violated Japan’s territorial waters in early December of 2004, forcing Beijing to publicly admit the presence of their vessel. Beijing’s subsequent apology to Japan was seen as a grave humiliation and a loss of international face by many Chinese nationalists, who still believe that China’s size and cultural duration should make it a dominant influence to its smaller, younger neighbor.
Infuriated by increasingly frequent Japanese rebuttals, many Chinese nationalists, who are predominantly young unmarried males from China’s ruling Han ethnic group, and who are commonly members of China’s emerging middle classes, are openly calling for war between the two countries, though such a prospect is highly unlikely given China’s dependence on international trade and good will to maintain its current rate of economic growth, and the strength of Japanese self defence force, which ranks as one of the most advanced and well trained in the world, despite a being restricted by a mandate that forbids it from engaging in any form of military action unless Japan is directly attacked.
War Shame
Feelings of shame, over its sub human wartime record, run so deep in many sections of Japanese society that, even under the Koizumi administration, it is rare for a Japanese politician to speak on any issue relating to the Japanese occupation of China, and rarer still for a Japanese minister to call on China to properly represent Japan in its history books or newspapers.
Japan’s culturally reaction, to bear incidents of shame silently and not to publicly discuss shameful incidents in its history, has often been misinterpreted by the west, and criminally misrepresented by China, as being an act of denial or ignorance. In reality, silence on an issue, in Japan, is often a sign that it is sensitive and painful for the country or for the individuals involved. The same is true for issues that divide feelings within the nation or a family, with contentious issues regularly remaining unspoken of, in order to preserve the appearance of unity.
It is only recently that ministers have been able to publicly make calls on China to adapt its stance.
Other Issues
In addition to making representations to Beijing, Korean officials also announced a plan of action to reassure Koreans over the accuracy of Japanese middle school text books, which are due to be authenticated in coming months, and to work through any differences of opinion with Japanese education officials before they become an diplomatic issue.
In direct contradiction to Chinese representations against Japanese text books, which have frequently taken the form of demands made through the media rather than through diplomatic and educational routes, Korean education officials are to hold a joint session with Japanese teachers and education officials to discuss any concerns over the teaching of Korean-Japanese issues. The meeting is scheduled for the period 18 March to 21 March.
In conjunction with the joint education session, officials have assembled a forum of 30 scholars and historians from both countries to write about the issue of Japanese-Korean history. The forums writings are to be cooperatively published in Japanese and Korean magazines and newspapers in tandem to cooperative work on text books.
Despite a frequent resurgences of the issue of text books, less than 0.5 percent of Japanese school children, most of middle school age, have ever been taught using the disputed text books and, in the most recent incident, between Japan and China, a historically bias book written by a ‘lunatic fringe minority’ was considered so befuddled that it was literally ‘laughed out of print’ by Japan’s powerful teachers union and never saw national distribution.
On top of existing cooperative measures, Korean education officials also said that they intend to set up a bilateral committee that draws on expert from both Japan and Korea that will monitor text books for rogue elements attempting to interfere with the accuracy of school teaching, so as to help prevent further issues arising, and to further peaceful relations between Japan and Korea.
Though taken seriously in Korea and China, disputed books are more widely considered to be laughable, and to have little influence on historic views. They are commonly only printed in short runs for private schools rather than Japanese state schools, or are factually correct and printed in greater numbers, but are lacking in specific details, veering towards the western style of education, where the observation of events through causes, consequences, and timelines are emphasized over the memorization of specific incidents. Many of this type of disputed text book would be considered wholly acceptable by western standards.
Most textbook complaints stem from China, which uses a heavily date, event, instance form of learning.
To a Chinese educator, the removal of the names and specifics of individual atrocities, in favour of broader view which explains atrocities as a whole, and the reasons behind atrocities, could easily appear to be an attempt to distort history or to justify Japan’s brutal and atrocity laden march across Asia.
Though still new to many parts of Asia, the cause, consequence, and timeline method of teaching is common outside of Asian, and is widely used to teach about other controversial topics including the rise of the Nazi in Germany, the Holocaust, and the US civil right movement of the mid twentieth century.
Since you are in China, have you ever read chinese history textbooks? Could
you give a specific example that chinese history book distort history?
I learned the atrocity of Japanese not from textbook, but from my grandma. She was from a well-off family and hate CCP too. It was lunatic to attribute the current problem to CCP's textbook.
steve
I know that there is a lot of dispute on this issue, so I won’t insult you
by giving you number and figures that one side thinks are correct and one
side thinks aren’t, instead I will give you a few clear examples of things
that differ widely from what is taught in the in the west as well as in
Japan.
There are a lot more things than this, particularly surrounding causalities and intent, and the language used in Chinese text books is more suited to a novel that a text book.
Historic
In China, it is taught that Chinese resistance fighters were solely responsible for the defeat of the Japanese army in East Asia, there are cursory mentions of the flying Tigers and Russian soldiers in North China, but usually only as footnotes. In truth, the Chinese army fought a rearguard action against numerically inferior Japanese troops for the duration of the war and, aside from guerrilla battles in the countryside, were largely defeated and forced to retreat further and further west until America began to draw Japanese troops out of China to fight in other campaigns. Japan was only defeated in China because US forces cut off Japan’s supply of oil and raw materials, forcing Japan to retreat away from China in order to use its Chinese contingents to counter the American advance on Japan’s outer islands. Japanese forces were also heavily defeated in the North by advancing Russian troops. In many areas Chinese troops merely took control once the Russian had left, or after the Japanese had retreated, rather than winning any real battles
Japan’s defeat in East Asia was largely a retreat due to lack of fuel, and to defend its home islands against the US and allied forces. It was not the result of Chinese military victories as is taught in China.
Chinese history also records that British colonial forces ran away and abandoned Chinese soldiers to the Japanese, in truth, Britain offered the Chinese army sanctuary in India and requested that Chinese soldiers join them in the hope of launching a counteroffensive later on, though this was on the condition that they set aside their arms. The Chinese leadership refused to enter India with the British because of this condition. They were however not refused entry and were not abandoned.
Another example is the casualty figures form several major city siege atrocities. During Nanjing and other massacres, a substantial number of those recorded as civilian casualties were actually guerrillas killed during or after Chinese resistance actions. They were not civilians, and they were not rounded up randomly and shot.
Today these people would be known as enemy combatants, saboteurs or commando guerrilla fighters. They are legitimate military targets under current international law, yet China still labels them as civilian casualties. This doesn’t however change the overall Chinese casualties, which were horrific, or the barbarous nature of the Japanese occupation.
Records are also slanted in favour of communist troops to the determent of nationalist troops, who are often depicted as being cowardly and weak.
Other Disputes
There are also numerous disputes about the numbers of people involved in atrocities, who did what, how many people were killed, and as to whether certain atrocities were orchestrated from the very top or whether they were the action of local commanders. I don’t think that it would do much good to name these, as anybody who was pro China would take the Chinese side, and anybody who was pro Japan would take the Japanese side, and I don’t want to turn this into an argument over who did what to who, because at the end of the day, Japan butchered tens of millions of people, and arguing about a few more or less each way won’t bring back the dead or make either side any less entrenched in their views.
The biggest of these disputes is probably that China claims that The late Emperor Hirohito masterminded the war, and the allies and Japan hold that he was a figurehead leader who just signed whatever was put in front of him. Historically, Hirohito was found not culpable by the allies, and was never prosecuted for crimes committed by Japan because he occupied a position similar to the British Queen and held no actual power to halt atrocities.
Modern
Most people in China are also taught that Japan never apologized, and that Japan never paid reparations. Both of these are incorrect.
Japan apologized on numerous occasions, but China considered these apologies to be incomplete or complete but not fully representative of the government and people of Japan, in fact, during the normalization of relations between China and Japan, China officially accepted an apology from Japan. Japan also began paying reparations to China in the 1970s with the acceptance of this apology. Japan’s reparations to China are called ODA, or Official Development Aid, they are still being paid today, though most people in China don’t know what they are. Similar reparations were paid to most countries that were brutalized by Japan. I have written substantially about them on this blog. Please see the Sino-Japanese category on the right side page gutter for information on Japanese aid to China.
