Japan's removal of ban on collective self-defense signals fascism emergence, escalates tension, stirs international unease

Japan's move escalates regional tension, signals fascism emergence: foreign experts

Foreign analysts and scholars have harshly criticized a resolution passed by the Japanese cabinet on Monday to allow it a larger military role in Asia, saying it will escalates regional tensions and is a sign of fascism emergence.

The resolution, which allows Japan to exercise the right to collective self-defense by reinterpreting the pacifist Constitution, greenlights Japan to take military action to defend other countries even though the nation itself is not under attack, marking a major overhaul from Japan' s postwar security policy.

"Japan is changing," warned Shada Islam, the director of Brussels-based Policy, Friends of Europe in a written interview with Xinhua.

The move is part of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's drive to transform Japan into a "normal country" when it comes to defence and security, said Islam, adding that he has also pushed through a law to strengthen control of state secrets, created American-style National Security Council, and lifted Japan' s self-imposed restriction on exporting weapons.

Abe's so-called "proactive pacifism" is clearly not popular at home and he has had to abandon his original plan to secure direct constitutional revision -- but this move should reassure the United States that Japan is taking on some responsibility for its own defence, she said.

Public opinion in Japan will continue to act as a brake on some of the Abe's more ambitious plans, so Abe will have to carefully balance his policies, she said, adding that the resolution "will certainly not enhance security and could increase tensions in northeast Asia."

It is absurd for Japan to allows collective self-defense, said Enes Begicevic, a journalist from Bosnia and Herzegovina, adding that Japan's move will lead to regional instability.

"This constitutional change is both historic and worrying as it moves one of the pillars which has maintained the balance of peace in East Asia since the end of the Second World War," said Augusto Soto, professor of ESADE institution of Ramon Llull University and Director of Dialogue with China Project.

This measure could have the effect of destabilizing Asia and the Pacific and this is understood by an important part of public opinion in Japan which is against the Abe administration. However, this opinion does not have the political power to stop the Japanese government's initiative, he said.

In the face of this situation China could launch a political offensive in order to try and convince Japanese public opinion that the announced measure goes against Japanese interests, he advised.

"The new interpretation of the constitution that Japan's cabinet has adopted now may do little good to the security situation in the Asia-Pacific region," Angel Maestro, a Spanish columnist of the Financial World and a expert on asian affairs.

Japan's neighbors may worry this is the sign of a new rise of the fascism in Japan's Political Arena. These countries may strengthen their defense forces as insurance against the possibility that Japan has chosen an expansionist foreign policy as it did during the Second World War, which would raise tensions in the region and escalate conflicts that already exist, he said.

"I think it may increase the historical mistrust that Japan already faces from its neighboring countries, especially China and Korea, about its military intentions," said Piin-Fen Kok, Director of China, East Asia and United States Program with the EastWest Institute.

It' s up to Japan to explain clearly to its neighbors why it is doing this, and why this is good for regional and global security. Japan also needs to provide assurances to its neighbors that it will not revert to its militaristic past, Kok said.

"Collective self-defense is a compromise born from Shinzo Abe's political will, who leads a group of people that don't represent the mainstream of Japanese politics," Professor Axel Berkofsky, senior associate research fellow of Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI) has told Xinhua.

"It is funny to say that Japan should regain the respect of the world. It was just saying: It's a weak commitment, a political move, a dream, a vision of Abe himself," he added.

- Xinhua (Editor:Wang Xin、Huang Jin)

Japan’s removal of ban on collective self-defense stirs international unease

The Japanese cabinet has approved a resolution that would allow the country to exercise the right of collective self-defense by reinterpreting the Pacifist Constitution.

The resolution sets three conditions that would enable exercise of the right including "clear danger" to the lives of its people due to armed attacks on Japan or "countries with close ties".

The move is an overhaul of Japan’s exclusively defense-oriented security policy after World War II and over half of Japanese are against it.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said that China is opposed to Japan's pursuit of its domestic political goals by deliberately inventing a "China threat", and urged Japan to respect the legitimate security concerns of its Asian neighbors and deal prudently with relevant issues. He said that Japan must not undermine China's sovereignty and security interests, nor should it harm regional peace and stability.

Japan’s removal of the ban on collective self-defense comes at a time of strained Sino-Japan relations, said Yuan Yang, a researcher with the Academy of Military Sciences of PLA. According to Yuan, China’s rapid economic and military development is the motive behind Japan’s move to constrain China.

Yuan Yang believes that lifting the ban on collective defense would ease certain restrictions on the Japanese military forces and might lead to gradual expansion of its military capability.

Yuan points out that Japan’s emphasis on "countries with close ties", rather than confining itself to its allies, increases the possibility of conflict between China and Japan. There is now the possibiltiy that the two countries might clash over issues related to third parties as well as the Diaoyu Island issue and other issues in the East China Sea.

Zhou Yongsheng, a professor with the China Foreign Affairs University, has also noted that the most serious consequence of removing the ban on collective self-defense might be a military alliance betweeen Japan and countries like the Philippines and Vietnam.

Faced with this situation, China needs to show the world that with peaceful development as its basic state policy, it will never pose any threat to other countries. It should try to unite all peace-loving forces, especially peace forces in Japan, to prevent these Japanese government moves. But China also needs to make it clear to the world that with its own strengthened military forces, it has nothing to fear from the provocative actions of other countries. - (People's Daily Online)

Related posts:

Japan defense shift sets free Tokyo’s militarism !

The Japanese cabinet's approval Tuesday of the right to collective self-defense is a major shift of Japan's defense policy. J...

Japan defense shift sets free Tokyo’s militarism !

The Japanese cabinet's approval Tuesday of the right to collective self-defense is a major shift of Japan's defense policy.

Japan's Peace Constitution states the self-defense forces can only adopt an exclusively defense-oriented policy. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe had intended to overturn the constitution, but due to strong domestic opposition, he reinterpreted the constitution to allow Japan to defend its allies.

Generations of Japanese right-wing politicians have staged a relay race to amend the pacifist constitution. They proclaimed the right to send soldiers overseas, and now it is the right to exercise force. Abe has almost fulfilled this task, and the Peace Constitution will become nothing but a figurehead.

Abe and his followers are eager to free Japan from the restraints imposed by its defeat in World War II. The US aims to contain China by making use of Japan, which provides room for Abe's strategic ambition. Japan's aggression, previously restrained, has gradually awakened. The US has been quite aware of this, but it believes such a Japan suits its interests.

In the near future, Japan will be cautious in exercising the right of collective self-defense, but it's hard to say in a few years' time. Both Tokyo and Washington wish to see more disturbances in Asia, as the US hopes it will hinder China's rise and Japan wants to seek opportunities to realize its rise both politically and militarily.

China needs to expose the Japanese rightists' evil intent. Although South Korea also feels disgusted by Japanese right-wing forces, it will not stand up in opposition to Japan. Seoul is wary of its distance from China, Japan and the US.

We should not be too optimistic about the opinion war between China and Japan. To count on international opinion to press Japan has been proved unpractical, because the US and the West have no intention to stop Japan, despite their awareness of Japan's dirty tricks. China should avoid a worse situation when it has to make strategic compromises with Japan in spite of Japan's wrongdoings.

An aggressive Japan is nothing to be afraid of. China can well manage the security risks an overweeningly ambitious Japan poses. As long as China continues to rise, the US will deploy more forces in Asia. But between Beijing and Tokyo, Beijing has strategic advantage and is able to deter Tokyo.

