Chinese Final

Article 9 of Japan's 1947 Constitution

Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution is a clause in the national Constitution of Japan outlawing war as a means to settle international disputes involving the state. The Constitution came into effect on May 3, 1947, following World War II. In its text, the state formally renounces the sovereign right of belligerency and aims at an international peace based on justice and order. The article also states that, to accomplish these aims, armed forces with war potential will not be maintained. However, Japan maintains de facto armed forces, referred to as the Japan Self-Defense Forces, which may have originally been thought of as something akin to what Mahatma Gandhi called the Shanti Sena (soldiers of peace) or a collective security police (peacekeeping) force operating under the United Nations. In July 2014, instead of using Article 96 of the Japanese Constitution to amend the Constitution, the Japanese government approved a reinterpretation which gave more powers to the Japan Self-Defense Forces, allowing them to defend other allies in case of war being declared upon them, despite concerns and disapproval from mainland China and South Korea, whereas the United States supported the move. This change is considered illegitimate by some Japanese political parties and citizens, since the Prime Minister circumvented Japan's constitutional amendment procedure. In September 2015, the Japanese National Diet made the reinterpretation official by enacting a series of laws allowing the Japan Self-Defense Forces to provide material support to allies engaged in combat internationally. The justification is that by not defending/supporting an ally, it would weaken alliances and endanger Japan.

Responsible Stakeholder

Blumenthal argued that being a responsible stakeholder entails a broader interpretation of national interest, to encompass the health of the international system, and that changing China's definition of its national interests will require domestic political change. Reforms to date have led China to accept the international system shaped by the United States after World War II; further domestic liberalization is necessary if China is to contribute to the long-term maintenance of the system. China is becoming a responsible stakeholder, demonstrating increasing willingness to contribute to international public goods, including economic stability and growth, nonproliferation, and regional security. China lags behind on human rights, Gill noted, but overall trends indicate that Beijing knows it has a stake in the current international order and takes its responsibilities seriously.

Geneva Agreement (on Vietnam) 1954

Collection of documents relating to Indochina from the Geneva Conference of 1954, included Cambodia, China, France, Laos, the UK, the US, the Soviet Union, the Viet Minh (i.e., the North Vietnamese), and the State of Vietnam (i.e., the South Vietnamese). The 10 documents—none of which were treaties binding the participants—consisted of 3 military agreements, 6 unilateral declarations, and a Final Declaration of the Geneva Conference. agreements were finally signed on July 21 between the French and Vietnamese, Laotian, and Cambodian representatives. The principal provisions were for a cease-fire line along the 17th parallel (effectively dividing Vietnam in two); 300 days for each side to withdraw its troops to its side of the line; and communist troops and guerrillas to evacuate Laos and Cambodia, where free elections would be held in 1955 and where French troops could be stationed if the Laotian or Cambodian governments should so request. It was stipulated explicitly that the partition line "should not in any way be interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary." Execution of the agreements was to be supervised by a commission from India, Poland, and Canada. A provision that was known as the Final Declaration stipulated that all-Vietnamese elections were to be held under the supervision of the committee before July 1956 to reunify the country. This was a matter of great importance in inducing the Viet Minh to accept the temporary regrouping of its forces in the northern half of the country, because on the eve of the conference it controlled three-quarters of Vietnam. While other countries agreed to these terms, the United States made it clear that it was not bound by them. The South Vietnamese also withheld approval, and the Final Declaration was left unsigned by all parties. The U.S. government undertook to build a separate anticommunist state in South Vietnam and in 1956 supported South Vietnam's refusal to hold nationwide elections in consultation with North Vietnam.

Constructive Engagement

Constructive engagement was the name given to the policy of the Reagan Administration towards the apartheid regime in South Africa in the early 1980s.

The Shidehara Diplomacy

During the remainder of the 1920s, Japanese governments attempted to play by the rules laid down at the Washington Conference. Known as Shidehara diplomacy, after the foreign minister (and later prime minister) who attempted to carry it out, this policy sought to use diplomatic and economic means to realize Japanese interests in Asia. But this approach came under severe pressure as Japanese industrialists began to move into new areas of opportunity, such as heavy industry, chemicals, mining, and the manufacturing of appliances and automobiles. Because such industries desperately needed resources not found in abundance locally, the Japanese government were then forced to find new sources abroad. leaders attempted to realize Japanese aspirations within the existing global political and economic framework. When the "liberal" approach of the 1920s failed to solve the problems of the day, the shift toward a more aggressive approach was inevitable The dominant elements in the government in the 1930s, a mixture of military officers and ultranationalist politicians, were convinced that the diplomacy of the 1920s had failed and advocated a more aggressive approach to protecting national interests in a brutal and competitive world.

The Stimson Doctrine

Named after Henry L. Stimson, United States Secretary of State in the Hoover Administration (1929-33), the policy followed Japan's unilateral seizure of Manchuria in NE China following action by Japanese soldiers at Mukden. on September 18, 1931. The doctrine was also invoked by U.S. Under-Secretary of State Sumner Welles in a declaration of July 23, 1940, that announced non-recognition of the Soviet annexation and incorporation of the three Baltic states—Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania—and remained the official U.S. position until the Baltic states regained independence in 1991. Stimson had stated that the United States would not recognize any changes made in China that would curtail American treaty rights in the area and that the "open door" must be maintained. The declaration had few material effects on the Western world, which was burdened by the Great Depression, and Japan went on to bomb Shanghai. The doctrine was criticized on the grounds that it did no more than alienate the Japanese

One Country, Two Systems

One country, two systems" is a constitutional principle formulated by Deng Xiaoping, the Paramount Leader of the People's Republic of China (PRC), for the reunification of China during the early 1980s. He suggested that there would be only one China, but distinct Chinese regions such as Hong Kong and Macau could retain their own capitalist economic and political systems, while the rest of China uses the socialist system. Under the principle, each of the two regions could continue to have its own political system, legal, economic and financial affairs, including external relations with foreign countries. Deng Xiaoping proposed to apply the principle to Hong Kong in the negotiation with the British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher over the future of Hong Kong when the lease of the New Territories (including New Kowloon) of Hong Kong to the United Kingdom was to expire in 1997. The same principle was proposed in talks with Portugal about Macau. The principle is that, upon reunification, despite the practice of socialism in mainland China, both Hong Kong and Macau, which were colonies of the UK and Portugal respectively, can retain their established system under a high degree of autonomy for at least 50 years after reunification. What will happen after 2047 (Hong Kong) and 2049 (Macau) has never been publicly stated.

