Human civilization has a verifiable history no more than 10,000 years, and its development process was trivial in comparison to the billions of years of evolution of the universe and the 4.5 billion years of Earth development. But the history of human civilization was indeed very complicated. This is because there are separate continents and oceans on the surface of the earth. The oceans divide the continents into four major land mass and countless islands. Human beings are land inhabiting creatures rather than ocean living species. Therefore, human beings must develop on land, and the invention of ocean transportation is also to explore new land for human development. This basic principle is dictating the progress of the human development and civilization. After evolving from animals to human beings living in groups, it is a continuous process of ‘human social development, that is migration, development, immigration, and organization in successive cycles.
 
Since the earth has five continents and countless islands, the time, the development progress and the order of migration and growth as well as the starting sequence of various human groups in different places on Earth have become the ‘variables or changing factors’ in the evolution history of human civilization. Therefore, in less than 10,000 years, human beings originated in various places have an uneven evolutionary history on the five continents. Of course, some different cultures have emerged. The similarities are plenty, but the speed of progress is different because of the starting time, the geographical environment and climate of the five continents are drastically different. Consequently, different level of civilization and cultural characteristics are manifested. Furthermore, the evolution of human genes, mutations caused by geographical and climate changes as well as by ethnic mixing such as intermarriages between immigrants, will cause different effects, such as body feature, skin and hair color, etc. These changes highlighted the physical differences in appearance of human groups more than traits of human characteristics. Today, human beings have basically overcome the communication and transportation over the seas and the skies. From now on, it is an inevitable trend for human beings on earth to become a common community. Racial discrimination on earth should be eradicated, although it still existed today remaining as one of the principal causes for human conflict and war.
 
The largest and oldest nation in the world should be China. China is a large and complex nation. Chinese history and culture are the longest, continuous history and the most extensive and inclusive culture of the 56 ethnic groups and 1.4 billion population. In the history of the evolution and development of China, it is obvious that she was once the most powerful and prosperous country in the world, and her people not only lived in Asia and the Pacific Islands, but also traveled all over the world. During her Ming Dynasty, the Ming Emperor had sent General Zheng He to lead a marine fleet to explore other continents seven times. Zheng's ship was five times larger than the later Columbus ship (travelled to Bahamas, America), and today there were many physical evidences to prove that Chinese had visited the American continent, including today's California. The evidences included giant anchors discovered near California shore, Chinese characters carved on ancient rocks in Midwest America, art facts, maps, and even genes match between Chinese and native American Indians. Ming Emperor made unwise assessment believing that all places far away from central China were backward not worth spending vast national treasury to explore. The emperor forbad further ocean exploration and made China adopting a closed-door national policy. This policy was continued until the Qing Dynasty, but it eventually invited the invasion of eight nations which brought catastrophe to China for one hundred years.
 
During this catastrophe, many Chinese coastal residents emigrated overseas, among them Guangdong, Fujian, Jiangsu and Zhejiang were the principal suppliers. Today, there are a large number of Chinese diaspora in the United States, Europe, Africa, and Australia, not to mention Asia. Many of these Chinese have taken root locally, some even for several generations, they have become nationals of the local country. The world traditionally calls them Chinese, and many people also consider themselves as overseas Chinese, living there temporarily, and returning to their ancestral homeland later or after death. This is a philosophy in Chinese culture recognizing one’s ancestors and lineage of ancestry. This philosophy still exists today. It is not only practiced by Chinese, but also by the Europeans, Africans, and Jews. Chinese people simply hold a stronger concept in paying attention to ancestral genealogy and valuing in building lasting family ancestral memorial halls.
 
Since the beginning of the 21st century, China's reform and opening-up has been very successful, and the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and culture has been flourishing. This is of course the result of the joint hard work of the Chinese government and its people. Unfortunately, the rise of China has made some countries uneasy, some countries jealous, and some countries envious. Oversea Chinese living in these countries are affected differently. The United States is the world's No. 1 power, but it is especially (unreasonably) in fear of China’s rise and consequently targeting her as the principal critical competitor. Under her anti-China policy, it has actually caused domestic anti-China and even anti-Asian sentiments to rise, and racial hate crimes to explode.
 