With the increase of Japan's military moves and the intensifying of confrontation between China and Japan, the region will face the pressure and new strategic elements are likely to emerge.

It's almost 70 years since the end of WWII, but Japan has apparently forgotten about its past. The Japanese people have found every reason for their burning nationalistic ambitions.

Japan's victorious past has gradually turned into the policies and actions of the Japanese government. It's hard to say how far it will go, but what we need to do is to be ready in a way that makes Japan feel daunted.

Source: Source:Global Times Published: 2014-7-2 0:13:01

Related:

China slams Japan PM Abe's speech to the World Economic Forum in Davos implication: the Nazis Hitler's DNA of the East?

China: Abe´s Britain-Germany comparison inappropriate CCTV News - CNTV English Full video: Chinese FM Wang Yi addresses World Eco...

Japanese Occupation survivors tell their stories

WW2 D-Day remembered in Normandy France; China praises Germany, slams Japan for denial of its brutal history

Full Video: Commemorative events held in Normandy ...

China praises Germany, slams Japan

(Reuters) - China used the 70th anniversary of World War Two's D-Day landings on Friday to praise Germany for its contrition over its wartime past and slam Japan for what Beijing views as Tokyo's continued denial of its brutal history.

China has increasingly contrasted Germany and its public remorse for the Nazi regime to Japan, where repeated official apologies for wartime suffering are sometimes undercut by contradictory comments by conservative politicians.

Ties between the two Asian rivals worsened on Dec. 26 when Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited Tokyo's Yasukuni Shrine, which China sees as a symbol of Tokyo's past militarism because it honors war criminals along with millions of war dead.

"Germany's sincere remorse has won the confidence of the world," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said at a daily news briefing, when asked about the D-Day anniversary.

"But in Asia on the Asian battlefield, the leaders of Japan, which caused harm and which lost the war, are to this day still trying to reverse the course of history and deny their history of invasion," Hong added.

"What Japanese leaders are doing has been widely condemned in the international community. We again urge Japan's leaders to face up to and deeply reflect on the history of invasion and take real steps to correct their mistakes to win the trust of its neighbors in Asia and in the international community."

Japan's government and Abe himself have repeatedly said that Japan has faced up to its past sincerely.

-  (Reporting by Ben Blanchard; Editing by Nick Macfie)

Japan urged to correct mistakes as D-Day remembered

BEIJING, June 6 (Xinhua) -- China on Friday urged Japan to reflect on its aggression past and correct mistakes with practical actions, as international D-Day commemorations were held.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said at a daily press briefing, "We again urge Japanese leaders to face up to and remember its aggression past, correct mistakes with tangible actions and win the trust of Asian neighbors and the international community."

Among international commemorations of the 70th anniversary of D-Day being held, one was in Normandy, France.

Hong said as far as the Second World War is concerned, Europe has turned over a new page. Quoting an old Chinese saying, he said, "Past experience, if not forgotten, is a guide for the future."

Hong said, "Germany has won world respect by sincerely apologizing for its wrong-doing.

"Yet leaders of Japan, a defeated country in World War II, are still attempting to deny its past and challenge the post-war international order, thus their acts are widely condemned by the international community."

Related Videos

• China urges Japan to reflect on its past 2014-06-06
• China: Regional concerns over US-Japan alliance 2014-06 

• Various activities held in France to mark D-Day landings 2014-06-06
• D-Day anniversary commemorate on Omaha beach 2014-06-06
• Southwick House: Where Normandy landings were planned 2014-06-06
• Military ceremony on Utah beach to honor the D-Day 2014-06-06
• Soldiers recreate D-Day in Portsmouth 2014-06-06

HMS Bulwark will be part of a flotilla heading to France from Portsmouth

Friday marks 70 years since the allied troops in the Second World War landed in Normandy. Ceremonies large and small have been taking place on both sides of the English Channel.

WWII veterons attend a Drumhead Service on Southsea Common in commemoration of the D-Day landings on June 5, 2014 in Portsmouth, England.

In the southern English naval base of Portsmouth, which was the departure point for troops heading to Sword Beach, one of the main landing points, British Royal Marines acted out military exercises for thousands of veterans who gathered on Thursday to make the crossing for the commemorations.

While over in northern France, 300 soldiers from the US, UK, Canada and France parachuted in tandem over the village of Ranville, and World War II planes flew over Utah Beach. Thousands of Allied troops flew or parachuted onto the German-occupied French soil during the early hours of June 6th, in 1944, catching the German army by surprise. But the price was high, nearly 4,500 were dead by the end of the day.

With many D-Day veterans now in their 90s, this year could be the last time that many of those who took part in the battle, will be able to make the long journey back to Normandy and tell their stories. The main D-Day ceremony will be held in Ouistreham, a small port that was the site of a strategic battle on D-Day. Some 18 heads of state are expected to attend the commemorations.

Related Articles

• China criticizes Japan for stoking up "China threat" 2014-06-05
• Provocative remarks from U.S., Japan not helpful for regional security: Chinese general 
• Chinese veteran diplomat debunks Japan's "proactive" approach to peace

China keeps an eye on Abe as Japan PM seeks to rally support from Asean

 Japanese PM Shinzo Abe BEIJING: The Chinese media kept a close eye on Tokyo as leaders from Asean countries gathered in Japan for the Japan-Asean Summit.

The three-day summit, which marks 40 years of ties between Japan and Asean, was seen as an opportunity for Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to rally support against China.

In the latest episode of China-Japan feud, China has declared a new air defence identification zone (ADIZ) over the East China Sea, which overlapped the territory claimed by South Korea and Japan.

As expected, Abe brought up the restriction on freedom of flight during the summit in an indirect reference to China’s air defence zone.

A Japanese official reportedly quoted him as telling the Asean leaders that “moves to unilaterally change the status quo, moves to put restrictions on the international aviation order, which is built on freedom of flight, are strong concerns”.

Under the aircraft identification rules which came into effect on Nov 23, all foreign aircraft intending to enter the zone have to report their flight plans to the Chinese authority and adhere to relevant instructions once they enter the zone.

The Chinese officials reserve the rights to adopt defensive emergency measures when aircraft fail to abide by the identification rules or obey the instructions.

State news agency Xinhua said Japan’s inclusion of air zone safety as a key security issue in the summit was a move to “plant a poisonous thorn”.

In a commentary, it said Abe’s frequent visits to nations in the Asean regional bloc in the past one year aimed at roping in the countries to rein in China.

It criticised Japan of using the East China Sea and South China Sea territorial issues to cause chaos and discord within Asean and to undermine the relationship between Asean and its partners.

Global Times was in the opinion that Japan would not succeed in its bid to get Asean to confront China.

“No matter how Tokyo creates waves, it will not gain a strategic advantage over China in South-East Asia.

“No countries will confront China for the sake of a declining Japan. Even the US, Japan’s patron, has to maintain relations with China while keeping its support to Japan,” it wrote.

During the summit, Japan has promised ¥2 trillion (RM62.7bil) of loans and grants to the region over five years. The pledge was interpreted as an attempt to increase its influence.

Tang Chunfeng, an expert on Japanese issues in the Research Institute of the Chinese Commerce Ministry, told the Chinese version of Global Times that Asean countries viewed Japan as the “God of Prosperity” who is willing to give them money.

“They are reluctant to offend Japan, but at the same time, they will not let China bear a grudge against them. They are only using Japan.”

