Forbes： Jean-Pierre Lehmann Contributor
President Aquino Should Keep Stum On South China Sea: China Is Not Nazi Germany! — The Philippines Has Other Priorities
Comment Now Follow Comments
The situation in Asia Pacific generally and in the South China Sea in particular is explosive. There are several actors and tensions involved, including between the Philippines and China. When last year Philippines President Benigno Aquino compared China’s stance in the South China Sea to that of Nazi Germany’s annexation of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia before the outbreak of World War II, it was inappropriate, irresponsible and inflammatory. To have done so again, in a speech in Tokyo on Wednesday 3rd June, borders on the incredulous. Aquino should certainly refrain from such comparisons in the future.
For starters the dynamics of the South China Sea are extremely complex. I recently read The South China Sea by Bill Hayton, sub-titled, The Struggle for Power in Asia. It is absolutely outstanding, fascinating, based on extensive research and very well-written. It underlines in detail the immense historical, legal, economic and environmental complexities that the South China Sea poses. To compare the South China Sea to the Sudetenland displays amazing ignorance, worrying on the part of the head of State of one of the countries concerned. The situation requires cool-heads, not saber-rattling hot-heads. Had he read Bill Hayton’s work Aquino would not have made such asinine remarks. The comparison of Nazi Germany and China is absurd and bears no scrutiny. Xi Jinping is no Hitler and the South China Sea is not the Sudetenland.
As inappropriate, irresponsible and inflammatory as the comparison was in the first place, repeating it in Tokyo in the presence of hawkish Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is like bringing a match to one of the Asia Pacific’s potentially most explosive power kegs. Abe has been energetically revisionist in his approach to the history of Japan’s wars and invasions of China. Calling the Chinese Nazis will obviously delight one who wants the world to forget that actually in World War II Nazi Germany was Japan’s close ally.
Had Aquino read a bit more history he would have found that it was the Japanese, not the Chinese, who invaded and occupied the Philippines from 1942 to 1945, who killed, tortured and raped – and forcibly recruited thousands of Philippine women as sex slaves, what the Japanese euphemistically call “ianfu” (comfort women), into Japanese military run brothels (see illustration below). It was also the Japanese, not the Chinese, who ordered the 1942 Bataan Death March, in which thousands died from exhaustion, starvation, malaria and maltreatment. The Chinese died in the millions, both soldiers in battlefields and innocent civilians, seeking to prevent the world (including the Philippines) from being dominated and ruled by the Japan-Nazi Germany alliance.
Phil ianfu oki
Perhaps Aquino’s intention in making his inflammatory populist remarks was in the hope of distracting the attention of the Philippino people away from the poor economic and governance performance of the country’s leadership and elites over decades. The Philippines is an extreme case of a country with very high promise – estimated by the World Bank in the 1950s, among others, to become the star economy of East Asia – and abysmal performance. Aquino’s attitude to China may be one of unhealthy envy. In 1980 the Philippines GDP per capita ($1,868) was six-times that of China ($302); by this year China’s ($13, 800) is four-times that of the Philippines ($4,062). (source: IMF) Need one say more?
The Philippines: From Poster Child to Sick Child
South Korea is a country that had virtually nothing going for it, objective conditions were stark, but it achieved tremendous social, economic and political developments and transformations. GDP per capita in 1980 ($2184) was just a little bit higher than the Philippines; today ($38,000) it is more than nine-times higher. The Philippines is the opposite narrative to that of Korea: a country that had everything going for it – natural resources, a comparatively high level of education and huge amount of aid from the US. Its failure is as unexpected and as remarkable as Korea’s success.
Much of the rot can be ascribed to the twenty-year dictatorial rule (1965-1986) of Ferdinand Marcos and his wife Imelda (see illustration below) and their cronies. Asia Pacific is (or at least was) characterized by authoritarian rule, but whereas a number of the other authoritarian rulers – Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore, Park Chung-hee of South Korea, Suharto of Indonesia, Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia, and, of course, Deng Xiaoping of China and his successors – brought high economic growth and social development, the Philippines under Marcos stagnated. In the 2008 report of the Commission for Growth and Development 13 economies are identified as having achieved sustained 7% average annual growth for 25 years over the period 1950 to 2005, out of which 9 are from Asia Pacific – China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan and Thailand: the Philippines is conspicuous by its absence.