The Reverse Course

Reverse Course was a change in US government and Allied Occupation policy toward Japan during the post-World War II reconstruction. Beginning roughly between 1947 and 1948, it lasted until the end of the occupation in 1952. The impetus for the Reverse Course divides between global events and developments within Japan. On the one hand, it is linked to the escalation of the Cold War, the Chinese Communist Revolution and the looming Korean War. On the other hand, due to domestic inflation, the growth of poverty, and the expansion leftist parties, Japan seemed ripe for communism to both the Japanese government and the leaders of the occupation—especially to the leader of the occupation, Douglas MacArthur. The Reverse Course resembled Europe's Marshall Plan. The occupation had begun with various moves toward democratization, including land reform, the purge of officials responsible for Japan's ultra-nationalism, and the suppression of both the zaibatsu and the yakuza. This extended to Japan's new constitution, which included an article that barred the government from maintaining a standing army. The Reverse Course changed such policies in favor of the containment policy.As a result of the Reverse Course, public-sector workers lost the right to strike, private-sector unions lost a great deal of bargaining power. Furthermore, severe blows were dealt to ideological freedom, to the zaibatsu-busting process, and to the suppression of the yakuza. It also allowed for the creation of the Japan Self Defense Forces. It put conservative politicians back in power, who went on to spearhead the development of Japan's Liberal Democratic Party. Opposition to the Reverse Course contributed to the protest against the 1960 Anpo treaty. In regards to Foreign Policy, Japan would serve as an industrial engine of East Asia; by extension, a strong Japanese economy would prevent communism from spreading in Asia. A re-militarized and strengthened Japan made Japan the cornerstone of US security policy in East Asia.As the US Dept. of State official history puts it "In this 'Reverse Course,' Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers, General Douglas MacArthur, focused on strengthening, not punishing, what would become a key cold war ally".

The Loss of China Debate

The "loss of China" refers, in U.S. political discourse, to the unexpected Communist Party takeover of mainland China from the American-backed Nationalists in 1949, and therefore the "loss of China to communism". The "loss of China" was Truman Administration as an "avoidable catastrophe". It led to a "rancorous and divisive debate" and the issue was exploited by the Republicans at the polls in 1952. It also played a large role in the rise of Joseph McCarthy, who, with his allies, sought scapegoats for that "loss", targeting notably Owen Lattimore, an influential scholar of Central Asia. During World War II, Franklin D. Roosevelt had assumed that China, under Chiang Kai-shek's leadership, would become a great power after the war, along with the U.S., the United Kingdom, and Russia.[2] According to John Paton Davies Jr. (one of the so-called "China Hands", whose diplomatic career was later ruined by the loss of China), Roosevelt's lack of sufficient material support to Chiang Kai-shek during the war against Japan in the 1930s and 1940s and his deplorable choices of U.S. diplomatic emissaries to China contributed to the failure of Roosevelt's policy. Franklin Roosevelt thought of China as a power already securely held by Chiang Kai-shek's. His hold on power was, however, tenuous, and "once the Japanese were defeated, China would become a power vacuum, tempting to Moscow, and beyond the capability of the Nationalists to control. In that sense, the collapse of China into communism was aided by the incompetence of Roosevelt's policy." In 1949, China declared independence, an event known in Western discourse as "the loss of China" - in the US. The tacit assumption was that the U.S. owned China, by right, along with most of the rest of the world, much as postwar planners assumed. The "loss of China" was the first major step in "America's decline." It had major policy consequences. The American historian Miles Maochun Yu complained in a 2010 book review of the "...endless fight over who got it right on China, whatever the Chinese reality. That is to say, the peculiar debate on Communist China, the questions asked and issued debated often reflected American partisan politics and policy spins rather than Chinese reality".In the early 1950s, the Truman administration was attacked for the "loss" of China.

The Anti-Comintern Pact

The Anti-Comintern Pact was an anti-communist pact concluded between Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan (later to be joined by other, mainly fascist, governments) on November 25, 1936 and was directed against the Third (Communist) International. In case of an attack by the Soviet Union against Germany or Japan, the two countries agreed to consult on what measures to take "to safeguard their common interests". They also agreed that neither of them would make any political treaties with the Soviet Union, and Germany also agreed to recognize Manchukuo. In 1937, Italy joined the pact along with Spain, thus forming the group that would later be known as the Axis Powers.