This kind of populist thinking also affected the mentality of politicians, thus an absurd policy of treating all Chinese as suspicious spies was quietly launched in the U.S. Furthermore, the U.S. had increased effort in using political ideology as anti-China tool. For example, cross-Taiwan strait issue has been increasingly used to provoke China which also caused divisions among Chinese Americans. In addition, the U.S. had sought any international issue that could be used to provoke China, but it would affect Asian American relations (China-India, China-Philippines, China-Japan, China-Korea, and China- ASEAN issues). This approach would definitely worsen the racial discrimination problem in the U.S., one could not help but suspect that the U.S. foreign policy was motivated by white supremacy thinking. The United Kingdom, Australia, and some European countries, which followed the U.S. in her anti-China policy, not only had opposing opinions on China policy domestically but more importantly their Chinese immigrants had become more and more pro-China sentimentally.
 
Except for a few Chinese dissidents who were kidnapped by political ideology, the rise of China was originally viewed by most overseas Chinese as a proud fact. Under the enhanced anti-China media smear and military provocation, the attitude of the overseas Chinese had become even more sympathetic to the rejuvenation of China. On a careful examination, China's behavior has shown no intention of aggression or threat to other countries at all. It is just an act of a large country to safeguard her interests for her own citizens. Other big countries should respect, and other small countries should accept China as an independent nation, just like all countries had always accepted the behavior of the United States. If a big country had no strength, it would be bullied like the Qing Dynasty was. A big and powerful nation must act in a measured manner. Excessive behavior is hegemonial. And being weak will suffer. The overseas Chinese all over the world understand this truth better than others, because China has a long history with ample cases for studies, especially the harm and humiliation recorded in her modern history.
 
The Chinese people can better understand, through the Chinese history, the causal relationship and the benefits and consequences of running a country and being governed. Based on the current observations, the Chinese all over the world have a much more rational understanding and attitudes towards the China issue. The West has overly slandered communism and did not recognize the positive deeds achieved by some communist governments. Because of China’s rise and her lifting hundreds of millions people above poverty, the Chinese all over the world has gradually discovered that a socialist system is not a static communist system, but a progressive 'democratic' system, where voting is just a method with various forms and itself alone does not represent democracy. True democracy is manifested when the majority of the people can realize the wishes of the people. The attitude of the Chinese all over the world, whether in Asia, North and South America, Europe, Africa, or Australia, is gradually trending towards this truth.
 



​

 
Abe is a familiar name to Americans referring to the famous American President Abraham Lincoln who was assassnated on April 14th, 1865 at the Ford's Theater in Washington DC by John Wilkes Booth, a South sympathizer. Abe Lincoln and his wife Mary Todd were watching the play, Our American Cousin. Abe died next morning and his assassination right after the American civil war (April 12, 1861 - April 9, 1856) increased the North’s hate for the South and slowed the reconstruction of the divided nation.
 
In this article, the author wishes to introduce Abe Shinzo to Americans (Abe is family name addressed first in Asian custom). Abe Shinzo was assassinated on July 8th, 2022 in Nara, Yamaguchi, Japan while he was giving a campaign speech. Although Abe Shinzo was not a well known name like Abe Lincoln, but his assassination may have more impact on future politics in Japan, in the U.S. and in the international politics since our world is obviously under security stress as Russian-Ukraine war is raging on and NATO is continuing expansion into Asia inviting Japan and South Korea to get involved. Abe Shinzo, as the longest serving two-time prime minister in Japan since 1948, had a significant influence on Japanese national politics. He served as a faithful U.S. military partner and acted diligently to transform Japan to a ‘normal nation’ by seeking constitutional revision to rearm Japan allowing first attack rights as well as trying to play a prominent role in the international arena. Abe’s death at age 67 may have cut short a decade of his influential political life as revealed by his wife’s saddened words expressed while rushing to Nara: “Abe can no longer work in politics!”
 
