Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: China risks becoming Asia’s Voldemort

interessante botta e risposta tra l'ambasciatore cinese e giapponese su 
The Telegraph in merito allo scontro in atto sul mar cinese meridionale, 
questo l'intervento dell'ambasciatore giapponese
 
----------------------------------------------------
 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/10552351/China-risks-becoming-Asias-Voldemort.html
 
 
China risks becoming Asia’s Voldemort
Japan is committed to peace and democracy – and a visit to a shrine will 
not change that
 
By Keiichi Hayashi 8:03PM GMT 05 Jan 2014
 
Everyone knows that relations between Japan and China are strained, 
especially in the East China Sea. Japan has been exercising utmost 
restraint. When a Chinese destroyer directed its fire-control radar at a 
Japanese destroyer last year, which in normal naval practice might be 
regarded as an act of war, the Japanese vessel made an evasive manoeuvre 
rather than risk further endangering the situation. Chinese ships 
repeatedly intrude into Japanese territorial waters surrounding the 
Senkaku Islands, which have been peacefully under Japan’s sovereignty 
for 120 years.
Further evidence of Chinese provocation was seen with Beijing’s 
unilateral declaration of an Air Defence Identification Zone covering 
the islands and overlapping with Japan’s own ADIZ. Despite such steps, 
Japan continues to call for dialogue. Can Japan really be considered to 
be displaying dangerous militarism, as stated by China’s ambassador Liu 
Xiaoming in this newspaper on January 2?
Let me outline some facts. Japan’s record over the past 68 years shows 
the strength of its democracy, its respect for human rights (one is not 
arrested in Japan for criticising the government), its commitment to 
peace (e.g. a strong contribution to UN peace-keeping operations), and 
its willingness to help developing countries. Our maritime forces never 
harass neighbours on the high seas and we have upheld in action the 
values inscribed in the UN Charter. Such values are so deeply ingrained 
in Japan that a visit to a shrine cannot undo them.
Following the great sacrifices made during the Second World War by the 
United Kingdom, among others, our two countries are now close allies in 
the pursuit of peace, sharing the fundamental values of liberal 
democracy. This was evidenced, for example, in recent cooperation to 
support disaster relief operations in the Philippines.
It is ironic that a country that has increased its own military spending 
by more than 10 per cent a year for the past 20 years should call a 
neighbour “militarist”. China’s military budget is now the second 
largest in the world and more than twice that of Japan’s. Its attempt to 
change the status quo by force or coercion has raised concerns not only 
in Japan, but also among its neighbours throughout the East China Sea 
and the South China Sea.
 
Prime Minister Abe issued a statement entitled “Pledge for everlasting 
peace” upon his recent visit to Yasukuni Shrine. He said his visit was 
made to pay his respects and pray for the souls of the war dead and to 
renew the pledge that Japan shall never again wage war. Nothing more and 
nothing less, and by no means to pay homage to war criminals or to 
praise militarism.
He also visited “Chinrei-sha”, a remembrance memorial to pray for the 
souls of all of those, irrespective of nationality, who lost their lives 
in the war. As he clearly stated at the time, Japan has created a free 
and democratic country and consistently walked the path of peace for the 
past 68 years, and there is no doubt whatsoever that Japan will continue 
to pursue this path.
Such a visit cannot be portrayed as a sign of reviving militarism. In 
the past, Japan caused tremendous suffering to the people of many 
countries, particularly in Asia. The government of Japan has 
consistently made clear that it squarely faces this history, and 
expresses deep remorse and heartfelt apology. This stance is firmly 
upheld under the Abe government.
As in the case of the Japan-UK relationship, exemplified in the meeting 
between Eric Lomax and Takashi Nagase described in the book The Railway 
Man, the only way to heal the wounds of the past is through the pursuit 
of reconciliation. But, critically, it takes two for this to be achieved.
In the case of Europe, not only the sincerity of the German leaders but 
also the magnanimity of the French, British and other European leaders 
were important in helping them to achieve reconciliation. It cannot help 
that China seeks to instil distrust of Japan among its own people while 
making unfounded accusations. It is important to note inconsistencies in 
China’s stance toward Yasukuni.
There have been more than 60 visits to Yasukuni by Japanese prime 
ministers since the end of the Second World War, with almost half after 
it was made public in 1979 that 14 Class A war criminals had been 
enshrined there in 1978. China began raising this issue from 1985, by 
which time 21 of these visits had gone unchallenged. China also formally 
expressed its positive evaluation of Japan’s post-war record as a nation 
of peace in the Japan-China Joint Statement of 2008, after all of these 
visits. Has Japan suddenly turned militaristic within five years? 
Certainly not.
China may well have different views. This is why the two countries 
should meet and seek mutual understanding. Prime Minister Abe stated 
that he wishes to build friendship with China based on respect, and that 
he strongly wishes to explain his thoughts directly to the Chinese leaders.
East Asia is now at a crossroads. There are two paths open to China. One 
is to seek dialogue, and abide by the rule of law. The other is to play 
the role of Voldemort in the region by letting loose the evil of an arms 
race and escalation of tensions, although Japan will not escalate the 
situation from its side. The answer seems obvious. Although China has so 
far refused to enable dialogue between our leaders, I sincerely hope 
that it will come forward, rather than keep invoking the ghost of 
“militarism” of seven decades ago, which no longer exists.
 
