University of London Professor Michael Yahuda addressed what he called "the constraints that apply in Sino-Japanese relations" - and their inability to be explained by theories of international relations - at a lecture at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy on Tuesday evening.
East Asia's two major powers are currently working on improving relations, but "neither the school of liberalism, or liberal internationalism, or realism, nor constructivism, can suffice by themselves" to elucidate China and Japan's complex relationship, Yahuda said.
One aspect puzzling to scholars adhering to the theory of liberal internationalism is that the Chinese and Japanese feel little affinity for each other. Yahuda cited Japanese magazine polls showing that only 10 percent of the Chinese "like" the Japanese and vice-versa.
But liberal internationalism holds that as countries develop economic interdependencies, they begin to recognize common interests, making conflicts easier to resolve.
According to Yahuda, while China and Japan have become economically interdependent, the two societies have not developed the mutual affection that should lead to the resolve of conflicts.
He shared an anecdote about a Chinese scholar whose house was surrounded and pelted by objects after he published a magazine piece suggesting that the Chinese should be more receptive to the Japanese.
Similarly, Yahuda said liberalism "emphasizes the importance of cooperative security between countries that are not enemies, but are not allies." These countries should then build a mutual trust, he said.
Nevertheless, Japan has made clear its distrust of China through dealings in the ASEAN Plus Three (the Association of South-Eastern Asian Nations, plus the "Three" - China, Japan, and South Korea).
Nor can the theory of realism fully explain the two countries' paradoxical relations. According to the theories of preeminent realist Kenneth Waltz, Japan must break dependency from United States, but "somehow or another, Japan has avoided it," Yahuda said.
Yahuda's next target was constructivism's relevance to Sino-Japanese relations. Constructivism fails to explain why the Chinese have reached out to Japan in an attempt to build better relations between the two, he said.
"Anti-Japanese-ness," Yahuda argued, is built into Chinese society from its history of wars with the country and other factors, and yet constructivism holds that states develop identities based on social forces within that state, which theoretically inhibits China from working towards cohesion with Japan.
The discussion lasted over an hour, including a brief question-and-answer session, and was followed by a sparsely-attended wine and cheese reception.
Many of the Fletcher students seemed disappointed with the event. "The ideas were not original," said one student who did not wish to reveal his name.
The session, the first in a series on "Danger and Opportunity in Pacific Rim Finance and Business Linking: China, Japan, and America," was co-sponsored by The Hitachi Center for Technology & International Affairs and the Fletcher School's Asia Club.
Yahuda, a professor emeritus of international relations at the University of London, was described as a scholar "both deep and broad; an authoritative voice on Chinese domestic politics, foreign policy and international politics of the Asia Pacific region" by Alan Walchman, associate professor of international politics at Fletcher.