The Anti-Secession Law

The Anti-Secession Law is a law of the PRC, passed by the third conference of the 10th National People's Congress. It was ratified on March 14, 2005, and went into effect immediately. President Hu Jintao promulgated the law with Presidential Decree No. 34. it formalized the long-standing policy of the PRC to use "non-peaceful means" against the "Taiwan independence movement" in the event of a declaration of independence. The Law is composed of ten articles. Articles one to five are aspirational. Articles six to nine set out in general terms the procedures for promoting cross-strait relations, negotiation, and resolution of the issue. Article ten sets the date of operation. Article one states that the aim of the law is to prevent "Taiwan's secession from China" and promote reunification. Stabilizing the Taiwan Straits area and protecting the interests of the Zhonghua Minzu are also purposes of the law. Articles two to four outline the PRC government's view of the present political status of Taiwan. This view is that mainland China and Taiwan belong to one China, that there is only one China and that the sovereignty of that one China is indivisible; the "Taiwan issue" is a residual problem of the Chinese civil war and is an internal affair of China. Article five maintains that the one China principle is the basis for resolution of the issue, and that the State must seek all possibilities of peaceful reunification. The same section also states that, following peaceful reunification, Taiwan will enjoy a high level of autonomy and operate under a system different from mainland China. Although this would appear to be similar to the "one country, two systems" scheme, highly unpopular in Taiwan, it is not so named. The law does not explicitly equate "China" with the People's Republic of China (referred to in the law as "the State"). Article six deals with cross-strait relations. It states that in order to maintain peace and stability in the Taiwan straits and to foster cross-strait relations, the State should (1) encourage people-to-people contact to foster closer relations and understanding (2) encourage cross strait economic exchanges (3) encourage scientific and cultural exchanges (4) joint efforts to fight crime and (5) encourage efforts to maintain peace and stability in the Taiwan straits. Article seven deals with cross-strait negotiation. It states that the State shall support negotiations and consultations on both sides of the straits with equal status, with different modalities, and in differing stages. The topics of such talks can include (1) ending the states of hostilities across the straits (2) developing rules for cross strait relations (3) the means of promoting unification (4) the political status of the Taiwanese authorities, (5) appropriate means by which Taiwan can participate in international organizations, and (6) any other issues relating to unification. There are several notable aspects of this article. First, this is the first time that the PRC has officially spoken of talks between the mainland China and Taiwan occurring in terms of equal status. Second, the condition that Taiwan accept any form of the one China principle is not explicitly mentioned in the text, and the statement that talks can occur in different modalities and in differing stages suggests that Beijing is willing to start at least informal talks without requiring a one China commitment. Article eight deals with non-peaceful action, and is the article which has caused the most controversy and attention. It states that the State shall use non-peaceful and other necessary means under these alternative conditions: (1) if "Taiwan independence" forces, under whatever name and method, accomplish the fact of Taiwan's separation from China, (2) or if a major event occurs which would lead to Taiwan's separation from China, or if all possibility of peaceful unification is lost. Article nine states that, in the planning and implementation of "non-peaceful and other necessary actions", the State must as much as possible act to protect the persons and property of Taiwanese civilians and foreigners in Taiwan, and to minimise their losses. The State must also protect Taiwanese interests in the PRC. Under Article 18 of the Basic Law of Hong Kong and similar measures in the Basic Law of Macau, the NPCSC must explicitly designate a law as having force in Hong Kong or Macau for it to be operative there. No such designation was made for this law, which is consistent with statement in the state press that this law would not be directed at Hong Kong or Macau.

The Battle of Midway

The Battle of Midway was a naval battle in the Pacific Theater of World War II.Between 4 and 7 June 1942, only six months after Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor and one month after the Battle of the Coral Sea, the United States Navy defeated an attacking fleet of the Imperial Japanese Navy under near Midway Atoll, inflicting devastating damage on the Japanese fleet that proved irreparable. was noted as "the most decisive blow in the history of naval warfare. The Japanese operation, like the earlier attack on Pearl Harbor, sought to eliminate the United States as a strategic power in the Pacific, thereby giving Japan a free hand in establishing its Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. The Japanese hoped it would force the U.S. to capitulate in the Pacific War and thus ensure Japanese dominance in the Pacific. Luring the American aircraft carriers into a trap and occupying Midway was part of an overall "barrier" strategy to extend Japan's defensive perimeter. This operation was also considered preparatory for further attacks. Faulty Japanese assumptions of the American reaction and poor initial dispositions caused the plan to fail. The American military was able to determine the date and location of the planned attack, enabling the U.S. Navy to prepare its own ambush and succeed. After Midway, Japan's capacity to replace its losses in material and men became insufficient. The Battle of Midway is widely considered a turning point in the Pacific War.

The Cairo Declaration

The Cairo Declaration was the outcome of the Cairo Conference in Cairo, Egypt, on November 27, 1943. President Franklin Roosevelt of the United States, Prime Minister Winston Churchill of the United Kingdom, and Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek of the Republic of China were present. The declaration developed ideas from the 1941 Atlantic Charter, which was issued by the Allies of World War II to set goals for the post-war order. The Three countries allied to enforce military operations against Japan.

The China Dream

The China Dream is a term popularized after 2013 within Chinese socialist thought that describes a set of personal and national ideals in the People's Republic of China and the Communist Party of China. It is used by journalists, government officials, and activists to describe the role of the individual in Chinese society as well as the goals of the Chinese nation. The phrase is closely associated with Xi Jinping, who is the General Secretary of the Communist Party of China. Xi began promoting the phrase as a slogan in a high-profile visit to the National Museum of China in November 2012 after taking the office of general secretary. Since then, use of the phrase has become widespread in official announcements and has become routine party lexicon as the embodiment of the political ideology of the leadership under Xi Jinping. Xi said that young people should "dare to dream, work assiduously to fulfill the dreams and contribute to the revitalization of the nation."[4] According to the party's theoretical journal Qiushi, the Chinese Dream is about Chinese prosperity, collective effort, socialism, and national glory. The relationship between the phrase and the American Dream has been debated.

The Five Power Treaty

The Five-Power Naval Limitation Treaty, which was signed by the United States, Great Britain, Japan, France, and Italy on Feb. 6, 1922, grew out of the opening proposal at the conference by U.S. Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes to scrap almost 1,900,000 tons of warships belonging to the Great Powers. The treaty marked the end of a long period of increases of battleship construction. The naval treaty had a profound effect on the Japanese. With superior American and British industrial power, a long war would very likely end in a Japanese defeat. Thus, gaining parity on the strategic level was not economically possible.

