* This article is based on a chapter which will appear in a forthcoming symposium edited by the author, The Sino-American Détente and its Policy Implications, to be published by Praeger, New York, in 1974Google Scholar;

1. Yoshida, Shigeru, “Japan and the crisis in Asia, ” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 29, No. 2 (01 1951), pp. 171CrossRefGoogle Scholar;179.

2. For instance, Yamada, Hisahari, “The multipolarization of the communist world and Japan, ” the Kajima Institute of International Peace (ed.), Japan in Current World Affairs (Tokyo: Japan Times, Ltd., 1971), p. 63Google Scholar;

3. Saiji Hasegawa, “The world will revolve around Peking, ” ibid. pp. 126, 128.

4. For an American view of the problem, seeBarnett, A. Doak, “The new multipolar balance in East Asia: implications for United States policy, ” Annals, Vol. 390 (07 1970), p. 73Google Scholar;

5. Shapiro, Henry, “Japan, Russia ties improve, Sato says, ” St Louis Post Dispatch, editorial section (2 10 1970), pp. 1, 4Google Scholar;

6. SeeOka, Takasbi, “Sato is seeking talks with China, ” the New York Times (14 12 1969), p. 8Google Scholar;

7. See“Government policy seen badly shaken by Nixon move, ” Japan Times (Tokyo) (17 07 1971), p. 1Google Scholar;

8. “No new approach on China problem revealed in speech, ” ibid. (18 July 1971), pp. 1, 4.

9. See, for example, “Opposition to submit bid on Peking ties, ” ibid. (18 July 1971), p. 1; “China policy under fire, ” ibid. (21 July 1971), p. 16.

10. The text of the joint statement, dated 2 July 1971, is inPeking Review, No. 28 (9 07 1971), pp. 20–21Google Scholar; See also “Komeito group signs Peking communique, ” Japan Times (3 July 1971), p. 1.

11. Peking Review, No. 28 (9 07 1971), p. 20Google Scholar;

12. See Premier Chou's talks with Professor Ikuo Oyama, 28 September 1953, inJih-pen wen-t'i wen-chien chi (Collection of Documents on the Question of Japan) (Peking: Shih-chieh chih-shih ch'u-pan-she, 1955), Vol. 1 (1942–1954), p. 116Google Scholar;Mo-jo's, Kuo talks with Dietman Masanosuke Ikeda (29 10 1953Google Scholar), ibid. p. 119; Editorial, “On Sino-Japanese relations, ” Jen-min jih-pao (30 October 1953), p. 1.

13. Peking Review, No. 41 (8 10 1971), p. 14Google Scholar;

14. During the period from July 1971 to Sato's retirement a year later, five joint statements were issued by delegations from various Japanese organizations visiting China, which specified conditions for the normalization of Sino-Japanese relations. Two of these have been mentioned above. The third was with the Japan-China Friendship Association (Orthodox) on 16 October 1971. In this statement, the five principles were repeated. SeePeking Review, No. 43 (22 10 1971), p. 16Google Scholar; In the fourth and fifth statements both sides upheld the first three principles and dropped the last two. See joint communique with the Japan-China Memorandum Trade Office, 21 December 1971, ibid. No. 53 (31 December 1971), p. 4; joint statement with the Democratic Socialist Party of Japan, 13 April 1972, ibid. No. 16 (21 April 1971), p. 17.

15. The text of the treaty is in MartinWeinstein, E., Japan's Postwar Defense Policy, 1947–1968 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1969), p. 139Google Scholar; For the text of the communique, dated 21 November 1969, see the New York Times, 22 November 1969, p. 14. For a discussion of the American security structure in the Far East, seeGreene, Fred, U.S. Policy and the Security of Asia (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968)Google Scholar;

16. SeeForeign Trade Quarterly, No. 33 (Taipei, 03 1972), pp. 58–59Google Scholar; In trade with China in the same year, Japan registered an export surplus of only $255 million out of a total two-way trade of $900 million. SeeChina Trade Report, No. 3 (Hong Kong, 03 1972), p. 15Google Scholar;

17. SeeChung-yang jih-pao (henceforward Chung-yang)(Taipei), 5 09 1972, p. 2Google Scholar; ibid. 19 September 1972, p. 1.