I believe that it is unlikely that China would ever accept any apology from Japan, no matter how it was worded, especially since it has fallen into nationalism. Prime Minister Koizumi even visited one of China’s largest Japanese war museums and apologized in person, but it was not accepted, and during the late 90s the outgoing prime minister apologized on behalf of the nation and was seconded by the rest of the government, China still did not accept it. Largely, China has called all apologies insufficient.
Media
China routinely censors news reports on Japan to put it in the worst light, for example it denounced Japanese proposals to build long range missiles, but did not report when the plan was thrown out, it also reported that Japan was now considered China to be a military threat and had instructed military planners to prepare means to counter the Chinese military, but did not report that at the same time Japan slashed its military budget and scrapped planes, tanks and field artillery in order to boost finances for its social care system.
Chinese censors also routinely remove liberal comments from China’s burgeoning web forums but leave anti Japanese messages intact, no matter how violent they get.
Blame
I am not actually blaming Chinese text books; I am blaming rabble rousing by the Chinese government to distract from internal problems. If you ask your grandmother about hatred from Japan, and you compare the level of hatred in the past to the level of hatred seen now you will soon see that it has actually increased rather than decreased, and much of this increase has occurred in the last 18 months.
Most of the people who hate Japan are young unmarried men who have reached or are about to reach as high on China’s ladder as they are going to be able to get, and are angry because everyday people in Japan (not to mention Europe and America) have a higher quality of life than they could reasonably expect to get no matter how hard they worked for it.
Right now, China has a lot of social problems, and a lot of people are getting fed up with being at the bottom of the pile. China is experiencing increasing rural unrest fro farmers who want their slice of the pie, migrant workers are fed up with being migrant workers, and the middle classes are fed up with seeing that the middle classes in other countries have it so much better than they do. They are angry, and it is very easy to direct this anger at Japan in order to distract people from internal issues.
It is not the people who have suffered at the hands of Japan who hate Japan, largely those generations are more pragmatic, and remember what Hiroshima looked liked like after the US decimated it, it is their grandchildren who hate Japan. This is not normal.
Me
I fully accept that Japan committed countless atrocities, and that what it did was a brutal crime, but I don’t accept the Chinese version of history.
I studied history and my education specialized in sorting through records and accounts to determine what actually happened, how it happened, and why. I history studied in Europe Japan, and I took this gauntlet up again in China, so what I am writing isn’t because of something that I Japanese text books. Where I believe that Japan is guilty, I will say so. I’m have not reason to do otherwise.
Japan is deeply remorseful of what happened, and is so afraid what it once became, that it won’t even stick up for its self. Anybody who says that the Japanese people are ignorant, or are unremorseful, obviously knows nothing about Japan. Which proves what I have been saying about the Chinese media.
If the US media said about another country what the Chinese media have been saying Japan, it would provoke outrage among most Americans.
A liar compliant other people was telling a lie now.
Felix
China’s lies are a lot bigger and go a lot deeper than anything that Japan has said recently. Remember. Japan put its house in order, as far as the government line went, almost immediately after the war, but the Chinese government is still distorting history.
I would invite you all to actually read a Japanese text book or two. You will find most of them up to international standards. It is only a small lunatic fringe that actually publishes false history text books, and even when they do NOBODY BELIEVE THEM.
Those books are a joke. Japanese children aren’t stupid, they can read the internet and talk to their grandparents, and most of them are taught with high quality books. Anybody who actually believe that Japanese children don’t know what went on, and that they aren’t being taught about the war in schools, has been watching too much Chinese state television.
You are also forgetting about Korea, Japan isn't the only wounded party. Korea never lifted a finger against China, don't you have any sympathies for the Korean people?
Hallo,
I am a jurnalist of German International Broadcasting
Service,
helping " reporters without borders"
(
http://angrychineseblogger.blog-city.com/ ) by organizing a "Freedom
Blog Awards".
We´d like to ask you if you want to be nominated on this
Awards with your blog:
http://beyondnormal.blogspot.com/
Pls give me feedback to feedback.chinese@dw-world.de as soon as possible.
thank you very much!
Dragonlady [feedback.chinese@dw-world.de]
I have asked you a simple questioin, i.e., did you read chinese history
textbook, and where chinese history textbook distort Japanese
atrocity.
You gave me a long answer regarding chinese downplaying US role. Is that the way you teach students to answer questions? Yes, China downplayed US role in defeating Japan, exaggerating the role of CCP and Russia. Did US downplay Russian's role in WWII? Everyone know just Normandy. The fact is that the most difficult year and war was fought by Russian alone and US just came in time to pick up the fruits.
"Historically, Hirohito was found not culpable by the allies, and was never prosecuted for crimes committed by Japan "
Hirohito was not prosecuted is that he was not guilty. US needs him to govern Japan. Millions people died for Hirohito's honor and he claimed he was not part of it. You can people are three-year-old kid? I can not believe that you actually write this kind of stuff.
Yes, many chinese know Japanese
has apologized. But take a minute to think about this. If someone killed
your relative and then apologize to you deeply. Then the next day he
worsh
steve
(continued)
Then the next day he was worshiped for his bravery to kill
your relative. Are you satisfied?
The recent deterioration of china-Japan relationship closely tracks the open worship of Class-A criminals by Japanese officials. Some japanese refused to let those criminals go despite all objections. Does that mean anything to you?
steve
Ummm is this turning into flame commenting?
If China will not accept any apologies, then Japan might as well not bother with it and move on. Continual guilt builds into anger, anger transforms into rage and we know where that leads. What does China expect? Japan cannot bring the dead back to life. Japan cannot create time travel and turn back the clock. All it can do is apologize and offer financial reparations. If China cannot accept that, then China has a problem that no one can solve. Terrible things happen; have happened; and will probably happen again, given human nature. We do the best we can to make amends and then get on with life.
If China expects mass suicide on the part of Japan it ain't gonna happen. And even if it did, would it bring the dead to life? Would it erase painful memories? No. It would only cause more grief and pain and hatred.
Visit me @ http://www.journalscape.com/rhubarb/
ACB, I just have to correct you on this Koguryo issue as it is a become a
pet peeve of mine. You are an intelligent fellow, but you seemed to have
not bothered to do any in-depth fact checking or analysis and have given
the Sino-Korean dispute a rather superficial treatment. Absent of the
facts, the western media defaults to the proverbial giant communist
dictatorship immediately at fault position and has made this a rather one
sided harangue of Chinese disingenuity.
Unlike what is written, the Koguryo dispute is not a long running issue but rather a very recent phenomenon beginning from the 90's and really took off in 2001 when China established an academic research institution on the issue which Koreans described as a vast billion dollar propaganda effort to in effect undermine the "Koreaness" of Koguryo.
Before I lay into detail the bases of the arguement, I have to take to task some of your word choices. Heilongjiang, Jilin, and Liaoning are not part of greater China as you have written, but rather they are part of China proper, the convention of greater China includes mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. These aforementioned territories were at one point part of Koguryo, but in your attempt to undermine the Chinese case, you have disingenuously left out something important. Immediately prior to Koguryo, these territories were administrative commanderies of the Han dynasty complete with sub-prefectures. At one point, the administrative capital was at the location of modern Pyongyang.
You also incorrectly attribute that China's claim of 5000 years of history to be a claim of 5000 years of territorial integrity of the current possessions of the PRC. It is not. Nor does the existence of independent feudal states somehow undermine Beijing's claim to its current territorial holdings as you have blithely insinuated.