The Four Power Treaty

The Four-Power Treaty was a treaty signed by the United States, Great Britain, France and Japan at the Washington Naval Conference on 13 December 1921. It was partly a follow-on to the Lansing-Ishii Treaty, signed between the U.S. and Japan. By the Four-Power Treaty, all parties agreed to maintain the status quo in the Pacific, by respecting the Pacific holdings of the other countries signing the agreement, not seeking further territorial expansion, and mutual consultation with each other in the event of a dispute over territorial possessions. However, the main result of the Four-Power Treaty was the termination of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance of 1902.

The Tonkin Gulf Resolution

The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution or the Southeast Asia Resolution, Pub.L. 88-408, 78 Stat. 384, enacted August 10, 1964, was a joint resolution that the United States Congress passed on August 7, 1964, in response to the Gulf of Tonkin incident. It is of historical significance because it gave U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson authorization, without a formal declaration of war by Congress, for the use of conventional military force in Southeast Asia. The resolution authorized the President to do whatever necessary in order to assist "any member or protocol state of the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty". This included involving armed forces. Senator Gruening objected to "sending our American boys into combat in a war in which we have no business, which is not our war, into which we have been misguidedly drawn, which is steadily being escalated". The Johnson administration relied upon the resolution to begin its rapid escalation of U.S. military involvement in South Vietnam and open warfare between North Vietnam and the United States.

The Sino-American Shanghai Communique

The Joint Communiqué of the United States of America and the People's Republic of China, also known as the Shanghai Communiqué (1972), was an important diplomatic document issued by the United States of America and the People's Republic of China on February 28, 1972 during President Richard Nixon's visit to China. The document pledged that it was in the interest of all nations for the United States and China to work towards the normalization of their relations, although this would not occur until the Joint Communiqué on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations seven years later. The US and China also agreed that neither they nor any other power should "seek hegemony in the Asia-Pacific region".[1] This was of particular importance to China, who shared a militarized border with the Soviet Union. Regarding the political status of Taiwan, in the communiqué the United States acknowledged the One-China policy (but did not endorse the PRC's version of the policy) and agreed to cut back military installations on Taiwan. This "constructive ambiguity" (in the phrase of US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who oversaw the American side of the negotiations) would continue to hinder efforts for complete normalization. The communiqué included wishes to expand the economic and cultural contacts between the two nations, although no concrete steps were mentioned.

The Karakhan Statements (manifesto)

The Karakhan Manifesto was a statement of Soviet policy toward China dated July 25, 1919. The manifesto came at a crucial time in the development of Chinese communism. It encouraged interest in Marxism and thus played a role in the founding of the Chinese Communist Party in 1921. The manifesto offered to relinquish various rights Russia had obtained by treaty in China, including extraterritoriality, economic concessions, and Russia's share of the Boxer indemnity. These and similar treaties had been denounced by Chinese nationalists as "unequal." The manifesto created a favorable impression of Russia and Marxism among Chinese. The manifesto was prompted by the Bolshevik advance into Siberia, which created a need to establish a relationship with China. The Bolsheviks saw the Chinese as one of "the oppressed peoples of the East" and therefore a potential ally against the "imperialist" powers. The version presented at this time includes the passage, "the Soviet Government returns to the Chinese people, without any compensation, the Chinese Eastern Railway."[4] Karakhan gave Chinese a second version of the manifesto six months later, one that did not include the Eastern RR. In fact, hey denied ever having made it, saying the railway offer had been included by "mistake". The warlords in Beijing, closely tied to Japan, responded hesitantly. The Russians withdrew their offer later when they saw an alliance was not in the near future. Russian interests and rights in China, including control of the Chinese Eastern Railway, were reaffirmed later in 1924-1925

The Lansing-Ishii Agreement

The Lansing-Ishii Agreement was a diplomatic note signed between the US and Japan on 2 November 1917 over their disputes in regards to China. both parties pledged to uphold the Open Door Policy in China, with respect to its territorial and administrative integrity. However, the United States government also acknowledged that Japan had "special interests" in China due to its geographic proximity, especially in those areas of China adjacent to Japanese territory, which was a contradiction to the Open Door Policy. In a secret protocol attached to the public Agreement, both parties agreed not to take advantage of the special opportunities presented by WWI to seek special rights or privileges in China at the expense of other nations allied in the war effort against Germany. At the time, the Lansing-Ishii Agreement was seen as proof that Japan and the US had dissolved their tensions over China, and the Agreement was hailed as a landmark in Japan-United States relations. However, critics soon realized that the vagueness and differing possible interpretations of the Agreement meant that nothing had really been decided. The Lansing-Ishii Agreement was repealed in April 1923 and replaced by the Nine-Power Treaty. For the Japanese the Lansing-Ishii Agreement of 1917 did not imply equality with white people, but instead that Japan could not easily be ignored in international affairs.

The Manchuria Incident

The Manchurian Incident, or Mukden Incident, was a staged event followed through by Japanese military personnel as a false cause for the Japanese invasion in 1931 of northeastern China, known as Manchuria. On September 18, 1931,the military detonated a small quantity of dynamite close to a railway line owned by Japan's South Manchuria Railway near Mukden. The explosion was weak & failed to destroy the track, causing no real damage, but the Japanese Army accused Chinese protesters of the act and responded with a full invasion that led to the occupation of Manchuria, in which Japan established its puppet state of Manchukuo six months later. The ruse of war was soon exposed by the Lytton Report of 1932, leading Japan to diplomatic isolation and its March 1933 withdrawal from the League of Nations

