Its annual military budget having registered a double-digit increase for most of the past quarter century, China continues its endless road to military expansion. Meanwhile, the US vows to be the “supreme ruler” of the Pacific Ocean. With tensions mounting steadily between the two giants, Journalist Yoshiko Sakurai asserts a renewed determination to increase self reliance while further cementing the existing alliance with the US is the key to Japan’s survival.

　　　On March 4, China announced that its 2012 defense budget would amount to slightly more than 670 billion yuan (US$106.4 billion) -€ an increase of 11.2 percent over last year. The enormous Chinese defense budget is nearly double this year’s Japanese defense spending.
　　　Chinese military spending is actually estimated to be two to three times more than officially stated; it does not include the cost of an independent Chinese space station scheduled for completion in 2020, development costs for fifth generation stealth fighters, or construction costs for aircraft carriers.
　　　During his ten-year rule starting in 2002, General Secretary Hu Jintao is credited with having increased China’s defense budget four fold, based on government figures. This trend is expected to be continued by Xi Jinping, Hu’s heir apparent, for reasons I explained below:
　　　Every year since 1989, with the exception of 2010, the Communist Party of China has implemented double-digit defense budget increases. The official Xinhua News Agency defended China’s unrivalled and abnormal military buildup in its March 4 commentary under a header which read: “China maintains a reasonable and appropriate defense budget increase.” It quoted a Chinese strategic expert as maintaining: “For more than a century starting in 1840, the Chinese people had the bitter experience of finding themselves in a critical situation where they remained defenseless, neglecting the importance of fighting. Therefore, they now crave the establishment of a powerful and resolute national defense, treasuring the environment for peaceful national development which this engenders, and which is not easily achieved.” According to Xinhua, this represents the core of the Chinese mentality justifying continued military buildup.
　　　The year 1840 refers to the Opium War. Overwhelmed by Britain’s military power, the Qing dynasty was compelled to sign the humiliating 1842 Treaty of Nanjing, and subsequently forced to sign similar treaties with the US and France. Since the days of Mao Zedong, China has persistently contended that, subject to invasion by the great powers, it experienced every hardship under the sun. The Chinese claim that, because of their experience of having lived a century marked by indescribable hardships, they recognize the necessity of maintaining a powerful military as a lesson that has pierced to their bones.
　　　Because of such “historical circumstances,” Xinhua further explains, “China will forever be a resolute power aimed at achieving a lasting peace and co-prosperity in the world.” If China is indeed building up its military due to its historical memory as a victim, the buildup will presumably continue on for as long as that memory exists.
　　　Backed by enormous military might, the Chinese also claim that the so-called “nine dotted line” -€ a line linking nine islands which encircle more than 80 percent of the South China Sea -€ is the official demarcation line for its legitimate maritime territory. With their sovereign islands and territorial waters constantly violated by China, Southeast Asian nations view as absolutely disingenuous China’s contention that its overwhelming military power is necessary for “joint prosperity” of the region. That noble slogans -€ such as “lasting peace” and “joint prosperity” -€ were announced along with the double-digit defense budget increase following Xi Jinping’s US visit has a profound meaning in terms of the future of U.S.-China relations.
　　　The Chinese vice president was received surprisingly coolly on his visit to the US starting February 14. Markedly absent during the Obama-Xi talks February 14 was the passion with which the leaders of both nations discussed only three years ago that the US and China -€ the G-2 nations -€ would set the order for the international community. President Obama started off with a reminder that “the US is a Pacific nation,” while expressing a desire to “strengthen ties with China as a member of the Pacific nations.” Clearly, it was a manifestation of US determination to not allow the Pacific Ocean to become China’s private sea.

China’s Biggest Weakness

　　　Obama asserted to Xi that, while the US welcomes “China’s peaceful rise,” it also believes that, as a major power, China has responsibilities as regards such vital issues as human rights and the regulation of the world economy. In contrast, Vice President Xi discussed the importance of the bilateral relationship only in abstract terms, unable to deliver any noteworthy messages or articulate any concrete initiatives from the Chinese side.
　　　Attending a luncheon co-hosted by Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton following his conversation with Obama, Xi faced an extremely blunt speech, with Biden expressing candid criticism of China’s policies. In sum, Biden stated: The US and China will continue to compete as both nations cooperate. Americans welcome this competition, which is “part of our DNA” and propels American citizens to rise to the challenge. “But competition can only be mutually beneficial if the rules of the game are understood, agreed upon, and followed.” What China lacks, Biden unhesitatingly declared, is fairness.
　　　In rapid succession, Biden outlined what the US wants China to rectify, such as the lack of protection of intellectual property, the undervalued exchange rate of the yuan, the absence of a level playing field for both foreign and Chinese corporations, and the acquisition of advanced technology through questionable or illegal means. Noting “advocacy for human rights” is a fundamental aspect of US foreign policy and stressing the “prosperity and stability of society can only be possible when human rights are protected,” Biden sternly asserted that the human rights situation in China has been worsening, with the hardships involving several prominent individuals becoming especially critical.
　　　Biden also noted that, “despite our differences,” the US and China are in consultation over matters pertaining to North Korea, Iran, maritime security, cyber security, as well as military interchange. Confronting Xi further with matters involving Sudan and South Asia, as well as important global issues such as climate change and nuclear security, Biden then concluded his address by saying the US welcomes “your candid response.” Seldom does one hear such critical remarks in a welcome address anywhere in the world.　
　　　In his reply, Vice President Xi delivered an address with the same innocuous content as his speech before President Obama earlier, although he did add an element somewhat new with regard to the human rights issue when he said, “The human rights situation in China has improved significantly,” and “China will continue to rectify this in its own way.”
　　　Meeting the following day with US congressional leaders of both the Republican and Democratic parties, including the Senate majority leader and the minority leader, Xi explained that human rights matters require a “steadily improving process in which things become better, if not perfect.”
　　　Without doubt, the human rights situation is China’s biggest weakness. When questioned about human rights, it is commonplace for Chinese leaders to generally be at a loss for an answer. Because they themselves hardly attach much value to human rights and democracy, they obviously do not know how to answer. However, they ought to realize that human rights, democracy, and fairness in the international economy constitute the basic values of the 21st century world.
　　　The specific issues raised with Xi are not only major sources of tension between the US and China; they also constitute values that divide the world into two. If Japan dares take a step forward to more resolutely announce its readiness to commit itself to these values, then it will represent a great opportunity for Japan’s regeneration. What is at issue is whether or not Japan is determined to do so.