Now that I have tackled some of the outlying misconceptions of the article, I will directly address the issue of the Koguryo dispute. This issue, as it has been (mis)framed in the west, as that of a singularly belligerent China somehow aimed at historical and perhaps insidiously at territorial acquisition later on could not be further from the truth. The spark of the Koguryo dispute does not lie with China, but rather within South Korea. The Koguryo issue is in truth not about historical accuracy, but territory. With the developement of South Korea came a corresponding natural growth in nationalism. This has led to a re-evaluation of past historical events and to a growing movement among civic groups to redress past perceived indignities, the one at stake here is the issue of the territory encompassing a swath of land directly north of the Korean peninsula that was once known as Gando. Essentially some Koreans hold that this territory rightfully belongs to Korea and throughout the late 90's and during the more recent years of the 21st century have made rather blunt irridentist territorial demands. It is not historical accuracy that is the desired goal, but rather acquisition of lands currently administered as part of the PRC. The Koguryo connection is a historical legitimizer on the "Koreaness" of the land to bolster support for this cause. The territorial dispute if it can be called that is not merely an insignificant uninhabited rock juting out of the pacific(Tokdo, Diaoyu, etc) but a wide swath of territory that cuts across several provinces and is currently inhabited by several million PRC citizens. Korean citizens groups and even government officials have recently increasingly brought this issue to the forefront and China's historical revisions are in essence a strategy to undermine Korea's historical justification for it's irridentist cause. While much superficial ballyhoo has been made of anonymous revisions made by unattributed Chinese bureaucratic organs, the political scene in Korea has been altogether complete ignored. Are you familiar with the fact that the South Korean ministry of foreign affairs and trade in essence pressed a territorial claim to what is a significant swath of Chinese territory.
The Koguryo issue is not simply a case of Chinese duplicity as you believe and have others do so, it is much more complicated and the fact that the principal instigators(not to mention the ones clamoring for actual territorial acquisition) are in Korea.
Jing [blah@blah.com]
Steve
Like I said, I wasn’t going to insult you by bringing up numbers or things that are subjective like human suffering. it would be pointless and would just get your goat, but if you wan a flat answer here it is.
China claims that all Japanese citizens and soldiers were culpable for the raping of China. It claims militia and resistance casualties as civilian casualties and it over emphasises each and every war crime, making isolated incidents and individual campaigns appear to be vast conspiracies to wipe out the Chinese people and vast campaigns that covered the whole of China.
The language in Chinese text books is extreme, massacre, butcher imperialist, etc and wouldn’t be acceptable in any western countries, not even when talking about Nazi Germany.
China is distorting history to make people angry.
Worshipping war criminals
You show a clear lack of understanding of Japanese religion and traditions here, Japan is not China, most Japanese people CAN’T worship war criminals.
Japanese ancestor worship requires you to be a descendant by blood or marriage for you to worship a deceased ancestor. An ordinary Japanese person simply can’t worship somebody else’s ancestor; it would be like an American celebrating the French President during president’s day.
Japan is also not increasing REMEMBERANCE of its wartime ancestors, other countries are merely reporting on it more.
You also don’t seem to realize that Japan’s war shrine is centuries older than WWII and that it contains the names and/or remains of people who died hundreds of years ago. In these troubled times, Japanese people go to remember the tragedies of war by remembering their ancestors, and you criticize them for this. You have no pity and no shame if you would deny somebody the right to remember an ancestor who died a needless death in an ancient war simply because a war criminal war remembered in the same shrine.
Would you deny American’s the right to go to the Vietnam memorial to remember conscripted brothers just because a handful of those named there were war criminals.
Japan hasn’t increased anything to do with its war shrine, Nothing has changed since the year Prime Minister Koizumi was elected, which was a number of years ago. China’s recent surge in feeling is less than two years old. In which time Japan has not changed its take on events or increased shrine activities.
Every year, thousands of foreigners also go to visit Japan’s national war shrine, as well as people remembering the tragedies of war, are they worshiping war criminals too?.
Hirohito
If Hirohito was spared because of politics, this means that people under him must have been sacrificed for the decisions that he made.
You have just undermined your own arguments about war criminals. If Hirohito is guilty, then some of them must be innocent and were just obeying their Emperor.
Jing
Congratulations, you are the only person who has noticed that I wrote about Korea at all, I will give you a metaphoric gold star, and then explain my stance which isn’t the conspiracy that you think, but more an attempt to only highlight the similarities between Japanese and Korean complaint by limiting them to the distortion of history rather than saying that saying that both had different roots.
1) 1990s, that’s 10-15 years. This is long running.
2) I used
greater China to mean everything claimed by the CCP, including the Senkaku
Islands and the afore mentioned territories. Maybe wider China would have
been a better way of putting it. I actually meant China now and in the
past, or everything that the CCP claimed was or once was part of
China.
3) Publicly the CCP says that China has 5000 years of history as
an entity entity, but some parts of China have much less than this, may
argument stands. Only sections of China have 5000 years of history as part
of China. Taiwan for example was not part of China for 5000 years and
neither was Tibet. Both are more recent acquisitions. The afore mentioned
provinces only have 1500 years of continuous history. Their history was
interrupted.
4) I am aware of the land dispute between China and greater
Korea, I am also aware that some of it stems from a decision made by a
JAPANESE court during Japan’s rather bloody occupation of what is now
Korea. Japan, not Korea or China set much of the border between the two
countries as it was the ruling power until not so long ago.
5) I
summarized two much larger disputes so as to fit them into a single
article. The theme was disputes with China over history rather than
territory so I chose only to only to emphasize the similarities between
Japan and Korea’s complaints. You are welcome to write a more detailed
article on about this dispute and I will post if for you as a guest blogger
if you want.
Sarah
Sadly the China doesn’t work like this.
China will go on demanding apologies, and it will reject any apology that Japan makes. It is not about the actual apology any more, it is about face. Japan’s text books aren’t actually distorting history. (OK, so a few are, but they are published privately, everybody knows that they are wrong, and nobody reads them. This kind happens all the time in Europe and America when it comes to evolution, the civil rights movement, the holocaust, and Vietnam). People in Japan know full well what happened, they just don’t talk about it.
During the 1970s China’s government accepted Japan’s apology and they accepted loans and other financial assistance, during the 1980s China promoted peaceful ties with Japan recognizing that the two countries had a lot in common and that you couldn’t live in the past. China also recognized that Japan had been defeated, occupied, and humbled. Hatred was much lower and was a hatred of what Japan did in the past, and not of the current people and not a hatred of the current people or the current government as is happening now.
During the 1990s little changed, there were a few more vocalizations about text books etc, which, if you read the article weren’t the vast conspiracy that China likes to make out.
During the 2000s China began to notice deep social problems caused by uneven development and the fact that everybody I China now knew that countries that they believed were only a little richer than they were, were far better off, and that no matter how hard they worked, only a handful of them could ever have the same lifestyle as western nations have. People in the farms vocally questioned why they were so much poorer than people in the cities, migrant workers complained that they were being unfairly treated, and China’s middle class youth began to complain that being middle class in China was like just escaping poverty in America and Japan. Then in 2003, the Chinese government cracked down on forums for debate, they removed almost all debates over poverty and wealth distribution, and almost all debates over social reform. What was left was often idle chit chat and nationalist hate mail. The Chinese government then used this nationalist feeling to rally support away from internal issues and to foster hatred against a single external issue, Japan.
You will notice that almost nobody protesting against Japan actually suffered under Japan. Most are young unmarried Han males with time on their hands and a lot of frustration about their place in the world. Japan is smaller, younger and richer than China. This is humiliating to a Chinese nationalist. How could a small upstart nation be a bigger world player than China? They feel insulted and cheated, and they use the war to express this. Really it is not about the war at all. Japan has been carrying on the same way that it has for twenty or thirty years, yet people in China hate it more now than they did in 1945.
ACB
"Japan is also not increasing REMEMBERANCE of its wartime ancestors,"
The shrine did not initially include those Class A criminals. The official visit of shrine only started a few years ago. Clearly there is a change in Japanese government policy. How do you explain that?
" You have no pity and no shame if you would deny somebody the right to remember an ancestor who died a needless death in an ancient war simply because a war criminal war remembered in the same shrine."
Once US president (or some western country head) accidently visit a cemetry with Nazi members, he had to apologize for the insensitivity. That is basic decency. You keep saying chinese history book is not up to western standard. Your argument apparently go right against western standard.
Again, the motion of setting up a memorial place to remember the dead without Class A criminal was defeated repeatedly in Japan. How do you defend that?
steve
Steve
1) Prime Minister Koizumi initiated the official visits when he entered office; it was a personal decision, not a state decision. A close family member of his is remembered in the shrine. They weren’t accused of committing war crimes; he has every right to go there, he just happened to be the Prime Minister. However, anti Japanese sentiment in China only erupted 2 years ago. The shrine visits were an irritant but not a major issue until recently. What has Japan done in the last 2 years that it hasn’t been doing for the last few decades?