The Marshall Mission in China

The Marshall Mission (December 1945 - January 1947) was a failed diplomatic mission undertaken by United States Army General George C. Marshall to China in an attempt to negotiate the Communist Party of China and the Nationalists (Kuomintang) into a unified government. His goal was to unify the Nationalists and Communists with the hope that a strong, non-Communist China, would act as a bulwark against the encroachment of the Soviet Union. Immediately, Marshall drew both sides into negotiations which would last for nearly two years. Significant agreements failed to appear, as both sides used the time to further prepare themselves for the ensuing conflict. Both the communist and nationalist governments were corrupt and had no intention of agreeing on anything that contradicted their ultimate goal. Finally, in February 1947, Marshall acceped failiure and left China. The failure of the Marshall Mission signaled the renewal of the Chinese Civil War. George Marshall returned to the United States and committed himself to the revitalization of Europe with the Marshall Plan in the role of United States Secretary of State, which became yet another roaring success in Marshall's distinguished career. By 1949, the Kuomintang was driven from the Chinese mainland into Taiwan by a victorious Communist Party, which established the People's Republic of China. The Marshall Mission was still noted as the "greatest blunder in American history" by Army general joe macarthur

The Nine Power Treaty

The Nine-Power Treaty was a 1922 treaty affirming the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China as per the Open Door Policy. This was after the Suzerainty system fell apart after the Western invasions of the Opium Wars, that outlawed the Chinese "Closed Door Policy" into China of the former Imperial Qing dynasty. The Nine-Power Treaty was signed on 6 February 1922 by all of the attendees to the Washington Naval Conference: the United States, Belgium, the British Empire, Republic of China, France, Italy, Imperial Japan, the Netherlands, and Portugal. It lacked any enforcement regulations, and was violated by Japan during its invasion of Manchuria in 1931 with little to no resistance. In November 1937, the Nine Powers convened in Brussels after the outbreak of the Second Sino-Japanese War, but to no avail. It did have a role in checking Japanese aggression, but China's hope for international intervention to Japanese invasion was not met, and World War II effectively violated the Nine-Power Treaty.

The Racial Equality Clause

The Racial Equality Proposal was an amendment to the treaty under consideration at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference offered by the Empire of Japan. After the end of seclusion in the 1850s, Japan signed unequal treaties, but soon wanted to rectify the injustices with Western powers. Correcting inequality became the most urgent international issue of the Meiji government.Japanese delegation to the Paris peace conference proposed the "racial equality clause" to the League of Nations. It was rejected due to the racist overtones the deciding nations still ran with at the time. Though broadly supported, it did not become part of the Treaty of Versailles, largely because of the opposition of Australia and the United States.

Taiwan Relations Act

The Taiwan Relations Act is an act of the United States Congress. Since the recognition of the People's Republic of China, the Act has defined the substantial but non-diplomatic relations between the people of the United States and the people on Taiwan. The act does not recognize the terminology of 'Republic of China' after 1 January 1979, but uses the terminology of "governing authorities on Taiwan". Geographically speaking and following the similar content in the earlier defense treaty from 1955, it defines the term "Taiwan" to include, as the context may require, the islands of Taiwan (the main Island) and Penghu. Of the other islands or archipelagos under the control of Taiwan's governing authorities, Jinmen, the Matsus, the Wuqiu Islands, the Pratas and Taiping Island are left outside the definition of Taiwan. Also any area claimed by the authorities, but not under their control, is without mention. The act authorizes de facto diplomatic relations with the governing authorities by giving special powers to the AIT to the level that it is the de facto embassy, and states that any international agreements made between the ROC and U.S. before 1979 are still valid unless otherwise terminated. One agreement that was unilaterally terminated by President Jimmy Carter upon the establishment of relations with the PRC was the Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty. The act provides for Taiwan to be treated under U.S. laws the same as "foreign countries, nations, states, governments, or similar entities". The act provides that for most practical purposes of the U.S. government, the absence of diplomatic relations and recognition will have no effect. The Taiwan Relations Act potentially requires the U.S. to intervene militarily if the PRC attacks or invades Taiwan. The act states that "the United States will make available to Taiwan such defense articles and defense services in such quantity as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capabilities". However, the decision about the nature and quantity of defense services that America will provide to Taiwan is to be determined by the President and Congress. America's policy has been called "strategic ambiguity" and it is designed to dissuade Taiwan from a unilateral declaration of independence, and to dissuade the PRC from unilaterally unifying Taiwan with the PRC. The act further stipulates that the United States will "consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States". This act also requires the United States "to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character", and "to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan." Successive U.S. administrations have sold arms to Taiwan in compliance with the Taiwan Relations Act despite demands from the PRC that the U.S. follow the legally non-binding Three Joint Communiques and the U.S. government's proclaimed One-China policy (which differs from the PRC's so-called one-China principle).

Discuss the significance and complexity of the Taiwan issue in Sino-American relations since World War II