18 See Chun-ju, Shen, “On the prosecution and punishment of war criminals (6 september 1951), ” in Jih-pen wen-t'i wen-chien chi, Vol 1, p. 74Google Scholar;

19. SeeFar Eastern Economic Review, No. 42 (Hong Kong, 16 10 1971), p. 4Google Scholar;

20. SeeYoshida, Shigeru, Japan's Decisive Century, 1867–1967 (New York: Praeger, 1967), p. 73Google Scholar;

21. See the text of Kiichi Aichi's United Nations speech on the China issue, dated 19 October 1971, Japan Times (21 October 1971), p. 16.

22 The trip was announced by the White House on 5 October 1971 without specifying a definite date. See the New York Times, 6 October 1971, pp. 1, 4. Dr Kissinger left the United States on 16 October and arrived in Peking four days later.

23. “Government said trying to contact Peking, ” Japan Times, 29 July 1971, p. 1; “Premier reiterates Peking visit desire, ” ibid. 18 August 1971, p. 5; “At Matsumura's funeral: Premier meets Wang, ” ibid. 27 August 1971, p. 1.

24. InBritannica Book of the Year 1972 (Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 1972), p. 397Google Scholar;

25. Halloran, Richard, “Japanese to seek closer China ties, ” the New York Times, 20 10 1971, pp. 1, 14Google Scholar;

26. “Sato says Japan-China ties would follow on Albanian resolution, ” Japan Times, 26 October 1971, p. 1.

27. Ibid. 16 November 1971, p. 1.

28. Nakamura, Koji, “Twice a loser, ” Far Eastern Economic Review (FEER), No. 47 (20 11 1971), p. 12Google Scholar;

29. See “‘Bid’ to occupy Taiwan, statements by Sato and Fukuda hit by China, ” Japan Times, 6 November 1971, p. 1.

30. “Government ready to make war crimes apology, ” Japan Times, 17 December 1971, pp. 1, 5.

31. For the text of the communique, seeJapan Report, No. 3 (1 02 1972), p. 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar;

32. Halloran, Richard, “U.S. and Japan: fears of a great unraveling, ” the New York Times, “ Week in Review, ” 16 01 1972, p. 4Google Scholar;

33. Lee, John M., “Nixon-Sato talks disappoint Japan, ” New York Times, 16 01 1972, p. 8Google Scholar;

34. “Concessions to Japan, ” St. Louis Post Dispatch, 8 January 1972, p. 1.

35. Halloran, Richard, “Japan's envoy warns U.S. of risks in trip to Peking, ” New York Times, 11 01 1972, p. 1Google Scholar;

36. See Joint Communique, 28 February 1972, Peking Review, No. 9 (3 03 1972), pp. 4–5Google Scholar;

37. See Japan Times, 18 June 1972, p. 1. The full text of this Sato speech is not available. The above quotation is in “Sato steps down, ”Peking Review, No. 26 (30 06 1972), p. 19Google Scholar;

38. “Tanaka conference stresses China ties, ” Japan Times, 6 July 1972, p. 1.

39. Kazushige Hirasawa, “Tanaka-Fukuda ‘cold war,’” ibid. 14 July 1972, p. 1.

40. “Sasaki arrives in Peking, ” ibid. 16 July 1972, p. 1; “Chou offers Japan talks in Peking, ” ibid. 17 July 1972, p. 1;“Kozo Sasaki in China, ” Peking Review, No. 30 (28 07 1972), p. 3Google Scholar;

41. “JSP Ex-Head has two-hour talks with Chinese Premier, ” Japan Times, 18 July 1972, p. 1; “Statement by Chou on Tanaka visit welcomed, ” ibid.

42. “Peking appoints Trade Office head, ” ibid. 20 June 1972, p. 11; “Chief of China trade office arrives, ” ibid. 4 July 1972, p. 13.

43. “Chinese Premier welcomes Tanaka policy on China, ” ibid. 10 July 1972, p. 1; “Tanaka forms new cabinet, ”Peking Review, No. 28 (14 07 1972), p. 22Google Scholar;

44. “Shanghai dance-drama troupe in Japan, ” ibid. No. 29 (21 July 1972), p. 21. The troupe arrived in Japan on 10 July and returned to China on 16 August.

