Of films, riots and hatred II: when islands are the issue
[ by Charles Cameron — comparative riotology, with sidelong glances at goats and a single mole ]
.
It’s not always disrespect for the Prophet that causes people to burn flags and attempt to break into embassies…
This week, the disputed sovereignty of some uninhabited islands has done the trick quite nicely in Beijing, where rioters have attempted to breach the Japanese embassy and burned the Japanese flag (upper image, above) in a manner that’s somehow reminiscent of the breaching of the US embassy and corresponding burning of the US flag (lower image) in Cairo .
I imagine that if one was Japanese or Chinese, one might consider the Beijing protests over the ownership of the Senkaku / Diaoyu / Tiaoyutai Islands to be the primary troubling news-story about embassies, rioting and gross breaches of diplomatic protocol this week.
There’s a strange kind of parallax involved here, I think. Or perhaps: what’s in the foreground depends on where you stand.
But that’s not to say there’s an exact equivalence between the situations, just that bearing one in mind may shed some light on the other.
**
I hope to get into the layers and layers of motivation that feed a riot in a subsequent post, but for now I’d just like to point to one similarity between the two situations. In each case, there’s an undertow of strong feeling that surfaces at a certain point — and astonishes us by its force.
In the case of the disputed islands, it may be Chinese feelings about Japanese behavior towards them in World War II that are triggered by Japanese claims on the islands. As China Daily USA says:
Japan has to recognize China’s sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands and atone for its past aggressions and atrocities, and take measures to punish those Japanese who deny the country’s violent past, in the way that Germany has been doing for decades. Only if Japan does that will China and other Asian countries see it as a normal country. Otherwise, China should prepare for a long-term struggle.
Or as the Israeli Arutz7 puts it:
As
The dispute with Japan is now part of the legacy of World War II and China claims that under the Potsdam Declaration of 1945, Japan was obligated to return all the territories seized illegally.
The above means that the dispute over the islands is now connected to one of the most highly charged issues in Sino-Japanese history, making it a matter of national honor for the Chinese that is not subject to negotiation.
Note here that the question is expressly one of honor.
It is significant, too, that the Chinese can be described as lenient towards their protesters attaching the sovereign embassy of a sovereign nation, just as the Egyptian government has been described as lenient towards their protesters attacking the sovereign embassy of the United States:
In the interim, China has allowed anti-Japanese demonstrators a relative freehand (“Their feelings are perfectly understandable” explained the Chinese Foreign Ministry) and the Japanese Embassy in Beijing has issued warnings to Japanese citizens and businessmen to take precautionary measures.
**
I strongly believe that undertows, as I am calling them here, are among the most important topics for monitoring and analysis — and that the fact that they so often take us by surprtise is a good reason to pay them closer analytic attention.
They surface in dreams, in graffiti, in conspiracy theories, in all the liminal spaces. And they can have game-changing impact: Great Game Changing impact.
That, btw, is why Cass Sunstein‘s paper on conspiracy theories is one we should consider in detail here on ZP one of these days.
**
Of course, as this recent map from the Economist shows —
— there are also oil and gas fields nearby.
What drives a crowd to riot and what interests the powers that be may be two very different sides to the same affair.
**
Curious Goat Fact accompaning the above map:
In the 1970s Japanese ultra-rightists took two goats on a 2,000km (1,250-mile) trip southwest from Tokyo to a group of uninhabited rocks near Taiwan called the Senkaku Islands. In the absence of humans willing to live in such a remote outpost, the hardy creatures would be the vanguard of a new push to solidify Japan’s hold over the islets, which are also claimed by China and Taiwan.
Supplementary Mole Fact:
The Senkaku mole is an endangered species.
**
Does comparing Beijing 2012 with Cairo 2012 change the emphasis with which you view recent events in Cairo and elsewhere?
Do you find the analogy between Cairo 2012 (upper panel above) and Tehran 1979 (lower panel) more convincing?
Look, I think the making of analogies is one of the chief ways — if not the chief way — in which we make “instinctive” judgments, which we then back up with appropriately selected data and reasoning. If you like, it’s subject to our own mental version of undertow in terms of what analogies we chose and how strongly we then weigh them — unless we take responsibility for the process, and begin to explore how it actually works in our own minds, and in the public mind…
Analogy is an extremely powerful instrument of thought — and it’s about time we understood it as well as we understand linear logic.
September 17th, 2012 at 4:07 am
Great tie-in, Charles!
.
There is a part of the world that sees diplomatic missions as symbols to be used as foils or enemy outposts/hostages of “the Other” to be attacked vs. the part that holds to the 2500 year old+ international norm that they are to be regarded as inviolate.
.
The Spartans, having impiously killed the heralds of the Great King Xerxes, later sent some of their own young men to Xerxes as human sacrifices and recompense to appease the Persians. The bewildered and disgusted Xerxes sent them away and set out to properly chastise the unruly Greeks.
.
I fear we are now in the same position as was Xerxes
September 17th, 2012 at 7:35 pm
Zen — Just so long as we’re not in the same position as General Gordon. From Wikiepdia’s article on him: “On his way to Khartoum with his assistant, Colonel Stewart, Gordon stopped in Berber to address an assembly of tribal chiefs. Here he committed a cardinal mistake by revealing that the Egyptian government wished to withdraw from Sudan. The tribesmen became worried by this news, and their loyalty wavered.”
September 18th, 2012 at 1:47 am
Hi Miss P.
.
Ah, Charles “Chinese” Gordon. The difference is, back then, by killing Gordon, the Mahdists brought down on themselves the wrath of the British Empire in the form of Lord Kitchener and his maxim guns, into which the Mahdists rode straight on, swords in one hand, Qurans in the other, to their deaths. Our leaders by contrast fear killing an enemy far more than having their own people die at their hands [exception: If the enemy is also a political embarrassment for a VIP, then he can be killed without ceremony, but only then]
September 18th, 2012 at 3:22 am
Zen — Yuppers. Yes indeed. Yup. My first thought when I heard of the Benghazi raid was, “What would Lord Kitchener do?” But that quote I pulled from Wikipedia gave me the shivers, Gordon’s key mistake is essentially what we did in Afghanistan; by telegraphing so much about our intentions the tribal chiefs wavered in their loyalty and often cast their lot with the Taliban — not because they liked them but because they thought that’s who would rule when the Americans lumbered home.
.
As to the rest of your comment, it’s so on target I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry so I did both.
September 18th, 2012 at 6:44 pm
The Japan Times has a page to follow the island controversy.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/senkaku.html
One thing to add, some Chinese have argued that all of Okinawa actually belongs to China as the Ryukyu kingdom there had a tributary relationship with China at one time. The descendants of the king are now members of the Japanese nobility.
September 18th, 2012 at 8:36 pm
Thanks, Gilles.
.
Nice to see you here, and your pointer is much appreciated.