Simon,

Digressing from this just a bit, it may be interesting to note this

(India's first prime minister) Jawaharlal Nehru "declined a United States offer" to India to "take the permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council" around 1953 and suggested that it be given to China, according to the United Nations Under-Secretary General, Shashi Tharoor.

In his latest book, "Nehru — The Invention of India," Mr. Tharoor writes that Indian diplomats who have seen files swear that Nehru declined the offer about the same time as he turned down "with scorn" John Foster Dulles' support for an Indian Monroe Doctrine.

Nehru had suggested that the seat, till then held by Taiwan, be offered to Beijing instead. He wrote that "the seat was held with scant credibility by Taiwan." [Shashi Tharoor]

Sorry with the mixup on the blockquote tag on the previous comment. Premature tagclosation ;-)

There's this belief among some Indian commentators that while China may not veto India's position, it may abstain from the vote; they call it the 'historical debt' theory.

It'll indeed be interesting to see if Beijing can successfully rein in the nationalistic fervor it helped to spawn in opposition to Japan. Japan certainly isn't helping matters, as this interesting FT commentary piece points out.

The party inherited its mantle and has almost continuously held power for five decades. Media whitewashing of the war legacy thus helps bolster LDP legitimacy, while friendly reporting on current issues furthers LDP policy objectives. These include a permanent seat on the UN Security Council and rewriting Japan's pacifist constitution.

Abroad, the propaganda tactics can backfire. In China, the Japanese media's nationalistic tone and denials of war crimes helped incite massive protests, with 22m Chinese petitioning against Japan's Security Council bid and mobs attacking Japanese-owned businesses. At home, the tactics are effective at chilling public debate and defusing opposition. If a broad segment of Japanese oppose the deployment of Japanese soldiers in Iraq, the overwhelming majority of media outlets reiterate dubious official assertions that the military, known as the Self- Defence Force, is constitutionally deployed in a "non-combat zone". Amid last year's escalating violence in Iraq, however, mainstream Japanese outlets withdrew their reporters and now simply take news from official military sources. If public sympathy for Japanese taken hostage in Iraq risks embarrassing the government, the media keep repeating the official line condemning them as unpatriotic for being there against the government's will.

I suspect that these feelings of intense nationalism have transcended the control of the governments that coaxed them into being. Divisions between Japan and China are naturally deepening as the two powers compete over resources and influence, and Japan's return to a more proactive foreign policy has stirred up resentment in mainland China and Korea over past colonial abuses.

Politically, the Chinese government will ultimately be able to circumvent any national feelings it finds unhelpful. The danger is perhaps more economic; as recent riots have shown, Chinese nationalism has threatened Japanese property, and may conceivably lead to a chilling effect on the volume of trade between the two countries.

Nitin, if that's true then it has to go down as one hell of a mistake by Nehru. How interesting to think what the world would have been like if he had taken the seat and China didn't get one....

Winston: I agree with your conclusion but I'm not sure China can control what is now assuming a life of its own, hense the title of the post.

Simon,

I read a great paper in the following. Everyone must read it.

The China Factor and the Overstretch of the US Hegemony

FIRST STORY
A view from an insider
George Zhibin Gu
CHINA IS BECOMING A GLOBAL THEATER
"A new power balance will emerge gradually and most likely indirectly"

STORY NUMBER TWO
A critical view from the center of the Global Power
Chalmers Johnson
CHINA REPLACED THE UNITED STATES AS THE TOP EXPORTER TO JAPAN
"The US is treading the same path followed by the former USSR"

THIRD STORY
A contrarian view from Europe
Andre Gunder Frank
RISING DRAGON
"We are witnessing the re-emergence of Asia"

...

http://www.gurusonline.tv/uk/conteudos/gu_report.asp

In regards to China's security council position. Their platform has been almost singularly non-interventionist except in rare occassions where it felt that the resolutions accutely threatened Chinese interests. China (PRC+RoC) has only exercised the veto a total of 5 times, possibly preferring to use bureaucratic obstructions to prevent a vote even coming up as others have mentioned. Compare this to France's 18 vetos, the UK's 32 vetos, the US's 79 vetos, and the Soviet Union/Russia's 122 vetos.