45. “Premier Chou welcomes and invites Prime Minister Tanaka to visit China, ” ibid. No. 33 (18 August 1972), p. 3.

46. “Tanaka reported leaving September 25 on Peking trip, ” Japan Times, 20 September 1972, p. 1.

47. “Taiwan envoy raps Japan's China bid, ” ibid. 17 July 1972, p. 2.

48. “Repayment terms to be decided on ‘quality’ basis, ” ibid. 27 July 1972, pp. 1, 5. The “Yoshida Letter, ” named after Prime Minister Hayato Ikeda's special envoy to Taipei, Shigeru Yoshida, was an agreement reached on 30 May 1964 between the Japanese government and Taipei which forbade the use of Japanese State funds to finance or guarantee plant exports to the People's Republic. The full content of the letter has never been disclosed by either Taipei or Tokyo, even after the severance of their diplomatic relations. For a discussion of this, seeHsiao, Gene T., “The role of trade in China's diplomacy with Japan, ” in Cohen, Jerome A. (ed.), The Dynamics of China's Foreign Relations (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1970), pp. 41CrossRefGoogle Scholar; 47.

49. “Yen-yuan settlement accord signed in Peking, ” Japan Times, 19 August 1972, p. 1; “Japan, China banks start yen-yuan system, ” ibid. 13 September 1972, p. 3.Roberts, John, “Meeting in Peking, ” Asia Year Book 1973 (Hong Kong: Far Eastern Economic Review, 1973), p. 182Google Scholar;

50. “Justice ministry approves Chinese re-entry in Japan, ” Japan Times, 10 September 1972, p. 2.

51. “Sun Ping-hua and Hsiao Hsiang-chien received by Japanese Prime Minister, ” Peking Review, No. 33 (18 08 1972), p. 4Google Scholar;

52. “Komeito leader says peace pact also envisaged, ” Japan Times, 29 August 1972, p. 1.

53. Nakamura, Koji, “Open door for China, ” Far Eastern Economic Review, No. 36 (2 09 1972), p. 13Google Scholar;

54. For a discussion, see Koji Nakamura, “Changing power balance, ” ibid. No. 48 (27 November 1971), p. 8; Editorial, “Mr Chou's invitation, ” Japan Times, 12 July 1972, p. 14.

55. “LDP council decision: five principles agreed for ties with China, ” ibid. 25 August 1972, p. 1.

56. “Pro-Taipei Dietmen hit speeded up China ties, ” ibid. 30 August 1972, p. 1.

57. “LDP group modifies principles on China, ” ibid. 6 September 1972, p. 1; “LDP council OK's five-point policy on China ties, ” ibid. 9 September 1972, pp. 1, 5. As discussed earlier, all opposition parties except the right wing of the JCP were for restoration of diplomatic ties with Peking. After adoption of the five-point decision by the LDP, the JCP changed its stand on the issue and supported Tanaka's mission. See “JCP changes its stand on Japan-China ties, ” ibid. 10 September 1972, pp. 1, 4.

58. A Japanese advance party headed by Hiroshi Hashimoto, chief of the China Division in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, first went to Peking on 31 August and left on 5 September. “Japanese advance party in Peking, ” Peking Review, No. 36 (8 09 1972), p. 4Google Scholar; The LDP delegation went on 14 September: see “First official LDP mission arrives in China capital, ” Japan Times, 15 September 1972, p. 1; “LDP mission explains position, ” ibid. 17 September 1972, p. 1.

59. See“Premier Chou En-lai on Sino-Japanese relations, ” Peking Review, No. 38 (22 09 1972), p. 3Google Scholar; “Mr Kosaka's speech, ” ibid. pp. 3–4.

60. SeeShimuzu, Minoru, “Big domestic issue: China question expected to speed Sato's exit, ” Japan Times, 19 08 1971, p. 14Google Scholar;

61. “Ohira bares policy on China, ” Japan Times, 9 July 1972, p. 4.

62. “Ohira, Kissinger agree on China in principle, ” ibid. 20 August 1972, p. 1.

63. Joint Statement of Japan-United States, 1 September 1972, Japan Report, No. 19 (1 10 1972), pp. 2–3Google Scholar;

64. “Kissinger says Japan's China bid won't hurt pact, ” Japan Times, 1 September 1972, p. 1.

