สำนักราชบัณฑิตยสภา

The Journal of the Royal Institute of Thailand Volume II - 2010 Sitthiphon Kruarattikan 41 Again, as with the anti-American protests six years before, the Chinese leadership faced a dilemma. On the one hand, China’s economic interests with Japan were considerable. By the end of 2004, arrival trade volume between the two countries had reached 167 billion US dollars and Japan had replaced the US as China’s biggest trading partner. Also, more than seventy thousands Chinese students were studying in Japan (Theeravit, 2006: 113). On the other hand, failing to take the issue of history seriously could be detrimental to the CCP’s legitimacy. In 2003, Ma Licheng, an editorial writer of People’s Daily, and some Chinese scholars proposed what is called “New Thinking” on Sino-Japanese relations. They held the view that China should abandon the issue of history in dealing with Japan. Moreover, it should recognize and value the economic aid that Japan had given to China since 1979 in the form of soft loans. However, their proposal aroused criticism, not only from scholars, but also from many citizens and netizens who denounced Ma as a “traitor” (Hughes, 2006: 149). Therefore, following “New Thinking” was not an option for the Chinese leadership, as it could easily arouse anti-CCP sentiments. The protests made it difficult for the Chinese government to keep a balance between “peaceful” foreign policy orthodoxy and “violent” popular sentiments. In his meeting with Kyodo News Agency’s president Toyohiko Yamanouchi on April 12, Chinese State Councillor Tang Jiaxuan said that the Chinese people could not really understand how a nation which was unable to honestly look at its aggressive history and correctly understand the feeling of the people of the countries it had victimized could be qualified to bid for a permanent seat on the UNSC. At the same time, Tang assured Yamanouchi that China and Japan “should look forward into the future and be friends forever” (Handling China-Japan Ties Carefully, 2005, April 28: 16). After allowing the people to vent their anger for a few days, the Public Security Bureau of Beijing Municipality on April 15 made a declaration that any protest without official permission would be considered illegal and assured the people that the government and the CCP would handle Sino-Japanese ties in a proper manner (Theeravit, 2006: 114). The outburst of anger and the government’s reactions to the two incidents revealed the growing importance of public opinion in the making of Chinese foreign policy. Despite the fact that the government and the CCP have maintained their media control mechanism, Chinese citizens in the age of commercialized press and information technology have their own windows to the outside world, reducing the state’s ability to influence public opinion. Moreover, the Chinese leadership had to give more space to the people to express their frustrations. Otherwise, they could