Japan-East Asia Relations
Freedom is a basic human right. There will be no human existence without freedom. Man and slavery, put together, is as good as human extinction. Freedom and democracy is never an invention of the West. A man, regardless of his nationality, will fight for his freedom and democracy. Even ethics, although different from country to country, still points out to human morality which can show democracy and freedom in a general point of view. Nowadays, despite apparently friendly and smooth relations between East Asian and Western countries, anti-Western sentiment is still ingrained into the political thinking of a part of the East Asian political elite. Moreover, the presence of Asian values is what these people are trying to show the West.
Asian Values
Values and virtues are the most important part of every human relation. For example, for a person to be accepted in a society, he must not be a deviant so as not to be cast out. Furthermore, a person learns during childhood the importance of knowing do’s and don’ts in wherever and whatever country he may be in. So, in our world, every person accepts a universal set of values which are accepted in different parts of the world. Although ethics in Asia is different from ethics in Europe, still, there are certain similarities which would not let a person be “looked-upon” badly by the other. However, in Japan, certain hypocrites who are very much excessive nationalists showed openly confrontational attitude toward the West. These people think that Asia should have their own set of values which are not influenced by the West. Still, as was presented earlier, they must think that there are values which are universal even if they imagine otherwise. These people believe that since Japan is the Super power of Asia, the continent must adapt to Japan’s planned policies. These new breed of leaders are seeking for more power and independence from the Western influence or supervision. They feel that they are being dictated by West.
Western Culture
In terms of culture, there may be some cultural decay in the West due to excessive wealth and economic progress and power. Still, the Westerners are still being depended upon by many continents in the world. For example, African continent, the Middle East, Russia, and many Asian countries depend highly on America and other European countries for basic commodities. In the world, we participate in a give and take relationship which is known in nature as mutualism. We depend on each other to live. We do not destroy each other to see who reigns supreme. Although America may rein supreme, leadership from the country and being a global aid are apparent. These Japanese dissenters hope for supremacy in global operations that is why they are trying to destroy the reputation of the West especially that of America.
Interferences
Although Asia has every right to scrutinize the West in terms of their interferences, still, Asian superpowers must reconsider. The Western continents have seen the dangers that certain top countries possess. The United Nations believe that Western interference is also necessary in the East. Why? Well, it is because of the fact that these top countries like Japan and China have their own “hidden agendas”. For example, During the Korean War, if America did not interfere, what would happen to South Korea? Of course, the people in that country would not be able to have their own freedom since we know that the North is a communist country. Another one is in Iraq. Could Japan do the same thing as what America did? Could Japan liberate the Iraqis Saddam Hussein? Japanese interference with other Asian country’s internal affairs really means something else. They must remember that they did something wrong to the World especially South Korea and the Philippines. Also, we must remember that Westerners have the capacity. On the contrary, Japan really does not have because they are trying to voice out that they are trying to occupy the country and take control.
Hypocrisy
A young nationalist, Fumimaro Konoe, wrote, “Western pacifism was nothing more than a hypocritical pose, a façade to conceal the injustice of the existing international order structured to benefit the West.” This statement was written before World War II. Well, speaking of hypocrisy, Japan joined Germany who tried to take over the World, and then was defeated during the war. Mr. Fumimaro Konoe killed himself after the war. Who is the “hypocrite” now? In addition, a high-ranking Chinese Government officer asserted, “While launching a loud human rights crusade against other countries in the world, the United States is turning a blind eye to its own serious human rights violations. This only serves to prove the US hypocrisy in its so-called concern for human rights.” Such statement is void – a mere justification to be exact. In China, people do not receive what they deserve. Women are treated like dogs and children as garbage. Although there are many people in their country, still, they are suffering. They do not eat properly. So, again, who is the hypocrite?
Conclusion
Though it is true that Asia must have its own core values, the fact that there exist universal values which are true for all the continents in the world is always there. These core values are embedded in every human being. The West is the first continent to publish and promulgate these important universal values. Asia should be content with what our world has; anyway, our main goal is to have a unified world which is why we have the United Nations, right?
