A Deliberative Approach to Northeast Asia's Contested History

Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>The failure to reconcile views of the past and to address historical injustice has damaged inter-state relations in Northeast Asia. Joint committees, dialogues, and the participation of civil society have been used to address historical issues, but scholars in the disciplines of international relations and area studies have largely ignored these dialogues and deliberative forums. At the same time, there is an emergent theoretical literature on how deliberative democracy can address ethnic conflicts and historical injustice. There is a serious disconnect or distance between the theoretical literature on the resolution of conflicts via deliberation on the one hand, and empirical studies of deliberative approach in East Asia on the other. This article aims to address this shortcoming in the study of the politics of historical dispute in Northeast Asia by proposing a deliberative approach to history disputes and highlighting the achievements, limits, and dynamics of deliberation. Through mapping and comparative testing, we confirm that deliberation offers some potential for a departure from nationalist mentalities and a shift towards a consciousness of regional history in Northeast Asia. Our empirical test of the utility of the deliberative approach suggests that a new model for addressing regional disputes may be emerging.</jats:p>

Lost Decades in Growth Performance

“…Literature has shown that in many cases these people's opinions on given public issues changed significantly before and after the process. The method has been applied successfully even in authoritarian societies (see the experiences in the PRC, called "authoritarian deliberation" by He and Warren, 2011; see also Fishkin et al, 2010;He and Hundt, 2011;Hsu, 2009). For the description of the other models, see the survey in Smith (2011).…”

The Awkwardness of Australian Engagement with Asia: The Dilemmas of Australian Idea of Regionalism

“…When a portion of voters did not like the idea of 'Asianization of Australian life' , the Howard government slowed down the process of engagement with Asia. Moreover, Japan and South Korea are both democracies, but their conflict over history textbooks inhibits the development of regionalism in northeast Asia (He and Hundt, 2011).…”

Competing Notions of Regionalism in South Korean Politics

“…The Northeast Asia sub-region has also played host to a range of initiatives by non-state actors. For instance, history researchers from China, Korea, and Japan have collaborated on bilateral and trilateral bases to arrive at common understandings of regional history (He and Hundt, 2011), while transnational links between civil society actors in sectors such as the environment are also substantial.…”