|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| A Western Path for Peace in North Asia |
| [Analysis] Can North Asian countries overcome their historic rivalries to become strategic partners? |
|
Pierre Joo (pierre_joo)  |
 Email Article
 Print Article
|
|
|
|
Published 2005-05-23 12:16 (KST) |
|
|
|
The year is 2025. Due to obligations requiring his presence in Tokyo, Japan's prime minister cannot attend the ASEAN+3 (China, Japan, Korea) annual summit in Manila. When reviewing his options for his country to be represented at the summit, the prime minister decides to call the president of the Republic of Korea, asking him to represent Japan during the summit.
For the past 20 years, relations between Korea and Japan improved so dramatically that both countries shared the same views and interests on almost every foreign relations issue. Most primary schools of both countries even shared the same history books, co-written by Japanese and Korean historians. Therefore one country's delegation speaking for the other at an international summit seems perfectly natural.
Alas, given the current state of relations between Japan and Korea, even the most imaginative and optimistic minds would think twice before believing such a future scenario. But looking back at Europe's history, we realize that countries which have fought for centuries have managed to dramatically change their relations from bitter rivalry to trust and peaceful cooperation -- in less than half a century.
It is conceivable that at the end of World War II, French people had the same feelings of bitterness, resentment and distrust for Germany as Koreans had for Japan. Indeed, the 80 years prior to World War II between France and Germany were a succession of wars and bitter peace: the 1870 war between France and Prussia lead to the annexation by Prussia of the French regions of Alsace and Lorraine for 40 years; the bloody trench battles of World War I resulted in the Versailles Treaty, setting the terms of a humiliating and unbearable territorial and financial price for Germany and eventually leading to the rise of the Nazi regime and another world war which, in turn, resulted in four years of occupation of France by the Nazis.
Yet today, the two countries' relations are almost as close as the above idyllic scenario: in October 2003, the German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder was absent from the European Council meeting in Brussels, but Germany was still represented by the president of France, Jacques Chirac. A few months later, it is the German Chancellor's turn to speak for France during a meeting with the Irish prime minister. In March, education ministers of both countries agreed on a project for a common history textbook, co-written by German and French historians.
So how do we get from a century of never-ending conflict and hatred, to relations that are so peaceful and close, that one country's head of state can speak for the other? There is no magic solution to such a challenge, but here are two hard steps taken by European leaders which Asian leaders could by inspired by.
Acknowledging Past Responsibilities
In 1970, Willy Brandt, then German chancellor, knelt silently at the Warsaw Ghetto memorial in recognition of his country's past atrocities. Thirty-five years later, the Japanese prime minister is still bowing to "Class A" war criminals at the Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo. Much has been said about the difference between Germany's thorough and courageous facing of history, compared to the attitude of many Japanese politicians up until today.
But acknowledging past responsibilities does not solely concern defeated occupiers. Freed countries need to heal the wounds of their own people -- those who chose to actively collaborate with occupiers, those who joined the Resistance, and the silent majority whose main concern was to survive. Achieving this depends on accepting that in some cases, authors of the worst crimes against patriots may well have been their very own people, rather than evil occupiers.
Governments and prosecutors then need the courage to bring charges against even the most prominent national figures within the political, industrial and cultural elite of the country. They also need to find the appropriate balance between punishment and forgiveness. Such a process may be humiliating and disturbing, but it is crucial.
From the early administration purges right after World War II, to the prosecutions of famous Nazi collaborators such as Klaus Barbie, Paul Touvier or Maurice Papon throughout the 1980-90's, France has more or less achieved this "coming to terms with the past."
Korea has only just begun, and the actual benefits of uncovering past trauma by hunting down and prosecuting those responsible for wrongdoings, more than half a century after the fact, may seem unclear. Yet, such a process is the only path to genuine national reconciliation and eventually, the ability for Korea to convey a firm, clear, but fair stance towards its former occupiers, rather than putting all the blame on them.
Overcoming Popular Distrust and Opposition
In the decade following the end of World War II, Germany officially and permanently renounced some regions inhabited by significant German communities; France accepted the necessity for its former occupier to rebuild an army in the context of the early Cold War; France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxemburg agreed to cede sovereignty over their steel production capacity to the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), a supranational entity that later would set the basis for the European Union.
All these examples teach us that reaching a sustainable peace with centuries-old enemies implies making substantial, sometimes heartbreaking concessions. Such concessions often go against popular instincts, as was often the case for the European construction. Again today, polls show that the adoption of the European constitution is being jeopardized by a potential rebuttal vote by the people of some founding countries of the EU, such as France and the Netherlands.
Overcoming centuries-old popular distrust and opposition to neighboring countries depends heavily on the capacity of foresighted leaders to serenely implement deeply unpopular, yet salutary policies. Europe's founding fathers are often remembered as wise leaders because they have managed to achieve this. Today, China, Japan and Korea's foreign policies are mainly dictated by internal politics concerns: by encouraging public anger at Japan, President Hu has found an easy way for the Chinese people to express their daily frustrations; the harsh words used by President Roh against Japan were dictated by electoral campaign concerns; finally, Mr. Koizumi's attitude towards Japan's war crimes ever since he became prime minister, is meant to appeal to the increasingly rightist base of his party.
Former U.S. National Security Advisor Dr. Henry Kissinger has compared today's Asian geopolitical situation with that of 19th century Europe. He even noted that "wars among (Asian) powers are not imminent, but they are not inconceivable either." My point is not to assert a pro-Western stance and claim the superiority of European leaders over their Asian counterparts. It is a hope that Asian leaders could replicate on a foreign policy level what they have been able to achieve on an economic policy level: to learn from Western countries' successes and avoid their failures.
|
|
©2005 OhmyNews
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
How worried are you about the H1N1 influenza virus? |
|
 |
| * Vote to see the result. |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSS
Del.icio.us
Digg 
reddit
Y! MyWeb
Comments Note: Kindly refrain from personal attacks and profanity.
.jpg)