While we are sorry for any violent act taking any politician’s life, we must also be calm and rational to examine Abe Shinzo’s assassination from a political point of view. While the official and mass media are focusing on assassination facts and mourning, not yet highlighting the motive and impact of this assassination, this column chooses to make an analysis on Abe’s assassination based on known facts, historical and current events, and causality principle, and more importantly to discuss how Abe’s assassination may impact the international politics.
 
Abe Shinzo (9-21-1954 to 7-8-2022) was born post WW II in a political family. His maternal grandfather, Nobusuke Kishi was the monster of shaohao (昭和）, a controller of Manchuguo and occupied northeast China pre-WW II. During the war, he was the vice minister of Munition (served in Tojo government, a co-signer of declaration of war against the U.S.) and post war, he was in prison three years as a class A war criminal but was never tried, later released and ‘de-purged’ with the U.S. blessing. Kishi found the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and became prime minister from 1957-1960. An ambitious man attempted to break the tradition seeking for third term as prime minister. He resigned after cancelling Eisenhower’s visit due to a strong Japanese protest over the unpopular U.S.-Japan Defense Treaty Kishi accepted from the U.S. (Concern of US protection may bring war to Japan) Kishi later survived a stabbing assassination. Abe’s paternal grandfather, Kan Abe (Western way of addressing), was a landlord in Yamaguchi, a house representative during WW II, opposed to Tojo government. Abe’s father, Shintaro Abe, served as a long-time House Representative (1958-1991), as chief cabinet Secretary, minister of trade and industry and minister of Foreign Affairs.
 
Despite of his strong political family background, Abe was an average student graduated from Seikei university (1977) with a political science degree in public administration. He went to the University of Southern California for graduate studies where he took a few courses and studied English but left in 1979 with no degree. He started his first employment with Kobe Steel but soon began his political career by working for the LDP party his maternal grandfather founded. In 1982, he became the Secretary of his father, Shintaro Abe, then Foreign Minister. Abe had a good opportunity to be groomed in the Japanese political system, in 1993, he won a House seat in the Diet (parliament) and rose to be the Secretary General of the party. In 2005, he was appointed as Chief Cabinet Secretary by PM Junichiro Koizumi who had to resign due to term limit in 2006. Abe succeeded Koiizumi as PM and President of LDP, but next year LDP lost in the House of Councillor election and Abe resigned due to ulcerative colitis. In 2012, Abe came back to be the President of LDP again and became PM second time after LDP had a landslide victory in the general election. Abe served two terms (2012 - 2020) and resigned for health reason again during which the U.S. transitioned from Obama to Trump Administration. It was these eight years that gave Abe the opportunity to pursue his political destiny, a family goal, to restore Japan’s previous glory (WW II power) and to try to walk out of the shadow of his family's war criminal act (class A war criminal). Abe’s effort in this regard might be his legacy far more pronounced than his Abenomics of first three and second three arrows which did nothing very significant in helping Japan’s faltering economy.
 
Many political scientists have wondered that why the U.S. would restore Japanese war criminals to political power after WW II, the most logical answer this author accepts is that after the atomic bomb, Japan was devastated needing quick restoration and the U.S. felt sorry and thought that by constructing a water-proof constitution (pacifist constitution) for Japan to stay away from imperialism (militarization), it would not matter who would be put in power. Besides, with criminal evidence in the hands of the U.S., it would be easy to control the puppet criminal to follow the wishes of the U.S. (This political logic was deeply ingrained in the U.S. foreign policy as history had shown that it was largely applied to U.S. allies, Japan, S. Korea, S. Vietnam, Philippines, Taiwan, … and South America states).
 
However, one of the Japanese traits is extreme patience and tenacity, that is the reason the LDP party would forever pursue its party goal (restoration of Japan's honor): 1. revision of the constitution (to permit re-militarization), 2. building a strong defense force and participating in international arena (as a normal country) and 3. Entering UN Security Council (as a powerful nation member). During Abe’s tenure, he had sought or created every opportunity to please the U.S. for the purpose of the above deep-rooted goal. Abe was an eager player of Obama era’s ‘pivot to Asia’ and ‘Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) excluding China and a diligent promoter of the ‘China Threat’ idea (Japan suggested the QUAD in 2007 now pursued by Biden and Blinken) and welcomed NATO to Asia to worsen the U.S.-China relations to give Japan the opportunities to achieve the above goal. Japan has been consistently seeking any opportunity to militarize itself and tying tighter the U.S.-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty.
 