Monday, July 27, 2009
lovely's insights.3
Japan-U.S Relations
Presence of unity and cooperation is vital for the growth of a relationship. Respect with each other is also a good way of growing a relationship. On the end of World War II, Japan and USA became allies after the signing of a treaty. We all know that these two countries were enemies, but they established a strong economic relationship even though economic difficulty was experienced. We can say that the presence of such mutualism is for the benefit of the East and the West. There are many ways on how they show a good relationship.
The Peace Treaty
The San Francisco Treaty was signed by the Japanese as a way of expressing their peace with the Allied Powers. It was done to show global cooperation, war on terrorism, and political and economic cooperation. Furthermore, the peace treaty will provide as a constant reminder of the wrong choice that it did during World War II. Moreover, Japan, the superpower of Asia, must provide a good relationship with the top countries of the West such as England and USA or else, they will be considered a threat to global peace. In doing so, they will stand up as the representative of the Eastern Hemisphere of the World. One must remember that the most advanced is always on the top.
Japan-U.S. Economic Relationship
Of course, investment is always part of a relationship. It was said that there was a friction in Japanese – American Economic relationship. After World War, investments are one of the good ways to expand capital profit. Cheating is always part of trade. USA said that Japan did things which are not favorable in their presence. For example, Japan sold machines to Russia which enabled them to create submarines which are not detectable by USA. Such accusations showed American greed, but come to think of it, such action done by Japan is really not a good one. Remember that USA and Russia both have bad reputation with each other since the Cold War. Still, Japanese – American economic mutualism becomes better and better everyday. Japan is America’s number one trade partner since both countries have good technological advancements. As global leaders, their economic strategies must lead to global economic stability.
Global Cooperation Issues
There are many ways on how Japan shows its cooperation with the United States. First is fight on terrorism. Ever since the attack on America, Japan made vigorous efforts on preventing such terrorisms. They took the war on their own which is good enough as an ally of US. Second, for the reform in UN, Japan made efforts by providing certain ideologies which would improve the organization. They do not aim to change the UN but to improve the UN in terms of peace building. Third is global development. How do they do it? Their main goal is to make common development principles which would ensure the most effective way of giving welfare assistance to third world countries. Last is global warming. Joint efforts of Japan and America to alleviate global warming are done by building environmentally friendly materials and equipments. Furthermore, strengthening policies regarding pollutants are strengthened by Japan and America. These policies are passed to countries like China, India, and other developed countries.
Conclusion
Indeed, these two countries must coexist so that they would be responsible to underdeveloped and undeveloped countries of the East and the West, being superpowers of the continents. Moreover, the examples that they show to other countries would show that they have the ability to control each other’s feelings with each other. War is not a way to settle disputes. It is a method that would destroy relationships. Mutualism is present because even if cultures are different, cooperation is vital for the survival of our species.
Presence of unity and cooperation is vital for the growth of a relationship. Respect with each other is also a good way of growing a relationship. On the end of World War II, Japan and USA became allies after the signing of a treaty. We all know that these two countries were enemies, but they established a strong economic relationship even though economic difficulty was experienced. We can say that the presence of such mutualism is for the benefit of the East and the West. There are many ways on how they show a good relationship.
The Peace Treaty
The San Francisco Treaty was signed by the Japanese as a way of expressing their peace with the Allied Powers. It was done to show global cooperation, war on terrorism, and political and economic cooperation. Furthermore, the peace treaty will provide as a constant reminder of the wrong choice that it did during World War II. Moreover, Japan, the superpower of Asia, must provide a good relationship with the top countries of the West such as England and USA or else, they will be considered a threat to global peace. In doing so, they will stand up as the representative of the Eastern Hemisphere of the World. One must remember that the most advanced is always on the top.
Japan-U.S. Economic Relationship
Of course, investment is always part of a relationship. It was said that there was a friction in Japanese – American Economic relationship. After World War, investments are one of the good ways to expand capital profit. Cheating is always part of trade. USA said that Japan did things which are not favorable in their presence. For example, Japan sold machines to Russia which enabled them to create submarines which are not detectable by USA. Such accusations showed American greed, but come to think of it, such action done by Japan is really not a good one. Remember that USA and Russia both have bad reputation with each other since the Cold War. Still, Japanese – American economic mutualism becomes better and better everyday. Japan is America’s number one trade partner since both countries have good technological advancements. As global leaders, their economic strategies must lead to global economic stability.