The names/remains were moved in nearly thirty years ago. Not recently. Sino-Japanese relations actually improved in the years between then and now. The names were also not included on the shrine intially because the shrine is several huindred years old. It was constructed to remember an internal war and then later re dedicated to remember all of Japan's war dead. I do not support the names being there. I would have them removed or a second shrine built without their names on it.
As I understand it thee constitution actually forbids him to worship at the shrine as a state act because the Shrine is Shinto and the state is secular. It would count as state promotion of Shinto, which was banned after WWII. He is allowed to go as an act of remembrance though, and government ministers are allowed to go with him, but not as private individuals, they are free to choose to go or not to go.
2) The leader was wrong to apologise, he insulted every innocent person in that cemetery by doing so. It was also a foreign cemetery. Japanese people are remembering their own dead.
The shrine is a national war memorial, not a WWII memorial. It remembers two and a half million people. This is substantially more than the number of military personnel who died during the war. Is remembering them remembering a WWII war criminal. Would you boycott visiting your grandfather’s grave if a serial killer was buried nearby, I don’t think so.
You can’t label a shrine by those who are remembered there. It is the individual purpose of the visit that counts. If Prime Minister Koizumi were to lay an offering beneath the name of Tojo, then that would be going too far for me, and I would denounce him.
3) I don’t support the decisions not to build a second shrine or not to remove the names, I decry them.
4) I would set up a separate shrine without any names on it dedicated to the remembrance of loss and put up an inscription dedicating the shrine to the preservation of peace through the remembrance of loss rather than the remembrance of individuals.
While I decry what the government has done, I understand it. It would seem like they were giving in to pressure from China. What you and China don’t understand is that if China would SHUT UP about the shrine, it would be less contentious, and people would be able to do something about it quietly without looking like they were backing down.
If somebody berated your country, you would stand up for it.
Steve
North Reading is not known for its Japanese ties, I would advise you to visit a Japanese cultural center, preferably one outside Massachusetts, and ask people there what they think. They will tell you that they are ashaed of what their ancestors did, but that China shouldn't blame them for it, and that no matter how horrifically Japan treated China, printing distorted versions of history, and spreading hatred to cover up the cracks in your own administration are wrong.
You also don't seem to have noticed that my article was also about Korea. Do you support what China is doing there?
ACB: Thank you for your response. What you said makes a lot of sense and
I understand the recent history a lot better now.
Important Notice for Idiot, and others
From this comment onwards, readers who are unable see the distinction between visiting a war shrine and worshiping war criminals will have their comments removed.
The same applies to readers who are unable to grasp the ideas that
•Japan is not China and that in order for a Japanese person to worship a war criminal; they must be a relation by blood or by marriage and perform a specific form of ritual.
•That Japan’s war shrine pre dates WWII and contains over a million other names, including those of Koreans and Taiwanese who served in the Japanese military.
•That many of the people who visit Japan’s war shrine are not engaged in any form of ancestral worship/ remembrance/ reverence that involves war criminal, but instead are remembering the tragedy and loss brought about by war, or are simply going to visit one of the Japanese tourist attraction s located in and around the shrines grounds (including its famous cherry trees, which are a symbol of the loss brought about by war).
In addition, readers who are unable to see that, no mater what Japan may or may not have said in the past, and no mater what Korea’s ulterior motives are, China should still correct its actions of bilateral history with its neighbors, are idiots who need a does of reality
Important Notice for Idiot, and others
From this comment onwards, readers who are unable see the distinction between visiting a war shrine and worshiping war criminals will have their comments removed.
The same applies to readers who are unable to grasp the ideas that
•Japan is not China and that in order for a Japanese person to worship a war criminal; they must be a relation by blood or by marriage and perform a specific form of ritual.
•That Japan’s war shrine pre dates WWII and contains over a million other names, including those of Koreans and Taiwanese who served in the Japanese military.
•That many of the people who visit Japan’s war shrine are not engaged in any form of ancestral worship/ remembrance/ reverence that involves war criminal, but instead are remembering the tragedy and loss brought about by war, or are simply going to visit one of the Japanese tourist attraction s located in and around the shrines grounds (including its famous cherry trees, which are a symbol of the loss brought about by war).
In addition, readers who are unable to see that, no mater what Japan may or may not have said in the past, and no mater what Korea’s ulterior motives are, China should still correct its actions of bilateral history with its neighbors, are idiots who need a does of reality
Just a few counterpoints to your post.
1) 10 years is not very long in the standard Chinese historical sense.
2) You are in error, the term Greater China is universally understood to mean mainland + HK + Taiwan. Greater China has an underlining political subtext meaning that although these locations are not neccessarily under the same government, they are culturally and politically Chinese. Thus attributing Liaoning, Heilongjiang, and Jilin as part of Greater China is incorrect as it implies a political divergence that does not exist.
3) The PRC has never publically stated that 5000 years is a reference to geographic borders or political cohesion. Again it is universally understood that 5000 years is a reference to cultural and civilizational linearity and you have made an error in interpretation.
4) Again you are in factual error, the dispute is actually a result of a rather ambiguous 18th century land settlement that was and is up to debate. The issue was not settled by a Japanese court, nor was it settled when Japan was in occupation of Korea and Manchuria. The issue over Gando came to a conclusion (albeit temporarily) when Japan had occupied Korea but prior to the Republican Revolution in China. The issue was concluded by diplomatic negotiations between Qing China and Japan via the exchange of special economic privileges in Manchuria. Your statement that Japan somehow "set much of the border between China and Korea" is meritless. The present border was settled by the PRC and DPRK in 1962 at the Yalu and Tumen rivers. Which is really no different than the Qing/Chosun borders centuries ago.
5) The main reason I raised issue with Koguryo is that for the Chinese, the historical debate is nearly totally irrelevant because no one cares. For China, the issue cannot be separated between history and politics because the issue for China is a completly political one. One may accuse China of distorting history, but it is only at the most official level. Most scholarly work and school textbooks still treat the issue of Koguryo as a feudal era kingdom that existed briefly at China's borders and do not attribute Koguryo to either Chinese or Korean camps so to speak. What distinguishes the issue of historical distortion in China as opposed to Japan/Korea is the locus of it. For China it is a top/down mandated political manuever to forestall any possible Korean irridentism or other separatist movements altogether and particularly foreign support for them. For Japan and Korea, the direction is the inverse, with conservative elements pushing for historical distortion to satisfy their own jingoism and refashion the domestic political agenda. Pick your poison as they say.
On the issue of recent difficulties between China and Japan, again I believe you to be terribly misguided in your distribution of all responsibility solely on the Communist Party. The party today wields far less ability to propagandize and socialize the Chinese people to its whims than it has at any other point in its entire existence. Hostility towards Japan is not a result of a singular machiavellian strategy by the party. The reason there is more criticism of Japan amongst the Chinese public isn't because of the communist party, but more accurately the lack of it. China today is exponentially more open than it was decades ago, socially and economically, with all the good and ills this entails. Antipathy directed against Japan isn't primarily due to deflected discontent directed against their own government, but more precisely the growth of nationalism has coincided with China's growing economic and political power in the global. Your assertion that Chinese are dissappointed that their definition of middle class is not the same as that of the developed world is for lack of a better word absolute bullshit. For most Chinese, the memory of living conditions were like only 20 years ago are a very real and recent memory and what they are experiencing now is far better than then. It certainly is not the level of the West yet, but the optimism is there to strive for it and not simply blame the government for its failure to catch the west in two decades. Mao tried that already, it didn't work. All the social problems of contemporary China you mentioned are true and pressing, but they are domestic social problems that have little to do with the attitudes of Chinese towards the outside world. The zeitgeist of China has changed and the growth in nationalism is a grassroots phenomenon. I do not deny that the communist party has not fanned the flames a little, but the origins of nationalism and subsequently anti-Japanese attitudes have nothing to do with what you mentioned.
