Jump to content

Imperial Matters


Recommended Posts

Given Tianxia's response to the Japanese request, the Japanese Ambassador Shiramine Yusuke was instructed by the government in Tokyo to meet with the Imperial governments representatives, so as to present them the matters the Japanese government deemed worth addressing and to respond to those questions Tianxia may ask. Without wasting much time, the Japanese ambassador went to meet his Tianxia counterpart, hoping for a conductive and productive meeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He would be sent to meet with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Chen Duli.  Then Foreign Minister gestured for the ambassador to take his seat at the opposite end of the large mahogany desk that dominated the foreign minister's office.  

 

"Well Mr. Ambassador, it is kind of you to extend such an offer, and your government to extend an offer for a state visit for the cherry blossoms.  Though naturally given the logistics that come with an Imperial Visit, such a visit must be planned extensively.

 

What is it that you seek from this Imperial Majesty?  What do you want from this visit?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Ambassador took his seat, after a polite bow to the Minister. "Thank you for receiving me, Minister Chen."

 

"We do understand that a meeting requires quite some planning, which is why we tried to send a request in advance, so as to allow for a schedule to be drawn up that hopefully can be satisfactory. It would be a stay of several days at the Tokyo Imperial Palace, a complex that is well-guarded and well-maintained to ensure security and well-being of a visitor of such high standing."

 

"As to what we seek from this visit, we were hoping that it could help demonstrate the close ties between our countries and hopefully also allow for a formal treaty of amity and non-aggression between our countries. It is the opinion of our government that Tianxia and Japan do share certain interests, especially in the regional security of the Asia-Pacific and the Pacific Rim and its shiplanes, where it was considered that cooperation would prove advantagous for both of us to conserve ressources while securing mutual benefits. Additionally, Prime Minister Akiyama was hoping to adress matters such as nuclear weaponry, your government's request to be given certain articles from captured Commonwealth military stock and one additional matter... Akiyama-san would like to request His Imperial Highness to maybe reannex into Tianxia the region of Outer Manchuria, in order to reestablish stable Imperial governance at this vital coastline along the Sea of Japan."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"By nuclear weaponry and the Commonwealth stock, I assume you're referring to the turn over of nuclear weapons and nuclear capable delivery vehicles captured from the Commonwealth and built by Tianxia." the Foreign Minister said.  "As for the rest of the items, especially annexation, this will have to be agreed to by the Emperor himself.  Extending the benevolent protection of His Imperial Majesty is something that he does not take lightly.  That said, as I'm sure you're aware, there is a sense in this capital that the De-Imperialization Process was poorly handled, particularly by traitors within the Empire who attempted to use it for selfish benefit.  It is generally seen as necessary, that the Empire reemerge in order for vitality to return to the World."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Indeed, we are referring to the stock that has been captured from the legacy power of the American Commonwealth, and which is scheduled to be dismantled over the coming years. Given that such is already decided, as long as no additional costs be incurred, Tianxia is welcome to cooperate on the matter. We won't miss the stockpile and we would hope that the NPT will be enforced rigorously and never make us miss it.", Shiramine stated with a cooperative smile, before turning towards a more concerned expression. "Considering the de-Imperialisation, I think it is hardly a secret that a good few in Japan have been hardly euphoric over the reduction of Tianxia's influence in the world. It has caused much concern over security of trade and some even go as far as to wonder whether the American Commonwealth and Japan had been at peace, had Alaska stayed with Tianxia from the very beginning. So, I'm sure any reemergence of Tianxia will find at least some approval within our country. Nevertheless, however, given our history, I of course cannot help but be concerned as to what such a reemergence would entail and how much of a threat it could be to our or Korean independence."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"With due respect, on the nuclear matter, that argument is very questionable if not an outright violation of the NPT in practical effect to cooperate rather than whole sale turn over.  In order to dispose safely of nuclear material it takes a very long time.  That is why the historic arms control treaties took such a long time to implement.  Further the retention of dual use capable weaponry is very hard to question.  