Global Cooperation Issues
There are many ways on how Japan shows its cooperation with the United States. First is fight on terrorism. Ever since the attack on America, Japan made vigorous efforts on preventing such terrorisms. They took the war on their own which is good enough as an ally of US. Second, for the reform in UN, Japan made efforts by providing certain ideologies which would improve the organization. They do not aim to change the UN but to improve the UN in terms of peace building. Third is global development. How do they do it? Their main goal is to make common development principles which would ensure the most effective way of giving welfare assistance to third world countries. Last is global warming. Joint efforts of Japan and America to alleviate global warming are done by building environmentally friendly materials and equipments. Furthermore, strengthening policies regarding pollutants are strengthened by Japan and America. These policies are passed to countries like China, India, and other developed countries.
Conclusion
Indeed, these two countries must coexist so that they would be responsible to underdeveloped and undeveloped countries of the East and the West, being superpowers of the continents. Moreover, the examples that they show to other countries would show that they have the ability to control each other’s feelings with each other. War is not a way to settle disputes. It is a method that would destroy relationships. Mutualism is present because even if cultures are different, cooperation is vital for the survival of our species.
Monday, July 6, 2009
lovely's insights.2
Political Reformation
In every generation, cultures either change or develop from one form to another. Culture can often describe the kind of government a certain country could possibly have. Charter Change and political reform are often the subjects of debates in the Senate or House of Representatives. However, in Japan, much consideration is being done just for them to have political reform. Let us have a quick look back in history.
Pacifism
Japan’s defeat in 1945 made the people suffer tremendously. This is the reason why article 9 is created. It says there:
“Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.
In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.”
Hatred of war is natural since war is destructive so, it will follow that warfare will be removed from the country’s constitution. During the Cold War’s spread in Asia, Japan began rearming themselves, but many considered this as a violation in the constitution. Therefore, the LDP (Liberal Democratic Party) changed the way the constitution is interpreted although the government has not changed its interpretation that Japan shall not engage in the collective right of self-defense. That is, Japan cannot fight for an ally or help an ally militarily. Also, it should be noted that Japan’s public opinion and media remain pacifist. Only 13 percent of Japanese people replied affirmatively when asked whether they would fight if Japan were invaded. In other major countries, around 80 percent or more answered affirmatively.
Possible Sources of Reform
Now, the biggest hanging question is what are the prospects of political reform in Japan? Can Japan not change? Could it not go with the flow of times? The following paragraphs give definite answers to the questions.
Firstly, the electoral reform of 1994 in Japan was supposed to bring an end to one-ended party dominance and encourage candidates to square-off in political issues. Despite of the attempted reform in elections, the system was still the same. The effectiveness of the reforms is debated among Japan scholars but still, change has been slower than many hoped for. It was said that the 1994 reform not only has effect on electoral reform but also to domestic policy and foreign affairs. Such reforms allowed Japan to have self defense troop during war in Iraq and enabled Japan to involve itself in overseas peacekeeping operations.
Secondly, another source of political reform is the generational change. Younger members of the National Diet support the idea of political reform. The new generation of Japanese leaders considers political change a very effective way of strengthening Japan’s dysfunctional constitution. Of course, as was said, constitutions change according to the kind of culture a certain country currently has. In addition, because of the new, overseas-educated and politically-prepared leaders, new skills or styles in politics emerged. Thus, a change in political policies is possible.
Furthermore, globalization may be another source of political reform in Japan. Although Japan was criticized during its total indifference during the Gulf war as a response to the horrors of World War II, the post-Cold War gave a galvanizing effect to Japan’s foreign policies. The recent war in Iraq made the country act upon America’s call for anti-terrorism by, at least, changing most of its foreign laws.
