Even as tensions between Beijing and Tokyo grow by the day, there are good reasons to believe outright conflict can be avoided.
The sequel seldom improves on the original. Yet Shinzo Abe, Japan’s newly re-elected prime minister, has already displayed more conviction during his second spell at the Kantei than in the entire year of his first, unhappy premiership.
Political energy is a plus only when it’s wisely deployed however, and some fear that Abe is picking a fight he can’t win when it comes to his hardline stance on China.
Rather than attempting to soothe the tensions that built between Beijing and Tokyo in 2012, Abe has struck a combative tone, especially concerning their dispute over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands – a keystone for nationalists in both countries. Each time fighter aircraft are scrambled or ships are sent to survey the likely flashpoint, we hear more warnings about the approach of a war that China and Japan now seem almost eager to wage. The Economist, for example,recently observed that, “China and Japan are sliding towards war,” while Hugh White of the Australian National University warned his readers: “Don't be too surprised if the U.S. and Japan go to war with China [in 2013].” News this week of another reckless act of escalation – Chinese naval vessels twice training their radars on their Japanese counterparts – will only have ratcheted up their concerns.
These doomful predictions came as Abe set out his vision of a more hard-nosed Japan that will no longer be pushed around when it comes to sovereignty issues. In his December op-ed on Project Syndicate Abe accused Beijing of performing “daily exercises in coercion” and advocated a “democratic security diamond” comprising Australia, India, Japan and the U.S. (rehashing a concept from the 2007 Quadrilateral Security Dialogue). He then proposed defense spending increases – Japan’s first in a decade – and strengthened security relations with the Philippines and Vietnam, which both share Tokyo’s misgivings about China’s intentions. An alliance-affirming trip to the U.S.is expected soon, and there is talk of Japan stationing F-15s on Shimojijima, close to the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu islands.
However, Abe would argue that he is acting to strengthen Japan in order to balance a rising China and prevent a conflict, rather than creating the conditions for one. And he undoubtedly has a more sanguine view of the future of Sino-Japanese relations than those who see war as an ever more likely outcome. Of course, there is a chance that Chinese and Japanese ships or aircraft will clash as the dispute over the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands rumbles on; and, if they do, there is a chance that a skirmish could snowball unpredictably into a wider conflict.
But if Shinzo Abe is gambling with the region’s security, he is at least playing the odds. He is calculating that Japan can pursue a more muscular foreign policy without triggering a catastrophic backlash from China, based on the numerous constraints that shape Chinese actions, as well as the interlocking structure of the globalized environment which the two countries co-inhabit. Specifically, there are seven reasons to think that war is a very unlikely prospect, even with a more hawkish prime minister running Japan:
1. Beijing’s nightmare scenario. China might well win a war against Japan, but defeat would also be a very real possibility. As China closes the book on its “century of humiliation” and looks ahead to prouder times, the prospect of a new, avoidable humiliation at the hands of its most bitter enemy is enough to persuade Beijing to do everything it can to prevent that outcome (the surest way being not to have a war at all). Certainly, China’s new leader, Xi Jinping, does not want to go down in history as the man who led China into a disastrous conflict with the Japanese. In that scenario, Xi would be doomed politically, and, as China’s angry nationalism turned inward, the Communist Party probably wouldn’t survive either.
2. Economic interdependence. Win or lose, a Sino-Japanese war would be disastrous for both participants. The flagging economy that Abe is trying to breathe life into with a $117 billion stimulus package would take a battering as the lucrative China market was closed off to Japanese business. China would suffer, too, as Japanese companies pulled out of a now-hostile market, depriving up to 5 million Chinese workers of their jobs, even as Xi Jinping looks to double per capita income by 2020. Panic in the globalized economy would further depress both economies, and potentially destroy the programs of both countries’ new leaders.
3. Question marks over the PLA’s operational effectiveness.The People’s Liberation Army is rapidly modernizing, but there are concerns about how effective it would prove if pressed into combat today – not least within China’s own military hierarchy. New Central Military Commission Vice-Chairman Xu Qiliang recently told the PLA Daily that too many PLA exercises are merely for show, and that new elite units had to be formed if China wanted to protect its interests. CMC Chairman Xi Jinping has also called on the PLA to improve its readiness for “real combat.” Other weaknesses within the PLA, such as endemic corruption, would similarly undermine the leadership’s confidence in committing it to a risky war with a peer adversary.
4. Unsettled politics. China’s civil and military leaderships remain in a state of flux, with the handover initiated in November not yet complete. As the new leaders find their feet and jockey for position amongst themselves, they will want to avoid big foreign-policy distractions – war with Japan and possibly the U.S. being the biggest of them all.