Marcos
In the closing years of the Marcos era I remember hearing a speech in Manila by Jaime Ongpin, a leading figure of the opposition, who later became Finance Minister in the government of President Cory Aquino (Benigno’s mother). The Philippines he argued needed fundamental reforms in three key areas: political, economic, and social. Political reform, he went on to say, could be achieved quickly with the overthrow of the Marcos cronyist regime. The economic reform would require abandoning big prestige industrial projects, for which the Marcos era was noteworthy, while concentrating instead on agrarian reform and promotion of the small-and-medium-sized sector. That he said would take a decade. The third reform required a transformation of social attitudes of the elites. That would take a generation.
The political reform came, but not the other two. There has been some rural reform but vanishingly pale in comparison with what was undertaken in Korea, or indeed China. Now that a generation has passed since the fall of Marcos, the profound social reform remains stillborn. The Philippino people have to sacrifice happiness and family in order to find work overseas. Foreign remittances are the country’s major source of revenue.
[I might add a personal note here. The Philippines is a country for which I have great affection. My mother was born in Manila and though after her father died in the 1920s she and her mother returned to Spain, I often went to the Philippines in my childhood, and also later for professional reasons. I have many Philippino friends. The affection clearly affects the frustration I feel in witnessing this country performing so far below its potential.]
Instead of giving irresponsible a-historical speeches, Aquino should concentrate on making the Philippines, like South Korea, an economic, social and environmental success story which its population so much deserves. (To be fair the Philippines economy has marginally improved during his administration, but it is far from being sustained and there remains a great deal of social injustice.)
Perspectives on the South China Sea
If there is to be World War III, the South China Sea (see map below) could be a major candidate location where the spark that triggers the war occurs. It is, as I stressed, highly complex. The conflicts are not just about resources, oil, fishing rights, or even security – if only things were so simple! The conflicts are also about history, about national identity and pride and about symbols.
Disputed-claims-in-the-south-china-sea-Agence-France-Presse oki
It is also perhaps the epicenter of the confrontation between two worldviews – the US and China. The Chinese view is that just as the US achieved its rise to great power status in the late 19th and early 20th centuries by securing control over its backyard and transforming the Caribbean into an American lake, before expanding to the rest of the world; China, as it rises to become a great global power in the 21st century, is now seeking to ensure stability and control in its backyard, including by transforming the South China Sea into a Chinese lake. The American view is to maintain its hegemonic strategic position in Asia Pacific.
China, given its size, its history, its humiliation at the hands of Western and Japanese imperialism, but also its past and contemporary achievements, naturally aspires to becoming one of the world’s great powers in the 21st century. In doing so Chinese thought leaders have sought to stress that China’s rise, unlike that of the Western erstwhile imperialist great powers and in stark contrast to its East Asian neighbor Japan, will be peaceful. Unlike preceding rising great powers, they insist, China will not resort to war and imperialism.
If China succeeds in becoming a great global power peacefully, it will be the first nation in history ever to have done so. Whether it succeeds or fails will of course depend very much on Chinese internal dynamics, but also on the acts and words of other nations, especially its neighbors, such as the Philippines, and the US. It will be the dominant narrative of the 21st century.
Comparing China to Nazi Germany poisons the environment and brings us one step nearer to conflict. As to the US, the best advice comes from an article by China expert Howard French, entitled “The South China Sea Could Become a Dangerous Contest of Military Might”. The US which is fond of sanctimoniously talking about rules – even if occasionally violating them – has so far refused to adhere to UNCLOS (the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea). As French writes: by adhering to UNCLOS, the US would “take a stand on a rules-based international order, …. rather than reducing this to a dangerous contest of military might”. And Aquino in the meantime should cease making his inappropriate, irresponsible and inflammatory remarks and drawing totally misleading historical parallels.
