The China-Japan rapprochement seen from Afar 

Europe and the rest of the international community should take more than a distant interest in this week’s visit to Japan by Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China April 11 to 13, but also take an active part in assuring the sustainability of the rapprochement by the two main Asian powers since much of the world also has a stake in the outcome.

For the European Union, both countries have been bestowed the status “strategic partner” which should imply both priority importance in the relationship with those states and also implicate the EU in major policy dialogues with both on this and other subjects. For all the outcome and atmospherics of the talks provide hope of more sensible approaches to resolving bilateral, but also regional, controversies. Yet some difficulties remain that should continue to preoccupy those most directly concerned, but others from afar.

Both Beijing and Tokyo in recent months have also indicated they place the highest importance on improvement of their bilateral relations, victimised by the sometime less than responsible personal behaviour of the previous Japanese Prime Minister. On several occasions, he judged his personal actions and beliefs to be more important than the national interest, even international stability. An indicator of the change in approach is the fact that although the current Prime Minister Shinzo Abe may feel even more personally and strongly about visiting the Yasukuni Shrine than his predecessor Jinishiro Koizumi, he will keep it secretly and discreetly personal in order not to antagonise Japan’s sensitive neighbours in China and Korea, and even others.

Just that difference in style and presentation, while not resolving this or any other basic issue, has opened up a new phase of dialogue and improved relations, because it recognised the national interests.

The current leadership in Japan and China have instead chosen to accentuate the positive – and even the imperative – aspect of their relations rather than dwell on the differences and antagonisms

The former common ground emphasises not only their seemingly inexhaustible economic complementarity, which has amounted to a mutually beneficial investment and trade boom. To a lesser degree it also takes into account the fact that the two leading Asian economic powers also represent the stimulus for regional economic and industrial integrationl but also a major engine of growth for the Asia-Pacific and indeed much of the world. But as Chong-Pin Lin of the Foundation on International and Cross-Strait Studies in  Taipei, noted April 11 in the International Herald Tribune, the balance of mutual economic interdependence had shifted in China’s favour, when after 2004 Japan fell to the rank of China’s third largest trading partner, while China had been Tokyo’s largest trade partner. “As Japan becomes more dependent on China’s markets, China has become less dependent on Japan. Moreover, the perception has been growing in Japan that trade with China has fuelled its recent economic recovery.”

The latter difficulties remain, but the improved atmospherics also probably improve the prospects for resolution or mitigation of these problems. . As the London Economist magazine noted April 4, “In a surprisingly short time, a wide range of topics has come up.” And it lists a number of key industrial and economic projects that go well beyond official communiqués. The two are even said to be making slow and difficult headway in their sometimes bitter and dangerous dispute over possible joint development of maritime energy rights.

Wen and Abe met in their third encounter for an an hour and forty minutes so presumably had a chance to touch on most issues, including, according to the joint press statement, a number of the most prickly, such as their territorial dispute in the East China Sea and Japan’s bid for a seat on the UN Security Council. They seemed to agree to continue the mutual exchange of high-level visits and to engage in additional bilateral cooperation in such fields as the environment, energy efficiency, and other productive areas.

Wen in making the first address to the Japanese Diet by a Chinese leader in 20 years acknowledged previous Japanese government and leadership apologies for the invasion and atrocities in the 1937-45 war and also the subsequent Japanese aid to economic development; “We Chinese people will ever forget this,” he underlined in tones that were well-received in Tokyo. A Japan Times editorial April 13 also noted the sympathy he showed regarding the Japanese furore over past abduction of its citizens and articles and photos showed Wen jogging in a Tokyo with Japanese residents.

But despite these positive mutual gestures illustrated by the exchange of visits and signing of statements of good intentions, much remains to be done to move beyond and create a true strategic partnership. London’s Financial Times on April 13 remarked repeatedly that “Most of the Sino-Japanese agreements reached this week have involved expressions of good intentions rather than detailed plans,” and noted some disappointments registered on the spot as well as the remaining difficulties.But it also added that “The vagueness and narrow scope of this week’s agreements do not mean that Mr Wen’s trip has been a failure.”

In much of the symbolism and analysis surrounding the improvement in relations there was emphasis on the need for a transition to more permanent reconciliation between the two former adversaries even 35 years after the establishment of formal relations.

As one European scholar remarked “Of all China’s relationships, the one with Japan is fundamental, from which all others are determined.”

Few drew similarities to the process that took place in Europe, but the relevance seems apparent. This and other positive impulses are among the array of incentives that European could explain to its two Asian strategic partners as they face up to this historical imperative.

DF-Brussels-April 13, 2007