5. The unknown quantity of U.S. intervention. China has its hawks, such as Dai Xu, who think that the U.S. would never intervene in an Asian conflict on behalf of Japan or any other regional ally. But this view is far too casual. U.S. involvement is a real enough possibility to give China pause, should the chances of conflict increase.
6. China’s policy of avoiding military confrontation. China has always said that it favors peaceful solutions to disputes, and its actions have tended to bear this out. In particular, it continues to usually dispatch unarmed or only lightly armed law enforcement ships to maritime flashpoints, rather than naval ships.There have been calls for a more aggressive policy in the nationalist media, and from some military figures; but Beijing has not shown much sign of heeding them. The PLA Navy made a more active intervention in the dispute this week when one of its frigates trained its radar on a Japanese naval vessel. This was a dangerous and provocative act of escalation, but once again the Chinese action was kept within bounds that made violence unlikely (albeit, needlessly, more likely than before).
7. China’s socialization. China has spent too long telling the world that it poses no threat to peace to turn around and fulfill all the China-bashers’ prophecies. Already, China’s reputation in Southeast Asia has taken a hit over its handling of territorial disputes there. If it were cast as the guilty party in a conflict with Japan –which already has the sympathy of many East Asian countries where tensions China are concerned – China would see regional opinion harden against it further still. This is not what Beijing wants: It seeks to influence regional affairs diplomatically from within, and to realize “win-win” opportunities with its international partners.
In light of these constraints, Abe should be able to push back against China – so long as he doesn’t go too far. He was of course dealt a rotten hand by his predecessor, Yoshihiko Noda, whose bungled nationalization of the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands triggered last year’s plunge in relations. Noda’s misjudgments raised the political temperature to the point where neither side feels able to make concessions, at least for now, in an attempt to repair relations.
However, Abe can make the toxic Noda legacy work in his favor. Domestically, he can play the role of the man elected to untangle the wreckage, empowered by his democratic mandate to seek a new normal in Sino-Japanese relations. Chinese assertiveness would be met with a newfound Japanese assertiveness, restoring balance to the relationship. It is also timely for Japan to push back now, while its military is still a match for China’s. Five or ten years down the line this may no longer be the case, even if Abe finally grows the stagnant defense budget.
Meanwhile, Abe is also pursuing diplomatic avenues. It was Abe who mended Japan’s ties with China after the Koizumi years, and he is now trying to reprise his role as peacemaker, having dispatched his coalition partner, Natsuo Yamaguchi, to Beijing reportedly to convey his desire for a new dialogue. It is hardly surprising, given his daunting domestic laundry list, that Xi Jinping should have responded encouragingly to the Japanese olive branch.
In the end, Abe and Xi are balancing the same equation: They will not give ground on sovereignty issues, but they have no interest in a war – in fact, they must dread it. Even if a small skirmish between Chinese and Japanese ships or aircraft occurs, the leaders will not order additional forces to join the battle unless they are boxed in by a very specific set of circumstances that makes escalation the only face-saving option. The escalatory spiral into all-out war that some envisage once the first shot is fired is certainly not the likeliest outcome, as recurrent skirmishes elsewhere – such as in Kashmir, or along the Thai-Cambodian border – have demonstrated.
Photo Credit: Wikicommons
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
SHADOW-33
Only through the coming crysis, which in many ways has already begun, can change the relations between the two. It is only through the crysis that will seal the alliance.
Robert L
If leaders handled all situations with less ego. This world would be a safer more peaceful place with less laws, which in consequence make humans feel more human and free. Fighting over something clearly shows lack of desire for peace and clear selfishness and showing a big inability to recognize and admit and own up to the truth. Every situation can be solved easily and fairly and in the truth if it is desired. When leaders fail to do so it just shows leaders and governments are not there mainly for the people, they are there for themselves first and their friends. And using the psychological angle “its for the people interest” to back us down so we will shut up and not come back with the words that shows where they went wrong . Peace in this world can be obtained even with an over populated planet if most leaders would practice the map truth. You’ll ask what is map truth? It has to be explained and i cant through this form of communication. Entire countries prepare for destruction while others plan how to take advantage of it. If i ever get out of the destruction upon me il make website explaining all that i can!
Timojin
The USA "Pivot" is responsible for this mess emboldening the Japanese.
Of course the USA will rely upon it's Naval power if there is a serious flare-up.
Unfortunately for the USA and Japan, the Chinese have sufficient "Smart" Land based and mobile Sea based ASCM's and ASBM's to wipe out the USA aircraft carriers 1000 miles away before they can even get their attack aircraft into the air.
The Americans have great defensive capabilities with Anti-magnetic systems, lasers etc but they will not survive a serious and concentrated attack by hundreds of missiles, and 3rd, 4th and 5th generation strike fighters.
First hit of course will be Okinawa USA Base with a "Clean" 20kton Nuke; this prevents an attack by Japanese or Americans from there.
China is perfectly capable of denying access to the East China Sea to the USA Navy.
There will be anguish in Washington and the Pentagon and calls to nuke Beijing and Shanghai but that will not happen as the retaliation by China and possibly Russia would put the USA back unto the 18th century.
Don't believe that ICBM's carrying multi-megaton nukes can be intercepted by the patriot system…it is not infallable and many of the latest Chinese ballistic misiles have SES .. "Smart Evasion Spools" and the Chinese SCS's (super computer simulations) show a 68% accurate strike rate.
I hope Japan can desist from it's false claim to the islands that historicaly belong to China and also that the USA can resist the temptation to anything stupid again. (Remember Viet-Nam; Afghanistan, Iraq,)
If you need more information ask Bradley Manning.
Don't bother posting a reply denying the above; I will not respond.
Ny
I agrreee with you.
Just My View
As soon as the first nuke is fired it is over the US will retaliate with the same. Anyone that believes otherwise is just fooling themselves.
If the war is limited and conventional the US and Japan will win. Current defenses that the navy has can protect the fleets well enough to hold off Chinese missile attacks of course the navy will suffer heavy losses but not catastrophic. The Navy will have superior air power then Chinese military and its offensive capability will lead to their ability to control the area. The navy will have a base of support as well from the counties in the area that rather have US then Chinese interest served. This is the case because the US as no claim in the area so the counties in the area will have their territorial waters protected and recognized.
The US will try to seek peace early after early success by defeating Chinese military power outside of their recognized territory and limited attacks on Chinese military facilities (mainly ports and coastline airfields) on the Chinese mainland.
In the end of a limited war will be won by the US lead alliance vs china. The end will be most likely china having to give up all claims on lands they do not actively control and a reduction of territorial waters to 200 miles off their coast (this being the international norm). So pretty much a Status Quo ending for a large amount of life lost and resources wasted.
Now something else I would like to bring up is I do not believe that Russia will get involved outside of selling weapons and materials to anyone that will pay in the conflict. They simply do not have a dog in the fight. A win for china means that they become a bigger power in the are threaten their influence and their territorial claim in Siberia that is being populated every day with more and more Han Chinese. A win for the US also will see a decrease in their influence in the area, but not as much as a Chinese victory.
Now for a total war conventional war will be too complicated to know what will happen. It would become a world war and I believe if the US can get Indian support then the US will win. If Russia and India stay neutral then I believe it will result in the same as the limited war but with extreme loss of life and resources that would make WWII look like a mild disagreement. If Russia sides with China and India remains neutral I think it would depend how active the rest of Europe get in the war even then I can’t really say who will come out on top. If China gets a diplomatic Coup and India and Russia both side with them then the Eastern Hemisphere will be totally controlled by them except for Austria and maybe the Philippians and UK. Also depending on the situation in South America that may become a RCI strong hold on everything south of Columbia.
Nitish
Japan is having International support from USA,India,EU and China has only Pakistan, NK & lots of Chinese scrap technology
Roberto
@Nitish,
International support even from EU? Are you wonderfully prewritting history or prewritting history? Or you just don't pay attention to international news? The current Japanese Prime Minister's around the world sympathy seeking trip got cold responds from Germany, France, UK, Australia, Canada, ……………………..etc, etc. India, Vietnam and Phillipines are insiginificant in international politics. What you said is not true if not a lie.
Roberto
@Nitish,
Correction: rewritting history or predicting history.
Chuck Norris
The US never took on The Soviet Union.
It took on Grenada, Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea….Man! These countries are heavyweights.
Kim’s Uncle
Those were limited wars fought for limited goals! No need to go to war when one’s adversary collapsed out of its own stupidity! It is better to defeat an enemy without firing a shot than to actually go to war and risk the prospect of death! I think a little kid can come to that conclusion so I think you’re younger than a little kid?
Pa Pa
@Kim's Uncle,
So far this is one of your post with a little point. However, brining up other bloggers' age does not make any sense here. Keep improving, young man. Pa Pa is watching.
GoodbyeJapan
@Kim's Uncle,
Wonderful job. Your comment totally fits for Japan. Wish Japan understand and take it.