Tsinghua University’s Institute of Modern International Relations deputy director Liu Yongjiang added that Asean would not take sides in this issue.

“Most Asean countries want the region to develop in a stable and peaceful environment, but Japan is constantly causing trouble.

“It will worry the Asean countries and even lead to dissatisfaction,” he said.

Commenting on Abe’s remarks to gather support from the Asean countries, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hong Lei said China is aware of the relevant reports.

“We believe that countries should not target a third party or undermine the interests of the third party when developing ties with each other.

“They should instead make efforts to maintain regional peace and stability,” he said in a press conference on Friday, the transcript of which was available on the ministry’s website.

Contributed by Tho Xin Yi The Star/Asia News Network


Don't make waves on China's ADIZ

If Tokyo truly seeks a peaceful and secure Asia-Pacific, then it is in its own interests to call off provocative moves over China's establishment of the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ).

According to a recent news report, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is going to stage again its China-is-to-blame game at the summit of Japan and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

It is also reported that Abe seeks to drag the ASEAN members into an agreement to counter Beijing in searching for "maritime and air security."

While, for the record, it is believed that anyone with only half a brain knows that it is Japan who intentionally set the region on fire in the first place.

Following its provocative purchase of China's Diaoyu Islands, Japan has wasted no time in trumpeting up the China-threat theory, and deliberately paints itself a victim of Beijing's development, which is in fact invigorating regional and global economic recovery.

Instead of chilling down the flaring regional tension of its own making and ending the decades-long economic stagnation, the cunning Abe administration has labored to drive wedges between China and its regional partners and neighbors.

Many might wonder why Japan chooses to bury its relations with China half dead over building up mutually beneficial partnership with Beijing, which would mean greater business and trade opportunities?

While, the truth is, Mr. Abe and his government have done their own calculations, but only with a flaw that could backfire.

For decades, an economically-strong Japan has attempted strenuously to return itself to the ranks of a "normal country," and become an influential power by shaking off military expansion yokes forged by the pacifist constitution in the wake of Japan's defeat in the Second World War.

To that end, a number of Japanese administrations have been expanding its military powers, buying votes for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, and denying its history of aggression.

The smarty-pants right-wing Japanese politicians also believed that their ambitions for the comeback of their hegemonic role in the region would be categorically concealed as long as it can promote China's growth a threat to the US national interests, and safety and security of other regional countries.

In fact, Tokyo has made so big a mistake that its inflammatory moves have already efficiently worried or enraged many of its neighbors. It seems to have forgotten that a constructive relationship with countries around it is the first step toward the final destination of a normal country.

If keep missing that point, Japan, which can never move out of Asia, can now kiss good-bye to its "big dreams."

Against the backdrop of world peace and global integration, China welcomes closer ties between Japan and ASEAN, and Tokyo's active participation in the regional integration process. However, Japan should never jeopardize China's interests and relations with any other third party.

As for China's establishment of ADIZ, it is just, reasonable and complies with international practices, and Beijing's normal growth of national defense capacity does not pose a threat to any country.

Beijing always advocates resolving territorial and maritime disputes through dialogue, yet it will never allow any country to infringe upon its territorial sovereignty.

Therefore, if history is too embarrassed for politicians in Tokyo to face, they should at least face the facts on the ground and start to pursue its national agenda in a rational manner. - Xinhua

Abe targets China at Asean Summit  

 China is expected to top the agenda at this weekend's summit between Japan and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as Tokyo seeks a united front against China's newly established Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) and aims to restore its influence in Southeast Asia.

The Japan-ASEAN summit in Tokyo, starting Friday, is held to commemorate Japan's 40-year ties with the group.

It comes after China's setting up of the ADIZ over the East China Sea and amid speculation that a similar zone would be imposed over the South China Sea, where several ASEAN countries are locked in territorial disputes with Beijing.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe wasted no time in seeking support from ASEAN countries.

During a meeting with visiting Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak on Thursday, Abe reiterated his criticism of China's ADIZ. According to Japan's Kyodo News, Najib expressed his understanding of Japan's protest.

A draft statement for the leaders "stresses the importance of freedom of flight through airspace over the high seas, as recognized by international law," Kyodo reported last week. The document reportedly does not single out China.

"Abe intends to defame China and pile up international censure on Beijing," Gao Hong, a deputy director with the Institute of Japanese Studies at the Chinese Acedemy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times, but noted it is doomed to failure.

Citing the fact that even the US didn't stand up to demand a revoke of the zone as Japan had wished, Gao said it is unimaginable that ASEAN, who have benefited from China's good neighborly diplomacy, would act in accordance with Tokyo's will.

Zhang Yunling, director of the Institute for International Studies under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times that while ASEAN is counting on Japan to counterbalance a rising China, they wouldn't accept statements that explicitly criticize Beijing.

Responding to the Japan-ASEAN summit, China's foreign ministry spokesperson Hong Lei on Thursday said that China hopes relevant countries will not target a third party and harm the interests of the third party.

The summit is the second of its kind between Japan and ASEAN. Zhang said, compared to the first summit held in 2003, this year's summit also eyes competing with China over influence in Southeast Asia.

While Japan used to hold a big sway in the region, China has surpassed it in recent years and is ASEAN's largest trade partner.

In a bid to restore Japan's influence, Abe has visited all 10 ASEAN members  since taking office a year ago, bringing a raft of business deals and aid to the region, while pushing for joint action to "maintain regional peace."

Abe plans to announce at the summit this weekend that Japan will extend 320 billion yen ($3.1 billion) worth of aid to boost disaster prevention and cultural exchange with ASEAN, Kyodo reported on Thursday.

On the sidelines of the summit, Cambodia and Japan are expected to sign four deals including defense cooperation and Japanese assistance for Cambodian road and hospital development.

Reuters reported that Japan is also going to pledge a post-typhoon loan to the Philippines of some 10 billion yen.

Hu Lingyuan, a professor with the Center for Japanese Studies at Fudan University, told the Global Times that Southeast Asia is only second to the US in Japan's diplomatic priorities.

"In recent years, Japan has been using territorial disputes in the East China Sea and South China Sea to draw Vietnam and the Philippines to its side. It is also helping the US to lower China's influence in Myanmar," Hu said, noting the aim is to exert political pressure against China and reap economic benefits.

Although dwarfed by China in trade, Japan has more investment in and contributes more aid to ASEAN, Zhang said, noting "therefore ASEAN countries are willing to maintain close ties with Japan and use the rift between Tokyo and Beijing to maximize their own gains."

Sidebar: Abe's 10-country tour of 2013

January 16, Vietnam

The two countries reached economic and security agreements. Japan will provide $500 million in new loans.

January 17, Thailand

The two countries agreed to strengthen economic and security cooperation.

January 18, Indonesia

The two countries discussed economic and security issues, including the East China Sea.

May 24-26, Myanmar

Japan endorsed Myanmar's reform program by writing off nearly $2 billion in debt and extending new aid worth $400 million.

July 25, Malaysia,

The two agreed to cooperate in high technology such as high-speed rail, water and waste treatment. They will also collaborate in finance and security in the Malacca Strait.

July 26, Singapore

Abe said he intends to promote "strategic diplomacy" in the region, particularly with an eye to strengthening ties and its economic partnership with ASEAN.

July 27, Philippines

Japan agreed to provide 10 patrol boats for its coast guard to help counter recent maritime advances by China.

