The Asia-Pacific is increasingly becoming an arena of power politics, which has its serious dangers. To understand this, one needs to delve a bit into the changing contours of global power. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the US was left as the only superpower in the world. The new China, under Deng Xiaoping’s leadership, was growing in economic power. There was a serious internal setback when the democracy movement erupted in 1989 but it was crushed with the deployment of the army. Deng proved persistent and China’s economic transformation and growth continued. A stage has arrived today when China refuses to be bound by international rules and norms that were made at a time when it was not part of the process. It, therefore, wants to create a new international order, at least a regional order in the Asia-Pacific, which will respond to the way Beijing sees the world with China at the centre. And it wants to correct the injustices of the 19th and parts of the 20th century when the Opium Wars made a mockery of its great history and wealth, and humiliated its people. During the 20th century, from the 1930s to the end of WW II in 1945, Japan committed horrible atrocities during the occupation and war. Now that China believes it has arrived of age with much of its strength (military) and economic power restored, it is seeking to right the old wrongs. Beijing is fully convinced of the justness of its cause in asserting sovereignty in the island chains of the South China Sea and East China Sea, which brings it into clash with Vietnam and the Philippines in the South China Sea, as well as with Japan in the East China Sea. And, by virtue of claiming all the contested islands, China also lays claim to much of the South China Sea and East China Sea. To assert its sovereignty, China is patrolling the seas and has declared an air identification zone around the disputed East China Sea islands under Japan’s control. Beijing believes that the US has no business being in the Asia-Pacific region as a military power, so far away from its homeland. The US, of course, is not buying it, with its own Pacific coast along California, for instance. China also believes that the US is building a containment ring around it by encouraging its regional neighbours to adopt a confrontation course and by forging/strengthening military alliances with some of them. In the latter category are countries like Japan and Australia. In this context, there have been two important developments causing concern and anger in China. The first is a reinterpretation of Japan’s pacifist constitution, imposed by the US on a defeated Japan after WW II, which barred it from declaring or engaging in war. Japan has a substantial self-defence force but not intended for military operations abroad. After its defeat and occupation, it became a US charge for some years. And when it emerged with independent status, it was part of a US security system in the midst of the Cold War. The Japanese people, by and large, developed a strong pacifist tradition and, according to some recent polls, over 50 percent still want to retain their pacifist constitution. In other words, they have not yet been convinced by the Abe government’s need for reinterpreting the constitution to facilitate war making, however limited its scope. But it would appear that more and more Japanese people are alarmed by China’s, what many will call, sabre-rattling. China’s rise and its persistence in claiming the disputed islands in the East China Sea (under Japan’s control) has created an inflammatory situation, often close to naval and air encounters. Such recurring tensions between China and Japan appear to have created some unease, if not actual fear, in Japan. In China, on the other hand, Japan’s wartime atrocities still evoke strong emotions and any resistance by Tokyo to Beijing’s claims is taken as a continuation of the old imperial arrogance. Japan’s right-wing Abe government is taking measures to deal with any Chinese military threat. But within the limits of its pacifist constitution, the government did not have much leeway. However, to amend the constitution to do away with Article nine that underpins its pacifist character would require a popular referendum, unlikely to favour the government. In the circumstances, the government has taken to making some important but limited changes for this purpose. These will, of course, have to go through Japan’s two houses of parliament where the government has a comfortable majority. It might take a while for the parliamentary process to run through but the government is likely to have its way; though it might harm its political prospects at the next elections considering that most people do not favour such changes. These changes enabling Japan to come to the military assistance of its friends and allies if they are under enemy attack, makes Japan a ‘normal’ country, in the words of Prime Minister Abe. Indeed, the US, which gave Japan the pacifist constitution in the first instance, has been pushing Japan over quite some time to amend and/or reinterpret its constitution to share the defence burden, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region where China has emerged as a contender. And the constitutional reinterpretation will further solidify the US-Japan alliance to China’s great discomfort. Beijing, though, is not sitting idle. It has been, at the same time, seeking an opening with South Korea against the backdrop of their shared antipathy against Japan’s wartime crimes. The recent visit there of Chinese President Xi Jinping was an important exploratory trip with an assurance that China, like Seoul, is for denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula. Since only North Korea has nuclear weapons in the peninsula, Xi was clearly favouring Seoul over its own Pyongyang ally. In another way, China is seeking to breach the US’s strategic bastion as Seoul and Washington are and have been security allies for many years. The recent visit to Australia of Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has further complicated the picture. The signing of a dual economic and strategic partnership during Abe’s visit added more depth to an already close relationship between the US’s two closest regional allies. Prime Minister Tony Abbot welcomed the new assertive security role for Japan from its re-interpreted constitution, lauded Japan for its peaceful international conduct since the end of WW II and even praised the heroism and patriotism of its soldiers, at times, during the war. In a parliamentary speech, Abbot said that Australians admired Japanese soldiers for “the skill and the sense of honour that they brought to their task, although we disagreed with what they did”. To which the Chinese news agency, Xinhua, riposted that Mr Abbot “probably was not aware that the Japanese troops possessed other ‘skills’ to loot, to rape, to torture and to kill”. Beijing is not amused at Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop’s remarks in a press interview that “China does not respect weakness.” In other words, Australia is on the right track towards cultivating powerful allies. All these developments do not bode well for the stability of this region. And if it continues, it might inexorably create an explosive situation. The writer is a senior journalist and academic based in Sydney, Australia. He can be reached at sushilpseth@yahoo.co.au