Senkaku/Diaoyu Island Dispute and the Reconstruction of China as Japan’s “Other”

In the recent years, much has been written about Japan’s security “normalization,” that is, the resurgence of Japan as a “proactive contributor to world peace.” This article aims to add to this debate, but it will approach it from a novel angle. Basing its epistemology in critical security studies,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Kolmaš, Michal
Format: text
Published: Animo Repository 2017
Subjects:
Online Access:https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/apssr/vol17/iss2/8
https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/context/apssr/article/1110/viewcontent/7_Kolmas_revised_20112317.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: De La Salle University
id oai:animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph:apssr-1110
record_format eprints
spelling oai:animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph:apssr-11102024-06-03T09:48:02Z Senkaku/Diaoyu Island Dispute and the Reconstruction of China as Japan’s “Other” Kolmaš, Michal In the recent years, much has been written about Japan’s security “normalization,” that is, the resurgence of Japan as a “proactive contributor to world peace.” This article aims to add to this debate, but it will approach it from a novel angle. Basing its epistemology in critical security studies, I investigate the relationship between national identity and Japan’s foreign policy (i.e., its normalization). The article dismisses realist assumptions that Japan’s security rejuvenation is a reaction to the changing balance of power in Asia. Rather, it argues that the normalization is a product of Japan’s discursive practice of victimization, that is, situating itself as a victim of foreign pressure. The identity of a victim is reproduced through the practice of “othering”—differentiating from various “others.” For most parts of the 20th century, the United States served as the focal other to Japan’s self-identification. In the last two decades, however, Japan’s identity has become practiced through differentiation to China. The article illustrates this process on the case study of Japan’s primary discourse on the Senkaku/ Diaoyu island dispute of 2010 through 2014. Japan’s narrative on the dispute has managed to depict China as a coercive, immoral and abnormal state that bullies subsequently weak, coerced, but moral and lawful Japan. By writing Japan as a coerced, yet lawful state protecting the status quo, Tokyo succeeded in persuading the United States to subdue the disputed territory under its nuclear umbrella. Through the process of victimization of a weak Japan then, the Prime Minister Abe Shinzo managed to propagate the new security legislature as a means of reconstruction of Japan from weak to a normal state. 2017-12-30T08:00:00Z text application/pdf https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/apssr/vol17/iss2/8 info:doi/10.59588/2350-8329.1110 https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/context/apssr/article/1110/viewcontent/7_Kolmas_revised_20112317.pdf Asia-Pacific Social Science Review Animo Repository Japan China identity revisionism normalization discourse
institution De La Salle University
building De La Salle University Library
continent Asia
country Philippines
Philippines
content_provider De La Salle University Library
collection DLSU Institutional Repository
topic Japan
China
identity
revisionism
normalization
discourse
spellingShingle Japan
China
identity
revisionism
normalization
discourse
Kolmaš, Michal
Senkaku/Diaoyu Island Dispute and the Reconstruction of China as Japan’s “Other”
description In the recent years, much has been written about Japan’s security “normalization,” that is, the resurgence of Japan as a “proactive contributor to world peace.” This article aims to add to this debate, but it will approach it from a novel angle. Basing its epistemology in critical security studies, I investigate the relationship between national identity and Japan’s foreign policy (i.e., its normalization). The article dismisses realist assumptions that Japan’s security rejuvenation is a reaction to the changing balance of power in Asia. Rather, it argues that the normalization is a product of Japan’s discursive practice of victimization, that is, situating itself as a victim of foreign pressure. The identity of a victim is reproduced through the practice of “othering”—differentiating from various “others.” For most parts of the 20th century, the United States served as the focal other to Japan’s self-identification. In the last two decades, however, Japan’s identity has become practiced through differentiation to China. The article illustrates this process on the case study of Japan’s primary discourse on the Senkaku/ Diaoyu island dispute of 2010 through 2014. Japan’s narrative on the dispute has managed to depict China as a coercive, immoral and abnormal state that bullies subsequently weak, coerced, but moral and lawful Japan. By writing Japan as a coerced, yet lawful state protecting the status quo, Tokyo succeeded in persuading the United States to subdue the disputed territory under its nuclear umbrella. Through the process of victimization of a weak Japan then, the Prime Minister Abe Shinzo managed to propagate the new security legislature as a means of reconstruction of Japan from weak to a normal state.
format text
author Kolmaš, Michal
author_facet Kolmaš, Michal
author_sort Kolmaš, Michal
title Senkaku/Diaoyu Island Dispute and the Reconstruction of China as Japan’s “Other”
title_short Senkaku/Diaoyu Island Dispute and the Reconstruction of China as Japan’s “Other”
title_full Senkaku/Diaoyu Island Dispute and the Reconstruction of China as Japan’s “Other”
title_fullStr Senkaku/Diaoyu Island Dispute and the Reconstruction of China as Japan’s “Other”
title_full_unstemmed Senkaku/Diaoyu Island Dispute and the Reconstruction of China as Japan’s “Other”
title_sort senkaku/diaoyu island dispute and the reconstruction of china as japan’s “other”
publisher Animo Repository
publishDate 2017
url https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/apssr/vol17/iss2/8
https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/context/apssr/article/1110/viewcontent/7_Kolmas_revised_20112317.pdf
_version_ 1806510836672364544