The Abe assassination event not only gained sympathy for Shinzo but the biggest impact was making the LDP the big winner in July 10’s general election making it controlling 2/3 seats of the Senate (179 of 245) over the 2/3 vote requirement for passing the constitution revision in the Senate. Chances are the House may tilt over a 2/3 mark as well at the scheduled general election on October 31, 2025. The present PM Fumio Kishida certainly benefitted politically with a control of 179 LDP seats. Whether or not the House opposition parties will fight back, and the Japanese citizens will be clear-headed to oppose the constitution revision towards militarization (possible revival of fascism and imperialism) are yet uncertain. What is hanging in the balance may be outside of Japan. If the U.S. and China would reach a sincere understanding that a sharp rivalry between the two countries are not really beneficial to both or the world (but being used by others); it is likely, before 2025, the world will see the real advantage of a collaborative world than a rivalry polarized world forcing each nation to take an oppossing side. A rational U.S.-China relation for sure will quench Japan’s restoration effort as well as resolve many international conflicts!
 


​

​Whatever was the reason that triggered the Russian-Ukraine War, the war had gone long enough with devastating consequence to the Ukraine people. However, the Ukraine people were defined throughout the history, they do not deserve this turmoil. Prior to the present war, there was eight years of internal war taking place already in the Eastern region of Ukraine, which was a manifestation of the fact that some Ukraine citizens in the East Ukraine were not happy with the new Ukraine government established by an election. In addition, the Crimea peninsula on the South East end of Ukraine had passed a status referendum and a declaration of independence on March 16, 2014, and then signed a treaty of annexation on March 18, 2014 to annex itself to Russia. This came about with the military intervention of Russia first seizing Crimea and then letting her to conduct a resolution vote resulting in an overwhelming approval votes of annexation to Russia. The above events were complicated, and the political procedure adopted were definitely subject to political debate on their appropriateness, but nevertheless they were resolved with less bloodshed than what is happening in eastern Ukraine and the present Russian-Ukraine war. The present Russian-Ukraine War is not only painful to Ukraine and Russia, but also affecting Europe and the entire world in its economic stability due to production, supply and trade disruption in energy, food and finance. If the U.S. and EU led NATO were to continue to supply weapons to Ukraine to sustain the war, it would most likely lead to a world war, likely a nuclear war. The Ukraine war has created tens of millions of Ukrainian refuges and the country has been devastated to ruins, from political, economic and especially humanitarian viewpoint, it is time to call for an immediate ceasefire and adopting a political solution which is fair and least painful to all Ukraine people and ideally approved by the Ukraine people.
 
The very fundamental issue of the Ukraine crisis at this point is that all Ukraine people should have a right to determine their destination and adopt their desired government (and nation) under the condition that it is acceptable by her neighbors and the world. However, Ukraine citizens consist of several races with different historical background connected with Russia, Poland, and other parts of Europe and even Asia to some extent. Therefore, it is understandable that Crimea with 65% Russian speaking citizens would adopt a resolution to become a part of Russia and Donetsk and Luhansk with nearly all Russian speaking citizens would declare independence from Ukraine. At this moment, it is clear that Ukraine must cease fire to stop the bleeding in the nation. Looking into the future, there are only three options for Ukraine to take. We shall discuss them below and offer our opinion on which one may be the best solution.
 