The Taiwan issue is a historical problem which is left over by China's civil war. Chinese government believes that the Taiwan issue is Chinese internal affair, so it cannot brook direct or indirect interference by any foreign forces. Both Cairo Declaration issued by China, the US and the United Kingdom in December 1943 and the Potsdam Proclamation signed by China, the US, the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union in 1945 announced that all territories, including Taiwan, occupied by Japan before the end of the Second World War should be returned to China. On 25 October 1945, the Japanese government completed the returning of sovereignty of Taiwan to China. Thus, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China and it has been proven through history. However, political behavior of states is not always dominated by rationality. In many cases, the political behavior will be irrational due to national interests. This is one of important reasons why the Taiwan issue can be regarded as a barometer for Sino-US relations. As the superpower in the world after the Cold War, the US seeks its national interests on a global scale, and Taiwan becomes an important American agent which is able to help the US to obtain strategic interests in the Asia-Pacific region. In the system of national interests, the status of various interests of countries is not immutable. At different periods of history, the core interests of different countries keep changing due to changes in international situations. The Taiwan issue is the core interest of China, and Chinese leaders believe that reunification of China is their historical mission. With constant enhancement of its comprehensive strength, China should widely participate in international affairs, actively integrate into the international community and develop friendly and cooperation relation with other countries in different fields. Thus, China is likely to continue to pursue its current external policy, marked by overall caution, pragmatism and an emphasis on a peaceful regional environment so as to permit China's modernization program to succeed (Hieronymi, 2004). The Sino-US relations can be seen as one of the most important bilateral relations in the world. If both sides intend to promote their relations, they should not challenge each other's core interests. If the government of the US continues to H. Xie 241 challenge China's core interests, especially about the Taiwan issue, and does not comply with the promise of one-China policy, the relationship between China and the US is bound to inevitably face setback. Obviously, striving for the peaceful reunification of China accords with the interests of China, the US and other Asia-Pacific countries. Chinese people are reluctant to see the horrible situation where they have to fight their compatriots across the Taiwan Strait. In fact, leaders in Beijing undoubtedly will be preoccupied with daunting domestic problems and unwilling to see a tense cross-Strait situation, which would distract them from their domestic agenda (Cheng, 2005). Maintaining good surrounding environment and stable Sino-US relations is very important for the development and modernization of China. From Taiwan's perspective, the war means a tremendous, absolute, comprehensive disaster which will destroy its painstaking efforts after the China's Civil War ended in 1949. From the Asia-Pacific countries' perspective, maintaining stability in the Taiwan Strait and maintain East Asia security is common aspiration of people in East Asian region. From the American view, the US and its allies will have to pay a high price for this possible war across the Taiwan Strait in the future. Therefore, the Sino-US relations will decide and contain the development of relationship between the US and Taiwan. With the peaceful rise of China and the decrease of Taiwan's international space, the common interests between China and the US will keep on increasing, but the common interest between the US and Taiwan will be made smaller than before. A divided Taiwan does not have enough special interest for the US if China can promote economic development and achieve democratization. Maintaining peace and stability in the Taiwan Straits aligns with the common interests of China and the US, so the American government should not send any wrong signal to the Taiwan independence force. The current American policy toward China will continue for quite a long time if the Chinese government still adopts its open policy and promotes democracy. On the current international situation, this policy in some extent will be effective and will lead to peaceful and stable relations between the US and China. Thus, this policy is very pragmatic. The US should realize that so long as Beijing eschews the use of force and works peacefully to adapt to and shape the future international system, the most destabilizing consequences of growing Chinese power will be minimized (Swaine, 2000). Actually, both China and the US do not want to use military means to resolve the Taiwan issue. It should be noted that China and the US have common interest in many aspects but it does not mean that the US can challenge the core interest of China. Since China and the US established the formal diplomatic relations in 1979, both Chinese leaders and the leaders of the US have been trying to use different ways to promote the Sino-US relations. Without doubt, they have already yielded fruitful results in various fields of cooperation which can lead to a better understanding of the Taiwan issue. In fact, in many fields they have reached consensus which is based on common strategies and interests. They are willing to promote world peace and development of the Asia-Pacific region and try to enhance economic cooperation and seek common development and prosperity.The US strategy toward China is one of the most important factors which can influence the development of Sino-US relations and US strategy toward China is subordinate to its global strategy. China's modernization is a long-term undertaking. In the process of reform, opening-up and modernization, China needs to maintain good bilateral relations with the US. The government of the US would emphasize particularly different aspects or fields, and thus, it could lead to volatility in the US strategy toward China. From the current international situation, the US is having increasing demand of cooperation with China, so the Sino-US relations can be seen as constructive and cooperative. It can be expected that the global strategy of the US will not be fundamentally changed in the next ten or twenty years. The government of the US realizes that it needs to prepare for and fight a long-duration war against terrorism. At present the war against radical Islamic forces has been going for many years, but the threat of terrorism has not diminished. In addition, the situation of preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons is becoming growingly complex due to the Iranian nuclear issue and the North Korea nuclear issue. The government of the US clearly knows that it will take a long time to resolve all of these problems. On the one hand, some officials in the government of the US still hold negative views on the impacts of China's development. They guard against China's development because they regard China as future threat to the US. However, on the other hand, China's development has also made the US government realize the importance of cooperation between China and the US in the international community The Chinese government proclaims to the world that China will follow the road of peaceful development and would never seek hegemony. If the Chinese government can prove that it will not change the existing international order which is mainly dominated by the US, the US strategy towards China will be more rational. The Taiwan issue is inextricably linked to the development of Sino-US relations and probably is the only possibility that leads to military conflicts between China and the US. In fact, due to their strategies, maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait can help Beijing and Washington to obtain common interests on the Taiwan issue. However, the Taiwan independence forces gravely threaten the common interests of China and the US. Both of them should ensure timely communication and cannot give any opportunity to the Taiwan independence forces which are able to destabilize the stable situation of the Taiwan issue. A new scene of relations among big powers can be seen after the Cold War and the main theme of the relations is seeking win-win cooperation. The interests and relations of big powers are so complicated that we cannot say the relationship among big powers is completely antagonistic. Actually, they are seeking cooperation in many aspects and the relationship between China and the US is also in the frame of relations among big powers. In the foreseeable future, both China and the US will not have strong motivation to break through the framework of relations among big powers. After the 9/11 event, international security situation has become more complex and non-traditional security threat is now growing. Terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, energy security, financial security, infectious diseases, environmental degradation and other threats become growingly serious. They endanger society and public interests of mankind. In respond to these threats, every country, especially major powers in the world should cooperate with each other. China and the US are able to find common interests and share broad space for cooperation. Because of the increase of interdependence and common interests, the major powers are willing to seek cooperation but not confrontation and conflict. In the future, economic globalization and world multi-polarization can be regarded as a trend which will be conducive to the relationship between China and the US.

The Tripartite Pact

The Tripartite Pact, also known as the Berlin Pact, was an agreement between Germany, Japan and Italy signed in Berlin on 27 September 1940. It was a defensive military alliance that was eventually joined by Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria,Yugoslavia, and Slovakia. Yugoslavia's adherence provoked a coup, and Italy and Germany responded by invading Yugoslavia (with Bulgarian, Hungarian and Romanian assistance) and partitioning the country. The resulting state of Croatia joined the pact on 15 June 1941. The Tripartite Pact was directed primarily at the United States. Its practical effects were limited, since the high contracting powers had disparate strategic interests. Some technical cooperation was carried out, and the Japanese declaration of war on the United States propelled, although it did not require, a similar declaration of war from all the other signatories of the Tripartite Pact.