 

It is equally very questionable that a country with no experience or tacit knowledge can stand up a nuclear disposal program, with a lower cost than a country with experience disposing of these materials and the tacit knowledge and experience that is only derived from doing.  On top of this the Japanese have I believe already said they were handing over the arsenal, the issue when discussed before was merely the weapon systems.  This seems to be a steady roll back.  A further roll back would in turn further undermine the word of the Japanese in the first place, and to be frank, on the matter of nuclear security a further roll back could be holding onto a few nuclear weapons.  That's just outright unacceptable.  

 

It is imperative that the Japanese maintain their initial word, and comply with the NPT.  And if you're going to give us an argument that its "costs" you should actually have a good argument based on fact in nuclear disposal."

Edited by Triyun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I would very much like to know in what way Japan has rolled back on any of its pledges made. As it stands, we have solely been cooperative wherever it was requested, under the sole condition that no additional costs be imposed upon us for the dismantling of the stockpile. as far as our government sees it, one way or the other, we will get rid of the stockpile, though your help is of course very much appreciated, as long as it serves first and foremost the reduction of the global nuclear stockpile and strengthening the Non-Proliferation regime. One would think there is no real disagreement there between us, no? Similarly, there has been no mention by us of any intention to withhold any of the delivery systems. at the most, our government has requested an inventory as to what systems are concerned, so we can make sure that all items are being accounted for and nothing goes missing. As it stands, you accuse us of rolling back negotiations, when Japan has done nothing of the sort, but merely requested to not be given additional costs and to be provided with an inventory of requested items. Japan is not a country that has produced these weapons of mass destruction, nor do we intent to keep them, we merely captured them given our enemy who was a legacy nuclear power disintegrated and left us with this. So I would like to know in what way this tone is warranted that we get treated as if we had been uncooperative and seemingly untrustworthy, Mr Chen."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The issue is that the weapons were to be turned over, and initial requests for weapons was met with a much less than cooperative response.  The idea as well that there be no additional cost is equally somewhat ridiculous.  You break it you buy it.  It was your nation that decided to invade the American Commonwealth knowing Japan would by definition immediately be in violation of the NPT if it acquired control of the American armed forces nuclear stockpile.  That's a cost associated with a policy choice you made built into it.  Secondly, the Japanese government having asked for reasons for weapons to be turned over, weapons built on Imperial technology seems at minimum presumptuous."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Well, if you could give the Japanese government a cost estimate then, so that we are able to make room in our budget for it, such be appreciated. Our initial response to your request for the nuclear stockpile has been met with full cooperation and Japan is not going to retain any nuclear weaponry following our initial and still standing policy on the matter. In regards to our request for information, the Imperial government requested us to dismantle the entire military stock captured from the Commonwealth, which also contains many conventional weapon systems that are neither nuclear nor delivery systems for nuclear devices. Given that we have no obligation to hand over or dismantle captured stocks of equipment that are not regulated by the Non-Proliferation Treaty, I would say that Tianxia may very well request of us to hand over such conventional weapon systems, but we should have every right to ask for reasons, for a list of equipment requested and what you are going to do with it. The Commonwealth military had thousands of aircraft, armoured vehicles, ships and other smaller systems that have a combined value in the quadrillions of Yen most likely, and aren't some trivial matter."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Many of which are aircraft with the capability to deliver nuclear armed stand off missiles and gravity bombs, tanks and vehicles designed to operate in contested environments with nuclear weaponry, and which if just a fraction with a fraction of the arsenal the Americans had, could be quickly integrated with the Japanese Armed Forces as part of a nuclear spear point.

 

Japan has had these coincide with its intensifying efforts to build up logistical points in the Americas.  Including what some analysts believe is a new canal.   A move previously destabilizing, and a strategic position which suggests a more long term stay.

 

We did not withdraw ourselves from positions so that an Imperial Thumb could be replaced with a Japanese Thumb.  We withdrew to give the Americas a fair shot at liberty.  Delayed custody transfer of the weapons while building the canal sends a red flag up in some circles here with your actions.

