I have with me a copy of an outrageous letter which was recently sent to a large number of Japanese parliamentarians from the embassy of the People’s Republic of China in Tokyo.

　　　The five-page letter, dated May 8, 20-12 and signed by Ambassador Chen Yonghua, sets out arguments pertaining to Tibet and Uyghur which are utterly contrary to the truth. Combining Chen’s remarks with those made by Premier Wen Jiabao to Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda during his visit to Beijing for the May 14 fifth trilateral summit among Japan, South Korea, and China, one cannot but conclude that China’s posture towards Japan is rude and nonsensical.

　　　The Chinese envoy wrote that there is in Japan “a backward-looking movement concerning Tibet and Uyghur, which is seriously hampering China-Japan relations.” The Chinese claims obviously come against the backdrop of the recent visits to Japan by two international figures the Chinese detest — Prime Minister Lobsang Sangay of the Tibetan government-in-exile, who attended a symposium in the Japanese capital on April 3 entitled “Freedom and the Wave of Democratization in Asia,” and Rebiya Kadeer, exiled Uyghur leader and President of the World Uyghur Congress (WUC), who attended a WUC-sponsored conference in Tokyo May 14-17.

　　　Chen’s letter is highlighted by outright lies. As regards Tibet, for instance, the envoy praises the Chinese government for having contributed significantly to “protect and nurture the customs and traditions of the Tibetan race, encouraging the study and use of the Tibetan language.” He further claims: “Freedom of religion is fully respected in Tibet, with more than 1,780 venues available in which the practices of Tibetan Buddhism are earnestly promoted; it is therefore easy to see that Tibet today is at the highest stage of development.”

　　　In connection with Uyghur, too, the Chinese government claims it “fully respects the traditions and customs of the Uyghur race” and is “safeguarding the culture of every ethnic minority, especially the religion.”

　　　And yet Ambassador Chen dares call His Holiness the Dalai Lama simply “Dalai,” scrapping his honorific title, while mercilessly accusing him of being a “defector dead set on disrupting the stability of Tibetan society and unity among its people while plotting to divide China under the cloak of religious values. Without any legitimate evidence, Chen accuses the WUC of being “a synthesis of the world’s terrorist organizations,” and characterizes Ms Kedeer as a “criminal.” Also, in referring to Dolkun Isa, the WUC’s General Secretary, Chen contends he is “involved in many criminal cases and terrorist acts,” pointing out he is on the “wanted” list of the International Criminal Police Organization (ICPO), commonly referred to as Interpol.

Does China Regard Itself as Japan’s Suzerain?

　　　If Tibet is really at the highest stage of its development today, as China claims it is, why do young Buddhist monks still continue to resort to self-immolation to protest Chinese suppression? Why is it that in the Xingjian Uyghur Autonomous Region young Uyghurs under 18 years of age, students, and government clerks are prohibited from entering Muslim mosques? Against such a backdrop, how can China ever claim that the indigenous religion and culture of the Tibetan people are “protected”? I have no doubt the Communist Party will not be able to answer these questions. And yet, Ambassador Chen adamantly declares that the Tibetan government-in-exile and the WUC are anti-Chinese organizations intent on breaking up China.

　　　On these false premises, Chen dared demand that Japanese parliamentarians “clearly recognize the anti-Chinese nature of ‘Dalai’ and Lobsang Sangay as subvertives plotting to divide China, refrain from supporting the forces advocating ‘the independence of Tibet,’ as well as providing them any platform to promote their views, or contacting them in any way.”

　　　Does China think it is Japan’s suzerain? It is absolutely unpardonable for the Chinese government to order Japanese parliamentarians to do or not to do anything, as giving such orders constitutes a brazen case of interference with Japan’s domestic politics. One parliamentarian particularly indignant over this abrasive action on the part of the Chinese is Tadamasa Kodaira, a veteran member of the ruling Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) who serves as Chairman of the Lower House Steering Committee. Comments Kodaira:

　　　“I gather that more than a month ago the Chinese ambassador somehow got wind of our plans to invite Prime Minister Sangay to the International Conference Hall in the Diet Members’ Office Building to exchange views on the occasion of his visit to Japan. A councilor of the Chinese Embassy came to see me, telling me to cancel the meeting. It simply is rude, and unheard of, for an embassy councilor to raise such a demand with a parliamentarian of his host nation. That China sees Tibet as a problem is a strictly Chinese problem; Japan has its own principles in dealing with Tibet. Japan is a nation honoring freedom -€ unlike a totalitarian state like China. I thought the councilor must be absolutely out of his mind, although I did somehow manage to refrain from saying so. In the end, I urged him to remind the Chinese ambassador anew that Japan happens to be a nation that honors and practices freedom and democracy.”