The Twenty One Demands

The Twenty-One Demands were a set of demands made during the First World War by the Empire of Japan under Prime Minister Ōkuma Shigenobu sent to the government of the Republic of China on January 8, 1915. The demands would greatly extend Japanese control of Manchuria and of the Chinese economy, & were opposed by Britain and the US. In the final settlement Japan gained a little but lost a great deal of prestige and trust in Britain and the US. The Chinese people responded with a nationwide boycott of Japanese goods; Japan's exports to China fell 40%. Britain was offended and outraged, and no longer trusted Japan as a partner. With WWI underway, Japan's position was strong and Britain's was weak. Nevertheless, GB and the US forced Japan to drop the 5th set of demands that would have given Japan a large measure of control over the entire Chinese economy and ended the Open Door Policy. Japan obtained its first four sets of goals in a treaty with China on May 25, 1915.

Viet Cong

The Viet Cong was the name given by Western sources to the National Liberation Front during the Vietnam War. was the name given by Western sources to the National Liberation Front during the Vietnam War (1955-1975). The National Liberation Front was a political organization with its own army - People's Liberation Armed Forces of South Vietnam (PLAF) - in South Vietnam and Cambodia, that fought the United States and South Vietnamese governments, eventually emerging on the winning side. It had both guerrilla and regular army units, as well as a network of cadres who organized peasants in the territory it controlled. North Vietnam established the National Liberation Front on December 20, 1960 to foment insurgency in the South. The organisation was dissolved in 1976 when North and South Vietnam were officially unified under a communist government.

Why the Washington Conference System failed to keep peace and order in the Asian/Pacific area in the 1930s

The Washington Conference was clearly a compromise endeavor, not a victory for any one nation. The Four-Power Pacts were well-intentioned efforts to calm tensions in the Pacific, but the lack of any real enforcement mechanism doomed the accords' effectiveness. However, a major benefit was gained by Britain and the United States by the termination of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance. The League of Nations failed because of US non-involvement. Our Senate would not ratify the treaty because they feared it gave the LN the authority to legislate in America. The Washington Naval Conference did its part to help preserve peace in the 1920s, but it indirectly led to the rise of the Japanese empire, which inevitably led to war in the Pacific. The Kellogg-Briand Pact was, sadly, farcical. A treaty that calls for renunciation of war is a very noble idea, but highly impractical to enforce. When Japan, a signatory to the pact, invaded Chinese Manchuria just three years later, the world did nothing except issue condemnations. Really, though, none of those things did anything to address the -root- causes of World War II: growing ethnic tensions in Germany, extreme poverty and inflation in Europe, resentment in Germany over the Treaty of Versailles, and the rise to power of the Japanese Empire. The Washington Naval Arms Conference pointed to an optimistic future for cooperation among the major military powers following the devastation of the First World War. It set a precedent for future arms control negotiations, particularly in the second half of the Cold War. Unfortunately, the treaties signed in 1921 and 1922 lacked firm verification and enforcement mechanisms. Many of the signatories, particularly Japan, violated the treaties in the next decade. These violations contributed to the outbreak of the Second World War in the Pacific.

The Washington Conference

The Washington Naval Conference, also called the Washington Arms Conference or the Washington Disarmament Conference, was a military conference called by U.S. President Warren G. Harding and held in Washington, D.C., from 12 November 1921 to 6 February 1922. The world's popular mood was peace and disarmament throughout the 1920s. Women had just won the right to vote in many countries, and they helped convince politicians that money could be saved, votes won, and future wars avoided by stopping the arms race. At the end of the Great War, Britain's navy was becoming obsolete, and the US and Japan were building new warships. Britain and Japan were allies in a treaty that was due to expire in 1922. Although there were no immediate dangers, the American-Japanese rivalry for control of the Pacific Ocean was seen as a long-term threat to world peace. To stop the arms race, the major countries signed a series of naval disarmament agreements. The United States, Japan, China, France, Britain, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, and Portugal all signed regarding interests in the Pacific Ocean and East Asia. Soviet Russia was not invited to the conference. It was the first international conference held in the US and the first arms control conference in history, and is looked at as a model for a successful disarmament movement. Tt resulted in three major treaties: Four-Power Treaty, Five-Power Treaty (aka Washington Naval Treaty), the Nine-Power Treaty, and a number of smaller agreements. These treaties preserved peace during the 1920s but are also credited with enabling the rise of the Japanese Empire as a naval power leading up to World War II.

The Xi'an (Xian) Incident

The Xi'an Incident of December 1936 took place in the city of Xi'an during the Chinese Civil War between the ruling Kuomintang and the insurgent Chinese Communist Party and just before the Second Sino-Japanese War. On 12 December 1936, Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, the leader of the Kuomintang, was arrested by Marshal Zhang Xueliang, a former warlord of Manchuria and Commander of the NE Army who had fought against the Japanese occupation of Manchuria and subsequent expansion into Mongolia by the Japanese and troops of the puppet state of Manchukuo. It led to a truce between the Nationalists and the Communists in order to form a united front against the Japanese threat. The Xi'an Incident is seen as a turning point for the Chinese Communist Party, as before the incident it was facing a new round of assaults by Kuomintang forces. Chinese nationalism had been roused by the Japanese invasion, but potential Chinese resistance was strengthened by the Xi'an Incident, leading to the United Front of Kuomintang and the Chinese Communist Party. Ultimately it would benefit the Chinese Communists once the Chinese Civil War revived after the defeat of Japan in 1945.