 

These aren't the actions of a Japan which has restrained itself, but one which is looking to build itself a global strategic position.  Which in an economic sense is fine, but you have a lot of energy for a young nation, energy which we sharply notice has not been used in the hand over of weapon systems other ambitious Empires may want to keep for themselves.  Shipping of these materials may begin immediately to Hawaii and the Aleutians.  It is not for me to give your government cost estimates of what you need to ship these, it is for me to verify that they are indeed transferred."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Well, indeed, these aircraft may carry nuclear missiles and gravity bombs. But these are nuclear missiles and nuclear gravity bombs that Japan does not posess and which we are in no way intenting to ever posess. Yet, I am sure that would we ever intent to have a delivery system that can be fitted on the majority of the Commonwealth fighters, it could as well be fitted on our existing stock, if necessary as old as the F-15J. In regards to vehicles, I'd like to know since when it has been prohibited for us to posess any kind of system that may actually still work, should we be subjected to a nuclear attack. NBC protection and the ability to function even on a battlefield that has been devastated by NBC weaponry is not a priviledge of the nuclear powers and if our defensive measures reduce the effectiveness of nuclear weaponry on our country, I think such only demonstrates that nuclear weaponry has just even less value and should be abolished in the mid-to-long term altogether. Just as much as all these assets allow for a 'nuclear spearpoint', provided we'd be keeping any part of the arsenal, we are no third world country that has no idea how to produce equipment on our own and many of these matters are way too basic, or not even offensive, raising more questions as to why we should hand over this stockpile to the last gun and bullet.

 

The establishment of logistical points has occurred, given that following the collapse of the Commonwealth, Japan was responsible for the protection of the american people, until independent states would form that are capable of defending themselves. Just as you, Japan has no intention of letting others abuse the current weakness of the Americas. But Japan has only a limited presence in the Western Hemisphere and we are in talks with the local regimes, in order to make sure that our presence will not be some neocolonialist adventure that creates another colony, as they still exist in the Americas.

 

The establishment of a canal most of all serves our economic interests and serves to shorten the time that is required for transit from the Northern Pacific to the Northern Atlantic. While I can see that such construction may be a bit problematic for the Panama Canal, I would think that this construction neither blocks your shipping, nor does it cause any harm of a magnitude that would warrant the term 'red flag'. Its military-strategic importance would be very much limited to shaving a few days off the transit time. The sole occassions in which it would be of importance would be if the Panama Canal was to be used as leverage against us, a case that the Japanese government deems quite unlikely, which it hopefully is. Japan has no intention whatsoever of establishing an apparatus of coercion and domination in the Americas, nor do we seek to put Tianxia at a disadvantage, but I think that we do have a right to freely pursue cooperation with the Americas to improve trade, stabilise the region and promote independence, without having to be told that such constitutes a 'red flag'. This is no Japanese thumb on the Americas, it is at best an open hand as we assist the Americas in their own security and as has been made clear repeatedly, the Japanese Empire will withdraw any and all garrissons, once the Americans are confident in their own capability of defending themselves.

 

The Japanese Empire, Mr Chen, is not entering a bid for global dominance here, nor are we trying to put others at a disadvantage. But at the same time, I do agree that our restraint has been somewhat lacking, which is however in no minor way related to the fact that the Japanese nation is hoping to be a more active contributor to the security of the region and to guarantee that there is no interruption to our maritime trade routes, which are of vital importance to our national security. It is not in our interest to compete with Tianxia for the traditional position of your Empire in the Asia-Pacific, but I would think we are also no suzerain nation anymore and it should be permissible for us to take measures to ensure our vital national interests. We are very much willing to cooperate with Tianxia, even as it reasserts itself, as such is conductive to the overall security and stability of the region, which undeniably is of great importance to both of our countries. But I must insist that we are treated as a sovereign state and as a friend and partner, not as a subject of the Emperor to order around and give veiled threats to.

