Pages

Share This

Deepseek https://www.deepseek.com/./深度求索 DeepSeek | 深度求索
Showing posts with label Geopolitics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Geopolitics. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 17, 2026

Japan at a crossroads; inside unit 731


Unpopular move? Protesters hold placards and lights during a rally against Takaichi’s administration for its military expansion policies in front of the parliament building in Tokyo last month. — Reuters 
 

LAST Octo­ber Sanae Takai­chi became Japan’s first female leader of both the Lib­eral Demo­cratic Party (LDP) and the gov­ern­ment.

The “lib­eral” in the LDP actu­ally means con­ser­vat­ive. Takai­chi her­self belongs to the hard­line rightwing Nip­pon Kaigi fac­tion of the party.

Soon enough, she would come to brush against China. Respond­ing to a ques­tion, she said Japan would take mil­it­ary action if China moved on Taiwan and affected Japan’s interests.

That soured China-japan rela­tions, trig­ger­ing bit­ter WWII memor­ies of a rightwing mil­it­ar­ist Japan invad­ing, occupy­ing and com­mit­ting war crimes in China. Those wounds have yet to heal.

Mod­el­ling her­self after Bri­tain’s brazen first female Prime Min­is­ter Mar­garet Thatcher, Takai­chi was unapo­lo­getic. She fur­ther prod­ded Beijing by seek­ing to revise Japan’s post­war Con­sti­tu­tion to favour mil­it­ar­ism, and work­ing with the US and its allies to con­tain China.

Other coun­tries began to regard Takai­chi’s Japan as poten­tially revi­sion­ist, bent on white­wash­ing its his­tory of war atro­cit­ies and may even repeat them. So is Japan get­ting ready to remil­it­ar­ise?

At issue is Art­icle 9 of the Con­sti­tu­tion on Japan’s mil­it­ary forces, offi­cially the Self-defence Forces (SDF) after Japan’s sur­render in 1945. Takai­chi wants to remove the SDF’S con­sti­tu­tional con­straints to enable an assert­ive mil­it­ary pos­ture abroad.

That is chal­len­ging because it requires two-thirds major­it­ies in both the Lower and Upper Houses of the Diet. While the LDP lacks sup­port from the lat­ter, it is work­ing to boost mil­it­ary power, capa­city and reach in other ways.

For the first time since 1945, Japan par­ti­cip­ated prom­in­ently in this year’s Us-led Balikatan mil­it­ary exer­cises with live-fire drills in the South China Sea. Japan will also be export­ing lethal weapons, man­u­fac­tur­ing to scale and expand­ing mil­it­ary links abroad.

Must this mean Japan is return­ing to its mil­it­ar­ist past of a cen­tury ago? Much depends on the pre­vail­ing regional real­it­ies.

The US is encour­aging other coun­tries to play a big­ger regional defence role. This is as true for Asia as it is for Europe, and applies for both Repub­lican and Demo­cratic admin­is­tra­tions.

A 2012 Us-japan treaty would halve the 19,000 Mar­ines in Okinawa by return­ing them to Guam, Hawaii and the US main­land. Deploy­ments to the Phil­ip­pines tend to be more lim­ited and ad hoc.

In post-wwii East Asia, US mil­it­ary hege­mony is seen to keep the peace by remov­ing the need for Japan’s mil­it­ary build-up. The same applies with Ger­many in Europe.

However, US bipar­tisan policy is retrench­ing long-term regional mil­it­ary post­ings. Mil­it­ary forces will still be deployed for lim­ited mis­sions, such as in Iran or Venezuela, but major post­ings in far-flung regions are another mat­ter.

Regard­less of who is head­ing Japan’s gov­ern­ment, Tokyo will want to look more to itself for its defence role and com­mit­ments.

Unlike Ger­many, Japan is not seen by other coun­tries to have fully atoned for its imper­ial wars and the dev­ast­a­tion they unleashed. An unre­pent­ant rightwing leader now lead­ing an appar­ent mil­it­ary revival only exacer­bates Japan’s trust defi­cits.

Non­ethe­less, mod­ern East Asia’s real­it­ies would inhibit if not pro­hibit any ultra-nation­al­ist Japan­ese leader from return­ing to the coun­try’s imper­i­al­ist past.

Such an out­come will not be accept­able to West­ern powers because Japan­ese nation­al­ism is anti-west­ern. A rampant nation­al­ist Japan will ali­en­ate all other sig­ni­fic­ant powers in a more developed Asia and a more mul­ti­polar world.

Eco­nom­ic­ally, Japan’s best days are over so it has insuf­fi­cient resources to chal­lenge the sov­er­eignty of other global stake­hold­ers includ­ing Asia’s middle powers. Its eco­nomy has slipped below Ger­many’s and India’s to fifth place, and con­tin­ues slid­ing.

