Alternatives International

Islands of Conflict

Michael Reford — 2012-10-01T21:58:15Z

At first glance, there is a serene nature to the islands that make up the Okinawa prefecture. Picturesque surrounding ocean and rich flora and fauna make for a paradise-like setting. In reality, one collection of deserted islands at the west end of the chain is creating havoc for its two fiercely proud neighbours.

The remote islands by the name of Senkaku in Japan and Diaoyu in China are at the centre of a tricky political situation that has been developing in the East China Sea.

The spat between the two is just another chapter in the rocky relationship both countries share. Control of the region has been at stake since the late 19th century when both fought in the Sino-Japanese wars. Preceding and throughout the Second World War, the political systems of both countries were thrust into an idealistic battle creating further division. The current dispute over these islands has brought a renewed relevance to several conflicts that are now over fifty years old. The Nanking Massacre of 1937 and other World War II atrocities are a severe blemish on Japanese history and have remained relevant in the last decade through denials and questions surrounding the authenticity of historical sources and the denial of facts by high ranking Japanese officials. This has brought anti-Japanese sentiment to the forefront of the current dispute, making the issue an ideological debate on top of a territorial dispute. National pride, ideals, and the future relationship of both countries are heavily intertwined with the fate of these rocky outcrops at sea.

Taiwan has added itself into the mix, desiring the fishing rights off the islands. This further complicates matters, as China claims Taiwan as a part of its jurisdiction. The island was handed over to the Chinese after Japan was forced to renounce its colonial claim after the Second World War.

The conflict surrounding the islands was renewed in 2010 as activists landed on the islands with Taiwanese and Chinese flags, prompting a small spat. The situation has recently come to the forefront once again when Japan announced the purchase of the islands from private owners. Taiwanese fishing boats are protesting by sailing to the islands where they will surely encounter the Japanese coast guard and/or the Chinese surveillance ships that have recently been in the area.

The Japanese stake in the conflict is high. Island disputes cover the continent as South East Asian countries and China have claims over a number of islands in the South China Sea. Closer to home, the Japanese continue to argue with South Korea over the Takeshim/Dokdo Islands. The south end of the Sea of Okhotsk brings another issue over the Kuril Islands with Russia. The secession of the Diaoyu/Senkaku can too easily have massive repercussion for other Japanese claims.

Territorial issues aside, the commercial value of the islands is a motivating factor for the nations and regions involved in the dispute. The location shadows important shipping lanes in the East China Sea. Aside from fishing rights, there are nearby Chunxiao gas fields as well as the potential discovery of new fields in the immediate vicinity.

The United States also has something at stake in this ongoing political conundrum. After the Second World War, a battered Japan renounced its claims to many islands including Taiwan in the 1951 Treaty of San Francisco. In 1971, the islands at the centre of the conflict were returned to Japan under the Okinawa reversion deal as the US had held them in trust. The Chinese claim this document to be illegitimate, although they did not protest at the time.

The mutual security treaty, part of the Treaty of San Francisco, means that should there be military engagement, the US would be obligated to defend its ally. The fact that they have stayed silent over the issue is evidence that they do not want to damage their relationship with China, a major trading partner.

Anti-Americanism in the Middle East and North Africa are surely enough to deter getting involved in a geopolitical region where they have not enjoyed much success in the post WWII era. The re-election campaign of Obama cannot be sacrificed, as a shift in foreign policy back to Asia could have a negative effect.

Leadership changes are also nigh in Japan as an election looms, as well as in China where the Communist Party will welcome a new leader in October. Xi Jinping, the most likely leader to take on Chinese leadership, can use this conflict as a political tool to assert his power and mandate depending on his agenda. Current Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda has a looming election to think about, and so a defeat over the island saga will surely seal his fate as he is already behind in the polls.

Mass anti-Japanese demonstrations have occurred all over China; damage to Japanese property has been a bi-product of the Chinese government allowing these demonstrations to occur. In a country that is known for being heavy handed with political opposition and protests in general, the allowance for mass gatherings in the streets can be seen as a step for the people of China, who lack a democratic voice.

The deteriorating relationship between the second and third largest economies in the world, who exchanged $340 billion last year, will have larger implications for both parties. The stagnation of the US economy and the uncertainty of Europe are global issues, and both of these ‘Asian Tigers' would not want to add themselves to the list of suffering economies. It is in both countries' interests to resolve this situation before it further damages their historically turbulent relationship or risks destabilizing a strong economic region. That being said, one can never question the resolve of any government committed to protecting a national identity in a historically troubled region.