 

As it stands, the Japanese Empire is going to hand over unconditionally the nuclear stockpile to Tianxia for disposal and we will also hand over every former long-range bomber, nuclear-capable cruise missile and all ballistic missiles and ballistic missile submarines, together with any stocks of weapons great fissible material inherited from the Commonwealth. Such we can guarantee you and there will be no rolling back on that matter. However, we are going to break up all major Commonwealth ships for scrap and all minor vessels that are not usable by our forces or by the successor states of the American Commonwealth. For the rest of the military equipment, these are mostly scheduled to be broken apart, so they can do no harm anymore, though we may also hand certain low-capability fighters to the successor states to speed up the establishment of American self-protection. If the Empire of Tianxia deems Japanese actions to be an ambigious bid for global power, then such is a sad misinterpretation of our actions. Japan has expanded its capacities since it had to care for itself, but we have no intention of challenging the East Asian status quo. However, it would be good if Tianxia did not try to adopt coercive measures to now fence us in, but rather accept that the Japan of today is not the Japan of the times of Yuan Jia and that our current status be seen as opportunities, not as challenges. Because ultimatively, while we very much seek friendship with you, given the long common history of our peoples and our many common interests, Japan will not accept any re-imperialisation of our very country and we can't in good faith compromise our own national security, especially not after the attitude displayed here. We do not want anything to cast shadows on our relations, but if Tianxia wants to reassert itself in East Asia, it is welcome to do so and we will certainly be cooperative, as long as it gives proper consideration also to our interests and position and isn't just aimed at trying to demonstrate some superiority, which Tianxia may very well have in terms of military and economic power, but which still cannot overrule our existing security concerns and which we are willing to negotiate on, but not in this way shape or form."

 

Ambassador Shiramine paused, took some breath and wondered how a Hanami visit could end with this kind of negotiation. But if such were the concerns present in the Empire of Tianxia, then it was all the more important to take care of them, before things got even worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The Japanese Empire does indeed seek a hand of friendship with Tianxia.  I will not deny that.  We are the most capable military nation on the planet though.  How Japan has behaved outside this is is different.  It has seemed indeed in the Russian Negotiations, Japan has been leveraging the Tianxia Trade as a way of insulting the Russians.  Even if you don't agree with their specific proposals, it seems Japan believes itself beyond the Russians.  Similarly the attacks on the Americans, while we understand somewhat are also iron fisted.  Neither power is particularly dynamic or rather was, but Japanese policy seems a lot more hard-nosed when it comes to weaker foreign powers.  

 

Japanese interest as you define it seem fundamentally based on a Japanese expansion.  Not in trade.  You may say the Japanese Empire is not threat to the Tianxia Empire, because it lacks Tianxia's resource.  But its course is certainly rising to the levels where it has emerged as threatening to other ones.  What we are saying is that especially after the Russian Dialogue and the repeated invocation of Tianxia's name by a third party, namely you, you have to do a lot to reassure, and this must start with compliance on the weapons.  We appreciate your compliance with it.

 

As for Canals, canals are fundamentally a military asset.  This was done without communications to other stake holders.

 

I am heartened to hear that Japan will not Re-Imperialize.  It is very good.  A return to the fascist regimes of the past so called, Japanese Imperial Families, would indeed be a very bad thing.  These have brought only bouts of war and destruction.   It is our view that Japan must do more to communicate its intentions to its neighbor regimes, and treat even the lowliest ones with respect and harmony."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"We do not try to gain leverage over Russia by mentioning your trade, at least not political leverage of any sort. It was however deemed necessary to remind Russian negotiators that Japan is not in any way dependant on Russia's ressources and that it will thus not seek to gain access to these at any cost. We do not have any intentions of expanding into Russia, if such is feared. While relations are not ideal, waging a war with such diplomatic, military and financial cost for whatever it is we could ever gain from it, is nothing we would do. Quite the contrary, as it is, our government has accepted to send a delegation to Russia in the hope that through these three-party talks, peace in the region can be solidified and that possibly a non-aggression pact with Russia can be found, but it seems to us, all Russia ever did was to tell us that it has ressources, and we should be thankful to buy them. Japan is not dis-interested in such ressources, but we are way more interested in an actually secure Northern Border.