Opening up to the Outside World (Duiwai Kaifang)

The open door Policy - duiwai kaifang zhengce, the policy of opening to the outside world was implemented - sometimes also referred to as open door policy, an American-invented term rejected by the Chinese. This policy includes attracting FDI and promoting foreign trade in targeted areas. At the beginning, this opening up was restrained to the two southern provinces Guangdong and Fujian. Later on, it was extended along the coast and to the inland provinces. The implementation of the opening up policies can be divided into three stages: 1. Early 1980s: opening up to a limited extent, establishment of Special Economic Zones (SEZs) in Guangdong and Fujian. 2. Middle to the end of 1980s: coastal preference strategy enforcement, designation of Coastal Open Cities (COCs), which were entitled to set up their own Economic and Technological Development Zones (ETDZs); establishment of Coastal Open Economic Zones (COEZs) and an Open Coastal Belt (OCB). 3. Early 1990s: further extension of the opening up policies to all of China, establishment of Border Economic Cooperation Zones (BECZs), Capital Cities (CCs), further ETDZs, and Bonded Areas (BAs).[17]

A Socialist Market Economy

The socialist market economy is the economic model employed by the People's Republic of China. It is based on the dominance of the state-owned sector and an open-market economy, and has its origins in the Chinese economic reforms introduced under Deng Xiaoping.The ideological rationale is that China is in the primary stage of socialism, an early stage within the socialist mode of production, and therefore has to adapt capitalist techniques to thrive. Despite this, the system has widely been cited as a form of state capitalism.After the Great Leap Forward (1958-1961) and the ousting of the Gang of Four from power, Chairman Deng Xiaoping was willing to consider market-based methods of economic growth so as to revitalise China's economy and find an economic system compatible with China's specific conditions. The socialist market economy was a concept introduced by Deng Xiaoping in order to incorporate the market into the planned economy in the People's Republic of China.The fundamental distinction between the Chinese and Western mixed-market economy models lies less in the implementation of the mixed economic model but rather in the degree of state-ownership and underlying authoritarian political philosophy, which eschews Western notions of democracy, individual rights, and the rule of law

A New Type of Great Power Relationship

When Xi Jinping defined the "New Type of Great Power Relations" in his meeting with Obama at Sunnylands last year, he described it in three points: 1) no conflict or confrontation, through emphasizing dialogue and treating each other's strategic intentions objectively; 2) mutual respect, including for each other's core interests and major concerns; and 3) mutually beneficial cooperation, by abandoning the zero-sum game mentality and advancing areas of mutual interest. Embedded in the "New Type of Great Power Relations" is a nation's hope for an international environment more conducive to its development. From the rise and fall of its many dynasties to its forced opening up to the West in the wake of the Opium Wars, China has always seen itself as a civilization deeply entangled and affected by history. Recognizing the historically recurring clashes between an existing great power and an emerging power, China looks to the "New Type" framework to avoid historical determinism and to seek a less-disruptive rise in an increasingly integrated world.

The Korean War

World War II divided Korea into a Communist, northern half and an American-occupied southern half, divided at the 38th parallel. The Korean War began when the North Korean Communist army crossed the 38th Parallel and invaded non-Communist South Korea on June 25th, 1950. As the North Korean army backed by he Soviet Union quickly overran South Korea, the United States came to South Korea's aid. General Douglas MacArthur, who had been overseeing the post-WWII occupation of Japan, commanded the US forces which now began to hold off the North Koreans at Pusan, at the southernmost tip of Korea. America was not particularly interested in Korea, but still went as representatives of the UN peace keeping forces, as an anti-communist force. With the US, UN, and South Korean forces pinned against the sea at Busan, Having made this landing, MacArthur crushed the North Korean army in Incheon and recaptured Seoul. MacArthur crossed the 38TH Parallel and pursued the North Korean army all the way to the northernmost provinces of North Korea. Afraid that the US was interested in taking North Korea as a base for operations against Manchuria, the People's Republic of China secretly sent an army across the Yalu River. This Chinese army attacked the US/UN/ROK forces. America held off the Communists just north of the 38TH Parallel. Peace negotiations dragged on at Kaesong, then moved and continued to drag at Panmunjom through 1951 and 1952. The US tried using strategic bombing to intimidate the Communists into negotiating a peace treaty, but they wouldn't budge, particularly on the issue of POW (Prisoner of War) repatriation. The talks went on for months. In 1953 a peace treaty was signed at Panmunjom that ended the Korean War, returning Korea to a divided status essentially the same as before the war. Neither the war nor its outcome did much to lessen the era's Cold War tension.

Viet Minh

a Communist front organization founded by Ho Chi Minh in 1941 to organize resistance against French colonial rule and occupying Japanese forces. organization that led the struggle for Vietnamese independence from French rule. The Viet Minh was formed in China in May 1941 by Ho Chi Minh. Although led primarily by Communists, the Viet Minh operated as a national front organization open to persons of various political persuasions.

The US-Japan Mutual Security Treaty

first signed in 1952 at the San Francisco Presidio following the signing of the Treaty of San Francisco. The Security Treaty was later amended further on January 1960 between the US and Japan in Washington.When the Treaty was first signed, it contained provisions that permitted the United States to act for the sake of maintaining peace in East Asia and even exert its power on Japanese domestic quarrels. The latter part mentioned has been deleted in the revised version of the treaty. In the amended treaty, articles that delineate mutual defense obligations, the US obligations to pre-inform Japan in times of the US army mobilization were included to alleviate unequal status suggested in the treaty signed in 1952. The treaty established that any attack against Japan or the United States perpetrated within Japanese territorial administration would be dangerous to the respective countries' own peace and safety. It requires both countries to act to meet the common danger. To support that requirement, it provided for the continued presence of U.S. military bases in Japan. The treaty also included general provisions on the further development of international cooperation and on improved future economic cooperation. The treaty has lasted longer than any other alliance between two great powers. The treaty had a minimum term of 10 years. However, it provided that it would remain in force permanently unless one party gives one year's notice that it wishes to terminate it.