Lastly, relationship between politicians and bureaucrats, nowadays, is not harmonious. Today, Japanese bureaucrats are regarded as a major cause of Japan’s economic difficulties: a prolonged lump, high unemployment, stock price stagnation, deflation, bad loans, and looming government debt. Until the early 1990s, however, the bureaucracy was lauded as a catalyst for stable economic performance, internationally competitive manufacturing, and record trade surpluses.
There are three possible ways for effective reformation of bureaucracy according to Junko Kato, a writer in Japanese politics. She said and I quote, “First, the cabinet office needs more staff. The 2001 reform has generally focused on increasing political control over policymaking. However, strengthening policy expertise for politicians that is independent of the bureaucratic organization is a more effective way of coping with current economic difficulties. The independent staff would complement bureaucratic capabilities by bringing in new ideas, conflicting views and alternative solutions—which would serve to break through the routines and precedents in bureaucratic decision-making. Second, in addition to strengthening policy expertise inside the cabinet office, ministries and agencies should have their own access to policy expertise that is independent of their unchanging organizational needs and thus may be used to reverse present policies. The Japanese government has long used advisory councils in policymaking, but has not made the best use of those policy experts appointed from the private sector—who, of all the council members, tend to be most opposed to policy proposals prepared by the government. Because of the emphasis on consensual decision making, the advisory councils tend to be no more than a “rubber stamp”; however, if active policy discussion were more appreciated, the councils could be a source of policy innovation. Some movement in this direction has already occurred, but more progress is needed. A third reform would involve cultivating “out of the box” thinking among members of the ministries and agencies themselves. For lateral entry, policy expertise should be a more important criterion (though making it the sole criterion would hurt the morale of existing organizational members, and there should be limits on the number of lateral entries and/or the terms of the individuals involved). A related move would be to increase opportunities for members to enlarge their own expertise, in order to stimulate them to break with “the done thing” inside the bureaucratic organization. Under the pure organizational orientation, bureaucrats do not have much opportunity to gain special knowledge on the inside, and their ability to do so does not necessarily respond flexibly to changing and imminent policy needs such as the recent need to solve the bad loan problems of financial institutions. This lack of opportunity exists because few inside the organization can designate the changing demand for expertise.”
There is no simple answer or panacea that will work for restructuring the Japanese political economy, especially as far as the bureaucracy is concerned. Looking for answers in another country—especially the United States, whose system is quite different—is not sufficient to address the complex problems related to bureaucratic reform and the need for a comprehensive, long-term approach.
Conclusion
Although Japan’s progress regarding political change is slow, still, it is natural for people to clamor for better governing policies. Security, welfare, and peace are the major concerns of the people – just like in any other country. However their hands are tied as to the reforms that they want to make. Japanese leaders must carefully plan and resort to all means even though it might seem impossible. Every stone must not be left unturned, for their efforts might result to fruition in the near future as long as their motives are for the welfare of the country and not for vested interests and hidden agendas.
In every generation, cultures either change or develop from one form to another. Culture can often describe the kind of government a certain country could possibly have. Charter Change and political reform are often the subjects of debates in the Senate or House of Representatives. However, in Japan, much consideration is being done just for them to have political reform. Let us have a quick look back in history.
Pacifism
Japan’s defeat in 1945 made the people suffer tremendously. This is the reason why article 9 is created. It says there:
“Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.
In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.”
Hatred of war is natural since war is destructive so, it will follow that warfare will be removed from the country’s constitution. During the Cold War’s spread in Asia, Japan began rearming themselves, but many considered this as a violation in the constitution. Therefore, the LDP (Liberal Democratic Party) changed the way the constitution is interpreted although the government has not changed its interpretation that Japan shall not engage in the collective right of self-defense. That is, Japan cannot fight for an ally or help an ally militarily. Also, it should be noted that Japan’s public opinion and media remain pacifist. Only 13 percent of Japanese people replied affirmatively when asked whether they would fight if Japan were invaded. In other major countries, around 80 percent or more answered affirmatively.
Possible Sources of Reform
Now, the biggest hanging question is what are the prospects of political reform in Japan? Can Japan not change? Could it not go with the flow of times? The following paragraphs give definite answers to the questions.