以下为电脑硬译文本：
阿基诺总统应该在中国南海问题上保持冷静：中国不是德国纳粹！
菲律宾有其他优先事项 !
在这种情况亚太地区一般并在中国南海尤其是爆炸性的。 有几个演员和所涉及的紧张局势，包括菲律宾和中国之间。 当去年菲律宾总统阿基诺相比，中国的立场，在中国南海到第二次世界大战爆发前的苏台德区在捷克斯洛伐克的纳粹德国吞并，这是不恰当的，不负责任和炎症。 已经在周三6月3日在边境怀疑这样做再次在东京的演讲。 阿基诺当然应该在将来这种比较克制。
对于初学者的中国南海的动力是极其复杂的。 最近，我读的中国南海由比尔·海顿，小标题， 在权力斗争亚洲 。 这是绝对优秀的，迷人的，基于广泛的研究和非常写得很好。 它强调了详细的巨大历史，法律，经济和环境的复杂性是中国南海构成。 为了比较中国南海的苏台德地区显示惊人的无知，就担心有关国家的国家之一的头部的一部分。 这种情况需要冷静的头，不磨刀霍霍热头。如果他读比尔海顿的作品阿基诺就不会取得这样的愚蠢的言论。纳粹德国和中国的比较是荒谬的，不承担任何推敲。习近平不是希特勒和中国南海是不是苏台德区。
由于不恰当的，不负责任和炎症的比较是摆在首位，重复它在东京的日本鹰派的存在总理大臣安倍晋三就像是把一个匹配的亚太地区最具潜在爆发力小桶之一。安倍晋三一直积极在修正主义他的做法对日本的战争和中国的侵略历史。呼唤中国的纳粹显然取悦一个谁希望世界忘记，其实在二战中纳粹德国是日本的亲密盟友。
有阿基诺读一些历史，他会发现，这是日本，而不是中国人，谁侵占菲律宾的1942年至1945年，谁杀害，拷打和强奸 – 和强行招募数千名菲律宾妇女作为性奴隶，什么日本委婉地称之为“ianfu”（慰安妇），为日本的军事妓院跑（见下图）。这也是日本，而不是中国的，谁下令在1942年巴丹死亡行军，其中数以千计的疲惫，饥饿，疟疾和虐待而死。中国人死于数百万，无论是士兵的战场和无辜平民，设法防止世界（包括菲律宾）从被支配和由日本，德国纳粹统治联盟。
也许阿基诺的意图使他的民粹主义炎症的言论是在分散注意力的菲律宾人的注意力从国家领导人的几十年恶劣的经济和治理绩效和精英的希望。菲律宾是一个国家的极端情况下，具有非常高的诺言 – 由世界银行在1950年代估计，等等，成为明星经济东亚 – 和糟糕的表现。阿基诺的态度，中国可能是不健康的羡慕之一。1980年人均（1868美元）菲律宾国内生产总值的六倍，中国（$ 302）的; 今年中国的（$ 13 800）是四倍，菲律宾（4062美元）的。（来源：IMF）需求的一个多说吗？
菲律宾：从海报的孩子生病的孩子
韩国是一个国家，有几乎没有为它去，客观条件形成了鲜明的，但它取得了巨大的社会，经济和政治的发展和变革。1980年人均国内生产总值（2184美元）比菲律宾的只是一点点高; 今日（38 000美元）就超过九倍。菲律宾是相反的叙述，以韩国的：一个国家拥有了一切去为它 – 自然资源，教育和数额巨大的美国援助的一个相对高的水平。它的失败是因为意外的是显着的韩国的成功。
大部分腐烂可以归因于马科斯和他的妻子伊梅尔达（见下图）及其亲信的二十年的独裁统治（1965至1986年）。亚太地区是（或者至少是）特征的专制统治，但而一些其他的独裁统治者 – 李光耀新加坡，韩国的朴正熙，印尼苏哈托，马来西亚的马哈蒂尔·穆罕默德，以及中，当然，中国和他的继任者邓小平 – 带来了较高的经济增长和社会发展，马科斯在菲律宾停滞不前。在委员会的增长和发展13个经济体2008年的报告中被认定为已经实现了持续7％的年平均增长率25年来在此期间1950年至2005年，其中9个来自亚太地区 – 中国，香港，印尼，日本，韩国，马来西亚，新加坡，台湾和泰国：菲律宾是显眼地缺失。
