Glocom has kindly posted my commentary on Jim Hoagland’s op-ed on President’s Hu’s visit. Ross thinks that I’ve gone overboard with the “thousand years”, but what the hell, I had fun writing it; must be my mean, pedantic streak kicking in.
Speaking of Japan-China relations, does anybody else remember George Will’s take (click through to the WaPo op-ed) on Yasukuni that he harvested from a trip to Tokyo during the Koizumi administration>? Goes to show, some pundits’ fly-bys are better than others’. I do notice that there was a little more space between his views on South Korea and China than I realized at the time.
2 comments:
I only mean that you beat the "100 years" trope to death, not that you're wrong (which you are not). As far as historical animosities go for duration and intensity, it's not like Japan v. China matches England v. France. Part of that has to do with distance between potential adversaries. I don't think many people understand how large east Asia is. The distances between capitals across the region is enormous compared to Europe.
That was my understanding, too. Sorry if I made you or anyone else think I misunderstood you.
Given the distances, it's amazing how China has been able to keep so much of itself together, for all the fluctuations, for thousands of years. It's an ancient empire.
Post a Comment