The first choice for Ukraine, which is the worst one, is to prolong the present war indefinitely. Presently Ukraine has already lost control of close to 20% of her land to Russia. In addition, Russia has completely destroyed Ukraine’s military facilities and industrial production bases. Thus, Ukraine depends entirely on U.S., EU and NATO support to continue the war. However, no matter how Zelensky is playing into the West's interest in weakening Russia, the sustainability of the war is totally uncertain judging on the world economic condition. Since the war passed 100 days, the disruption of energy, food and commerce supply due to heavy battles, economic sanctions plus the world pandemic impact, the world economy is under stress reaching a breaking point. We have seen in the media, the Ukraine war supporters of the U.S. and EU have already shown a second thought. So the author’s opinion is that Ukraine should make an honest and realistic assessment of her citizens wish, for the benefit of the Ukraine people, she should not and will not want to continue the war.
 
The second choice for Ukraine, which is the simplest one, is to sign a cease fire and peace treaty accepting Russia’s basic demand – remain neutral and peaceful. From a negotiation and procedure point of view, a treaty can be reached so long Ukraine accepts the de facto war consequence and agrees to Russia’s demand of Ukraine being a neutral country and never to be a NATO member. This treaty would get Ukraine immediate peace so she may start rebuilding the nation from the war devastation. How can Ukraine get her people’s consensus to make a definite choice of the first, the second or the third choice (below) is a political science problem. Would the Zelensky government resort to a fair democratic resolution method to arrive at a choice? The author’s opinion is that Ukraine does not have too many choices except diligently following a democratic process to reach a consensus. This process is critical and delicate for the third choice discussed below.
 
The third choice for Ukraine, which is an idealistic one, is to arrive at a political solution based on a modern political science procedure – a government serving as an agent for the people to negotiate and develop a political relationship with a host nation willing to own the Ukraine rebuild problem. As discussed above, Ukraine consists of several races with different historical background. Although the present Ukraine borders Russia and has deep and long relationship with Russia during the Soviet Union era, she also has close relations with other nations. We will mention just two examples, one is Poland because part of western Ukraine belonged to Poland before the expansion of the Soviet Union. Poland may be motivated to become a close partner with Ukraine and help Ukraine rebuild. The second example is China, even though China was far away from Ukraine, China and Ukraine have been close and friendly in trade and research and development partnership. That is the reason, China has maintained a neutral position regarding the Russia-Ukraine war and more importantly, Zelensky has repeatedly pleaded that China could play a pivotal role in mediating the Russia-Ukraine cease fire and being the guarantor of Ukraine’s peace and security. China with her Belt and Road Initiative linking Asia and Europe for mutual prosperity may see Ukraine as key bridge for BRI, hence willing to provide the needed aids to rebuild Ukraine. Based on the above discussion, the author suggests that it is entirely feasible for Ukraine to adopt a political solution for settling her current conflict with Russia and rebuilding her future.
 
From broadest political science point of view, Ukraine should let her citizens have freedom to make choices through a consensus building process to arrive at a compromised but well-thought-out democratic solution. Ukraine obviously requires rebuild and needs vast external financial, technology and economic support. Ukraine government may begin to engage potential ‘support’ countries to work out a political relationship and a Ukraine rebuild assistance plan and to develop a politico-economic resolution for her citizens to select. Ukraine may consider China or Poland even Russia or the U.S. to broaden her post-war ‘host’ nation candidacy. This task is obviously a political science problem. The author invites political scientists to engage a discussion on the Ukraine rebuild plan and the nation to nation relationship. The latter issue could be a trusteeship model, possibly workable between Ukraine and China or Ukraine and the U.S. or a special administrative zone arrangement between Ukraine and Poland or Russia. Obviously, these are over-simplified thoughts, but the fundamental concept is viable. The question is whether the Zelenskyy government can be reorganized to work on the above plan. Ukraine has a large fertile area and a strong work force. It is entirely feasible for China to take on a trusteeship for a part of Ukraine say for 30 years to execute a rebuild Ukraine plan. Ukraine’s agriculture output such as wheat can be exported to China and her engineering talents applied to BRI. The Ukraine government should diligently seek all potential candidates' offers to let Ukraine citizens make the best choice.
 
In conclusion, the Ukraine situation is complicated. The government may be overwhelmed by war and corruption. But it is a case of a political science problem (dispute between nations involving citizens having different races, cultural inheritance and geographical affiliations) begging for a peaceful solution.


​