Firstly, the electoral reform of 1994 in Japan was supposed to bring an end to one-ended party dominance and encourage candidates to square-off in political issues. Despite of the attempted reform in elections, the system was still the same. The effectiveness of the reforms is debated among Japan scholars but still, change has been slower than many hoped for. It was said that the 1994 reform not only has effect on electoral reform but also to domestic policy and foreign affairs. Such reforms allowed Japan to have self defense troop during war in Iraq and enabled Japan to involve itself in overseas peacekeeping operations.
Secondly, another source of political reform is the generational change. Younger members of the National Diet support the idea of political reform. The new generation of Japanese leaders considers political change a very effective way of strengthening Japan’s dysfunctional constitution. Of course, as was said, constitutions change according to the kind of culture a certain country currently has. In addition, because of the new, overseas-educated and politically-prepared leaders, new skills or styles in politics emerged. Thus, a change in political policies is possible.
Furthermore, globalization may be another source of political reform in Japan. Although Japan was criticized during its total indifference during the Gulf war as a response to the horrors of World War II, the post-Cold War gave a galvanizing effect to Japan’s foreign policies. The recent war in Iraq made the country act upon America’s call for anti-terrorism by, at least, changing most of its foreign laws.
Lastly, relationship between politicians and bureaucrats, nowadays, is not harmonious. Today, Japanese bureaucrats are regarded as a major cause of Japan’s economic difficulties: a prolonged lump, high unemployment, stock price stagnation, deflation, bad loans, and looming government debt. Until the early 1990s, however, the bureaucracy was lauded as a catalyst for stable economic performance, internationally competitive manufacturing, and record trade surpluses.
There are three possible ways for effective reformation of bureaucracy according to Junko Kato, a writer in Japanese politics. She said and I quote, “First, the cabinet office needs more staff. The 2001 reform has generally focused on increasing political control over policymaking. However, strengthening policy expertise for politicians that is independent of the bureaucratic organization is a more effective way of coping with current economic difficulties. The independent staff would complement bureaucratic capabilities by bringing in new ideas, conflicting views and alternative solutions—which would serve to break through the routines and precedents in bureaucratic decision-making. Second, in addition to strengthening policy expertise inside the cabinet office, ministries and agencies should have their own access to policy expertise that is independent of their unchanging organizational needs and thus may be used to reverse present policies. The Japanese government has long used advisory councils in policymaking, but has not made the best use of those policy experts appointed from the private sector—who, of all the council members, tend to be most opposed to policy proposals prepared by the government. Because of the emphasis on consensual decision making, the advisory councils tend to be no more than a “rubber stamp”; however, if active policy discussion were more appreciated, the councils could be a source of policy innovation. Some movement in this direction has already occurred, but more progress is needed. A third reform would involve cultivating “out of the box” thinking among members of the ministries and agencies themselves. For lateral entry, policy expertise should be a more important criterion (though making it the sole criterion would hurt the morale of existing organizational members, and there should be limits on the number of lateral entries and/or the terms of the individuals involved). A related move would be to increase opportunities for members to enlarge their own expertise, in order to stimulate them to break with “the done thing” inside the bureaucratic organization. Under the pure organizational orientation, bureaucrats do not have much opportunity to gain special knowledge on the inside, and their ability to do so does not necessarily respond flexibly to changing and imminent policy needs such as the recent need to solve the bad loan problems of financial institutions. This lack of opportunity exists because few inside the organization can designate the changing demand for expertise.”
There is no simple answer or panacea that will work for restructuring the Japanese political economy, especially as far as the bureaucracy is concerned. Looking for answers in another country—especially the United States, whose system is quite different—is not sufficient to address the complex problems related to bureaucratic reform and the need for a comprehensive, long-term approach.
Conclusion
Although Japan’s progress regarding political change is slow, still, it is natural for people to clamor for better governing policies. Security, welfare, and peace are the major concerns of the people – just like in any other country. However their hands are tied as to the reforms that they want to make. Japanese leaders must carefully plan and resort to all means even though it might seem impossible. Every stone must not be left unturned, for their efforts might result to fruition in the near future as long as their motives are for the welfare of the country and not for vested interests and hidden agendas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