65. The offers were announced inTai-wan hsin-sheng pao (Taipei), 12 08 1972, p. 2Google Scholar;Chung-kuo shih-pao (Taipei), 18 08 1972, p. 1Google Scholar;

66. Chung-yang, 9 September 1972, p. 1.

67. These measures were announced on different occasions in August 1972. For a comprehensive report, see ibid. 19 September 1972, p. 1.

68. Japan Times, 29 August 1972, p. 5.

69. Chung-yang, 19 September 1972, p. 1.

70. Ibid. 18 September 1972, p. 1.

71. “Premier Chiang on relations with Japan, ” ibid. 30 September 1972, p. 1.

72. Ibid., 19 September 1972, p. 1.

73. The English text of the joint statement, dated 29 September 1972, is inPeking Review, No. 40 (6 10 1972), pp. 12–13Google Scholar; the Chinese text in Jen-min jih-pao, 30 September 1972, p. 1.

74. See“Exchange of notes between plenipotentiary of Japan Isao Kawada and plenipotentiary of the Republic of China Yeh Kung-chao, 28 April 1952, ” Ministry of Foreign Affairs (ed.), Treaties Between the Republic of China and Foreign States, 1927–1957 (Taipei, 1958), pp. 254–55Google Scholar;

75. Emphasis added. These two sentences are taken from the Chinese text: the Peking Review translation is ungrammatical and confusing.

76. See“Foreign Minister Ohira holds press conference (29 September 1972), ” Peking Review, No. 40 (6 10 1972), p. 15Google Scholar;

77. “Significance of the signing of the Sino-Japanese joint statement (6 October 1972), ” in American Embassy, Summaries of Selected Japanese Magazines (Tokyo), 11 1972, pp. 46–47Google Scholar; (Translated from Toki no ugoki.)

78. See“Liao Cheng-chih on the conclusion of a Sino-Japanese peace treaty, ” Hua-ch'iao jih-pao (China Daily News) (New York), 19 05 1973, p. 1Google Scholar;

79. See the Joint Declaration by Japan and the U.S.S.R. (19 October 1956), art. 9, in The Japanese Annual of International Law, No. 1 (1957), pp. 129Google Scholar; 131.

80. See “Tokyo still asserts status of Taiwan is not determined, ” New York Times, 6 November 1972, p. 22.

81. The 1943 Cairo Declaration reads in part: “Japan shall be stripped of all the islands in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the First World War in 1914, and that all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa [Taiwan], and the Pescadores shall be restored to the Republic of China.…” Art. 8 of the Potsdam Proclamation reads: “The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out and Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku, and such minor islands as we [the Allied powers] determine.”

82. In “Significance of the signing of the Sino-Japanese joint communique, ” p. 47.

83. See Treaty of Peace with Japan (8 September 1951), art. 2, in U.S. Treaties and Other International Agreements, Vol. 3, pp. 3169, 3172.

84. Foreign Minister Chou En-lai's statement, 5 May 1952, in Jih-pen wen-t'i wen-chien chi, Vol. 1, p. 93.

85. The remark, “unfriendly act” was reported byHalloran, Richard, “Japan's Asia Plans Are Merely Ideas, ” in the New York Times, 16 03 1973, p. 8Google Scholar; For a description of the natural resources in Siberia, see“The vast new El Dorado in the Arctic, ” Time, No. 15 (9 04 1973), pp. 30Google Scholar; 39.

86. SeeNakamura, Koji, “China: ‘political’ deal, ” Far Eastern Economic Review, No. 4 (29 01 1973), p. 33Google Scholar; “Sino-U.S. pincer, ” ibid. No. 10 (12 March 1973), p. 20; “Remember the foe, ” ibid. No. 14 (9 April 1973), p. 12; “China and Japan: the wedge-drivers, ” ibid. No. 16 (23 April 1973), p. 12;“Japan: statements on Japanese-Soviet peace treaty and northern territories, ” Peking Review, No. 44 (3 11 1972), p. 26Google Scholar; “Japan: demand for return of four islands, ” ibid. No. 46 (17 November 1972), p. 19; “Demand for return of northern territory, ” ibid. No. 49 (8 December 1972), p. 19. The P.R.C.'s offer to develop oil resources is not firm. Latest reports indicate that the P.R.C. has turned down a Japanese government proposal for the joint adventure. See “China said shunning Japan aid in oil drilling, ” Japan Times, 22 May 1973, p. 1.