在最后几年马科斯时代的我记得由Jaime Ongpin，反对派的领军人物，谁后来成为财政部长在总统阿基诺（贝尼尼奥的母亲）的政府听到马尼拉演讲。菲律宾他认为需要根本性的改革在三个关键领域：政治，经济和社会。政治改革，他接着说，可能是与马科斯cronyist政权被推翻迅速实现。经济改革将需要放弃声望大工业项目，为此，马科斯时代是值得关注的，而不是集中在土地改革和推广小和中型部门。他说，将需要十年。第三个需要改革的精英社会态度的转化。这将需要一代人。
政治体制改革来了，但没有其他两个。已经有一些农村的改革，但在什么承诺在韩国，还是中国确实比较难以察觉苍白。现在，一代自马科斯的秋天过去了，深刻的社会变革仍然胎死腹中。该菲律宾人不得不牺牲幸福和家人为了寻找海外工作。国外汇款是该国的主要收入来源。
[我在这里可以添加个人笔记。菲律宾是一个国家对我有很大的影响。我的母亲出生在马尼拉，虽然之后她的父亲在她和母亲返回西班牙1920年去世后，我经常去菲律宾在我的童年，也是后来出于职业原因。我有很多朋友菲律宾。亲情显然影响了挫折，我觉得在目睹这个国家执行远远低于它的潜力。]
而不是给一个不负责任历史讲话，阿基诺应集中精力使菲律宾，像韩国，经济，社会和环境的成功故事，它的人口这么多值得。（公平地说，菲律宾经济已略有他执政期间的改善，但远未持续，仍有大量的社会不公。）
在中国南海的观点
如果是第三次世界大战，中国南海（见地图）可能在那里触发战争的火花发生重大的候选位置。它是，因为我强调的，非常复杂的。冲突并不只是资源，石油，渔业权，甚至安全 – 只要事情就这么简单！冲突也是对历史，对国家认同和自豪感和对符号。
这也是也许是两个世界观之间的对抗的震中 – 美国和中国。中国人的看法是，正如美国通过确保控制其后院改造成加勒比海美国湖，扩展到世界其他国家之前，在19世纪末和20世纪初达到了它的崛起，以大国地位; 中国作为它上升到成为21世纪全球大国，目前正在寻求以确保稳定性和控制在其后院，包括通过将中国南海成为中国湖泊。美国的观点是保持在亚太地区的霸权的战略地位。
中国，鉴于其规模，它的历史，它在西方和日本帝国主义的手里屈辱，而且它的过去和当代的成就，自然渴望成为21世纪的世界大国之一。在此过程中中国人的思想领袖都力求强调，中国的崛起，不像西方帝国主义昔日大国，并形成了鲜明的对比其东亚近邻日本，将是和平的。不同于前面的崛起大国，他们坚持，中国不会诉诸战争和帝国主义。
如果中国成功地成为一个全球大国和平，这将是历史上的第一个国家曾经有这样做。无论是成功或失败，当然在很大程度上将取决于对中国内部动力，也对行为和其他国家的话，尤其是邻国，如菲律宾和美国。这将是21世纪的主导叙事。
中国比较纳粹德国毒化环境，使我们一步接近冲突。至于美国，最好的建议来自一个文章中国专家霍华德法国，题为“ 中国南海可能成为军事力量的危险大赛 “。美国是喜欢sanctimoniously谈论规则-即使偶尔违反他们-迄今拒绝遵守联合国海洋法公约（联合国海洋法公约的法律）。作为法国写道：坚持联合国海洋法公约，美国将“采取以规则为基础的国际秩序的立场，……。而不是减少这危险的比赛军事力量“。阿基诺和在此期间，应停止做他不合适，不负责任的言论炎症和绘画完全是误导的历史先例。