October 9, Brunei

At the 16th ASEAN-Japan summit in Brunei, Abe called for security cooperation with Asia-Pacific nations "with which we share fundamental values."

November 15, Cambodia

Japan offers support in investment, democratic reform and health, while promoting it will "proactively contribute to the regional peace and stability."

November 16, Laos

The two decided to seek the launch of a security dialogue framework. Japan agreed to provide infrastructure and medical aid.

By Yang Jingjie - Global Times

Defeated Japan ought to honor terms dictated by Cairo Declaration in post-war world order

As the world is commemorating the 70th anniversary of the Cairo Declaration Sunday, it is high time that Japan observed the terms dictated by the historic document.

 

Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Prime Minister Winston Churchill met at the Cairo Conference in Cairo, November 25, 1943.

Chinese embassy marks 70th anniversary of Cairo Declaration

Declaration supports China´s Diaoyu Islands sovereignty CCTV News - CNTV English

On Dec. 1, 1943, the Cairo Declaration was broadcast in a communique on radio in Chongqing, Washington and London, setting the tone for an imminent end to the most destructive war in human history.

The landmark document, issued by China, the United States and Britain, voiced the determination of the Allies of World War II to continue military actions until Japan's unconditional surrender.

It also set goals for the post-war order, in which Japan shall restore all the territories it has stolen from China, including Taiwan. The Diaoyu Islands, which for recent years Japan has claimed as its own territory, was then affiliated islands of Taiwan.

The Cairo Declaration serves as a cornerstone of the post-war order in East Asia. By incorporating history, international law and bilateral treaties, the document laid the foundation for regional peace.

On July 26, 1945, the Potsdam Declaration, issued by the United States,Britain and China, reaffirmed that the terms of the Cairo Declaration would be carried out, and stipulated that "The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out and Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and such minor islands as we determine."

By signing the Instrument of Surrender a month later, Japan specifically accepted the provisions of the Potsdam Declaration, which incorporated the terms of the Cairo Declaration.

The normalization of Sino-Japanese relations was also achieved within the framework of the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Declaration. In the Sino-Japanese Joint Communique inked in 1972, Japan agreed that "it firmly maintains its stand under Article 8 of the Potsdam Declaration."

Six years later, in the China-Japan Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1978, the two countries pledged to strictly observe the principles in the joint communique, and vowed that "they will use peaceful means to settle all disputes and will refrain from the use of force or the threats of the use thereof."

The post-war order in East Asia, which has weathered the vicissitudes of time, remains steadfast in its commitment to the restoration of territories seized or occupied by invaders, as well as the international status of those countries that fell victim to Japan's aggressive war.

On such basis, East Asia has quickly emerged from the ashes of war to become enviable economic powerhouses of the world. Amid overall peace, Japan, China, South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore as well as many Southeast Asian countries and regions have witnessed spectacular growth in past decades.

The Cairo Declaration, as well as other related documents, have served as legal guardians for economic prosperity in East Asia.

To ignore these documents and allow the then militarist invaders maintain their stolen land would defy the post-war East Asian order, risk a resurgence of the once rampant Japanese militarism, and breed historical resentment in countries, on which Japan's war of aggression had wreaked havoc.

China loves peace and needs a peaceful environment for its domestic development. It is Japan that has provoked the dispute over the Diaoyu Islands, and heightened regional tension to challenge the post-war order.

Despite the strong opposition from China, Japan, on Sept. 10th last year, unilaterally announced its "nationalization" of the Diaoyu Islands, riding roughshod over the declaration.

Over the past year, Abe's government has turned a blind eye to the evidence presented by the Chinese government and the testimony given by Japanese witnesses, and refused to recognize the agreement to "shelve the disputes" over the islands issue, which was struck by the two sides in 1970s.

If Japan would not even admit the dispute, how could dialogues and negotiations be launched to seek a settlement?

To amend Japan's current pacifist peaceful constitution and beef up its military muscle is the major factor behind the Abe administration's hell-bentness on having its own way.

As stipulated in its post-war pacifist constitution, Japan has no right to wage war. The so-called "China threat" is a lame excuse Japan has invented to break the restraints imposed by the constitution.

What's more, the Abe administration takes an apathetic stand on war crimes Japan committed some 70 years ago.

Provocative remarks and actions, such as quibbling with the definition of "aggression", sparing no efforts to revise the country's war-renouncing constitution and visiting the Yasukuni Shrine, have been repeatedly brought up by the prime minister.

The dispute over Diaoyu Islands has thus borne heavily on Japan's understanding on its aggressive and militarist past, its intention to amend the pacifist constitution and the post-war order in East Asia dictated by the Cairo Declaration.

The post-war order in East Asia and in the Asia-Pacific at large, as prescribed by the Cairo Declaration, serves not only as an warning and caution against the catastrophe of war and a penalty on war crime perpetrators, but also an important gateway toward the hard-won regional peace, all of which entails a regular and in-depth review of the historic document.- Xinhu

Experts say Cairo Declaration establishes post-war world order

The Cairo Declaration, issued by Britain, China and the United States in 1943, is of great significance in rebuilding the international order after the end of World War II, experts said.

On the eve of the 70th anniversary of the signing of the declaration, which stated that all the territories Japan had stolen from the Chinese should be restored to China, experts at home and abroad called on the international community to jointly safeguard the established international order.

The most important significance of the Cairo Declaration is that major territories seized by Japan since 1895 should be restored, said Michael Schaller, a regents professor of the University of Arizona.

He said the declaration included a determination that Japan should "give up virtually all the territory it had acquired by force since 1895 and 1914, including northeast China, the island of Taiwan and nearby islands ... and Pescadores."

"When Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration ... as part of its agreement to surrender, it acknowledged that in doing so it was also accepting the terms of the Cairo Declaration ..." added Schaller, who is also a member of the Society for the Historians of American Foreign Relations.

"I don't think there was any ambiguity or confusion about the fact that Japan would need to surrender all territories it had seized on the Asian mainland and Taiwan. I don't think that even today's strident Japanese nationalists question that," he said.

Dan Plesch, director of the Center for International Studies and Diplomacy at SOAS University of London, said the Cairo Declaration was the culmination of a success for China during World War II.

"This in turn was only made possible because of the heroic resistance of the Chinese people to Japanese aggression," he said.

In regard to the role played by the declaration in post-war reconstruction and today's world order, Plesch said the document was an important agreement that led to the end of World War II.

"Its content, particularly with respect to Japan, was part of the settlement which enabled the war to come to an end with the Japanese surrender," he said.

Plesch said that as the declaration stipulated the solution to territorial and border issues, any defiant moves are "potentially highly destabilizing with respect to international order."

Huang Dahui, director of the Center for East Asian Studies at Renmin University in Beijing, said that in face of Japan's flagrant defiance of the post-war order set up by the Cairo Declaration and other documents of international law, the international community should have a better understanding of the declaration to ensure obedience to relevant terms.

The Cairo Declaration stated in explicit terms that "all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa (Taiwan), and Pescadores" shall be restored to the Chinese, he said, adding that the Diaoyu Islands, then administrated by Taiwan, should be included in the returned territories.

The Japanese government, however, took a unilateral action to "nationalize" the Diaoyu Islands in a move not only to severely infringe upon China's territorial sovereignty, but also to publicly challenge the outcome of the world anti-fascist war and the post-war international order, Huang said.

