This research aims to find how the territorial dispute between Japan and China has been developing through the era of cold war and up to current point of New Hegemony Struggle. And, It ultimately helps to suggest the solutions of territorial and ocean ...
This research aims to find how the territorial dispute between Japan and China has been developing through the era of cold war and up to current point of New Hegemony Struggle. And, It ultimately helps to suggest the solutions of territorial and ocean dispute.
To achieve the purpose of this study, this study has been conducted based mainly on the following research themes. The first research theme, dispute condensation and integration: San Francisco system and latency of territorial problem, analyzed the factors of territorial dispute. and the contents. A special focus, in this research, worked on the role of United States and its intervention in the North East Asia. Because US did exert their influence through the progress of reorganizing postwar order in Northeast Asia and US was the actual ruler in this area until the time of the restoration of Okinawa to Japan in 1972. To summarize the result, it can be said that neutral policy of US on Senkaku Islands is still unsolved and causing the continuation of territorial dispute between Japan and China.
In the second research theme, Value change of Japan and China and Territorial and ocean dispute, has been conducted based on policy paradigm, interest and political institution between China and Japan and to find out the cause of cooperation and dispute that goes back and forth since normalization of relations between China and Japan in 1972. A remarkable point in this research is that Changing the decision-making system is a core amplification on the territorial dispute. In case of China, Diversification of decision-making is the main cause that triggers stronger claims on Senkaku Islands. Because claims of various agents from central government, local government, enterprises, and think-tank are growing stronger in terms of foreign and security policy. For the case of Japan, Political elite of pro-American and anti-China has taken initiative, and the net effect strengthen the ownership of the Senkaku Islands. These factors are creating even worse tension between two countries.
At last, in the third research theme, latency of dispute and dispute control mechanisms, focus on the fact that political elites of two nations used to work together and cooperate to control the dispute until 1990’s. In the end, however, political elite were not willing to improve the relation when the dispute has come to surface since 2000’s and the dispute has become even worse. This means that dispute controlling mechanism is an important key to solve a problem of Senkaku Islands.
Based on the achievement from first year of research, the following research themes for the second year has been set. The first research theme, inseparability of territorial and ocean dispute and legitimacy strategy, is an analysis about the progress of expansive reproduction of territorial claim between Japan and China. In conclusion of research, Japan is reinterpreting the postwar system and history as the national strategy and they use Senkaku Islands to clean up the vestiges of postwar system. China is also pursuing to become a global leader to cope with the international order change since 1990’s. To achieve that, they are reasserting its control over the Senkaku Islands.
The second research theme, policy inconsistency and characteristics of political institution, is an analysis about the political elite structure and characteristic political system of China and Japan that bring about spread of government policy. A noteworthy is that a diversity of political elite is a key factor that drives hard-line policy in China, while in japan, dull uniformity of political elite due to the conservatization is a factor to strengthen territorial claim over Senkaku Islands and hard-line policy over the public. Japan, in particular, their weak cohesion of political elites has caused a distrust of governmental policy over Senkaku Islands, and a distrust of policy has increased more supports of hard-line policy over China supporters and they support the same type of hardline policy over Senkaku Islands as well.
The third research theme, lack of dispute control mechanisms and mobilization of bias, studies about the absence of dispute controlling mechanism that comes from the changes in structure of political elite in Japan and China and analysis how they restraint the civil act to form state centric mobilization of bias in process of decision-making. One remarkable fact in this research is that biases of intellectual society has been a persistent factor of territorial dispute. Existing relative researches emphasize that political conservative shift is a main factor that triggers spread of dispute between neighbor countries. More important point, however, is that we must be careful of strong statism in the intellectual society.
To summarize the results of the research, it can be said that dispute between two nations over territory is anticipated to be continued because of political conservatism and their sole leading in Japan, plus ongoing Chinese nationalism in China.