Chinese scholars put the breaks on Sino-Japanese history project?

whichever way you look at it, the first few years of the 21st century were not good years as far as the Sino-Japanese relationship was concerned. There were trade disputes, there were territorial disputes, there were even disputes over whether Chinese actors actresses should be considered traitors if they played Japanese characters in movies. However, at the end of the day, disputes over Sino-Japanese history not only prove to be the biggest of them all, but also to be a factor that sooner or later cropped up in most of the other disputes, too.

For this reason Chinese and Japanese scholars decided to get together in 2007 and to produce a unified outline of Sino-Japanese history that was agreeable to both sides. One which neither sugar coated events, nor would bathe them in wolf's blood. However, it would appear that things have gone somewhat astray. With delays wracking up and arguments brewing.

Hopes/Fears

Naturally, the news was welcomed by China watchers but was also met with a certain air of skepticism. China watcher's hoped for the best, but didn't bank on it as a certainty.

On one had China watchers greeted the announcement as being a step forward. Having a unified and mutually agreed up account of Sino-Japanese history could help to reduce tension by not only giving both sides a neutral account of events from their own country's perspective, but also giving them an equally neutral account from the perspective drawn from the other side.

An account free from the politically motivated bias supplied by Beijing – which has often used issues of Sino-Japanese history disputes to redirect people's attention away from domestic issues – and void of the ranting of Japan's discredited nationalist minority, whose own text book prove to be so unpopular in Japan that they were barely able to give it away.

Yet. on the other hand, China watchers were also did not get their hopes up. Sino-Japanese history is a fraught subject that has been the source of bitter disputes for decades. Thus creating much uncertainty over whether a unified account could be agreed on, and raising questions about exactly how many contentious details would have to be left out by both sides in order to do so

Questions were also raised as to whether a unified account would make things better, or whether it would just be throwing fuel on the fire. Particular concern was voiced over whether conservative groups would brand the compromises made on certain issues in order to reach agreement as being unacceptable surrenders.

Delays?

Despite initial concerns, work on the unified account moved forward, with Chinese and Japanese scholars working hard to reach agreement on everything from the way in which events panned out to the motives of those involved in the events.

For a while things looked as if they were on track. However, things came somewhat unstuck in mid 2008. The date for the delivery of a key report to both Beijing and Tokyo came and went, yet no report was forthcoming.

At the time very little was said on the matter, it was swept under the carpet as being a routine delay as often happens when scholars start debating and then get carried away. However, if reports in the Japanese media prove true it would appear that a much more serious snag was hit. One which doesn't bode well for the project as a whole.

As you might expect, and as China watchers suspected from the beginning, the reported snag is a disagreement over a contentious area of history. But which one you might well ask? After all, there are so many areas of contention ripe for snagging.

Was it a dispute over the death Nanjing/king toll? China and Japan have never agreed on this one.

Was it a dispute over the controversial Yasukuni Jinja? The war criminals remains contained  there within? Or even the yearly visits paid there by some of Japan's most senior politicians?

Was it a dispute over Japans' motives for the war, the way that it fought the war, and exactly who was culpable for what?

Could it even have been a disagreement over Japan's post war apologies, and the fact that most Chinese don't know about them, and don't accept the ones that they do know about?

Apparently not.

According to the Japanese media the project has not been held up by disagreements over Sino-Japanese history at all, but rather by a dispute over Chinese domestic history: Namely the 1989 suppression of students and trade unionists in Tiananmen square.

To be more specific, the report has been delayed because the Mainland team has demanded that all references to the 1989 suppression – often referred to in the West as the Tiananmen Square Massacre – be excised from the text, despite it being a relevant event in Sino-Japanese relations.

Why?

When questioned on the delay professor Kitaoka Shinichi, who heads up the Japanese delegation, attempted to play down both the dispute and the delay, stating that the report would be finished by March 2009, and that the delay was simply the result of a difference of opinion between Chinese and Japanese scholars over how select events should be described.


Although Kitaoka did confirm that the report had been delayed because of a difference of opinions they would neither confirm nor deny what the difference of opinion were, nor which issues they were about. Kitaoka also did not detail whether the differences of opinion originated  from Japanese/Chinese scholars who disagreed with the other's account of history, or whether it originated from the Chinese government
Beijing

Beijing?

While Japan's history controversies often originate from private groups seeking to promote their own slant on historical events for personal gain, China's controversies primarily originate from Beijing

Indeed, while Japan's war time actions are well known amongst Japanese citizens who have free access to an uncensored media, information on many of Mainland China's controversies is often suppressed by the government: which often refuses to allow books or academic papers to be published if the contradict its official line on history, society, or politics. Or is altered to suit the government's agenda.

Amongst the most controversial of these controversies is the 1989 massacre. While its events are common knowledge in Japan and can be spoken of publicly, information about it is still tightly controlled on the Mainland to the point that any version that would be accurate enough for Japanese scholars to accept as being correct would substantially contradict Beijing official account. Something that Beijing would likely wish to avoid.

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit