China's strategy in Korean peninsula

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
I don't know if I agree about Japan being screwed under Chinese leadership. China is a very generous country. Personally, I've seen Chinese groups warm-heatedly invite many foreign friends including Japanese (though I see Japanese and Korean groups preferring to keep themselves pure) into their community. If Japan submits and accept Chinese leadership, what would it lose? I think nothing or next to nothing. Diaoyu, if lost, is not much of a loss at all and with a dramatic warming of relationship, I can see China agreeing to joint exploration. Japan's economy would gain a great boost from Chinese support as China would most certainly bring big economic baskets during relationship warming meetings. What would they lose? I just don't see China relentlessly punishing a country for its past if its current self is repentant and ascribes to Chinese leadership in the region.

But I do agree that the Japanese are stubborn in their thousand-year-ways and may choose to continue to distrust China. It is important to note that that was much easier in a time period where countries were much more isolated and less dependent on foreign trade and relations than today. Once the environment is right, it would simply and obviously be foolish self-alienation. It remains to be seen if that stubbornness will prevail or if the desire to avoid huge obvious mistakes will.

And from the Chinese point of view, if Japan submits to Chinese leadership, then Japan becomes a willing ally.

It would be simply be counter-productive for China to continue anti-Japanese invective.

Look at the example of the USA which vilified Japan during WW2, but when Japan became an ally, the relationship changed a lot.

I think Japan will eventually re-orient towards China, but that will only willingly happen when China becomes wealthy and hi-tech. Then pretty much everyone in Japan will share Ishihara's view that Japan doesn't have any choice in the matter.

A similar calculation applies to South Korea or a unified Korea, which is much smaller than Japan and also much closer to China.
 

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
Your vision of harmonious relationship between a powerful china and comparatively smaller Japan and Korea, or Philippines and SCS nations in all likelihood, seems to be predicated upon the assumption that these little people would naturally recognize that the best thing for them is to not exhibit the sort of 骨气 you might find praiseworthy in the Chinese when confronted by a superior power determined to make others bend to its will.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Your vision of harmonious relationship between a powerful china and comparatively smaller Japan and Korea, or Philippines and SCS nations in all likelihood, seems to be predicated upon the assumption that these little people would naturally recognize that the best thing for them is to not exhibit the sort of 骨气 you might find praiseworthy in the Chinese when confronted by a superior power determined to make others bend to its will.
Well, that 骨气 would be misplaced as the harmonious would be joined by the mutual goal of raising Asia to the pinnacle of the world, a position she could take only under Chinese leadership. China would treat them as team members, not as slaves that need lashing to move. If the Japanese and Koreans want Asia to stay behind the US and Europe, then the correct action for them to take would be to fight and resist China with their last breath and show the world how stupid 骨气 can be. Assuming they would not do that is crediting their intellect.
 

dingyibvs

Senior Member
Your vision of harmonious relationship between a powerful china and comparatively smaller Japan and Korea, or Philippines and SCS nations in all likelihood, seems to be predicated upon the assumption that these little people would naturally recognize that the best thing for them is to not exhibit the sort of 骨气 you might find praiseworthy in the Chinese when confronted by a superior power determined to make others bend to its will.

I've never seen a democracy exhibit that sort of determination in the face of overwhelming power. While an autocracy like NK or Cuba can make the decision for its people that sovereignty is more important than individual well-being, when you leave the choice to the people themselves they'll always choose their own individual well-being. The only way they can resist is if they have the backing of a comparably overwhelming power, which wouldn't be the case in our imagined scenario.
 

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
Right. The Chinese can, and are indeed encouraged to show 骨气, but little people should not show 骨气. Only then are the little people and the Chinese partners,

I see the little people have plenty of reason to work to help china rise.
 

dingyibvs

Senior Member
Right. The Chinese can, and are indeed encouraged to show 骨气, but little people should not show 骨气. Only then are the little people and the Chinese partners,

I see the little people have plenty of reason to work to help china rise.

I know you're being sarcastic but that's exactly right. I've always said that one should not fight wars one cannot win. China can win, the "little people" can't. Better to ride on China's wave than to be drowned by it. If they've decided to ride the wave, then the bigger it is the farther they'll go, so they indeed have plenty of reason to help China's rise. I mean, they've done it decades already, except they were riding America's wave, but now the tide is changing and the time has come to change sides.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Right. The Chinese can, and are indeed encouraged to show 骨气, but little people should not show 骨气. Only then are the little people and the Chinese partners,

I see the little people have plenty of reason to work to help china rise.
Because China's rise means Asia's rise and it means their rise. To be an Asian in a world were Asia is the most powerful and advanced region, it is their only chance to ascend from vassal to partner. That is why they have reason to invest in it. I thought my post was very clear.
 
Last edited:

solarz

Brigadier
Your vision of harmonious relationship between a powerful china and comparatively smaller Japan and Korea, or Philippines and SCS nations in all likelihood, seems to be predicated upon the assumption that these little people would naturally recognize that the best thing for them is to not exhibit the sort of 骨气 you might find praiseworthy in the Chinese when confronted by a superior power determined to make others bend to its will.

No, a harmonious relationship is predicated on long-lasting compatible mutual interests.

Right now, SK and PH's interests are clearly aligned with China, though there are political obstacles. SK benefits tremendously from a friendly China, both economically and, if they were willing, militarily. PH *could* benefit tremendously from Chinese investments. Yes, the two nations have disagreements over SCS islands, but the current PH president has clearly calculated that the benefits of courting China clearly outweigh the benefits of antagonizing China over those islands.

Japan is, as it always has been, a different case. Though Japan eagerly learned from Tang, it has always been outside of direct Chinese influence, simply because of geography, and I see little reason or incentive for that to change. At the moment, the Japanese people seem content with subordination to the US, and aside from a trading relation, has little mutual interest with China.

Japan is well aware of its value to the US, and so long as the US maintains a presence in East Asia, this will not change.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Your vision of harmonious relationship between a powerful china and comparatively smaller Japan and Korea, or Philippines and SCS nations in all likelihood, seems to be predicated upon the assumption that these little people would naturally recognize that the best thing for them is to not exhibit the sort of 骨气 you might find praiseworthy in the Chinese when confronted by a superior power determined to make others bend to its will.

You mean like how Mexico or Canada have no choice but to bend to the USA?

Or alternatively, I've got a front row seat to how British politicians publicly proclaim that in the Brexit talks, they will somehow be able to negotiate a better deal than the one currently in place.

It's simply deluded.

The rest of the EU has a population and economic/industrial heft some 7x larger, which is far less dependent on access to the UK than vice-versa.

British goods and service exports are going to face a myriad of restrictions which will see these migrate from the UK to the EU.
 
Top