Keiichi Hayashi is Japan’s ambassador to the United Kingdom

 chiacchere.
 
e farà la fine di 70 anni fa. Ma stavolta, cattivi! (cit.)

 c'ï¿½ una sola comprensione: 10 anni di PIL giapponese come parziale risarcimento per la bestiale occupazione della Cina. Per ora, poi ci sono da contare gli interessi...
 
sei quasi comico... :-)


 
siamo in una fase di grandi cambiamenti geopolitici, in questo momento è 
difficile prevedere cosa succederà, in questa fase viviamo un 
disorientamento di carattere epocale, tuttavia non è ancora chiaro chi 
farà la prima mossa e dove, per tante persone rischia di essere un 
brusco risveglio. Personalmente mi pregio di aver previsto tutto questo 
con largo anticipo, di aver ben interpretato i segnali quando altri mi 
davano del "peculiare", occorrerà vedere se il dopo Obama confermerà 
questa tendenza, c'è ancora molto tempo per fare molti danni comunque :-)

 Am.
 
l'archivio del ng ï¿œ tuo amico...

 Am.
 
i primi dubbi:
 
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/it.politica.internazionale/93H9idOvVDQ
 
 
post dello scrivente :-) del 18 ottobre 2009
 
""il pericolo iraniano esiste ed ï¿œ un pericolo per molti alleati degli 
Usa. Se
gli Usa vogliono continuare ad essere la potenza garante della pace
nell'area non possono esimersi dall'affrontare le proprie 
responsabilitï¿œ. Se
gli Usa invece vogliono tornare ad una politica isolazionistica mascherata
da un 'volemose bene globale' generalizzato ï¿œ chiaro che quella fiducia
storica negli Usa puï¿œ venire meno. Concordo con te che l'amministrazione
americana mostri due facce e l'ho giï¿œ detto piï¿œ volte. Sarebbe bene che 
quel
lato dell'amministrazione americana che gioca al disimpegno capisse che gli
Usa sono tali perchï¿œ hanno compiuto certe scelte strategiche nel corso 
della
sua evoluzione politica. In questo senso il lato piï¿œ "ministeriale"
dell'amministrazione americana ï¿œ quello che adesso, nel bene e nel male, 
sta
tirando il carretto...e per fortuna dell'America aggiungo...""
 
sicuramente ho detto qualcosa anche prima ma sinceramente la ricerca 
diventava troppo lunga tornando indietro tempo...

 Am.
 
starai scherzando immagino...

 starai scherzando immagino...
 
un esempio a caso fra le centinaia del 24 febbraio 2009:
 
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/it.politica.internazionale/cina$20egemonia$20mondiale$20curzon/it.politica.internazionale/HS8MLhHlbF0/u7xLjjD0W4UJ
 
 
""la Cina ha si assunto caratteristiche proprie dell'occidente, 
ciononostante
non ha assunto la piï¿œ importante, ovvero la democrazia. La Cina ha fatto
semplicemente in modo che il proprio sistema produttivo, con tutto quello
che gli gira intorno, potesse entrare nel grande circuito dell'economia
globale da protagonista ma l'ideologia politica che manovra questa macchina
ï¿œ una riedizione moderna del piï¿œ bieco assolutismo. In questo non c'ï¿œ stato
alcun progresso socio-culturale, forse addirittura un regresso.
Se conosci la storia saprai che fin dalla guerra del Peloponneso Atene e
Sparta usavano 'suggerire' o imporre ai propri alleati o sottoposti una
forma di governo simile alla propria in modo da poterli controllare meglio.
Lo stesso avverrebbe oggi se la Cina uscisse dai propri confini per
espandere la propria egemonia nel mondo. E' la stessa cosa che ha poi fatto
l'URSS... E questo ï¿œ il pericolo.""
 
Che grande profezia...aggiungo l'11 gennaio 2014 :-)

 Am.
 
piï¿œ che altro ho insistito, difficile discutere con chi vede la Cina 
come la propria squadra di calcio... :-)

 Moi?
 
parlo di IPI


IPI, c'est moi!

Il 14/01/2014 22.36, giovanni ha scritto:

ti confermo che in effetti sei un esempio perfetto per il caso :-)