87. “Letter to Brezhnev, Premier wants talks on treaty resumed, ” Japan Times, 8 May 1973, p. 1.

88. For an unofficial translation of the text of the Japan-Soviet Joint Communique (10 October 1973), see Japan Times, 11 October 1973, p. 12.

89. SeeFEER, No. 18 (7 05 1973), p. 5Google Scholar; “Chou praises Japanese bid in Moscow, ” in Japan Times, 11 October 1973, p. 1.

90. “4, 630, 000 million yen outlay nearly double last plan, ” JT, 10 October 1972, p. 1;Nakamura, Koji, “Introducing ‘Positive’ Defense, ” FEER, No. 43 (21 10 1972), p. 15Google Scholar; Tanaka apparently explained to Chou that Japan's defence budget would be limited to 1% of GNP.

91. For an analysis of this subject, see Koji Nakamura, “China and Soviet relations: treading the Siberian tightrope, ” in Special Report on Japan 1973, ibid. No. 19 (14 May 1973), p. 6.

92. For trade figures cited above and immediately below, seeThe Japan Economic Review (Tokyo), No. 3 (15 03 1973), p. 9Google Scholar;

93. Chung-yang, 18 November 1972, p. 1.

94. Ibid. 3 December 1972, p. 1.

95. Ibid. 9 January 1973, p. 1.

96. See Huang T'ien-ts'ai, “Readjustment of Sino-Japanese relations, ” ibid. 10 December 1972, p. 2. One U.S. Dollar is equivalent to about 260 yen.

97. See ibid. 1 December 1972, p. 2.

98. See “Agreement between the Association of East Asia Relations and the Japan Interchange Association, 26 December 1972, ” ibid. 27 December 1972, p. 1.

99. Ibid. 14 March 1973, p. 1 and 15 March 1973, p. 1.

100. See“China-Japan air route meets difficulty, ” Economic Salon (Honolulu), 04 1973, p. 8Google Scholar; “Government seen speeding up talks on China air and fishery pacts, ” Japan Times, 28 May 1973, p. 11.

101. See Kazushige Hirasawa, “Sino-Japanese relations, ” ibid. p. 1. For reference to Taiwan's reaction against the proposed Japan-China aviation agreement, see Chung-yang, 25 May 1973, p. 1; 27 May 1973, p. 1. The statistics cited above can be found in the sources just quoted.

102. “China desires aviation pact, ” ibid. 15 October 1973, p. 12; 25 May 1973, p. 1; “Japan-China air pact opposed by LDP Dietman, ” ibid. 26 May 1973.

103. SeeThe Japan Economic Review, No. 3 (15 03 1973), p. 9Google Scholar;

104. Japan Times, 13 October 1973, p. 12;“Japan-China economic interchange girding for steady gains, ” The Japan Economic Review, No. 10 (15 10 1973), p. 3Google Scholar;

105. “Japan, China officials agree on trade rules, ” Japan Times, 31 August 1973, p. 1.

106. “Prime Minister Tanaka addresses America-Japan Society (18 October 1972), ” Japan Report, No. 23 (1 12 1972), pp. 3Google Scholar; 4.

107. Apart from Tanaka's own statement, quoted above, the influential Yumiuri shimbun, for example, once made a strong emotional remark on the issue: “Without the restoration of Japanese-Chinese diplomatic relations, the master-servant relationship between the United States and Japan cannot be changed to a relationship of true equality.” InLee, John M., “Nixon-Sato talks disappoint Japan, ” New York Times, 16 01 1972, p. 8Google Scholar;

108. For a discussion of this matter, see Edwin O. Reischauer's testimony in the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, 92 Congress, Second Session, The New China Policy: Its Impact on the United States and Asia (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972), pp. 3–18Google Scholar; James W. Morley's testimony ibid. pp. 152–59.

109. See“Interview with Japan's Foreign Minister Masayoshi Ohira, ” in Special Report on Japan 1973, Far Eastern Economic Review, No. 19 (14 05 1973), p. 5Google Scholar;