Reliance on US-Japan Alliance Alone Won’t Do

　　　The double-digit defense budget increase made public after Xi’s visit to the US is a clear reflection of China’s strong sense of rivalry towards the US. Professor Tadae Takubo of Kyorin University and Deputy Director of the Japan Institute of National Fundamentals, a Tokyo-headquartered private think tank which I head, points out that at no time is it more important for Japan to sharpen its long-term strategic thinking than now. He comments:
　　　“U.S.-China relations can be viewed as ugly. After all, the basic ingredient of U.S.-China ties boils down to ‘engagement.’ The policy of engagement calls for the US to promote interchange with China on all levels in an attempt to eventually transform China into a democracy without antagonizing it during the process. Washington’s policy toward China has swayed back and forth between cooperative engagement and adversarial confrontation. No matter which way US-China relations may swing, Japan will have to strive to become a nation that can stand on its own. So long as Japan makes up its mind to be more self-reliant, the international situation will clearly develop in its favor.”
　　　The “Jasmine Revolution,” which began in Tunisia in 2010, toppled long-lasting dictatorships in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya in 2011. The revolution has now spread to Syria, where fierce battles continue. China and Russia have been desperately supporting President Assad, who has been barely clinging to power, mercilessly suppressing and slaughtering scores of citizens. The UN Security Council twice attempted to sanction Syria under Assad for the merciless crackdown on protesters, but a draft resolution recommending sanctions was vetoed by Russia and China each time.
　　　With the demonstrations demanding democratization having reached Russian shores, however, the top Chinese echelon must genuinely be frightened, as they share the same disposition as their Russian counterpart to manage by relying solely on the power of the state. After all, nearly 200,000 riots occur in China every year. In other words, between 500 and 600 demonstrations or protests take place daily in which 100 citizens or more participate. The Chinese leadership has every reason to be concerned.
　　　Taking aim at this grave Chinese weakness appears to be one of the surest ways for both Japan and the US to develop truly effective ways of dealing with the Chinese threat. Excepting China, Russia, and a few other countries, the majority of the world’s nations are on the side of democracy. That is why the Obama administration has clearly been implementing a major shift of foreign and security policies since the winter of 2011 in an effort to push China to adopt democratic values, while at the same time taking concrete steps towards ample military preparedness.
　　　Last November 16, Obama announced plans to deploy 2,500 marines in the northern Australian port city of Darwin -€ a move obviously designed to counter China’s advances into the South China Sea, the Western Pacific, and the Indian Ocean. Shortly after the announcement, Secretary of State Clinton visited Myanmar. If Myanmar can successfully be democratized and torn away from China, Beijing will be forced to reshape its South Asian strategy, which has been built around a close alliance with Myanmar’s military regime. Myanmar could be a powerful lever in drastically shifting the balance of power in Asia. Democratization of Myanmar cannot but influence neighboring Tibet. Any move in Tibet would inevitably spread to Uyghur and Mongolia in a chain reaction. This is what terrifies China most.　
　　　Guarding themselves against China, several Asian nations have begun building a defensive framework, with the US at the center. Well-orchestrated military cooperation has been forged among important Pacific nations, with Australia, New Zealand, and members of the ASEAN (Association of the South East Asian Nations) collaborating with the US and Japan, and India working closely with South Korea.
　　　But the world is now faced with another serious problem -€ Iran’s secret nuclear development. There is a great possibility of a preemptive attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities by Israel, which regards Iran’s possession of nuclear weapons as a threat to its survival. An Israeli attack on Iran could lead to major international discord, possibly instigating violent changes in the geopolitics of the 21st century. Now is the time for every nation to give priority to increasing its defensive capabilities. Japan will be on extremely fragile ground if it has only the alliance with the US to turn to.
　　　What the administration of Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda ought to do is increase the 2012 defense budget with the aim of strengthening Japan’s military might. And the next step? Of course, Japan should exercise its right to collective self defense as a responsible ally of the US so that the US-Japan alliance can truly function.

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” in the March 15, 2012 issue of The Weekly Shincho.)