 

Japanese expansion is maybe not merely economical, but we are hardly expanding territorially too, if such is a concern of yours. As it stands, the Empire has made one sole lasting expansion, which has been the incorporation of the Southern Seas Territory, which occurred peacefully. Since, we made it a point to allow for the establishment of new states, both in Korea, where our intervention followed a humanitarian and political crisis caused by Koreans themselves, and in the Americas, where already three states have risen from the ashes. Japan has every intention to cooperate with these new states and establish trade, which has for a long time been vital to our economy, but such will be without coercion and not aimed as a new Co-Prosperity Sphere.

 

As for the Re-Imperialisation... I do think we have a communication error here. I mostly used this term, as a counter to your mentioning of rising criticism over Tianxia's de-imperialisation. Tianxia's change in policy towards its former territories has not gone unnoted and we are very much aware of what is happening in Southeast Asia. It has been stated that Japan's independence be respected, but of course, given the actions in Southeast Asia and how we just had to talk about 'red flags' one cannot help but worry about what intentions a Re-Imperialisation movement could have towards our free country, now or possibly in the future. In that sense, we have no intention to be the next Burma. Of course, that doesn't mean that we do not disagree on your notion on past fascism. While our country does carry the official title ofJapanese Empire still, as it has since the days of Yuan Jia, Japan has no intention of repeating its early Showa Era mistakes and we enjoy our democratic governance and free market. On the matter of the Imperial family, the whereabouts of said family are unknown and elements exist in our country, which do wish to actually see a return of a Japanese Emperor. But I am fairly sure that even if a majority for reinstatement can be found, constititutional restraints will remain in place, as there are no majorities for absolutism and fascism. It is a complicated issue, Mr Chen, given that many see the idea of the Imperial institution as an important constituant of Japanese political culture and society, even if such is merely the personification of national unity, with governance being firmly exercised by the Diet and the Prime Minister with her cabinet. To a degree, one could say, I am relieved the whereabouts are unknown, given it settles the matter for the moment anyway.

 

But I can reassure you, Japan is looking for a peaceful order in the Pacfic and hopefully the world at large, and we value trade over expansion. While some decisions on our part may have seemed to indicate belligerence, such is not our wish for domination, but we do hold our national security in high regards and we normally engage into talks before taking any drastic action, even if these talks take time. In regards to Russia, as stated, we do not wish to leverage Russia into acquiscing to any outrageous Japanese demands, but we do deem it prudent that a trade agreement come with a general settlement to secure the status quo and our northern border. Because just as you fear our intentions to repeat our history, so are we not unconcerned about any potential Russian pivot to the Pacific, which could be detrimental to our security, given the quite substantial disparity in military firepower between our two countries and the strategic position of the Japanese Inner territories. But as long as a peaceful border is possible, we have no ill will towards Russia."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"There are territories whose independence was recognized, there are territories whose independence was not.  The idea that a state must guarantee that it gives up territories claim if it loses control is very questionable.  By those arguments you would no longer acknowledge the sovereignty of the Athenian Federation, which is not something I think you do.  In that setting, return to Empire is a return to normalcy.  

 

Japan has had its independence acknowledged by the Emperor himself, therefore it cannot be seen as having to worry. 

 

On the subject of Russia, the issue is, regardless of how Russia behaves they need to be felt to be respected, we've seen in previous incarnations of Japan the tension that exist between Russia and Japan when Japan disrespects Russia.  Japan giving off an arrogant attitude, does not help regional harmony, because even though several members of the Russian state may act and smell like a big smelly dog in need of a bath, they are also a friendly dog.  Japan must respect this.

 

Along these lines, it also brings up the issue of non-aggression arrangements.  Why precisely is there a pursuit of such agreements.  Most nations like most citizens it seems to us should be able to get along just fine without non-aggression arrangements.  The default position is peace, the aggression is war.  Countries do worry about their GDP growth though on a regular basis, the prosperity of their citizens.  For most war is a remote thing, but keeping people fed and paying for the daily essentials of life is a hard slog.

 

It is therefore understandable the Russians wish to discuss economics first.  The attitude of the Japanese towards that is disheartening and prickly.

 

The point Mr. Ambassador is that Japan needs to behave itself as a humble member of the international community regardless of status.   While Tianxia itself has not been disrespected, we've watched from afar as others have, we wish to see this undone.

 

Beyond that there are two serious matters.

