By Shi Yinhong
The history of East Asia has two sides. One is the chronological
side consisting of ancient, modern and contemporary histories. The
other is the generic side featuring national histories of the
countries in the region and histories of relations among them. Each
of these histories possesses some basic elements that hinder the
birth of a regional cooperation system now or will do so in the
future.
As far as ancient history is concerned, the most important and
persistent fact is perhaps the "Chinese empire" many foreigners and
some of our fellow countrymen often talk about, or, to be more
specific, the unified and enormous Chinese nation. But, the
basically independent existence and development of other nations in
the region are equally significant.
Ancient China (especially at its peak) as we Chinese remember
was a glorious and great nation. By glorious I mean the nation's
power, civilization and cultural achievements, while "great" refers
to moral principles and ethics such as benevolence or the "kingly
way" in addition to peaceful exchanges with other countries and the
influence of its civilization.
However, other nations in the region leading a largely
independent existence and development, particularly China's
land-linked neighbors, also remember negative factors that we
Chinese tend to overlook, ignore or even deny.
As a result, against the backdrop of China's rapid development,
some of our neighbors' worries about what China might become in the
future, though the concerns are usually exaggerated or even
delusional.
The modern history of East Asia can be seen as having two core
components: first, from the 1894 China-Japan war to the end of
World War II in 1945, the half-century is dominated by Japan's
aggression with extreme violence, brutality and ferocity; second,
the emergence and growth of other East Asian nations' modern
nationalism, in which the experiences of opposing and resisting
Japanese aggression and colonization more or less played the
decisive role.
As far as the first component is concerned, the basic problem
today is that the majority of Japanese are inclined to forget,
trivialize or even deny the country's history of aggression and
brutality.
This attitude has helped strengthen the mentality among at least
the Chinese and Koreans to keep this chapter of history firmly in
their hearts, repeatedly bringing it up.
The second component features a basic difference between the
modern historical experiences of East Asia and Europe. With the
tragic memory of the two world wars still fresh, the Europeans
finally decided that nationalism, or at least excessive pride and
exclusive nationalism, was something that should be banished
forever.
This realization provided the cognitive conditions for the
"post-modern" construction of the European Community.
In contrast, a major fundamental outlook that the two world
wars, especially the second one, gave East Asian nations other than
Japan was modern nationalism. The birth or liberation of these
countries as modern nation states almost all took place during or
even relied on the two world wars.
It is fair to say that East Asian nationalism burst forth as
these modern nation states emerged, rose and developed.
These different histories all affect the possible emergence of
an East Asian cooperation system. Whether the standoffs and
rivalries between the countries' nationalism or their economic
interdependence and common interest in security prevail remains to
be seen.
The contemporary history of East Asia includes the Cold War
period, with memories that definitely stand in the way of a
regional multilateral system in East Asia.
In the minds of the Chinese, the US-Japan military alliance and
US-Republic of Korea military alliance created during the Cold War
period are more or less designed to counter China.
For the majority of the Japanese, their Cold-War era impressions
of China as an autocratic or authoritarian state remain basically
unchanged.
And the impression continues to give rise to misunderstanding,
distortion of truth and harmful prejudice. In the minds of Koreans
both north and south of the demilitarized zone, strong nationalism
combined with national division and the US-ROK alliance are
products of the Cold War directly or indirectly stoking suspicion
and anxiety toward their big neighbors and even each other.
Not to be forgotten is the influence of the Cold War on the
United States: whether physical as seen in its alliances with
certain countries and military presence or psychological as
characterized by a Cold War mentality, Cold War legacies of China,
the ROK, North Korea and Japan still profoundly influence current
US strategy and policies in East Asia. The result is Washington's
obvious indifference mixed with suspicion toward the creation of a
regional cooperation system.
To sum up, history has left the creation of a regional community
in East Asia a multi-faceted burden. It can also be described as a
multitude of barriers not easily overcome. In order to shake off
the burdens and overcome the barriers, it is absolutely necessary
to proceed with an awareness in touch with East Asia's complex
histories.
To use a couple of words popular among foreign observers, moving
forward involves "truth" and "reconciliation".
"Truth" means acknowledging and understanding history, not only
from a nation's own point of view but from that of other nations
concerned.
An outstanding example is found in Japan, which must view its
history of aggression, colonization and brutality without bias,
face up to the disastrous outcome of its injustices and learn the
lessons of this history.
Otherwise neither the East Asian region nor Japan itself will
have real peace. At the same time, "truth" also means looking back
at and summing up the past, including the history of Japan and its
relations with China, not only according to what happened back then
but to the consequences.
As for "reconciliation", it first requires all governments
concerned to meet two conditions: 1) respect other peoples'
memories and feelings as well as their own people's and, when
seemingly irreconcilable differences are found between the two,
they should try their best to ease the animosity; and 2)properly
treat hatred deeply rooted in history by emphasizing the present
and future according to the overriding principle of sticking to the
core (not fringe) historical truth and today's overriding (not
insignificant) national interests today.
To do so it is advisable to leave the resolution of such
disputes to future generations. Generally speaking, an East Asian
country should avoid the specifics when resolving its inherited bad
relations with neighboring countries.
Some of the disputes should be largely or even totally avoided
while concentrating on positive issues. But, this must not apply to
differences over such fundamental issues as Japan's history of
wartime atrocities.
It is also necessary to discuss China's contemporary experience
in light of "truth and reconciliation". The first question is how
to view relationships between the People's Republic of China and
its neighbors, and perhaps on what overall principle to base our
view of such historical issues.
The history of China's relations with its neighbors since
October 1949 is one of both great achievements and real lessons. As
far as lessons are concerned, China is responsible for some of the
negatives while the United States, the former Soviet Union and
certain neighbors all have their share.
Also, some potential as well as current disputes and
difficulties have persisted till today. Quite a few relate to
historical animosity, which the Chinese and their neighbors should
handle appropriately as prescribed above.
Can a regional cooperation system beneficial to peace, stability
and joint development in East Asia be created?
It depends, in my opinion, to a considerable degree on whether
governments and the people of East Asian countries can face the
long and complicated East Asian history, particularly international
relations among East Asian nations, with the right attitude and
mindset.
The author is a professor at the School of International
Relations, Renmin University of China.
(China Daily March 23, 2007)