Socially and insti­tu­tion­ally, Japan­ese hawks may be in a minor­ity even in Japan. Groups and indi­vidu­als stage protests against per­ceived drifts towards mil­it­ar­ism, in a coun­try where dis­sent­ing voices mat­ter.

Even within the LDP and other main­stream insti­tu­tions, evid­ence of an exclus­ive, mono­lithic bloc favour­ing mil­it­ar­ism is sparse. The gen­eral pub­lic still tends to be averse to rad­ical con­sti­tu­tional changes.

Former Prime Min­is­ter Yukio Hat­oy­ama cri­ti­cised Takai­chi’s petty pop­u­lism, stress­ing that Taiwan’s status is China’s internal affair. Former Deputy Prime Min­is­ter Yohei Kono inves­ted a life­time in build­ing bridges with China.

Another former Prime Min­is­ter, Yasuo Fukuda, accepts rein­ter­pret­a­tion of Art­icle 9 without des­cend­ing into pop­u­list mil­it­ar­ism. In 2017, then Prime Min­is­ter Shinzo Abe declared that Japan was ready to cooper­ate with China in the Belt and Road Ini­ti­at­ive, des­pite Abe being another mem­ber of the LDP’S Nip­pon Kaigi fac­tion.

Pro­fessor Mike Moch­izuki says the way for Japan to work with a way­ward Trump-led US is not to ali­en­ate China, but instead to improve rela­tions with Beijing and deepen Tokyo’s stake in the region. Takai­chi also hap­pens to be reach­ing out to Asean coun­tries like Malay­sia in busi­ness deals, and this should be encour­aged.

Kono passed away last Monday, while fine-tun­ing new plans for cooper­at­ing with China. Whether Takai­chi’s real­ism will even­tu­ally out­live her pop­u­lism remains to be seen.

Bunn Nagara is dir­ector and senior fel­low of the Renais­sance Stra­tegic Research Insti­tute, and hon­or­ary fel­low at the Perak Academy. The views expressed here are solely the writer’s own.


By BUNN NAGARA
Bunn Nagara

Bunn Nagara is dir­ector and senior fel­low of the Renais­sance Stra­tegic Research Insti­tute, and hon­or­ary fel­low at the Perak Academy. The views expressed here are solely the writer’s own.

Related:

Share your videos with friends, family, and the world.
Missing:  ‎| Show results with: SINGAPORE,

Singapore historian Lim Shao Bin uncovers the hidden story of OKA 9420 - a secret Japanese germ warfare base established in Singapore during ..


Monday, October 20, 2025

Victor Gao: ‘China has become a very powerful force promoting peace

 

 


 "https://www.youtube.com/embed/RPEOJN3JS4U"

Related posts:

Victor Gao: ‘China has become a very powerful force promoting peace



Victor Gao 

Victor Zhikai Gao[a] (born 1962) is a Chinese lawyer, businessman,[1] and academic who is the vice president of the Beijing-based Center for China and Globalization (CCG).

Gao is an expert on international relations at Soochow University,[2] where he is a Chair Professor. Gao is also a member of the Beijing Municipal Committee of the Revolutionary Committee of the Chinese Kuomintang, a minor and non-oppositional party under the direction of the Chinese Communist Party.[3] He was formerly a translator for Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping.[4][5][6]

Early life and education

Gao was raised in rural China during the 1970s.[7] He attended high school in Southern China. When Chinese Communist Party leader Deng Xiaoping reopened universities during the Chinese economic reform, Gao convinced local authorities to allow him to take the Gaokao for college admission in 1977 before he had graduated high school.[8]

Gao received a Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) in English language and literature from Soochow University in 1981,[9] then earned a Master of Arts (M.A.) in English language and literature from Beijing University of Foreign Studies in 1983. He pursued graduate studies in the United States at Yale University, where he graduated with a master's degree in political science in 1990 and then a Juris Doctor (J.D.) from Yale Law School in 1993.[10] He was admitted to the New York State Bar Association in 1994.[11]

Career

From 1983 to 1988, Gao was a translator for Deng Xiaoping.[7] He was also a member of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs from 1983 to 1989 at the United Nations Secretariat in New York. After leaving the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1988, Gao was recommended by Henry Kissinger to study at Yale University, where he earned a Juris Doctor degree from Yale Law School in 1993. Then he was a policy adviser for the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission from 1999 to 2000.[12]

Gao has been an investment banker for Morgan Stanley.[13] He is a director of the China National Association of International Studies[14] and an executive director of Beijing Private Equity Association.[15] Gao is the vice president of the Center for China and Globalization.[16]

According to Foreign Policy, "Gao was once treated as a reputable interlocutor in U.S.–China relations."[17]

Views

Hong Kong

In 2014, Gao condemned pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong as illegal and provocative.[18] He supports the 2020 Hong Kong National Security Law.[19]


Sunday, October 12, 2025

Goodbye trade war

 

China seems to be winning the tariff war even as Trump threatens to impose a massive increase of tariffs on Chinese imports in response to the republic's announcement of new export controls on rare earths. — Getty Images/AFP


South-east asia, once only a bruising trade war’s secondary victim, should now have asean showing its mettle as china wins.

