YUAN CHEN
TOKYO, Aug. 20
A Chinese diplomat once described relations between China and Japan as being extremely difficult. "The two may be on good terms for a couple of days, then relations can just collapse again," he said. The crux of the problem is obvious -- the Yasukuni Shrine.
Aug. 15th marked the 62nd anniversary of Japan's surrender in World War II. Neither the Chinese nor Japanese people can forget this day, but they have very different feelings about it. The same is true of the Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo. Because it includes name tablets for 14 Class A war criminals among the war dead it honors, many Chinese people have strong feelings about this shrine.
Former Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi went to the shrine to pay his respects for five consecutive years, marking the lowest point in Sino-Japan relations. Current Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has taken a milder position by not saying whether or not he will visit the shrine. This allowed Abe to make his "ice-breaking" visit to China last year, followed by Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's return "ice-melting" trip to Japan this year.
Has the ice between China and Japan really melted? Will it reappear when the climate changes?
China regards the shrine visits by Japanese leaders as evidence of indifference to the feelings of the Chinese people. But for the Japanese leaders, to say they will not visit the shrine could be to deny their own feelings. So what should the Japanese do?
Japanese intellectuals and congressmen have sought a solution to this problem for years, with little success. It is a complicated matter and is linked to public opinion. There is broad public approval in Japan for visits to the shrine, which was proved by Koizumi's high popularity. It is therefore not practical for China to expect Japan to follow its wishes concerning the shrine visits.
For a long time the Chinese have stressed what they call "standpoint" in relations with outside parties. One's "standpoint" determines whether one is right or wrong, friend or enemy. This is applied to people of different social classes, countries or races. A shared standpoint is like sharing team spirit; it enables people to naturally cheer for the same side. Team spirit is good in sports, but in other circumstances, we have to consider its implications.
Different people naturally have different standpoints. Take the war criminal issue for example. The Japanese think those people made mistakes as a result of doing their jobs in wartime. No country has a law against the crime of "invasion," and these "criminals" were taking action to serve their country. Also, even if the Class A war criminals' names were removed from the shrine, there would still be Class B and Class C criminals, and the problem would remain.
There is also the issue of singling out a few people to take the blame for the war. The war was carried out by the whole country, so how can people put the responsibility on a few people? Even the Japanese emperor was relieved from responsibility for the war; why couldn't the war criminals be treated the same way? What's more, the Japanese admitted their defeat, accepted the Potsdam Agreement, Tokyo Trials and the San Francisco Peace Treaty. The war was finished with these post-war arrangements, so why should Japan be forced to accept the viewpoints of the winning countries?
In recent years China and Japan have been on unfriendly terms. The media have made lots of false or exaggerated reports; Sino-Japan relations will not improve as long as both sides remain mired in emotions.
Agreeing to disagree is one solution. The key point is that people on both sides need to be able to move on. The solution should serve the interests of both countries.
Good Sino-Japan relations will benefit both countries, whereas bad relations will harm both. Japan is a great economic power, with advanced technology and many things worth learning. China can provide Japan with a large market and investment opportunities for surplus capital. There are many advantages to friendly relations. It is a real pity that historical factors are still causing confrontation.
Chinese President Hu Jintao has introduced the concepts of building a "harmonious society" and a "harmonious world." In order to have harmony, we need to first resolve conflicts. This requires an attitude of tolerance and an effort at understanding. We need to understand our relatives and friends, but also our opponents. As Chinese, we understand how Chinese people think, but how do Japanese people think? Doesn't their thinking make sense too?
First, let's consider the issue of blaming a small group of people for Japan's aggression in World War II. Former Japanese Premier Tanaka Kakuei came to China and negotiated resuming diplomatic relations in 1972. When discussing the issue of responsibility for the war between China and Japan, former Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai proposed that only a small number of militarists should be blamed, and that the majority of ordinary Japanese people were victims of the war.
I think all Chinese people would view this as a very friendly proposal. Following a disastrous war in which millions of Chinese people lost their lives, the Chinese side was willing to forego compensation and put the blame for the war on only a few people, who were already dead. That showed that China had forgiven everything. But Tanaka did not accept this generous proposal. Thus it was included only as China's opinion in the Joint Declaration.
The reason China continues to oppose Japanese prime ministers' visits to the Yasukuni Shrine is still related to this issue of placing blame for the war on a small number of war criminals. Japanese who are concerned about Sino-Japan relations have tried to find a way of dealing with this, for example, by removing the 14 Class A criminals' tablets from the shrine, or building another memorial.
If a group of people have done something wrong, it is reasonable to punish them in accordance with the magnitude of their crimes. Even though they confess their wrongdoing, blame should not go to a single individual, or to a small group. That would be against the facts and unjustified. Therefore, if Tanaka had accepted Zhou's proposal to blame the war on a few war criminals, his political life would have been over.
The significance of the location of the name tablets of those few Class A war criminals is very questionable. Moreover, Japanese people's view toward war and war criminals may not change because of this. If the Grade A criminals' tablets were removed from the shrine, it would merely be as a show for the Chinese and Korean people.
Former Japanese Premier Nakasone Yasuhiro first openly visited the shrine in 1985, after the Class A criminals' tablets were moved in, but he stopped his visits due to China's objections. At that time, Sino-Japan relations were in a rare honeymoon period. In later days Nakasone explained that he stopped his visits for the sake of Japan's foreign relations, not for domestic reasons. Originally, the shrine visits had no real significance for China, but after Nakasone's move, refraining from them was treated as a gift for China from Japan. Does China really need this kind of superficial face-saving gift?
(To be continued)
--
(Yuan Chen is the pen name of a Chinese scholar who has lived in Japan for 20 years. He is also a freelance writer on China's politics and current affaires. This article is edited and translated from the Chinese by UPI Asia Online; the original can be found at www.newcenturynews.com. ©Copyright Yuan Chen.)
没有评论:
发表评论