On a final note, I will end this post with another axiom, that it takes two to tango. Japan unlike what you had written most certainly has changed in the last 20 years. The pop psychology sentiments you ascribe to the Chinese in the very same vein could very well describe changes in Japanese society. Japan of the 80's was figuratively at the top of its game and now nearly 15 years of nearly continuous recession, Japan inc no longer has quite the same luster as it once held. While it has seen itself mired in stagnation, it has seen its neighbor and once enemy ascend rapidly up the geopolitical ladder, toppling its own once position as top dog of Asia. This is not accompanied without its own sense of uneasiness, given the ubiquitous and racialist nature of Japanese exceptionalism. I believe Asahi Shimbun had an article about such very recently. How Japanese public opinion of China, which was at a high during the 80's (barring Tiananmen) began to witness a steady and unreversed decline throughout the 90's and ever since.
Jing [blah@blah.com]
ACB,
Calling people disagreeing with you as idiots says a lot about you.
As my wife said, it is really a waste of my life to write this garbage. No matter how you call people, the reality is that, many people's view is different from you, and the reason of difference is not totally due to CCP as you claimed. Many people in Hongkong and southeast asia hold the same view. Who are you going to blame in their case?
steve
Jing
You and I obviously have had very different opinions and aren’t going to agree on this, ever. I hope that we can leave it at this and not turn this into a full scale war. If you want to write a something on Koguryo explaining the dispute I will use it to write a China-Korea article, or publish it as a guest article.
As for Japan, I would say that I have had a much deeper and more peaceful experience of the country than you have had, and that I am a little closer to the ground than you are on the issue of Japan and Japanese war shame. I won’t tolerate distortions of history and I openly denounce them, but I will say that what is going on not a right wing conspiracy, it is a mixture of a lunatic fringe that is neither widespread nor believe, and a changing of teaching styles.
To treat your perspective, I prescribe making a few Japanese friends and a visit to the temples of Kyoto. Then sitting down and comparing last years middle school text books (It is only middle school text books at issue, not high school or college text books) to Americas books. If you still feel the same way afterwards then I will simply say that you are entitled to your opinions and I won’t press you any further on the issue.
1) 10 years covers a leadership and a reshuffling of administrations in both countries. It is long enough.
2) I needed a word that showed modern China, historic China, and perceived China. I couldn’t think of a word in English that even came close so I used a word that meant a superlative of scale, ‘Greater’ seemed like a good word, obviously it has already been taken. I retract my use of the word. English is a very poor language for expressing concepts in.
3) Both sides have used the validity or invalidity of the argument. It is one of many.
I understand what you are saying, but you haven’t explained why hatred towards Japan is increasing or what the catalyst is. It makes no sense that economic ties are thriving while political ties are ice cold. Even greed doesn’t account for trade increase and political cold shouldering at the same time.
Look at it this way. Prime Minister Koizumi began his shrine visits half a decade ago. The damage was done a long time ago. Japan has made no overt anti Chinese moves. Its text books have become better and not worse, business ties are their strongest ever, yet public hatred of Japan has only exploded only in the last two years.
This increase in hatred quickly followed the government censorship of liberal blogs and bulletin boards during 2003 and rural and urban unrest over the slow pace of reforms. It also coincided neatly with a flare up between mainland China and Chinese Taiwan. The latest flare ups also coincides with a government ban on the publishing of articles regarding the difference between rich and poor, and the move towards an anti succession law directed at Chinese Taiwan. Baring the Asia cup, a rise in nationalism and confrontation with Japan and Chinese Taiwan always followed a restriction in freedoms or calls on the government for reform.
You also don’t see Government ministers on the television calling for people to grit their teeth, put their hatred aside and to work with Japan for the sake of the Chinese economy like you did in the past when the old guard put in place a policy of friendship to Japan after the normalization of relations
If the government really wanted to quell this, they could. The only reason that they haven’t is because it is more useful to them that the people hate Japan than it is for them to put up with Japan.
It is a standard social-historic trend that when experiencing internal difficulties a government will try to deflect concerns on to another issue, usually a neighbor (In this case, Japan and Chinese Taiwan). You will see a decrease in freedom of speech and an increase in censorship rising criticism of outside forces coupled with the encouragement of nationalism. This is exactly what is happening in China. It is also happening in the US and in Germany, both of whom are seeing nationalist movements increasing in potency, are considering tough new laws restricting personal freedoms, are making accusations against other countries, are experiencing social, and economic stagnation and rising social problems.
The exact same thing happened during the rise of the Nazi in Germany.
Take a look at this.
Then
During the Zhao years
• Increased urban and rural
wealth
• Markets liberalized
• Increased freedom of
speech
• Decreased censorship
• Decreased nationalism
• Rising
political and trade relations with Japan
Now
• Wealth increases but is
tightly contained and has not spread
• Increased awareness of the China
and the outside world
• Farmers begin to complain that they are still
poor
• City dwellers begin to complain that, despite the countries
economic growth, they still cannot reach the level of their foreign
counterparts.
• Increased censorship
• Decreased freedom of
speech
• Increased nationalism
• Rising trade relations with
Japan
• Decreased political relations with Japan
According to socio-historic observations, China should be seeing increased freedom of speech, decreased censorship and improving relations with Japan, but it isn’t. Can you explain why?
Can you also explain what Japan is doing to hurt China? Its not text books, which have either improved or remained the same. It’s not shrine visits which have been going on for years, it’s not militarization because Japan has slashed military spending. What is it?
Yes, Japan stagnated, but it stagnated at a higher level than most countries have ever reached. Japan’s problems are largely due to an unwillingness to debate change (Contentious issues are often buried in Japan, both socially and politically, because of a cultural urge not to break the image of consensus) and an unwillingness to put in place reforms, however, the country still enjoys a high level of prosperity and a high quality of life. Then again, Britain, Germany, and the US are all in the same boats, and they are large mutual trading partners with Japan and with each other. A stagnation or setback in one economy causes ripples in the others.
The sad truth for China remains through; even after 15 years of stagnation, Japan is still 50 years ahead of the highest branches of Chinese prowess. If you were a Chinese suburbanite, wouldn’t you find this infuriating?
Steve
I hate to burst your bubble, but it is a fact that ancestor worship is only possible if you are a relative by blood or marriage, and the rituals for ancestor worship are distinct from other rituals. You can tell quite easily who is worshipping a war criminal if you know what you are looking at. To date, I’ve never seen anybody doing this, not even in a picture published in a Chinese newspaper.
You need to accept that Japan is not hostile and the Japanese people are not ignorant. Everybody knows what went on during the war. Your hatred will only prolong Japan’s refusal to talk about these issues. If China had bitten its tongue and not made a public an issue about things, Japan would have quietly removed all of the names from the shrine and would have issued a fuller apology.
You don’t seem to understand basic Japanese psychology. If people feel shame then they won’t speak out even if they disagree with something. The more that this becomes an issue, the quieter ordinary people will become. Speaking about an incident of shame is in itself shameful. It is the Japanese way to conduct business behind closed doors and then to emerge with consensus, the government simply won’t engage China productively if it tries to battle through the media. China needs to keep quiet and let its ambassador do the talking, not its press.
You have also forgotten a basic human trait, if somebody attacks you, you will defend. China’s actions have made people like me, who would otherwise decry something, defend it simply because what China is saying is inflated. I used to attack war crimes and denials at every turn, but because what China, and people like you, are saying is unfair and based on emotions rather than reason, I’ve ended up spending more time trying to correct misconceptions than I have trying to spread a more constructive message.
On Hong Kong. I’ve lived there for a while, have you?
The level of feeling there is more or less sane and reasonable; it is a million miles away from the level of feeling in mainland China, as is the level of feeling in Chinese Taiwan. There is simply no way that you can compare the calls for war coming out of Shanghai to the calls for a fuller apology coming out of Hong Kong. I squarely blame long dead Japanese leaders in this case.
I am also not blaming the CCP, I am blaming nationalists. Some nationalists are part of the CCP, others are not.
I was originally planning on my last post to be the final word on the issue
but it appears that you just cannot resist building up straw men.
On the issue of Japanese war crimes and guilt, I have made no judgement of such and have not even discussed it. You are simply conflating two separate arguements. I have not discussed the textbook issue, nor do I consider it very relavent to the question at hand. My issue of discussion is on Chinese domestic socio-political trends and not Japan. Frankly I find your attitude insulting and insipid when you directed me to "make Japanese friends" and "visit the temples of Kyoto". What do either have to do with this discussion and how would either be relevant in changing my opinion. (Is even visiting a Kyoto temple supposed to teach me something?)
As for the increased nationalism and antipathy against Japan, I have already stated clearly in my previous post my hypothesis for the origins of such. Whether ot not you choose to read carefully is not my concern. Your entire arguement consists of a series of disparate issues that you have managed to hatchet together into a rather unconvincing ad hoc case for anti-Japanese sentiments within China. Political censorship of online media and forums was not directed against "liberal" blogs but rather at everything that was deemed politically sensitive. You continue to build strawmen arguements from a rather obtuse selection of facts. There was no banning of articles related to the growing economic imbalance between the urban and rural sectors. You can find the issue being discussed in any number of academic venues or government white papers. What was banned was one particular book that for one reason or another managed to be targeted by the censors. Flare ups as you call them between the mainland and Taiwan are continuous and always over the horizon baring any radical changes in the status quo. I fail to recognize how the situation has degenerated in the past two years to any considerable degree anymore than it has in the past. The error you have made is in conflating separate unrelated issues with Japan, much as you had done in your reading of my last post. As for perceived "failure" of government ministers making televised callings for a public rapproachment with Japan, all I can say is that this is a complete non-sequitor. Perhaps my recollection is faulty, but I don't recall any such statement ever being issued both in the now and then. Even so, the context of the times have obviouslly been lost on you as the fact it could have been precisely because Japan had newly switched recognition from the RoC to the PRC that such a statement could possibly have been made.
On the issue of the government intervening to halt anti-Japanese sentiments among the public, what course of action would you recommend the Communist Party take? Censorship? Jail? Struggle sessions? If my sarcasm hasn't dawned on you, then perhaps the quixotic notion of calling for more freedom within China while simultaneously at the same time muzzling public freedom of expression has.
fyi, that broad socio-political theory of yours also applies to Japan as well.
Oy vey, thats about all I can say in regards to your list of talking points. I will spare the whole concern regarding idolization of Zhao within the western press (and western bloggers) for another debate but I presume that by Zhao era you mean 1980-1989 when he held the offices of premier of the state council and party general secretary. Increased economic growth during the 80's was not as equitable as you would like us to believe. Zhao and Deng both emphasized the developement of the eastern coast as rapidly as possible. Rates of economic developement are almost inevitably always lopsided. As Marx wrote, capital accumulates, it doesn't wander out into the countryside for no good reason. The urban/rural gap was not as significant then of course as now, but that was only because economic developement had only just begun and the social distortions of capitalism were not observeable yet. Markets were liberalized then under the "Zhao" era, yet they are even more liberalized now. I fail to see the point of that arguement. Freedom of expression and levels of censorship are subject to relevancy. In the 80's of course they were far freer than they had been during the heady days of Maoism during the 70's. In contemporary China, freedom of expression which you decry as being diminished along with increased censorship, is no less than it was during the 80's(excepting the months leading up to Tiananmen) and most certainly more so. On the issue of social freedom, it is without a doubt that China of today is far ahead of China during the 80's. Political freedom has more or less remains stagnant with minor gains made and lost as the party struggles to retain relevance. Decreased nationalism during the 80's is an interesting way to put it, and by interesting I mean wrong. I would postulate that what you call decreased nationalism is more of a de-marxinization of Chinese society. The rhetoric of anti-imperialist, anti-rightist, and anti-capitalist discourse became no longer relevant to China. As for the complaints of the Chinese peasantry, this is obvious, as for the complaints of the new urban middle class, I will once again reiterate that this is more or less bullshit. Do you have anything to substantiate your theory? Chinese newspapers? Statistics? First hand experience with Chinese you know?
In regards for socio-historic trends, there are none that are applicable to the developement of modern China. It is a phenomenon in and of itself. Your subscription to some sort of catch all theory that dictates China should be experiencing is nothing but a expression of the intellectual limitations within your understanding of China.
There is a new dimension of Sino-japanese relations that has obviouslly escaped you. That is the new threat posed by China to the established security order in the Pacific. The choice of the word "hurt" is a quaint throwback to the victimology drivel that emanates from both China and Japan but the antagonism now is due to geopoltiical factors. Competition for power, influence, and prestige more than anything else fuel the current impasse between China and Japan. Anti-Japanese sentiments in China is as they say, is simply icing on the cake.
On a final note regarding your last paragraph, all I have to say is that you have broadly missed the point I was raising.
Jing [blah@blah.com]
Just a small addendum, but ESNW has an interesting topic on this issue. It
begins with the standard western media auto-response and his commentary.
http://www.zonaeuropa.com/20050303_1.htm
Jing [blah@blah.com]
It is very interesting to observe the recent Koguryo controverse. Actually
I originally believed that Koguryo was Korean, until I talked to a Korean
scholar who corrected my view. Later I read some scholarly paper about this
issue and realized that just like Chinese and Japanese, the make of modern
Korean nation has been quite complicated. The original core part of modern
Korean nation, the so-called Han (not Chinese) were Sino-Tibetan speaking
people, maybe a relative of Ancient Chinese. The modern Korean nation is a
melt-up of this and other elements, of which the ancient Koguryo people
were one. However, this does not mean Koguryo people were or are Korean as
quite a part of Koguryo people were obsorbed into Jurchen (the ancestor of
today's Manchurians, I am not totally sure) or sinitized into northern
Chinese. Superficially, the Korean nation inherited its name from Koguryo,
but many traditional Koreans still think the Koguryo was a foreign element
(some time ago quite a few old Korean scholars called Koguryo people
straight 'Manchus' (just like my Korean colleague). The reevaluation and
the revival of the Koguryo heritage is a quite recent phenomenon in Korea,
and even within China the views about the status of Koguryo are divided
(totally Chinese or part-Chinese-part-Korean or totally Korean or totally
neutral, neither Chinese nor Korean, but an absolute independant nation for
its own good). But in China the different views can still be read in
various scholarly papers but in Korea the people who called Koguryo
Manchurian are completely silenced. How can this be possible, considering
China a totalitarian dictatorship and South Korea a free democracy? My
international experience tells me not to blame everything on political
system. What is more interesting is that when the Korean ambassador went to
Chinese foreign ministry protesting, he was choked by one answer:"why do
you turn this scholarly issue into a political debacle?" (Chosun Ilbo)
As to the apology of Japanese government, I have believed the sincereness of Japanese government until I read an analysis of Japanese expert on the wording of these apologies and realized what a joke it is. This can be compared with Spy plane standoff with the U.S.. When Chinese government demanded an apology, the Americans just said sorry and told Chinese this was the same as an apology. When I ask Americans, every Americans I met wanted to convince me these were the same. When I turned to some career diplomats, they admitted to me the nuance in between. When I read American newspaper and found that the eagles in the congress were strongly against offer any apology, even a sorry too generous, then it is quite clear why Colin Powell would rather say a double sorry not a single apology. This is actually OK. what is not OK is that he wanted to convince the international community and me that these two were the same. Later we found out that Colin Powell lied a lot too about Iraqi MDW. Go back to the apology of the Japanese government. As we know, the Japanese government has issued an official apology to South Korea when visiting there. When the Japanese prime minister on the same trip went on to China and his host asked for the same treatment, the Chinese government just got some giggles and a blank reject. Why China cannot receive the same treatment, the prominent Japanese politicians have explained quite clearly on the Japanese press.
Regarding Chinese and Japanese textbooks, we know that China is still very underdeveloped country and its textbook authority is very underfinanced and the quality of its work is by no means comparable with that of Japan. Even backed by such an excellent education background, quite a few young Japanese I met still sincerely believe that Imperial Japan just wanted to help China with its communism problem. As we know, the entry of Japanese army was prior to the founding of the CCP. But such are popular beliefs and cannot battled just with textbook or even sense. As to the role of the Teno, we know that in the case of Germany, even Hitler was the mastermind, his minions must also take responsibility. The German historian Goetz Aly has written a book about why average Germans should be responsible for the war.(Sozialabbau konnte er sich nicht leisten). According to the recent literature, the Teno was very actively participated in the war plans and changed the course first-handedly, which caused a lot of avoidable loss to the Japanese army.