 

The first is of the Americas.  A canal is a military undertaking and its hard not to see it as such.  Canals are used to build Empires and they are indicative of them.  To pretend the Suez did not serve this role for Britain, the Panama for America, the Thai/Burmese for us, is just false.  These canals permanently cement a power into a region.  Powers that make Canals aren't in the habit of leaving them.  You see how the optics work.

 

On the matter of the Imperial Family, the matter is not just the Showa.  The matter is that the Imperial Family of Japan has on several occasions shown itself since then to be of fascist sympathies, aggressively jutting out from its position to try and subjegate most of Asia as well as other parts of the world.  This ambition has only been contained when there is a power with more force of arms then themselves.  The restoration of such a family particularly the ones of the Empresses Akeiko Sumeragi and Haruhi, rather than the Frost Branch, which has renounced the titles would be seen by many as a return to a war like state. 

 

Japan can rise as a normal nation, but a normal nation is not what the Imperial Myth and its way of unifying the nation seems to have been in the last decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Indeed, Tianxia recognised our independence and we trust in the Emperor's word that our independence is ours. Yet, one cannot help but notice that the Imperial government seems overly concerned with matters that for all intents and purposes are our own internal policies for us to decide and resolve. As it stands, the Japanese Imperial family has not been sighted in decades and we have no clue whether they are even alive. The matter has seen some debate following the end of our personal Union, but it ultimatively died down, as the Japanese public is not interested about discussing distant possibilities, in a time when more pressing matters ought to be adressed. For the moment, the Imperial family is not an issue on our agenda and the Imperial myth is neither encouraged, nor discouraged, as it is not for us to decide what our people believe in, nor would we want to bother our people unnecessarily. Tianxia may feel that this is careless and that there may be real danger, but the Japanese government deems the matter harmless and of no concern, given that regardless of the sympathies of the people towards a curently not present Emperor may be, our country is a stable democracy with constitutional barriers to any accumulation of power in what is the least powerful position in the entire policy-making process. The last time most people remember that a monarch actually intervened in the affairs of the state, Yuan Jia dissolved the country and part of the party spectrum due to allegations of fascism. Popular opinion since then has been that power should rest with the elected parliament and the cabinet responsible to it, not with hereditary autocrats.

 

On the matter of Russia, the non-aggression pact is maybe not the most reasonable choice, but the Japanese government deems it prudent to conclude this agreement as a demonstration of good will towards Japan on the behalf of the Russian Empire. You may lecture us on disrespecting the Russians, but I do think that overall, the lack of respect has historically been a mutual issue, especially given that past attempts by our government to establish any kind of good relations have been rebuffed or ignored and the last time there were talks between Russia, Tianxia and our country, it was about the extradition of Japanese nationals who were tortured by Russian law enforcement.

 

In regards to both, our democracy and the Russian Empire, you seem to be intervening on behalf of matters that are not being threatened and which to us seem very much capable of defending themselves had they been threatened. It thus puzzles me as to why Russo-Japanese trade and security talks, which have at no point involved any threat of force or any other form of coercion, require you to intervene, especially on behalf of an Empire which is considerably larger than ours. This intervention, Mr Chen, does raise quite a few questions as to how Tianxia seems to perceive us and I fear it may leave quite a few people puzzled as to the degree of which Tianxia lectures our country on our internal and security affairs.

 

As towards your last point, the canal, we do not deem the issue a step of Empire-building and while it doubtlessly will have some military and strategic value, it is first and foremost an economic project and only secondarily does it allow improved transit of military vessels. The matter is, a canal is of value because it connects two points of one Empire, be it for Britain the British Isles and India, for America its East and West Coast or for you the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea. Japan however has no holdings beyond the Pacific, I would say the Imperialism cemented here is not really present. If Tianxia however feels that the canal is too much of an issue, I may propose that it be administered by the Americans, or it be internationalised for equal access to all parties."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Administration by the Americans would be acceptable.

