Indy asked in the comments about the local Chinese reaction to the North Korean missile tests. I thought it might make a good post, since I've been a little inactive lately.
The Chinese media has been paying a little more attention to the missile launches now that they've actually taken place, but the discussion is mostly about the U.S. request for a security council resolution. There isn't a lot of concern about the missiles themselves.
It doesn't take more than a few moments of consideration to figure out why that might be. First, North Korea has long had the ability to launch missiles that could potentially hit major Chinese, South Korean, or Japanese cities. These tests don't change the status quo for any of these countries. The fact that North Korea is trying to develop a missile that might be able to hit the U.S. is not particularly interesting. Any Americans who think that the Chinese should be more concerned about missiles that could possibly hit Alaska than missiles that could definately hit Shanghai, Beijing, or Qingdao are more than a little self-centered
Second, North Korea is an ally. Most people in this area, even the South Koreans, are much more concerned with the potential changes in Japanese constitution that will allow it to once again become a military power. Whatever the American's memory of Pearl Harbour, they pale in comparison to the memories of Japanese occupation shared by both the Koreans and the Chinese.
Part of this is simply the Chinese government keeping the memory alive for political purposes, but there's no denying the atrocities that were committed by imperial Japan, and it wasn't that long ago. The idea that the U.S. is now encouraging Japan to re-arm is disturbing to a lot of people. This shift in regional military power might even serve to tighten the relationships between the two Koreas and China.
12 comments:
Hi Ami,
Interesting comments. I hadn't really expected the Chinese would worry that N. Korea would use the missles against THEM. But you're right about us being more worried about a missile that didn't work than the several they have that do work.
I hadn't seen anything about the US encouraging Japanese rearmament in our press so I did some googling. The only article I could find that mentioned such a thing was a leftist site complaining about the Clinton administration doing just that:
http://www.socialistaction.org/news/199909/japan.html
There were a few more recent speculations in the press, but nothing indicating official US action in that area.
Is it a common perception that the US is rearming Japan in China? If so, I'd guess that's a bit of government anti-American propaganda.
On the domestic front, I would guess that Japan having strong defensive capabilities wouldn't bother most Americans, after all, people have a right to defend themselves. But encouraging a strong offensive capability would stir many of the old WWII memories of the Japanese and would be met with strong oposition HERE as well. I know that much of this is labeling as a fighter jet can be used in either role, but it also goes to the composition, deployment and size of forces. The Japanese military is miniscule compared to North Korea's or China's.
Here's a couple of recent western news links on China's actions and reactions, Ami.
CNN (7/9)
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/07/florcruz.china.btsc/index.htmlCNN (7/9)
BBC (7/6)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5153786.stmBBC (7/6)
I hadn't thought much about the Chinese reactions to Japan's efforts to rearm - which the US has been encouraging at least since Reagan was president. It's made sense from a US perspective since Japan playing a larger role in its own defense means the US perforce would be playing a lesser role. If I were a neighbor of Japan I'd also be concerned about how Japan might choose to use that military in the future.
Okay, I botched those links. Here they are again.
CNN (7/9)
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/07/florcruz.china.btsc/index.html
BBC (7/6)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5153786.stm
Grrr. It wasn't me botching the CNN link. Apparently it's too long to be accepted as a "word" by the software.
Here's the first part of the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/07/florc
And here's the part that's NOT showing up:
ruz.china.btsc/index.html
Thanks Indy. You know you can also use html links.
Brian: I'm sorry I haven't had time to respond properly to you comment. I'll try to do a little more research tomorrow.
The issue with the Japanese constitution is pretty sensitive, and I wouldn't expect the U.S. to make a lot of noise about it. It would probably backfire. But I think it's pretty widely accepted that the U.S. would like Japan to be military power again, since it's a potential ally in the area, and could serve to counter China.
I'll try to find more tomorrow.
Ummm. Actually I can't use "hot links" on your site anymore - the software doesn't recognize the html code and won't save comments with them included. That's why I had to paste the urls.
Japan is wondering whether they even need to modifiy their constitution to attack North Korea:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060710/ap_on_re_as/nkorea_missiles
*sigh*
Part 1:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060710/ap_on_re_as/n
Part 2:
korea_missiles
I heard about the talk of Japan possibly modifying their constitution to allow them to do a "defensive" first strike. Such talk concerns me.
A Japanese (or US) strike on the missle pads would do nothing but escalate the problem.
I also am concerned that many Democrats seem to be calling for an air strike on the missile pads as well...
Test link
Indy: Links do appear to work. Are you sure you're doing it right?
Here's a story on the Sino-Russian counterproposal on North Korea. It deletes language in the Japanese proposal which "could have led to military action against Pyongyang."
Good. The hot link worked that time. There have been problems on other sites recently with hot links, due to changes in the software designed to combat spambot tactics. Kind of silly for Blogger to do that, with their word verification routine, but perhaps some spammers figured out how to read the letters.
Post a Comment