The three signatories of the Cairo Declaration -- Britain, China and the United States -- should work together to ensure the implementation of the document and safeguard the fruits of the victory, he said. - Xinhua

Related posts:
1. China sets up air defence zone over East China Sea, a strategic move
2. Who owns Diaoyu Islands?
3. Japan stole Diaoyu Islands
4. Japan’s buying Diaoyu Islands provokes China to strike back
5. Japan should drop its sense of superiority and tricks over China, Asia
6.China defense ministry acts as Japan buys its Diaoyu Islands
7. China's vessels patrol Diaoyu Islands after Japan illegally purchases and nationalizes them  
8. Japan, the deputy sheriff in Asia?.

Vietnamese hero defeated French and US dies aged 102

.

Vo Nguyen Giap, the celebrated general who masterminded the defeat of the French military at Dien Bien Phu and led North Vietnam's forces against the US, has died aged 102 at a military hospital in Hanoi.

Giap, whose victory at Dien Bien Phu triggered France's departure from Indo-China, was a self-taught leader regarded as one of the great military geniuses of the post-second world war era.

He remained as the commander of the North's forces supporting the Viet Cong throughout the subsequent Vietnam war, being credited with the 1968 Tet offensive.

Giap, known as the Red Napoleon, was a national hero whose reputation was second only to that of Ho Chi Minh.

While some, such as the American journalist Stanley Karnow, regarded him as a strategist in the mould of Wellington, others, including the US general William Westmorland, believed his success was down to his ruthlessness.

Indeed, Westmorland complained to Karnow: "Any American commander who took the same vast losses as General Giap would have been sacked overnight."

Giap was born in the village of An Xa on 25 August 1911 and attended the University of Hanoi, gaining degrees in politics and law, before working as a journalist.

He was jailed briefly in 1930 for leading anti-French protests and later earned a law degree from Hanoi University.

He fled French police in 1940 and met Ho Chi Minh in southwestern China before returning to rural northern Vietnam to recruit guerrillas for the Viet Minh, a forerunner to the southern insurgency later known as the Viet Cong.

During his time abroad, his wife was arrested by the French and died in prison. He later remarried and had five children.

In 1944, Ho Chi Minh called on Giap to organize and lead guerrilla forces against Japanese invaders during World War II. After Japan surrendered to Allied forces the following year, the Viet Minh continued their fight for independence from France.

Giap was known for his fiery temper and as a merciless strategist, but also for being a bit of a dandy: Old photos show him reviewing his troops in a white suit and snappy tie, in sharp contrast to Ho Chi Minh, clad in shorts and sandals.

Giap never received any formal military training, joking that he attended the military academy "of the bush."

At Dien Bien Phu, his Viet Minh army surprised elite French forces by surrounding them. Digging miles (kilometers) of trenches, the Vietnamese dragged heavy artillery over steep mountains and slowly closed in during the bloody, 56-day battle that ended with French surrender on May 7, 1954.

"If a nation is determined to stand up, it is very strong," Giap told foreign journalists in 2004 prior to the battle's 50th anniversary. "We are very proud that Vietnam was the first colony that could stand up and gain independence on its own."

It was the final act that led to French withdrawal and the Geneva Accords that partitioned Vietnam into north and south in 1956. It paved the way for war against Saigon and its U.S. sponsors less than a decade later.

The general drew on his Dien Bien Phu experience to create the Ho Chi Minh Trail, a clandestine jungle network that snaked through neighboring — and ostensibly neutral — Laos and Cambodia, to supply his troops fighting on southern battlefields.

Against American forces with their sophisticated weapons and B-52 bombers, Giap's forces again prevailed. But more than a million of his troops perished in what is known in Vietnam as the "American War."

"We had to use the small against the big; backward weapons to defeat modern weapons," Giap said. "At the end, it was the human factor that determined the victory."

It was his command of Viet Minh forces during the eight-week battle of Dien Bien Phu, which raged from March to May in 1954, that made his reputation.

Vietnamese forces, who wore sandals made of car tyres and lugged their artillery piece by piece over mountains, managed to encircle and crush the French troops in a bloody engagement immortalised in Bernard Fall's Hell in a Very Small Place.

Although he was at first a renowned exponent of guerilla tactics, Giap commanded a devastating conventional assault at Dien Bien Phu, in which his forces used Chinese-supplied artillery to prevent effective resupply by air of the base deep in the hills of north-western Vietnam.

During the bitter fighting that would follow, the garrison, comprising a series of outposts in a deep valley, gradually succumbed.

On the brink of being overrun by Giap's forces, the French commander, Christian de Castries, was forbidden to surrender in an infamous order from his superior, General René Cogny in Hanoi, who told him: "You will fight to the end. It is out of the question to run up the white flag after your heroic resistance."

The unlikely victory, which is still studied at military schools, led not only to Vietnam's independence but hastened the collapse of colonialism across Indochina and beyond.

Giap went on to defeat the US-backed South Vietnam government in April 1975, reuniting a country that had been split into communist and non-communist states. He regularly accepted heavy combat losses to achieve his goals.

"No other wars for national liberation were as fierce or caused as many losses as this war," Giap told the Associated Press in 2005 in one of his last-known interviews with foreign media on the eve of the 30th anniversary of the fall of Saigon, the former South Vietnamese capital.

"But we still fought because for Vietnam, nothing is more precious than independence and freedom," he said, repeating a famous quote by Ho Chi Minh.

In later life Giap served as deputy premier and minister of defence.

He is survived by Dang Bich Ha, his wife since 1949, and four children.

Sources: AP & the guardian

Also on HuffPost:

Flawed perception remembering Heroes and Zeroes

Yuen, a Special Branch officer, spent most of his time being hunted down by the communists and was even shot in the chest. 

Remembering heroes and villains 

There is a flawed perception that the fight against the CPM was a battle only between the Chinese-dominated movement and the Malay-majority soldiers and police. Many innocent Chinese lives were also taken by the CPM.

THIS is not another comment about Chin Peng but a reflection on how two Special Branch officers, both of Chinese descent, fought against him. It is also a timely reminder to many of us who have not heard about them, or simply forgotten about these heroes in our midst.

It is also about the thousands of Chinese civilians who lost their lives because of the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM), a reality which many have forgotten or, worse, chosen to ignore.

There is a terribly flawed perception that the fight against the CPM was simply a bitter battle between the Chinese-dominated movement and the Malay-majority soldiers and police.

The two Malaysians who dedicated their lives to fighting the communists were the late Tan Sri Too Chee Chew, or better known as CC Too to his Special Branch colleagues; and Aloysius Chin, the former Senior Assistant Commissioner of Police and Deputy Director of Special Branch (Operations) at Bukit Aman.

Too was highly regarded as the master of psychological warfare and counter-insurgency and his deep knowledge of the CPM helped the authorities to fight the guerrillas. In fact, he was widely acknowledged as one of the world’s top experts on psy-war as head of Bukit Aman’s psychological warfare desk from 1956 to 1983.

In the words of his long-time friend, Lim Cheng Leng, who wrote his biography, “CC Too could read the communist mind like a communist.”

The web of intrigue of how friends can become foes is exemplified in Too’s relationship with Kuantan-born Eu Chooi Yip, the communist mastermind in Singapore. Eu was Too’s special friend and Raffles College mate, but the two ended up as foes in different arenas.

Aloysius Chin also dedicated his life to fight the CPM and I had the privilege of meeting Chin, who wrote the book The Communist Party of Malaya: The Inside Story, which reveals the various tactics used by the CPM during different periods in their attempts to overthrow the government.