BEYOND multiple global uncertainties are two core fundamentals: Us-china relations being the world’s most important bilateral relationship, and economics determining much of everything else.

This makes the trade war between the world’s two biggest economies pivotal to all. Multiple spheres in various regions are impacted accordingly.

That much is the main plot in today’s geopolitics. Problems tend to arise when the script is amended without warning, explanation or acknowledgement.

US President Donald Trump has sought a personal meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping since last year, but that will happen only next year. Why does it take two years for such a crucial event to occur?

It is precisely because of the summit’s importance that it has to take so long. Unlike MOUS, summits do not set the tone of an intended agreement but to cap what has already been agreed.

Transnational deals are too important to be left to formal summits with their pomp and pageantry. The serious business of negotiations by government experts and specialists differs vastly from the PR theatre of official photo opportunities.

The months and years between signalling interest in a summit and actually holding it are for senior officials to work out sufficiently agreeable terms to constitute a deal. That period of talks by officials began informally last year between the incoming US administration and China’s incumbent team.

It is a period now effectively coming to a close in ending the trade war, but still only unofficially. The basic agreement that is now done in all but writing has the US broadly conceding to China’s terms.

China is the only country that has pushed back on Trump’s tariffs, with resounding effect as recent events show.

After Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s grating condescension about supplying China with only Nvidia’s sub-par microchips, Beijing blocked all of Nvidia’s chips. Nvidia boss Jensen Huang said China’s own chip development is only “nano seconds behind” his company’s best products.

In agriculture, China has stopped buying US soybeans for supplies from Brazil and elsewhere. With US farmers devastated, China again demonstrated considerable leverage.

With Trump clamping down on countries buying Russian and Iranian oil and gas, India was hit with high additional tariffs, but not China. Instead, China raised Russian gas supplies with the Power of Siberia (POS) pipeline and now also POS 2.

China is also importing more than a million barrels of Iranian oil daily, amounting to almost 90% of Iran’s output. These major purchases were never going to be impacted by US restrictions.

Trump declared victory on Tiktok but it was a net gain for China. Beijing refused to sell Tiktok’s proprietary algorithm, the heart and brain of the winning platform.

A copy of the original algorithm was supplied to US investors, and China’s Bytedance owns just under 20% of US Tiktok – yet is entitled to 50% of US profits. US negotiators must have realised that was the most they could get from China’s tough bargaining position and accepted it.

China has introduced new restrictions on rare earth exports, launched an antitrust probe into US chip giant Qualcomm, and will raise port fees for US ships in return. In virtually every sector China is fighting back through tit-for-tat action and new policies.

If there is still any doubt that China is leading the charge of what remains of the trade war, its use of carrots and sticks to access the US market confirms it. Beijing has offered more than a trillion dollars (RM4.2 trillion) of investment in the US through Chinese companies admitted there.

These could include Chinese electric vehicle companies, which Trump last year said he would invite to the US to provide jobs. Only the stronger economy can dish out inducements of such proportions to the relatively subordinate economy.

Such is the substance of a negotiated trade peace. Ultimately, Trump is less concerned about what actually makes a trade victory than what can be interpreted and portrayed as his personal triumph.

He is anxious to gain snatches of a win between trade skirmishes, however fleeting or questionable, and China is only too happy to provide them to win the trade war. More of this can be expected at next year’s summit.

Meanwhile, Louis Gave of Hong Kong’s Gavekal Research has declared China’s trade war victory. South-east Asia should likewise flip the old script to its favour.

Asean countries are not just collateral economies subjected to the whims of a trade conflict. When China takes a beating, South-east Asia was assumed to be beaten also.

But the US still hopes to obtain from this region what it failed to get from China. To do this it needs to keep up appearances that it is winning over China as the centre of global supply chains.

Asean can call that bluff to protect itself.

Repated posts|:

  •   https://bbc.com/news/articles/crrj1znp0pyo Anthony Zurcher North America correspondent  and James FitzGerald   Watch: What could happen du...

Call for contingency plans in face of US govt shutdown