Abstract
The idea of a dangerous China is omnipresent in the articulation of Japanese national identity, manifest in the daily media and public opinion, as well as among the policy elite. On 26 July 2013, the Japanese Ministry of Defense released an interim report on its defense posture, calling for an increase in the country’s military capabilities and a more assertive role in regional security, reportedly due to the increased threats from an emboldened China and an unpredictable North Korea (DPRK).1 Indeed, the Kyodo News Agency headline read, ‘Japan needs greater defensive power given threat from China, N. Korea’.2 A further article by the Yomiuri Shimbun on the eve of the publication of this interim report even omitted the DPRK threat, mentioning only China.3 Since 2011, Japanese White Papers on Defense have increasingly portrayed China’s military build-up and its actions in the waters surrounding Japan as threats to national and regional security. This leaves the image of a weak Japan surpassed by and giving in to a growing China, especially on matters such as the economy and security. This constructed image supports the discursive establishment of the need for a tougher China policy, and accordingly provides a justification to adjust defense budgets.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
L. Dittmer and S. S. Kim (1993) ‘In search of a theory of national identity’, in L. Dittmer and S. S. Kim (eds.) China’s Quest for National Identity (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press), pp.1–31 based their theory on E. Erikson (1956) on individual identity and the theories of S. Verba and L. Pye (1971) on national identity, while adding a synthetic dimension to the merely analytic explanation of the term.
S. Verba (1971) ‘Sequences and development’, in L. Binder and J. La Palombara (eds.) Crises and Sequences in Political Development (Princeton: Princeton University Press), pp.283–316.
See P. Duara (2008) ‘Historical narratives and trans-nationalism in East Asia’, in S. Richter (ed.) Contested Views of a Common Past. Revisions of History in Contemporary East Asia (Frankfurt am Main and New York: Campus), p.105.
The Self-Other approach was developed within social theory, but is also increasingly used in IR theory. See Th. Diez (2004) ‘Europe’s others and the return of geopolitics’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 17/2, 321;
I. B. Neumann (1996) ‘Self and other in international relations’, European Journal of International Relations, 2/2, 139–74.
See D. Campbell (1993) Politics without Principle: Sovereignty, Ethics and the Narratives of the Gulf War (Boulder: Lynne Rienner), p.95.
See Sh. Suzuki (2007) ‘The importance of “Othering” in China’s national identity: Sino-Japanese relations as a stage of identity conflicts’, The Pacific Review, 20/2, 24–5.
H. Befu (ed.) (1993) Cultural Nationalism in East Asia, Representation and Identity (Berkeley: University of California Press), pp.82–4; taken from
H. D. Harootunion (1988) Things Seen and Unseen: Discourse and Ideology in Tokugawa Nativism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), p.409.
See H. Naga and S. Matsumoto (eds.) (1971) Nihon shisō taikei, vol. 51: Kokugaku undo no shisō (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten).
E. Ohnuki-Tierney (1993) Rice as Self Japanese Identities through Time (Princeton: Princeton University Press), pp.102–4.
A rising power is here defined as a state in the process of agglomerating capability at a rate that exceeds that of other powers. In China’s case, ‘rise’ reflects the country’s transformation from a regional middle-ranking power to a great power/superpower in the international system. Not only have Chinese capabilities grown in absolute terms, but inherent in the understanding of China’s rise is also the notion that it has occurred at least partly at the expense of other states’ relative power. X. Yan (2006) World Politics: Views from China: International Security (Beijing: New World Press), pp.12–13.
K. Srinivasan (2013) ‘China’s rise: Perceptions and misperceptions’, ECIPE Policy Briefs 6. http://www.ecipe.org/media/publication_pdfs/PB6.pdf (accessed 28 July 2013). M. Swaine (2010) ‘Perceptions of an assertive China’, China Leadership Monitor 32, 1–19. http://www.lepointinternational.com/attachments/531_Perceptions%20of%20an%20Assertive%20China.pdf (accessed 28 July 2013).
Ch. Moon and S. Suh (2008) ‘Identity politics, nationalism, and the future of the Northeast Asian order’, in J. Ikenberry and Ch. Moon (eds.) The U.S. and Northeast Asia (Landham: Rowman & Littlefield), pp.198–203. Also, according to L. Hagström, the notion of the ‘China Threat’ is mostly coming from US researchers and policymakers, and is related to the strategic interests of the US in the region, and can therefore provide them with a compelling argument for justifying their presence in the East Asian region. ‘Interview with Linus Hagström’, Japan Foreign Policy Observatory, 21 June 2012. http://www.japanfpo.org/2012/06/interview-with-linus-hogstrom.html (accessed 28 July 2013).
See Moon and Suh, ‘Identity politics, nationalism, and the future of the Northeast Asian order’, p.209; N. Bisley (2011) ‘Biding and hiding no longer: A more assertive China rattles the region’, Global Asia, 6/4, 62–73;
J. H. Chung (2009) ‘East Asia responds to the rise of China: Patterns and variations’, Pacific Affairs, 82/4, 663.
M. C. Williams (1998) ‘Modernity, identity and security: A comment on the “Copenhagen controversy”’, Review of International Studies, 24/3, 435.
For more on this, see Swaine, ‘Perceptions of an assertive China’, 1–19. For a reaction to this so-called ‘new’ assertiveness, see A. I. Johnston (2013) ‘How new and assertive is China’s new assertiveness?’, International Security, 37/4, 7–48.
E. Wishnick (2005) ‘China as a risk society’, Working paper, Politics, Governance, and Security Series, 12, 1–7.
B. Jerdén and L. Hagström (2012) ‘Rethinking Japan’s China policy: Japan as an accommodator in the rise of China, 1978–2011’, Journal of East Asian Studies, 12, 215–50 cite, among others, the Japanese Overseas Development Assistance policy to China and non-interference on matters such as Tibet or Tiananmen as arguments.
H. Satō (2010) ‘Japan: What future with China?’, in L. P. Er, N. Ganesan and C. Dürkop (eds.) East Asia’s Relations with a Rising China (Sankt Augustin: Konrad Adenauer Stifting), p.183.
T. Hitoshi (2012) ‘Myths of decline: Why Japan matters as China rises’, East Asia Insights, 7/5, pp.1–3.
D. Rustow (1967) A World of Nations: Problems of Political Modernization (Washington: Brookings Institution), p.22.
L. Hagström (2012) ‘“Power shift” in East Asia? A critical reappraisal of narratives on the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands incident in 2010’, The Chinese Journal of International Politics 5, 267–97; Y. Tiberghien (2010) ‘The puzzling 2010 Diaoyu crisis: Centrifugal domestic politics, shifting balance of power, and weak regional institutionalization’, Harvard Asia Quarterly, 74.
T. Akaha (2008) ‘The nationalist discourse in contemporary Japan: The role of China and Korea in the last decade’, Pacific Focus, 23/2, 156.
L. W. Pye (1971) ‘Identity and the political culture’, in Binder and J. La Palombara (eds.) Crises and Sequences in Political Development (Princeton: Princeton University Press), p.111.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2014 Tine Walravens
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Walravens, T. (2014). Diversifying Narratives: Perceptions of a Weak Japan Facing a Rising China. In: Dessein, B. (eds) Interpreting China as a Regional and Global Power. Politics and Development of Contemporary China Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137450302_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137450302_8
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-49697-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-45030-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Intern. Relations & Development CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)