Malaysians have never had much fondness for serious history books. Worse, their views of historic events are often shaped by the movies they have watched.

Unfortunately, movie producers, armed with what is called poetic licence, often dramatise events to make their movies much more interesting.

Who can fault them as they have to sell their movies?

But we really need to read up more about the events during the Emergency era, especially the assassinations of Special Branch personnel and the many ordinary policemen, who were mostly Chinese.

The CPM’s biggest hatred was directed at the Chinese policemen, who were regarded as “running dogs” as far as Chin Peng was concerned.

The reality was that these Chinese policemen were the biggest fear of the CPM as many had sacrificed their lives to infiltrate the movement, posing as communists in the jungle.

It would have been impossible for the Malay policemen to pose as CPM fighters, even if there were senior Malay CPM leaders, because of the predominantly Chinese make-up of the guerrillas. It was these dedicated Chinese officers who bravely gave up their lives for the nation.

Between 1974 and 1978 alone, at least 23 Chinese SB officers were shot and killed by the CPM, according to reports.

In one instance, a Chinese police clerk attached to the Special Branch in Kuala Lumpur was mistaken for an officer and was shot on his way home.

The CPM targets included a number of Chinese informers, who provided crucial information, as well as Chinese civilians.

One recorded case which showed how cruel the communists could be was the murder of the pregnant wife of a Special Branch Chinese officer at Jalan Imbi as the couple walked out of a restaurant.

This was the work of Chin Peng’s mobile hit squads. The assassination of the Perak CPO Tan Sri Koo Chong Kong on Nov 13, 1975, in Ipoh was carried out by two CPM killers from the 1st Mobile Squad who posed as students, wearing white school uniforms, near the Anderson School.

Other members of the same squad went to Singapore in 1976, shortly before Chinese New Year, in an attempt to kill the republic’s commissioner of police, Tan Sri Tan Teik Khim, but they were nabbed.

Another notable figure in our Malaysian history is Tan Sri Yuen Yuet Leng, a former Special Branch officer who spent most of his life being hunted down by the communists during and after the Emergency years, as one news report described him.

Yuen was shot in the chest in Grik back in 1951 in an encounter with the CPM and the communists even tried to kidnap his daughter while he was Perak police chief, so much so he had to send her to the United Kingdom in the 1970s for her safety.

Their top targets included former IGP Tan Sri Abdul Rahman Hashim who was killed in 1974 and the Chief of the Armed Forces Staff Tan Sri Ibrahim Ismail who faced three attempts to kill him.

The CPM targets also included many active grassroots MCA leaders. After all, at the Baling talks in 1955, the government side was represented by Tunku Abdul Rahman, David Marshall, the Chief Minister of Singapore, and Sir Tan Cheng Lock of the MCA. The CPM was represented by Chin Peng, Chen Tian, and Abdul Rashid Maidin.

The talks broke down after two days – the deadlock was simple with Chin Peng wanting legal recognition for the CPM while the Government demanded the dissolution of the CPM, or, in short, their surrender.

In a research paper, Dr Cheah Boon Kheng wrote that as of June 1957, “a total of 1,700 Chinese civilians were killed against 318 Malays, 226 Indians, 106 Europeans, 69 aborigines and 37 others.”

At the end of the Emergency, the final toll was as follows – 1,865 in the security forces killed and 2,560 wounded, 4,000 civilians killed and 800 missing, and 1,346 in the police force killed and 1,601 wounded.

The figures, quoted by Dr Cheah, a renowned CPM expert, were taken from Brian Stewart’s Smashing Terrorism in Malayan Emergency.

The fact is this – many innocent Chinese lives were taken by the CPM, and the killings continued even after the Emergency ended in 1960.

Anthony Short, in his book The Communist Insurrection in Malaya, 1948-1960, also wrote that the Chinese civilians suffered the highest casualties in the fight with the CPM.

At Chin Peng’s funeral wake in Bangkok, some of his old comrades put on a brave front to say they fought for revolution.

But they must have been let down by China, which they looked up to, because in the end, it was Beijing which first down-graded its ties with CPM and eventually stopped funding them entirely when it forged diplomatic relations with Kuala Lumpur.

And today, China is a communist nation in name only as its elites and people openly flout their wealth and compete for the trappings of a capitalistic society along with its ills, including corruption.

The CPM said they wanted to fight the Japanese and the British but in the end, faced with the resistance of the Malay majority, the people they killed the most were Chinese civilians and the policemen.

And let us not also forget the indigenous people of the peninsula, Sabah and Sarawak who served in the security forces and were renowned for their jungle tracking skills. They too suffered many casualties.

Among our forgotten heroes are some who were awarded the highest bravery awards. The point here is that all laid down their lives for the country as Malaysians.

These are the facts of history. There’s no need to be bleary-eyed because, in the end, we should let the realities and the facts sink in.

Comment contributed by  WONG CHUN WAI \

Related Posts:
Chin Peng, a hero or zero?

Time to leave the CPM era behind; Chin Peng, CPM no longer Enemy No. 1

Chin Peng’s Farewell: A Letter to Comrades and Compatriots

Chin Peng's remains couldn't be interred in his Sitiawan hometown to be cremated in Bangkok instead.

Tracing the origins of the formation of Malaysia Sept 16

Chin Peng’s Farewell: A Letter to Comrades and Compatriots

My dear comrades, my dear compatriots,

When you read this letter, I am no more in this world.It was my original intention to pass away quietly and let my relatives handle the funeral matters in private. However, the repercussions of erroneous media reports of me in critical condition during October 2011, had persuaded me that leaving behind such a letter is desirable.

Ever since I joined the Communist Party of Malaya and eventually became its secretary-general, I have given both my spiritual and physical self in the service of the cause that my party represented, that is, to fight for a fairer and better society based on socialist ideals. Now with my passing away, it is time that my body be returned to my family.

I draw immense comfort in the fact that my two children are willing to take care of me, a father who could not give them family love, warmth and protection ever since their birth. I could only return my love to them after I had relinquished my political and public duties, ironically only at a time when I have no more life left to give to them as a father.

It was regrettable that I had to be introduced to them well advanced in their adulthood as a stranger. I have no right to ask them to understand, nor to forgive. They have no choice but to face this harsh reality. Like families of many martyrs and comrades, they too have to endure hardship and suffering not out of their own doing, but out of a consequence of our decision to challenge the cruel forces in the society which we sought to change.

It is most unfortunate that I couldn’t, after all, pay my last respects to my parents buried in hometown of Sitiawan (in Perak), nor could I set foot on the beloved motherland that my comrades and I had fought so hard for against the aggressors and colonialists.

My comrades and I had dedicated our lives to a political cause that we believed in and had to pay whatever price there was as a result. Whatever consequences on ourselves, our family and the society, we would accept with serenity.

In the final analysis, I wish to be remembered simply as a good man who could tell the world that he had dared to spend his entire life in pursuit of his own ideals to create a better world for his people.

It is irrelevant whether I succeeded or failed, at least I did what I did. Hopefully the path I had walked on would be followed and improved upon by the young after me. It is my conviction that the flames of social justice and humanity will never die. – September 21, 2013.

* Chin Peng died at hospital in Bangkok on Malaysia Day, September 16, 2013 at the age of 89. This is his final letter to his comrades and compatriots published in his memorial booklet.

- Sources:  http://www.themalaysianinsider.com

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.

