China’s Changing Perception of Japan: A 2022 Review of the “1972 System” Discourse and the “New Thinking on Japan” Debate

IF 0.3 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Asia-Pacific Review Pub Date : 2023-01-02 DOI:10.1080/13439006.2023.2206740
Eto Naoko
{"title":"China’s Changing Perception of Japan: A 2022 Review of the “1972 System” Discourse and the “New Thinking on Japan” Debate","authors":"Eto Naoko","doi":"10.1080/13439006.2023.2206740","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What is the structure of the political framework that defines the relationship between Japan and China? In the early 2000s, a little before the thirtieth-year anniversary of normalization of the bilateral relationship, experts from the two countries argued over the importance of issues regarding history in the framework of bilateral relations. By discussing the formation of the debate on the so-called “1972 system,” and its background and subsequent development, this article indicates that China’s argument is transforming from rational to more nationalistic. The two consistent features of China’s strategic theory toward Japan are (1) China shares with Japan an understanding of where the issues in Sino-Japanese relations lie; and (2) China differs in many respects from Japan in its political interpretation of the issues and seeks setbacks from Japan in a manner consistent with guiding domestic public opinion in China. This implies that Japan and China can potentially share a common understanding of the issues at stake, despite political friction on the surface.","PeriodicalId":43120,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia-Pacific Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13439006.2023.2206740","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

What is the structure of the political framework that defines the relationship between Japan and China? In the early 2000s, a little before the thirtieth-year anniversary of normalization of the bilateral relationship, experts from the two countries argued over the importance of issues regarding history in the framework of bilateral relations. By discussing the formation of the debate on the so-called “1972 system,” and its background and subsequent development, this article indicates that China’s argument is transforming from rational to more nationalistic. The two consistent features of China’s strategic theory toward Japan are (1) China shares with Japan an understanding of where the issues in Sino-Japanese relations lie; and (2) China differs in many respects from Japan in its political interpretation of the issues and seeks setbacks from Japan in a manner consistent with guiding domestic public opinion in China. This implies that Japan and China can potentially share a common understanding of the issues at stake, despite political friction on the surface.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中国对日观念的转变——2022年“1972体制”话语与“对日新思维”之争述评
界定中日关系的政治框架结构是什么?21世纪初,在两国关系正常化30周年前夕,两国专家就历史问题在两国关系框架内的重要性展开了争论。本文通过对所谓“1972体制”争论的形成、背景和后续发展的探讨,表明中国的争论正在从理性转向民族主义。中国对日战略理论的两个一贯特征是:(1)中国对中日关系问题所在的认识与日本一致;(2)中国对这些问题的政治解释在许多方面与日本不同,并以与引导中国国内舆论一致的方式寻求日本的挫折。这意味着,尽管表面上存在政治摩擦,但日本和中国可能在利害攸关的问题上有共同的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Asia-Pacific Review
Asia-Pacific Review INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊最新文献
G20 Summit Places Priority on Avoiding Division G7 Hiroshima Summit 2023: Objectives, Achievements, and Prospects Republic of Korea’s “Anchored Flexibility” Diplomacy The European Union and an “Indo-Pacific” Alignment The Transnistria Problem and the Crisis in Ukraine: Analysis from the Perspective of the Security Dilemma Argument
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1