　　　Kodaira’s assertions are perfectly legitimate. I believe a little explanation is necessary here concerning the Diet Members’ Office Building, which embraces several conference halls. The Chairman of the House Steering Committee has the right to approve the use of these halls. Presumably, the Chinese ambassador had somehow learned about the existence of such regulations and obviously thought the best way to cause a cancellation of the projected meeting between Sangay and the Japanese parliamentarians would be to work on Kodaira. Commented former Prime Minister Shizo Abe, with a look of surprise on his face:

　　　“There is no question that this constitutes an appalling interference by the Chinese government in our domestic politics. But I find it even more shocking that the Chinese side had discovered such minute regulations governing the Japanese parliament. I would think that even some of our parliamentarians probably aren’t aware of them.”

China Needs Pertinent Values for the 21st Century

　　　Despite the Chinese envoy’s desperate efforts to exert pressure, the conference hall was packed with as many as 91 bipartisan Japanese parliamentarians (including their deputies) who vigorously exchanged views and ideas with Prime Minister Sangay. Undeterred, Ambassador Chen sent the afore-mentioned letter to many parliamentarians in yet another attempt to exert pressure. This matter, having important bearings on China, was taken up in Beijing immediately. Explains a Japanese government official on condition of anonymity:

　　　“Upon our arrival in Beijing, we were told that Premier Wen Jiabao had just proposed a meeting among a limited number of Chinese and Japanese officials for the specific purpose of discussing three points -€ Uyghur, the Senkaku Islands, and North Korea. So we met, and Premier Wen opened the discussion with Uyghur-related matters. He pointed out that it was impertinent of Japan to have allowed individuals on a wanted list as terrorists into the country, and demanded that Japan show concrete plans to rectify the situation, stating that China could no longer overlook the problem because it involved its core interests.”

　　　To this, Prime Minister Noda responded by explaining that Japan and China maintain widely different political systems; he emphasized that unless a legal problem is involved, the Japanese government refrains from involving itself in matters concerning the entry into Japan of specific individuals. Urging China to understand the difference, Noda reportedly brought up the Japan-China “Human Rights Dialogue” held between the two nations since 1997, asserting that universal values should be respected when it comes to such matters.

　　　In response to Noda’s quite sensible retort, Wen shot back: “It was fortunate that the (World Uyghur Congress) conference was held the day after our bilateral (China-Japan) talk, wasn’t it?”

　　　The China-Japan talks were held in Beijing on May 13, followed by the WUC conference in Tokyo on May 14. According to government sources, the Wen statement was obviously intended to insinuate that the bilateral talks might have been cancelled had the WUC conference in the Japanese capital been staged on the same day. In point of fact, a meeting between Noda and Chinese President Hu Jintao requested by the Japanese side failed to materialize, although Hu had already conferred with his South Korean counterpart, Lee Myung-bak. Obvious from these incidents is a strong degree of China’s mistrust and rejection of freedom, human rights, and democracy, impressing on one the fundamental national character of China as sinister and different. Of course, the international community does in no way support China as it continues to infringe on human rights, freedom, and ethnic self-determination. That is all the more reason for Japan to continue to confidently adhere to the values it honors as pertinent in the 21st century.

　　　Premier Wen further asserted to Noda China’s claim of territorial rights over the Senkaku Islands. Sources admit sensing acute tension on the part of the Chinese delegation during the one-on-one meeting between Noda and Wen, as if to indicate the Senkaku issue entered a new stage in which Japan must proceed with considerable caution. I personally commend the diplomatic stance Noda took this time, as he is believed to have declared in no uncertain terms that the Senkaku Islands are Japan’s sovereign territory and that the unlawful activities repeatedly undertaken by China in the East China Sea have greatly upset the Japanese people. Now that Noda has made clear his stance, I would strongly urge the Japanese government to implement effective measures to defend the Senkakus.

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” column no. 510 in the May 24, 2012 issue of The Weekly Shincho)