No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 February 2013
In 2010–12, Sino-Japanese relations deteriorated without the Yasukuni Shrine or Chinese human rights violations in the forefront. To improve relations, attention should turn to what I label the ideological, sectoral, and horizontal dimensions of a national identity gap between these countries. They have each figured in the decline and offer more promise than the temporal dimension, with its symbols of wartime memories, and the vertical dimension, where sensitive Chinese internal affairs are at stake. The sectoral dimension comprises political, economic, and also cultural national identity, each of which has grown more intense in China, while cultural identity is still a force in Japan. Establishing an East Asian community is now the centerpiece in the hope that the horizontal dimension will be an impetus for mutual understanding, yet the notion of community is repeated with no sign of a shared vision of the outside world, whether the US role or the international arena and regionalism. With South Korea, their partner in trilateralism and North Korea's transformation at the crux of all three of these dimensions, this paper emphasizes the way divergent views of the peninsula keep growing in importance for bilateral relations. It suggests ways to reframe relations through cooperation over Korea. As difficult as Korean relations are for both states, it is a test case for their identity gap.
1 On how to analyze and estimate a national identity gap, see Rozman, Gilbert (ed.), National Identities and Bilateral Relations: Widening Gaps in East Asia and Chinese Demonization of the United States (Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press and Stanford University Press, 2012)Google Scholar, especially the Introduction to Part 1, ‘Conceptualizing National Identity Gaps in East Asia’, and the Introduction to Part 2, ‘The US Factor and East Asian National Identity Gaps’, pp. 1–14 and 155–72.
2 For a fuller discussion of the six dimensions, see Rozman, Gilbert (ed.), East Asian National Identities: Common Roots and Chinese Exceptionalism (Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press and Stanford University Press, 2012).Google Scholar
3 For the principal assessment of the evolution of Sino-Japanese relations covering national identities, see Wan, Ming, Sino-Japanese Relations: Interaction, Logic, and Transformation (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2006)Google Scholar. Also see Wan, Ming, ‘National Identities and Sino-Japanese Relations’, Rozman, (ed.), National Identities and Bilateral Relations, Chapter 3, pp. 65–94.Google Scholar
4 Hosoya, Yuichi, ‘Japan's National Identity in Postwar Diplomacy: The Three Basic Principles’, and Ming Wan, ‘China's National Identity in Postwar Diplomacy: Noninterference in Internal Affairs’, in Rozman, (ed.), East Asian National Identities, Chapter 6, pp. 169–95Google Scholar, and Chapter 10, pp. 257–72, respectively.
5 Togo, Kazuhiko, ‘The Search for Japanese Identity by Foreign Service Officials’, in Rozman, (ed.), National Identities and Bilateral Relations, Chapter 1, pp. 15–44.Google Scholar
7 ‘Hu Meeting Nixed Amid Senkaku Spat’, The Japan Times Online, 12 February 2012.
8 Sankei shimbun, 30 January 2012, p. 1.
10 Tiankai, Cui and Hanzhao, Pan, ‘Waijiaobu fubuzhang Cui Tiankai: Zhongguo waijiao de quanquzhong de Zhongmei guanxi’, Zhongguo wang, 20 July 2012.Google Scholar
11 ‘China–Japan–ROK Cooperation’, China Daily, 11 May 2012.
12 ‘China, Japan, ROK Leaders Meet in Beijing’, China Weekly, Global Edition, 15 May 2012.
13 Gilbert Rozman, ‘Russian Possibilities for Integrating into the Asian Regional Order’, Carlyle, PA: Army War College conference paper, May 2012.
14 Easley, Leif-Eric, ‘Diverging Trajectories of Trust in Northeast Asia: South Korea's Security Relations with Japan and China’, in Rozman, Gilbert (ed.), Asia at a Tipping Point: Korea, the Rise of China, and the Impact of Leadership Transitions (Washington, DC: Korean Economic Institute, 2012), pp. 149–69.Google Scholar
Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.
No CrossRef data available.