It seems to me that you pay a lot of attention to the
civil issues of China. But some of your observations are not confirmed by
the facts I found. The provinces along the coast, where a majority of the
population piled, are by no means impoverished and malnutritious. They may
not pass a critical Japanese eye but are better than the countries of the
same development level. To the impoverished and malnutritious part of China
you cannot blame all on taxation or governmental intervention. Actually, it
is due to the lack of necessarry intervention. A lot of Chinese you
encountered may give you an abundant compliment to your country, people,
political system, etc., but if your country does not issue a work
permission to them, I doubt their fever will last longer than five minutes
after you disappear. The same phenomenon can be massively observed all
around the third world, also in free and democratic countries like India or
Columbia or Liberia. The most Chinese emigrants I met in Europe want to
return home when they have made enough money, many of whom are asylum
seekers. If there is really a vigorous repression back home, I doubt such
intention is possible. As to the racial tension, if you read some
literature, you will find out that the Hui-Han Chinese relationship has not
been perfect since last five hundred years, should the communism be blamed
for that? Pakis (Indian muslims) and Hindus also get on each other, should
the Indian government be held responsible. Actually the different clans of
Han Chinese also fight each other on various grounds. This is just like
hot
talked issue like forced sterilization. I remember even during the
heyday of one-child policy when I drove past by some rural areas I could
see elder sisters taking care of five or six younger brothers or sisters
along the village road. Even today I can read on international press that
China should be pressured for its family policy on one page and the parents
cannot afford school fees for their five children on another. Both of these
are not forged facts. They are just different facets of one country.
However, when I read the Chinese population just got to 1.3 billion, I just
wanted to laugh.
leo
LEO
At last, a civilized comment without a lot of accusations.
Korea
On Koguryo, I am making no judgements over ownership. My entire article was based around the premise of two of China’s neighbors accusing China of distorting their various histories. I have not spent enough time looking into Koguryo to decide who is right and who is not, but I have spent enough time looking into it to say that China has distorted historical facts. This was all that I was arguing.
I am also sure that Koguryo wasn’t subservient to the Chinese Emperor as Beijing stated, which was the main thing that I made an issue of.
Japan
Japanese people who believe that the invasion of China was to quell communism? I’m afraid that I’ve never seen this in a distorted text book. This is probably the result of stupidity rather than a baloney book. Anybody in Japan who has studied Chinese history should be able to see the conflict in dates.
I doubt that the people were actually taught this; they probably got something else wrong, for example, applying reasons for aiding Chinese Taiwan to remain outside of CCP rule to earlier Chinese history as well.
One of the more controversial reasons why Japan invaded China was to drive the white men out of Asia. This might sound like a poor excuse, but many people inside Japan really did want to drive whites out of China (Japan had already done this on the Japanese islands earlier on in time when misionaries began convertin Japanese people, they later allowed protostant traders back in becasue they weren't as incluned to convert people), and they really did believe that this was good for China. Of course they wanted to replace white rule with their own, which wasn’t exactly an improvement was it. China counts books that say this as being distorted, though this feeling it is true. If only for a set period of time, and among a specific section of the Japanese military and leadership.
Many in Japan seriously believed that they could lead a united Asia to glory. Though, in the end, it became a bloody campaign of death, rape and destruction.
Many Nazi believed the exact same thing in Europe, and look what happened there.
The Government
I will say this again, I AM NOT BLAMING THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT, I am blaming NATIONALISM.
People already had strong, if misguided (in my opinion), feelings about Japan, their frustration is simply being redirected towards Japan because it can be redirected there, and not towards the government, because they can’t take their frustration out on the government.
They need an outlet, and Japan is that outlet. Solve their problems and their anti-Japanese feeling will go away as well.
ACB
Jing
You really need a holiday. I have uploaded some soothing pictures of Panda bears for you to look at. I like Panda bears.
Look, they're soooooo cute.
I would advise you not to read anything else that I write on Japan, it will only upset you, however, if Japan ever ‘sticks it to China’, I will report on that, and I will criticize Japan for it if it is unwarranted.
Japanese Friends
Making Japanese friends would help you to better understand Japanese concepts and give you someone else to discuss these issues with. It would also help you to see that Japanese people are nice, friendly, and that people are not ignorant of the truth. If people from different countries got together more often, there would be far fewer stupid misconceptions based on ignorance and stereotypes.
Kyoto
Visiting Kyoto is something that I would recommend to everybody. Kyoto is a very traditional Japanese city; it is peaceful and relaxing, just as long as you don’t visit it in mid summer when it can become very hot because there is often almost not wind. The city is very ancient and was laid out using ancient Chinese divination methods, it also has a vast array of ancient temples and the mountains close to the city are very beautiful. A visit to Kyoto would show you a side of Japan that only the most extreme of people could possibly not fall in love with. Kyoto is my favourite city in Japan. I have written about it at length.
I would also recommend visiting Japan during the approaching Cherry blossom season, or at least visiting Washington, where many donated Japanese Cherry Trees were planted. There is a large Cherry Blossom festival in Washington at this time of year. Take a camera; it is well worth a look.
Nationalism
It given historical fact that prosperity and openness drive down nationalism and that internal strife drives it up. This is true for conflicts with neighboring countries. You will notice that anti Japanese sentiment has near paralleled anti succession sentiment against Chinese Taiwan, even when President Chen isn’t up to something foolish.
It is also very obvious in the US at the moment, and in world history.
Anti-Japanese sentiment
As for reducing anti-Japanese sentiment, maybe publishing good news about Japan would be a start, or some more cultural exchanges.
Chinese news is very one sided. It reported on the plans to build a long ranged missile, but not that the plans were scrapped. It reported that Japan was worried about China’s military spending, but not that Japan had cut its own military budgets, and it is still not reporting that Japan is both a major investor in China, a major supplier of tourists, and a major consumer of Chinese culture.
Chinese text books use very angry phraseology, toning down the language to internationally accepted norms would help things no end. History text books should be emotionally neutral, events should create emotions, not the language used. Words like bloodthirsty, butcher, and inhuman have no place in a text book even if they are accurate. China also needs to stop using variations on the word Imperialist when describing post war Japan as it is inaccurate, and stop both presenting unfavourable actions from Japan as being a continuation of the occupation, and including WWII remarks when address in issues like removing visa requirements for residents of Chinese Taiwan or the issuing of a tourist Visa to the former president Lee. There is no need to bring the war into everything.
The Proof is in the Pudding
I told my students and friends in China how much shame Japan feels and how much of a scar this shame has left on Japan, it helps them to understand things better, and none of the Chinese students that I know who have had a Japan teacher in the past hate Japan either. They are upset about the past, but most of them agree that China is wrong to press on against Japan in such a manner as it is doing now, and a large number agree that Japan’s wealth is a large contributing factor to anti Japanese sentiment.
People who have been able to actually meet with Japanese teachers in China largely have far more reasonable views.
I obviously see things differently from the way that you do, I don’t believe that I could convince you to change your mind no matter how good my arguments were or how many established socio-historic trends I could present to you. Similarly, you aren’t going to be able to convince me that people in China are as shallow and foolish as you are telling me..
This is how things look from my end, and I would rather go through life believing that people in China are basically good, kind, and emotionally stable people who are getting angry about normal things, but are directing their anger towards an easy target, than believe that they are holding such hatred against the grandchildren of people who tormented their grandparents (and in many cases died for their crimes) and are seeing current events as a continuation of the crimes of history.
This discussion isn’t going anywhere. Let’s end it.
Yes, I fail to cite the motive of expelling white men, which is, in fact,
not so poor an execuse as you described. Otherwise, the Japanese would not
have been able to astablish a Manchukuo, an autonomous northern China, a
puppet national government in Nanjing, which quite a few prominent Chinese
politicians and intellectuals served.