ACT
@denk
what do you think the north koreans and the Chinese did in the korean war? i listened to the accounts found in the video……..and found nothing new. Never forget that these kinds of attrocities are part and parcel of war. When the Red Army reached Berlin in 1945, its commanders declared Berlin an open city; female soldiers of the Red Army helped their male counterparts rape German women, among other things. But the reality is that there are few nations outside of the United States that would allow books like "kill them all: the real story of the Vietnam War" to be published. I have no doubts that similar things happened when China invaded Vietnam in 1979; Russia lured Georgia into invading South Ossetia in 2008, then invaded Georgia and proceeded to aid Ossetian separatists in the deliberate genocide (public executions) of ethnic georgians in the region…starting with the teenagers, as they would be the first to fight against Russian aggression; Georgia started the war to defend itself against Ossetian raids on its villages……and Russia then invaded Georgia and continued indiscriminate destruction even after a cease-fire was reached. See the report below.
http://www.crimesofwar.org/commentary/eu-report-targets-both-sides-in-georgia-russia-conflict/
My point is, denk, that war-crimes of the nature that you try to spear the U.S with are not unique to it; all nations do this when thier wars are fueled by ideological and ethnic misunderstandings.
oh, and then there's China's invasion of Vietnam, which started because:
"On 25 December 1978, Vietnam launched an incursion into Cambodia, quickly defeating the Khmer Rouge and pushing its remnant forces into Thailand. Vietnam did this under considerable provocation, as the Pol Pot regime was extremely hostile to Vietnam, carried out a major ethnic cleansing of Vietnamese within Cambodia, and mounted a series of cross-border attacks that cost many Vietnamese lives. Vietnam’s incursion was therefore based on, and a response to, serious Cambodian provocations" (http://www.globalresearch.ca/aggression-rights-and-wrongs-vietnam-in-cambodia-the-united-states-in-iraq/9863)
"…the Chinese in all essence, implemented a "scorched-earth policy" as they retreated back to China, causing extensive damage to the Vietnamese countryside and infrastructure.
Villages were reduced to rubble, roads and railroads received damage at the hands of the Chinese." (SinoVietnameseWar.com)
a_canadian_observer
And the chinese are very proud of their barnbaric deeds, although they would never have the courage to document them.
denk
act
*My point is, denk, that war-crimes of the nature that you try to spear the U.S with are not unique to it*
1] which country has committed more than 500 aggressions since its birth ?
2] which country has plotted handreds of coups on foreign countries since wwii ?
3] which country has committed documented war crimes in hundres of countries ?
u've chosen to ignore my questions so i'd answer for u
1] only the usa
2] only the usa
3] only the usa
for proof refer to my previous postings
yet u still insist its nothing unique to the usa
may be u should check the meaning of unique ?
for comparison to china, u keep citing vn
r u saying that 1 = 500 ?
i address ur posts coz u r the more thoughtful one amongst the pro-west commentators
but u r not bringing credit to urself
Bill Rich
So you have never studied history of China.
denk
a_canadian_observer
*And the chinese are very proud of their barnbaric deeds, although they would never have the courage to document them*
perhaps they have nothing *barnbaric* to document in the first place. ?
pro-west posters like to gloat that usa is very *courageous* [sic] to document its own barbaric acts
so a serial rapist who recorded his crimes in facebook is something to be proud of eh ?
a_canadian_observer
@denk: The West is not perfect, but everything done has been documented, while china has no gut to even admit anything, let alone document.
denk
a_canadian_observer
*@denk: The West is not perfect,*
not perfect ?
in view of the existing evidences
that should count as the understatement of the century !
* but everything done has been documented,*
so u really think that a serial ciminal who publicise every crime he committed since birth is someone to be admired ?
* while china has no gut to even admit anything, let alone document.*
perhaps they have nothing to document in the first place ?
*And the chinese are very proud of their barnbaric deeds*
can u prove it ?
Errol
@ denk,
I was gonna keep quiet but this part jumped out at me. :
* while china has no gut to even admit anything, let alone document.*
perhaps they have nothing to document in the first place ?
As you so aptly pointed out, would a criminal be honest enough to own up to his crimes? Why not talk to the victims, in this case, the Vietnamese? They know first-hand what it was like to fight the PLA on Vietnamese soil.
a_canadian_observer
@denk: Just ask any Tibetan, Uyghuir and you get your answer, or as Errol said, you can also ask any Vietnamese about their account withe the PLA. Or perhaps you don't even have a shred of decency/honest to realize your chinese problem?
denk
errol n canuck
my reply was censored
denk
act
looks like my reply 2u was censored
i swear 2u, nuthin offensive !
lets c if they censor this one ?
denk
•Kim’s Uncle
*During the Korean War: the allies described the Communist troops (DPRK, Red China) as having the faces of men but minds of demons! I think that still holds for Commies in China today. But today it is Red Commies have the greed of selfish unscrupolous capitalists but cold hearted heart of a Nazi! *
+The Pentagon always claims that our "enemies have no respect for human life" but the facts point to just the opposite being the truth+
http://space4peace.blogspot.sg/2013/02/kill-them-all.html
most of ur posts are unadulterated b.s.
why waste ur time here,
pentagon can use talents like u