The Battle for Land and Survival

Michael Reford — 2012-08-01T16:54:11Z

There is a certain practicality to civil disobedience that ends with meaningful results. One simple act or specific instance can become a rallying point or spark that lights the fuse of something much bigger. Thereafter, the results of change can come over a much longer period of time and with varying results.

While wider scale movements and civil disobedience have gone hand-in-hand in the past, there is something to be said for the shorter-term, immediate impact of civil disobedience. Crafty ideas from civilians around the world have been used to gain more immediate and meaningful results. In this difficult economic time, land reclamation has become a popular means to break from societal norms, as citizens fight for their future. It has been a beacon for people who have come across difficult financial times or those who have been traditionally hard done-by.

The recent subprime mortgage crisis in the United States has left many working middle-class people vulnerable to the loss of their houses to foreclosure. Although foreclosure activity has been at its lowest since 2007, nearly 1.9 million properties experienced filings in 2011, still a significant amount. Those who considered housing as an investment were dismayed when they had lost their homes overnight, leaving many in dire need of shelter and with financial issues.

A unique and practical strategy was then devised, drawing inspiration from the Landless Workers' Movement in Brazil. People move back into their houses, change the locks, and reclaim a property that is owned by the bank. The legality of the situation is ambiguous, but the bottom line is that, unless the banks call for aid in protecting their assets, police will not exactly be eager to jump in and evict organized squatters that have neighbourhood support.

The Take Back the Land movement in Florida was formed after the shaky housing market in south Florida started to struggle as excess supply and falling prices took their toll. Take Back the Land upholds the basic human right of obtaining shelter and works with communities in order to facilitate organized squatting and the return of houses to homeless residents. It has also proved difficult to combat, as the movement is decentralized and organized on a local scale.

The original idea comes from a Latin American social movement called the Landless Workers' Movement (LWM) in Brazil. Landlessness has long been a central issue in Latin America. Peasant farmers can be victims of loan sharks, fraudulent documents, or pressures to sell land to large agro-industrial multi-national corporations. Renting land and working for abnormally low rates while being tied to the land creates a poor quality of life and a trap for rural farmers. Currently, fifty percent of the land is owned by two percent of the population in Brazil. The LWM has organized itself to reclaim fallow land owned by large landowners or multinational corporations.

This type of farmland occupation does not go without conflict. Encampments on large tracts of land in the countryside comes with the challenge of erecting schools, building health centres, and providing food and water for the many peasants turned activists. Violence against the poverty stricken occupants by paramilitary organizations is also an issue. Large landowners and corporations can hire armed individuals or paramilitaries to deter and destroy encampments.

This form of civil disobedience is not without its pitfalls, but is a strategically important method, through which victims of landlessness and rural farmers can obtain real results that have a direct impact on their livelihoods.

Harsh economic times around the world have led to mass layoffs in some manufacturing sectors as global production slows and economies contract. Many are subject to pains of the free market, though some have taken matters into their own hands.

In late 2008, with the financial crisis in the United States in full force, the workers of the Republic Windows and Doors factory were informed that the factory was closing as their financial backer, the Bank of America, was in trouble. The workers occupied the factory with the help of their union in order to save their jobs. The deal struck by the local union leader allowed for a further ninety days to find a buyer or form a co-op.

This idea—drawn from an early success in Argentina—shows the immediate benefit of a well-executed plan to protect the interests of citizens at the mercy of the free market. With Argentina in the midst of an economic crisis in the late 1990s, the workers of Cerámica de Cuyo were about to be laid off by a boss that had led them along, promising payment of wages after they were long overdue. They returned to the factory after a year of having been laid off. Sleeping outside, sharing blankets, providing food, and living at the factory in order to protect the valuable equipment were only the first steps. They now operate a successful cooperative and own the factory outright after a long struggle.

Employees admit that the work is much harder, but they can now enjoy a more hands-on, thorough approach to the business while also enjoying the benefits of salary equality and ownership.

Drastic measures against the injustices of the world must be taken in the face of the harsh economic reality of today. Civil disobedience is a necessary action when one is pushed to the limit. It is a natural, primal instinct to protect one's own existence if that existence is threatened. Examined here is a unique approach with short-term, immediate results that stands out from other means of civil disobedience. It affects people close to the action, but has wider implications in a world where the needs of so many are threatened by abuse within a free market economic system.

Although independent, these small groups of people, trying to preserve the basics of life, are interconnected by larger implications of this form of civil disobedience. These daring, results-oriented, practical strategies of opposing a system that forgets many achieves an idea far greater than the material result of reclaiming land, houses, or factories: the idea of solidarity, human survival, and the capacity to grasp one's own future while operating in an imposing, cut-throat system.