 

As for why Tianxia lectures, it is not a lecture but a statement of concerns.  Let us be frank what you call Japanese concerns are not remotely exclusively internal.  If you want to carve out a large stake in the world for Japan, as your government seems intent on doing, a great deal of transparency is needed.  Equally, it is the responsibility of the Empire to guarantee the stability of the international system and its institutions.  Japan or any other nation cannot expect to come onto the stage hyperactively without their being questions.  Whether powers rise peacefully or violently, there will be questions and a need for reassurance.

 

On top of that internal governments if those governments are associated with expansion matter.  The Imperial Question is much better addressed before it becomes an issue than after."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I will convey your opinion on the matter of the Nicaragua canal to my government then. I am sure it will be taken into consideration and it will be adressed before the canal is completed.

 

As for carving out a stake in the world for Japan, our government has no intention to become an Imperial entity, but there is no denying that our international profile has been increasing. But we are interested merely in our own security, not in domination, and for that we use the channels available. While Tianxia may be a guarantuor of international institutions, apart from a select few, most of the old institutions vanished or have lost influence, reducing the options in the international framework. It is our hope that cooperation is possible and that security can be established peacefully, though this will require a good bit of effort at times. The Japanese Empire is not going to seek drastic changes, but we do hope that we will be treated with due consideration as well.

 

As it stands, the Imperial family matters not. Should they ever return though, I do think that the constitutional system will show them their limits and if not... I think our trouble will be greater than just your discontent. I have full confidence in the prodence of our government and people and the stability of the current system and doubt there'll be any issues anytime soon."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And I am sure that you are aware Ambassador, every single rising power regardless of malevolent or benevolent intentions would say the exact same thing you do right now.  So you must be aware that Japanese policy cannot merely be that it pays lip service to a peaceful rise, but it must have transparency in its actions so that others can understand them.

 

International Institutions such that they are may have weakened but they are not gone.  We have had our own travails, but our power has returned to us.  Our internal restrengthening programs are nearing the end, and we are not prepared to surrender so easily to anarchy.  Should new institutions look to replace old ones, being driven solely by one state's ambition, this is a recipe for chaos.  Japan is one major power among many, what happens if Central Asia, the Middle East, the Americas, all start trying to push their own agendas.  Disharmony.

 

We must remain above this, to protect that which has worked and holds legitimacy, even while removing ourselves from the general fray, and at times such as perhaps now, bring our hand down on the scales to remind others of the need for order such as it is."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Yet, I cannot give you more than my word here, given that no more is in my power at this very moment. I do however think that calling our actions particularly intransparent is not necessarily reflective of the truth, nor would I think we have been particularly uncooperative in our actions up to now. While there may have been certain differences between our countries, such is the case between all countries at certain times, but I would say that the peaceful and mutually acceptable resolution of any such disputes should not be disregarded in your judgement of our character.

 

In regards to international institutions, Japan is not interested in establishing new ones solely to serve our own ambition, but we also have not seen any reason to put much confidence in the UN anymore. This however is not to say we are unwilling to cooperate within a fair and stable framework. You surely recall that our country was quite vocal in favour of the UN when it was reestablished, but you must admit that at the current time, the system has fallen out of use apart from enforcing the nuclear non-proliferation regime, and apart from that, there is not much point in participating in such organisations more actively at this point of time. But Tianxia can rest assured that should it, as guarantor of stability, see to the establishment of a new framework or restore old ones to working order, provided they are fair stability and security-minded organisations, Japan will duely consider its cooperation. But even in the absence of such, we do not intent to neglect our bilateral relations with your country, as my visit hopefully proves.

 

I would think that demonstration of Imperial power is at times surely needed and adequate, but I would dearly hope that our Empire be not unduely subjected to any unreasonable treatment. We do hope that our bilateral relations stay a bilateral affair and not become muddied by any general necessity for demonstrations of power. Because while our interests may at times be deviating, one would hope that there can be constructive steps towards realignment, which take into account the traditional preponderance of Tianxia's position, as well as the legitimate concerns of our country. Ideally, we would hope that the rise of our nation, rather than merely cause conflict, also show opportunities for positive development and that via mutual cooperation the Japanese position can be positively integrated into the regional structures, rather than cause any alienation between our traditionally close peoples."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...