TENSIONS IN THE FAR EAST ARE TROUBLING
TENSIONS IN THE FAR EAST ARE TROUBLING
by
Ken Eliasberg
With most of the world’s attention understandably focused on the Middle East, it is not surprising that the media has been less focused on another trouble spot—the Far East—where tensions could ultimately prove to be both more disturbing and more dangerous. My last column on this topic (4/6/05) addressed one of the area’s more recent developments—the passage of an anti-secessionist law by China, which was clearly intended as another shot across Taiwan’s bow (and a not so subtle shot at that). Naturally, this served to ratchet up the anxiety level in a region that is already a bit too rife with anxiety. While North Korea has usually been the anxiety-producing focal point, the China-Taiwan situation is no less disturbing—and very possibly one in which a resolution may be more difficult to come by.
Before getting into the nuances of the Far Eastern situation, it should be observed that better than 40% of the world’s population resides in the countries of this region. The players are powerful and heavily populated. The immediate and obvious players are China, North Korea, Taiwan, and South Korea. A power that might ultimately prove to be a pivotal player is Japan. And 2 powers that are involved, if not directly, as certainly more than marginal players are Russia and India. Given this abundance of “players,” is it any wonder that George Bush suggested that the North Korea situation could only be properly addressed by some form of multilateral arrangement (a suggestion rejected by the Democrats, despite their call for greater sovereign participation in the Middle East). Clearly, a multi-country effort is called for - UNLESS China takes a more restrained approach to Taiwan and a more forceful one to North Korea. It’s simple—China has it in its power to singlehandedly reduce tensions in the Far East to the point where the region might actually look forward to a peaceful resolution of its various problems. Permit me to elaborate.
China is the fulcrum of this Far Eastern see-saw. Why? Because North Korea, without China’s support, is a balloon without any air. All China has to do is lean on Kim Jung Il, and this member of the Axis of Evil would be neutralized. It’s really that simple. North Korea is a puppet of China, and it was only because of China’s involvement in the Korean war that this situation was not resolved in the early 1950’s and has been allowed to fester ever since. The solution to this problem is a no-brainer—China just pays Kim a visit and indicates that she will not support North Korea in her nuclear ambitions, and that’s it for North Korea—game over!
While the China-Taiwan situation may not lend itself to quite so simple a solution, it can be resolved if ingredients like patience, diplomacy, and a kinder-gentler approach are thrown into the diplomatic stew. A continuous assault on Taiwan’s integrity is not calculated to make Taiwan look with either favor or trust on China’s desires. While I do want to take a closer look at pathways to progress in this situation, for purposes of this column, I want to point out just how sensitive this situation is, and how many countries could be directly affected if the China-Taiwan-North Korea problems are not resolved.
South Korea is quite clearly involved, and it has been felt by many that, without a U.S. presence there, North Korea would have resurrected hostilities a long time ago. Thus, while there was an indication not too long ago from some in South Korea that they would like to see us leave, when it appeared that we might actually act on this suggestion, cooler South Korean heads prevailed—and we are still there (50 years after the Korean War it should be observed for the benefit of those expressing impatience with our stay in Iraq).
Russia and India, while at the geopolitical margins, are certainly not marginal players because both border on China, and each has had some difficulty with her. Moreover, should hostilities break out, they may not be as containable as one might hope. Therefore, being on the borders could be a difficult place to be—one that might draw you in to an unfolding debacle.
However, the real wild card here is Japan. Japan has a long history with both Taiwan and China, and that history is not apt to call up fond memories. Regarding Taiwan, Japan occupied her from 1895 until the close of WWII—as the result of besting China in the war that immediately preceded the occupation date (as a consequence of which, many among the older generation in Taiwan still speak Japanese). WWII left a very bitter taste in China’s mouth insofar as Japan is concerned. Japan attacked China in 1931, occupied Manchuria (which it renamed Manchuoko, setting up a puppet government there), and, several years later, proceeded to brutally march through much of China, raping, killing, and looting in the course of this assault—the highlight of which was the Rape of Nanking, wherein some 250,000 Chinese civilians were butchered. Unlike Germany, Japan has never admitted culpability, let alone apologized, for its conduct in WWII. This remains a bone in the throat of China, which continues to view Japan with distrust.
Is Japan a significant factor in this geopolitical equation? More than significant—she could be critical. Why? Because of China’s saber rattling, there has been considerable talk of rearming Japan. You will recall that, as a part of the terms of her surrender at the close of WWII, Japan agreed to have no “offensive” military, i.e. a military that could do anything but defend her shores and was incapable of launching anything of an offensive nature. It was written into her Constitution—at the urging of the U.S. per General McArthur—and has remained operative since. A rearmed Japan is cause for Chinese concern; the specter of a Japanese military power off her coast is not comforting, and, while she is a much larger country and much more technologically evolved than when attacked by Japan in 1931, Japan is still a force to be reckoned with—an economic and technological powerhouse with a militaristic background. China has to be quite disturbed at the possibility of such a prospect becoming a reality.
So, in the world of realpolitik, how is this likely to play out? At first, I suspect, China would approach the U.S. (undoubtedly in some back channel fashion) and suggest that, if the U.S. were to back off rearming Japan and take a softer approach to the defense of Taiwan, she, in turn, would be willing to use her influence on North Korea to dismantle its nuclear apparatus as well as its nuclear ambitions. What will be the U.S.’s likely reaction in the event of such an overture? My suspicion is that the U.S. would reject any such entreaty out of hand. Why? Because, as noted in my previous column, Taiwan is not a bargaining chip in any form., shape, or manner. We will not—indeed, we cannot—turn our back on Taiwan. Rearming Japan is a more speculative manner. In my opinion, its resolution depends more on how anxious Japan is to rearm, rather than any pressure that China would bring to bear. Japan is a sovereign entity, and, with China making menacing gestures in her neck of the world, it is unlikely that the U.S. would create too much of a roadblock in the path of Japan’s rearmament designs.