STOP PRESS: China-Japan row escalates.i remain optimistic the row will deescalate, though it’s not looking good for my rosy view, tbf. Both sides are hardening their stances. Still, I’ll stay with my Panglossian view; for now.
And… I still don’t want to take sides
I wrote below before the latest:
What did new Japanese PM, Sanae Takaichi say that sent Beijing ballistic?
It was this, on November 7th:
“If warships are used and armed force is involved [in a Taiwan emergency], it could undoubtedly become a survival-threatening situation” (from the Taiwan Times, considered China-friendly)
The Straw Man response to Takaichi from China was along the lines of:
"So, what you're saying is:
(1) You'll invade us and brutalise us, and commit genocide, just as you did in WW2. And...
(2) You'll demand massive Reparations, as you did in the 19th century."
(Views echoed by Bejing's Pit Bull)
Well, no to both those.
The comparison to WW2 is clearly wrong. What Takaichi is saying -- even if she should not have said it -- is that if China invaded Taiwan, Japan would have to help defend it, because it would amount to an attack on Japan itself. That is, via its ownership claims to the Senkaku islands, which China also claims, via a Taiwanese county.
I explained that a bit more in my previous post.
Short-form of what happened:
Japan, via Takaishi, said the quiet part out loud. She should not have. Even if it was permitted under 2015 legislation.
China said the quiet part super Loud. It should not have. Even if its strategy is to complain loundly about perceived slights over Taiwan, to keep the rest of the world wrong-footed.
In any case, the current spat is nothing like as serious as the one back in 2012 over Japan's annexation of the Senkaku islands. And we got past that. So I’m guessing we get past this one too.
What of the second point of the Straw Man: the charge about Chinese massive reparations to Japan in the 19th Century?
Here's the summary of the China case:
When China was weakened by western powers (opium wars), Japan attacked China from behind -- defeated China’s Qing Dynasty in the First Sino-Japanese War, imposed the Treaty of Shimonoseki (1895) to extract 200 million taels from China and forced it to cede Taiwan, and levied an additional 30 million taels after the Triple Intervention.
The massive war indemnity and territorial gains provided the foundation for Japan’s industrialisation and gained membership in the colonisers’ club.
Here’s a quick fact-check of the statement:
- China weakened by Western powers (Opium Wars): Correct. The two Opium Wars (1839–1842 and 1856–1860) and the resulting unequal treaties severely weakened the Qing Dynasty.
- Japan attacked China from behind: Correct, of dramatic wording. Japan launched a surprise offensive in 1894, catching the Qing off-guard.
- First Sino-Japanese War (1894–1895) → defeated Qing Dynasty: Correct. Japan decisively won.
- Treaty of Shimonoseki (1895): Correct name and year.
- Extracted 200 million taels from China: Actually 230 million taels (sometimes rounded to 200 million in older Western sources, but the treaty text says 230 million Kuping taels).
- Forced China to cede Taiwan: Correct (Taiwan + the Pescadores/Penghu islands).
- Additional 30 million taels after the Triple Intervention: Correct. Russia, Germany, and France forced Japan to retrocede the Liaodong Peninsula; Japan demanded and received an extra 30 million taels as “compensation”.
- Massive war indemnity provided the foundation for Japan’s industrialisation: Largely accurate. The 230 + 30 million taels (≈ ¥364 million at the time) was about four times Japan’s annual national revenue. Japan used much of it to expand its army/navy and build the Yawata Steel Works (opened 1901), a cornerstone of heavy industry.
- Gained membership in the colonisers’ club: Fair characterisation. Victory over China and the Triple Intervention ironically helped Japan join the imperialist powers; by 1902 it had the Anglo-Japanese Alliance, and in 1905 it defeated Russia, fully entering the great-power club.
Verdict: The statement is accurate.
Ok, fine. But if the first complaint against Japan relates to the Second War, already 80 years ago, and if I said in my previous post:
… it's EIGHTY years ago... When do we give up our bitterness? When do we willingly forget? When do we give up our victimhood? ....
... then what about this Reparations charge against Japan, now going back well over a century?? I mean, come on, Japan-haters, when does it end?
After all, since the end of the Second Warld War, Japan has been a constructive member of the world community. Not always the case with China, one must say. Can we really see Japan demanding "Reparations" from China? I think not.
But if we are to insist that we go back that far, if we're to go 130 years back to find Japanese perfidy, then what's good for the Goose (Japan) is good for the Gander (China):
Here are clear historical examples where China’s actions were on the same level of severity (or worse) than what Japan did to China in 1895:
- Ming–Qing conquest of Joseon Korea (1627 & 1636)
- Twice invaded Korea, forced the king to kneel before Qing generals, took tens of thousands of Koreans as slaves, extracted massive tribute for centuries, and turned Korea into a vassal state.
- Comparable to Japan later turning Korea into a colony (1910).
- Qing destruction of the Dzungar Khanate (1755–1759)
- Full-scale genocide: Qing armies deliberately exterminated 80–90 % of the Dzungar Mongol population (est. 500,000–800,000 killed through massacre, starvation, and smallpox).
- Far more lethal and intentional than anything Japan did to Chinese civilians in the 1894–95 war.
- Holds the region, now Xinjiang and Uygur, until today.
- Qing conquest of Tibet (1720)
- Military invasion, execution of resistance leaders, installation of direct Qing rule and garrisons.
- Tibet has remained under Qing (later Chinese) control until today.
- Qing invasion of Vietnam (1788–1789)
- 200,000-man army sent to overthrow the Tây Sơn dynasty and restore the Lê puppet ruler. Defeated, but the intent was outright conquest and annexation.
- Centuries of tribute system coercion
- China routinely used military threats to force neighbouring states (Korea, Vietnam, Ryukyu Islands, Burma, Nepal) to send humiliating tribute missions, accept Chinese calendars, and acknowledge the emperor as “Son of Heaven” above their own rulers. Refusal often meant invasion.
In short: Imperial China was just as aggressive, extractive, and occasionally genocidal as any other empire when it had the power to be.
The Qing in the 18th century acted exactly like the European powers or Meiji Japan did later — they just lost that capability by the 19th century and became the victim instead of the perpetrator.
I rest my case. For now.
(And so should Beijing and Tokyo).
Afterthought: In any case, why do I worry? Why do I write about this? I have zero influence on what either of the parties to the current spat do. Zero. So.. there it is. What, me Worry?