When the British landed on Chinese coast in 1840, they also made a lot of rape, destruction, and deaths that was not less glorious than the Japanese soldier. Anyway, 1940s human beings have archieved a much better technology of killing. When the white men were sent to camp by Japanese in 1943, they were sometimes beaten up by their former Chinese servants. Such details you can watch in film the Empire of Sun, which is based on a true memoire. The anger of the Chinese was not ungrounded. The Chinese citizens were treated as livestock in their own country by the colonial administration; the British and the French policemen often beat up the Chinese civilians at will; the British police officers shot protesting students and workers on Shanghai downtown thoroughfare; there were waves of revolts in Shanghai and Hong Kong. A lot of such facts you can only sporadically find in private diaries, rarely in the colonial document record or English-speaking newspaper. But the British administration ruled Shanghai 100 years, Hong Kong more than 150 years. I think a lot of Chinese just got used to many things and began to adore their informidable caretakers, adopting their customs, fashion, thought, norms. A lot of Chinese moved into the colonial territories to seek a better chance. In comparison with that, the Japanese were newcomers and foreign and aroused a lot of horrible fantasy. But after they took over the Chinese City of Shanghai, Lun Xun, a contemporary of the war put it in this way, '... after all that fears and rumours the life has just returned to dull normality...' (not exact quote, sorry!) In Manchukuo, after several rounds of confrontation at the beginning, the population there also rose swiftly due to Chinese immigration.
Today's Japanese right wing are whining that the history writing is not fair. I must say they may have some point. At the handover of Hong Kong, the Prince of Wales shamelessly told people "we bring the progress and democracy to this land" (not exact quote, either), forgetting his police deputies using canon to settle the deputy with the local farmers, shooting the demonstrating student when they were demonstrating against the British instead of the commies. Even a local British resident was appalled by the statement to call the puppet legislature, though free elected, without any real authority, a democracy, and wrote a reader's letter to the Time. I do not know how the British draw a picture of the Opium War and its consequences. When I talked to a few British people, they just got red and immediately evaded the topic. On another occasion when I by chance mentioned a few positive aspects of the colonism, a British teacher just showed such an enormous kindness to me that I felt quite uneasy. It seems that the shame psychology is not only Japanese or Asian.
What's more, I am sorry that I also have to smash your hope that China will get rid of nationalism when it has settled its own problems. I'm afraind I have to point out that nationalism is a national sport of every country. You should realize it if you have ever watched an international football match. I actually view the nationalism quite positive. It improves the consciousness of the common people about their shared identity and collective situation, making them a unity. How to express their concern and exert their influence, this is another issue. Considering the fact that the Hui and the Han Chinese can so easily get on each other, I don't think that they can manage this well. We know that the Japanese does not treat their own minorities very well, but they are at least polite to each other. You said that the rise of the nationalism is due to the fact that the common people cannot not talk about the real issues and have no other outlets. This is a point a lot of people want to sell. Again taking India and Pakistan as example, in both countries there are free election and free press and we know in both countries there is a strong nationalism against each other. Just like in India the muslims and Hindus getting on each other so easily, some time ago these two countries almost nuked each other (this is the stage China and Japan are heading to but not yet reached). So where is the problem? Let's take it from another aspect and admit that free election and free press help little on improving governmental efficience and economic performance, not to mention reducing corruption, and people are just increasingly frustrated by the evergrowing poverty and like to get an execuse for a fight.
This point also reminds me of a documentary film shot by German ARD, commissioned by the propaganda apparatus of the EU, interviewing the border regions of the new EU countries. In baltic countries the film repeatedly shows the martyrdom sites of these countries against the Russian rule, stressing the victimhood of these countries, but when going to the Nazi German presence there during the war, it is talked about reconciliation. The border between Lithuania and Russia is called "the border of Europe", "the end of occidental" (I suppose you know what is the connotative meaning of oriental in Europe). When it goes to the desperate local Russian minority, this journalist shows little sympathy to their wretched situation, calling them "a problem of the EU", "a factor of instability". Instead, the journalist tells the viewers convincedly that the measures local government takes up to forbid native language education for Russians is necessarry for a successful integration. At the first look, the film is quite harmless. But there are a few questions I want to raise. Is Moscow not located in Europe? Does the border of the European Union equal to the border of Europe? Is the opposite of occidental, namely, oriental a connotation with weakness, barbarism and foreign attack? When people talk about the reconciliation between the baltic countries and Germany, why no reconciliation with Russia? Why is there no mention of the fact that today's Russia is also free and democratic, other than an alien body that should be kept away? When I hear that an ethnic group was collectively called a "problem" and a "factor", I was totally appalled. If in China, an ethnic group is denied the right of national language education, it is called forced assimilation; in Europe it is a common practice. We know if, say, CCTV produces a similar film, carrying a similar information, we will immediately despise it as a blank propaganda. (Of course, CCTV cannot reach such a high quality and professionality.) However, this film has been run several times in various channels since the last year. So here is the question, why a free, democratic, and prosperous body like the EU, will produce a film we will expect in a underdeveloped, totalitarian, dictatorship? Because they fulfill the same need. Even the EU has concerns about its unity and identity, worrying that to these new members Washington is more attractive than Brussel, and the EU economy is temporarily not in its best form, either. So it set up a threatening, vague, Russia as straw man. We know on different occasions it also stabbed Washington from behind.
I don't know when China will be free and democratic like Pakistan and India, as prosperous as the EU (I mean, the level of an average Chinese). Especially I doubt the third factor, if our planet not to be doomed.
By the way, I checked the various English-Chinese dictionaries published in China, for 'condom', and found the correct explanation. Even in some very early editions. I hope you wouldn't think me no sense of humour.
leo
Leo
The Condom entry was a joke at Americas expense. I checked my dictionary as well, but it didn’t come up with anything very interesting.
You raised an interesting point about the opium wars, and I have a simply answer, which is that many British people don’t know about the Opium war. For most students, it simply isn’t part the history curriculum at anything less than college level.
People are not getting flusters out of denial, but because you are telling them about a section of their own history that they know nothing about.
I had the dubious pleasure of being in Britain for a while, and the state of history teaching in schools there decries belief. Most British school children don’t know more than a few scraps about the British Empire, and they only know about Pearl Harbor, and the Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombs, when it comes to the Pacific war. If you ask a British school boy, when Japan in invaded Chinese Taiwan, they will probably say sometime just ‘after Pearl Harbor was bombed’ because they won’t know that it was ceded by a forced treaty decades years before WWII.
Then again, during the Falklands war, most British school children didn’t know where the Falklands were.
If you look at things perversely, British history books have actually done almost everything that China has accused Japan of doing (Including the things that weren’t really true). Largely, British students don’t learn about anything other than the Roman invasion of Britain, the Norman Conquest of Britain in 1066, WWII (And then only Europe), and maybe a little classical history about Shakespeare, Dickens and Chaucer that was taught to them in a literature lesson rather than a history lesson.
A lot of this is down to short school hours (British schools only work 5 days a week, and often only have teaching classes between 9am and 3pm), they have too many different lessons and so not enough time to go into any detail during them, and an apathy towards their own history. There are also almost no Juku or evening schools in Britain for school children, and because there are no entrance papers for high schools (British students are often forced to go to the closest school, no mater how awful it is), extra study outside of regular homework is not all that common.
I’m really glad that I don’t have to go to school there.
ACB
This comment will have to be the last word for now due to the non blogging
issues (AKA, a life, and possibly a spouse and children demanding to be
taken hiking) needing time as well.
This site is only going to print file material for the next few days (Read old articles that were never printed when they were still relevant), if anything. Comments for this article will be re opened, but comments for this article that are added to other articles will be deleted, or deleted and reposted with an answer at a later date.
let make history a history. Put it aside and concentrate on the frienship
of all countries and people. european or japanese ,chinese, american or
whatever history......none of them are accurate.....let focus on the
future....that way, we will have a beautiful world......at the same time
maybe we can help the chinese people overcome with the suffering of their
past (past japanese invasion and opium war)
Unfortunately, China sees any move by Japan to put the past behind them as
a denial that it happened.