MY COMMENT: My views on the status of the late Chin Peng are well known. I think his remains should be brought home and his wish to be interred with his parents should be granted. It is not being magnanimous but about honouring our treaty obligations. 

I therefore compliment the former Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Rahim Noor for standing up for the rights of Chin Peng under the 1989 Hatyai Peace Agreement between the Malaysian Government and the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM). On the other hand, former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir under whose administration the peace deal was signed did not make any comment on the Chin Peng matter. I suppose it is convenient for him not speak on this issue since his son, Dato Mukhriz, has entered the race for UMNO Vice Presidency.

 

Now that Chin Peng is dead, his cremated remains should be brought home to be buried beside his parents. This is not about politics. It is the most honorable and decent thing to do. We must also learn to accept our history, and recognise that Chin Peng fought the Japanese and British imperialists, although we may not accept his ideology and methods. More importantly, when our government signed that peace treaty, we accepted him and his comrades as non-combatants and partners in peace.

 

Yes, many lives were lost during the Emergency (1948-1960). Armed conflicts cost lives. The United States lost 55,000 soldiers and Vietnam many times more. But once the Americans and the Vietnamese signed the Paris Peace agreement,  they began the process of rebuilding their relations, and today both former combatants are working together to advance their common interests. Reconciliation is possible only if we can come to terms with our past and learn the lessons of our history.–Din Merican

Related posts:

Time to leave the CPM era behind; Chin Peng, CPM no longer Enemy No. 1 

Chin Peng, a hero or zero? 

Chin Peng's remains couldn't be interred in his Sitiawan hometown to be cremated in Bangkok instead 

Time to leave the CPM era behind; Chin Peng, CPM no longer Enemy No. 1

The death of Chin Peng has created a buzz about the relevance of the Red spectre in Malaysia, especially among Malaysian Gen Yers. 

IT has been an educational week for finance manager Rita Wong* as she tried to find the answers for her 10-year-old son’s questions.

“He’s always curious and this week it has been all about Chin Peng,” Wong relates. “‘Who is he, mum; why can’t he come home; why do we have to be scared of his ashes?’”

Wong, a 40-something working mother, says she has had to recall her history lessons in school but even then “most of the answers he is asking for are hard to give as I don’t really understand it myself.”

Chin Peng, the Malayan-born guerilla who led a fierce Communist insurgency against the British in the peninsula after World War Two, and later against the government after independence, died early last week after living in exile in Thailand for more than two decades. He had fought alongside the British during the Japanese military occupation, but had started a fight to establish an independent Communist state here in 1948.

Thousands were reportedly killed during the insurgency, tagged by the British administration as the Malayan Emergency, that lasted until 1960.

Hence, even in death, his name still evokes much bitterness in Malaysia, as seen during the week in the media and social media network.

“I can never forgive him because the Communists killed my grandfathers and uncles,” says a marketing manager in his 30s.

But for over 80% of the Malaysian population aged below 55 (some 25,610,000 Malaysians) who would have been in their diapers or not born when the Emergency ended, Chin Peng remains a distant grandfather story or, at the most, an answer to an examination question.

With his death, many are saying it’s time to also put the CPM ghost to rest, as can be seen in the comments in cyber space.

“Does Chin Peng’s death really matter?” writes secondary school student Tianqian Tong. “I thought he had died for years actually...”

Like many young people, Tong does not see Chin Peng and communism as a security threat any more.

“Chin Peng and the CPM are in the past, not in the present, neither will they be in the future. We are now free and independent,” notes Tong.

“Anyway, history is a lesson for the future – every single thing will be remembered. It will be good for us to learn that ‘In the practice of tolerance, one’s enemy is the best teacher’.”

A number of the comments in cyber space are also quite light-hearted and related to a topic that’s very popular among Gen Yers these days.

“His ashes could spread around the country and invade the body of every Malaysian. This could be worse than an alien invasion ...” says one in a long line of zombie jokes about the “Chin Peng ashes – to return or not to return” debate.

A budding entrepreneur who only wants to be known as Amin admits that he finds the issue a tad confusing. “We all now want to ‘make friends’ with communist China and break into their market,” he observes.

Chin Peng and the CPM have not been a valid bogeyman for a long time, local theatre director and lecturer Mark Teh says.

“Bogeymen are ghosts or phantoms. The reason we have them is to create an irrational fear in people,” he opines.

For many young people, the Emergency and communists are lumped together with the Japanese Occupation and fight for indepen­dence under the topic of “War in History”, Teh points out.

“Many do not know the difference. But it is not completely their fault that they are confused. It’s because the history books present it in a sketchy manner. It is presented in a linear way that does not add up sometimes and discussions are not encouraged.”

This may have led to a thirst for information on communism among some, but not to the point where they want to stage a revolution, he adds.

“They are intrigued by it because of the gaps in history but I don’t think they are interested in the ideology or to embrace communism.”

Teh, who used to teach Culture and Society in Malaysia, had organised an “Emergency Festival” with a loose collective of young artists in 2008 to mark the 60th anniversary of the insurgency.

It was an attempt to re-examine the documents, images and narratives of the Malaysian Emergency from the younger generation’s perspective, he explains.

“We saw many students participate because they wanted to create alternative spaces for themselves and answer the questions they have about this part of Malaysian history.”

Teh feels this is the underlying issue in the debate on Chin Peng and the CPM’s role in the struggle for independence.

“The argument is contemporary because it is really about people fighting for their own version of Malaysia now – and they are reclaiming a past, whether it includes the CPM, Chin Peng or a past that excludes their contribution or labels them only as terrorist,” he says.

Writer Zedeck Siew, in his 20s, agrees, saying that any interest in communism among the young is mainly due to the suppression of communism’s place in history.

“In the classroom, we had the impression of the communist as an evil, grimacing Chinese fellow creeping through the jungle, killing cops and citizens. People have realised that this is not a complete picture.

“Those who want to learn about the CPM and Chin Peng are merely trying to find out more about the country’s past,” he reasons.

Crucially, interest does not equal participation, he stresses. “Frankly, I just can’t see my peers leaving their iPad, artisanal cupcakes and comfortable suburban warrens to join a people’s Armed Struggle and subsist on rations.”

Women rights activist Smita E concurs, saying that young people now seem to be largely anti-ideological. “I base this statement on my observation that people don’t read enough and don’t have time to read big books and think big thoughts.”

What is true, however, is that young people are starved for local histories, she adds. “It’s about alternative histories, not communism per se.”

Postgraduate student Ahmad Z also feels ideology rarely survives these days. “The grand narrative is history, though I believe young people see communism as a symbolic representation of change.

“If there is a resurgence in interest, it is a romantic interest of communism in Malaysia but not in the sense that people are trying to revive it and to suddenly pick up arms,” he says.

Putting the academic input into the issue, Boon Kia Meng believes that for many young people, the communist armed struggle belongs in the annals of history now.

“As Chin Peng mentioned in his memoirs, he was a man of his time and circumstances, where the world, in the immediate aftermath of the Japanese occupation, was overtaken by nationalist and anti-colonial movements and liberation struggles,” explains the academic.

“The armed resistance of the CPM was conditioned by those wars and the realistic options before them, in the context of British detention of firstly the Malay anti-colonial Left (a thousand were detained before the Emergency) and the crackdown on labour unions and political groups. The Emergency in 1948 was the culmination of British desire to secure their economic and geopolitical interests in the region.

“The CPM, rightly or wrongly, decided on armed struggle in the face of such challenges.”

Today, conditions are very different, says Boon. “A measure of formal democratic institutions has prevailed, and capitalism is triumphant globally, including in so-called communist China. As such, the bogeyman of communist terror in Malaysia is no longer a plausible claim.”

In fact, he highlights, most left-wing political movements today are democratic grassroots movements or parties.

“Just look at the elected governments of Bolivia, Venezuela and Ecuador, or even the growing popularity of the Greek radical left, Syriza (a likely winner in the next Greek elections) and the Occupy Wall Street movement. They are all non-violent, popular struggles.”

Ironically, even Chin Peng had noted the change of the times. Writing in his 2003 memoir My Side of History, he said: “A revolution based on violence has no application in modern Malaysia or Singapore... The youths who have known only stable governments and live in an independent age of affluence will find the choices I made as a teenager deeply puzzling... I was young in a different age that demanded very different approaches.”

He also stated that one of his final wishes was to “exchange views with young Malaysians nowadays to understand how history is shaped, exchanging ideas about how things move the world.”

Open dialogue and ­reconciliation

For many young people, an open dialogue on Chin Peng and communism is something they hope will happen now.

Student Nik Zurin Nik Rashid says it might be difficult for them to feel the victims’ experience but it will not hamper them from empathising.

“To ask the current generation that live in ignorance of such an experience is like asking a Malaysian what it feels like to be at Auschwitz: they can’t answer, and neither should they,” says the 19-year-old who is currently an undergraduate in a university in Texas.

The fact is that in the modern context, any way you look at it, the CPM is no longer around, she says.

“The CPM is no longer the enemy for the simple fact that it does not, for all intents and purposes, exist as a cohesive force that mobilises the masses since it signed the armistice with our government in 1989. By that alone, they are no longer the “Number One Enemy” as much as the Russian Federation is no longer a de facto enemy to Nato or the US since the Soviet Union collapsed.”

Nevertheless, she does not believe the CPM deserves any form of pardon.

“If Hitler is still unforgiven for his crimes, then I don’t see why Chin Peng needs to be forgiven for his Red Terror campaigns during the Emergency.

“To many, Chin Peng and his Commies will not be forgiven, and that is understandable.”

Alternative musician A. Nair feels that an open dialogue will help reconcile our nation with its painful past.

“If we try to be politically correct all the time, we will not get any idea across. If the older generation gets upset about us not caring or being insensitive about what they went through, it is something we need to learn to understand.

“But they also need to understand that it is not relevant to us now. We are moving towards a developed society, so we need to be more open and less sensitive.”

- Stories Contributed by HARIATI AZIZAN  sunday@thestar.com.my/Asia News Network

CPM: No longer Enemy No.1 

No going back: For many young people, the communist armed struggle belongs in the annals of history now. — Filepic 

The Star’s teen and youth pullout Stuff@school readers have their say on Facebook. Some comments had to be edited.

Tan Kar Can, 20, Brickfields Asia College

Compared with communist countries like China, the term communism is not even feared by most people in the world in this era. Chin Peng’s death has caused many people to have negative opinions about whether communism still exists in the country or not.

Communism has already been eradicated in our country and we should not fear communism any more. Instead, why not focus on eliminating corruption and gangsters which recently became the fear of the nation?

Shelbie Diana, 18, St Joseph Private Secondary School

Frankly speaking, I do not think that the party is a threat to our nation building right now. Media and national portrayal of the party wasn’t in the Sejarah syllabus. The young are simply taught communism is a game of violence and it stops at that.

The CPM that Chin Peng spearheaded was once a symbol that the nation demonised and derided but if learned methodically, this party’s downfall could be a lesson for the future.

Chin Peng died as a man in exile, wildly reviled in his lifetime. I believe he has paid the price for his political rebellion against the nation. The crime sure is heinous, but the stone that the builder refused will always be the head cornerstone. One has to clearly know he did contribute to free Tanah Melayu from the Japanese back then. We were taught to forgive.

Arivaran Ravichantar, 20, cadet pilot

Basically, the CPM fought for independence for our country and their motive was to set a Communist country. They would have succeeded if the British hadn’t given us our first election to make way for independence.

Their methods may have not been the best and may have hurt a lot of people, but nobody can deny that the CPM played a role in chasing out the Japanese in a short period of time. They may be also an indirect reason for the British to give us independence.

Na Yi Lun, 19, SMK Dato’ Penggawa Barat

Unlike some countries like North Korea, we do not have to worry about communism in our country. The CPM was established to drive out invaders from our land. During WWII, that was the Japanese. If not for their efforts, independence for our country would probably be delayed or we may still be under British rule till today.

In war, it is difficult to differentiate the enemy and the innocent. Humans are prone to mistakes, and in war, people make many mistakes.

Xina Ter, 17, SMK Sungai Ara

In my opinion, the CPM shouldn’t be considered No.1 enemy now. The party has long been inactive. I think the most dangerous thing to us now is racism and corruption. I think if we are united, regardless of race, we will be able to achieve almost anything. But when we are divided, even though we have the best leader in the universe, we will still be unable to achieve much.

Seet Rui Xi, 17, SMK Canossa Convent

The CPM is no longer a threat to our country. Are they the people gunning down innocent civilians in broad daylight? No. Are they causing discord, division and disharmony in society? No. Are they putting our independence at stake? No.

People who do not have the best interests of Malaysia at heart and people who do not consider national harmony a priority, people who are consumed with fulfilling their selfish agendas without considering how they will affect Malaysia’s future, and people who politicise every single thing possible are bigger threats to Malaysia.

Chin Peng’s wake a low-key affair

 

 Gen Kitti (right) and Gen Pisarn paying their last respects to Chin Peng at Wat That Thong temple in Bangkok.

BANGKOK: It was a calm and low-key affair as the body of the late Chin Peng was brought into a prayer hall at Bangkok’s Wat That Thong temple.

Some 30 people, mainly comrades of his outlawed Communist Party of Malaya and relatives, were present to pay their last respects at his wake yesterday.

Chin Peng’s two children, believed to be in their 60s, were said to be absent from the ceremony but a white and yellow wreath bearing their names stood next to the casket.

The note on the wreath, written in Chinese, reads: “In loving memory (of) our dear father. Your children.”

Also present were several DAP members, who said they came here on their own accord.

Klang MP Charles Santiago said he came for a meeting with non-governmental organisations and dropped by at the temple after his business ended.

He was seen kneeling and holding a joss stick at a floral dais inside the air-conditioned hall, where the sealed casket bearing Chin Peng’s remains was placed.

Santiago was accompanied by Selangor DAP committee member S. Ramakrishnan, a former senator, and Aliran exco member Sarajun Hoda.

Prior to their arrival, Kuala Selangor district council member Kwi Ai Mei was spotted paying her respects to Chin Peng.

Others who came to pay their last respects were former Thai military commanders Gen Pisarn Wattanawongkiri and Gen Datuk Kitti Ratanachaya.

Taking a prominent place among the many wreaths for the late communist leader was one bearing the symbol of Princess Chulabhorn, the youngest daughter of Thai King Bhumibol Adulyadej.

More well-wishers joined the funeral service in the evening, which was carried out according to Buddhist rites.

Chin Peng is scheduled to be cremated here on Monday evening.

- Contributed by LEE YEN MUN  yenmun@thestar.com.my

Related posts:

Chin Peng, a hero or zero? 

Chin Peng's remains couldn't be interred in his Sitiawan hometown to be cremated in Bangkok instead