Japan: Finding its place in a new global order
By Taichi Sakaiya
In few corners of the world will the new "geo-strategies"
arising from the changes in Europe (discussed elsewhere in this issue by Mihály
Simai) have more importance or urgency than in Japan - the new economic giant on
the world scene in the closing decades of the 20th century. In the following
article, however, Taichi Sakaiya questions whether Japan's opinion leaders,
policy-makers and media truly appreciate that an old world order is ending and a
new one arising.
How Japan manages to adapt its own special culture to these
global rearrangements, he contends, is one of the most urgent problems facing
that country today. In the past, he notes, Japan's failure to adjust to such
realignment "led straight to its calamitous role in World War II."
A writer and social commentator, Mr. Sakaiya graduated from the
University of Tokyo where he majored in economics, and has served in the
Ministry of International Trade and Industry. He is the author of a number of
works on the problems of modern Japan. The following article is excerpted from
the Spring 1990 issue of Japan Echo with permission. - Editor
At the Washington Conference of 1921-22, multilateral pacts
embracing Japan, the United Kingdom, France, Italy and the United States were
established to replace old bilateral alliances - such as that between Japan and
the UK, concluded in 1902, which had helped to fuel Japan's rapid industrial and
military expansion.
But the aftermath of World War I saw a major alignment of
political forces - which the Washington Conference attempted to address. Japan's
leaders, however, continued to operate on the assumption that the old British
interests in Japan held true - and that the country's military adventurism would
be tolerated. By the time they realized their error, Japan had reached the point
of no return and found itself on the threshold of a disastrous war.
To avoid a similar miscalculation in our own time, we must first
of all come to grips with the fact that the breakdown of the Yalta setup heralds
a major regrouping of the world's political forces. This is only the most
obvious change that faces Japan in the 1990s and beyond. Some of the most
fundamental political and economic assumptions on which the world has operated
are being rapidly underminded. Japan must face up to these changes if it is to
avert another disaster.
One such change is the trend toward the formation of regional
blocs as manifested in the European Community's plans to create a single market
by 1992 and the US-Canadian Free Trade Agreement that went into effect in 1989.
While these are technically economic agreements focused on market unification,
they are premised on regional and cultural proximity. In essence, the impulse
that we have seen gaining momentum over the past few years - particularly in
Western Europe - is the consolidation of a particular cultural sphere.
As countries open their borders and bring their industrial
standards and regulations into line with those of the rest of the world, the
international flow of peoples and goods will certainly accelerate, lending
further impetus to the forces of consolidation along cultural lines.
This trend poses a serious dilemma for Japan. Some Japanese
commentators have suggested that we respond to American and European moves
toward regional market integration by proposing a unified Pacific basin market,
but the cultural diversity embraced by this vast area argues against the
feasibility of such a scheme. Great obstacles would have to be overcome before
Japan could integrate its markets with those of the United States and Canada,
for example. As our Western trading partners join hands with one another, Japan
could easily be left out in the cold.
The consolidation of cultural spheres in Europe has been
accompanied by attempts on the part of ethnic groups within nation-states to
reassert their cultural identities. On a personal level, for example, I have
been interested to notice the resurgence of the Catalan language over the course
of repeated visits to Barcelona, Spain, in recent years. The same phenomenon has
reached crisis proportions in the Soviet Union as national movements have been
gaining momentum in the non-Russian republics.
In short, national boundaries are giving way to cultural, ethnic
and regional boundaries. This brings us to a third development of crucial
importance to Japan in the coming decades: a radical change in the very concept
of the modern nation-state.
In Japan, the world "globalism" is understood almost exclusively
in the economic sense. But in most of the world its increasingly frequent use
reflects the perception that the nation-state is no longer the absolute and
unchallenged political concept it used to be. One indication of this is the
burgeoning flow of refugees world-wide.
The flood of migrants over the last several decades signals a
sharp departure from the traditional concept of the nation-state: as a body
sustained by the loyalty of its people and, in turn, committed to their
protection. This was a concept to which Japan had subscribed enthusiastically
ever since it bid farewell to the feudal age in the mid-nineteenth century. It
marks the emergence of a new globalism whose repercussions extend far beyond the
"borderless economy" that the Japanese are so fond of contemplating.

An aerial view of the Nippon Convention
Center at the Makuhari New Town development project in Chiba Prefecture in Japan
which hopes to become a top international convention facility.
The decision by President Nixon in 1971, to free the cost of gold,
signaled the dawn of a new age of currency - untied to any commodity and thus
divorced from production costs. For roughly the next decade, there was an effort
by the United States to stabilize the dollar by keeping its budget and external
accounts in some semblance of order. But then the Reagan administration threw
caution to the winds - and (et the budget and trade deficits balloon to
monstrous proportions in an attempt to create the illusion of prosperity.
The effects of this policy of fiscal irresponsibility extended
beyond government finance to every level of economic activity. Over this
century, America's ratio of private debt to gross national product, for example,
had held remarkably steady, allowing for the impact of war and depression.
Beginning in 1983, however, it climbed at the extraordinary rate of 10
percentage points a year. Even now, the average corporate ratio of net worth to
total capital is falling as companies continue their borrowing spree.
A similar attitude has invaded American households. It is no
longer deemed necessary to keep the family accounts in the black each month. In
fact, since 1986, America's household budgets have registered an aggregate
deficit - an unprecedented development. Clearly, a new perception of money has
permeated society from top to bottom.
Related to this change is the increasing dissociation of prices
from cost. Japan is very much at the forefront of this trend, though it began
elsewhere with the erratic rise of oil prices in the 1970s. In the 1980s the
market value of Japanese land and stocks has soared far out of proportion to the
returns one could rationally expect from their ownership.
A final development to which the Japanese must pay heed is a
general reassessment of the utility of military power. Of course, it would be
naive to imagine that all the peoples of the world have suddenly committed
themselves to peace. But there is mounting skepticism as to the relevance of
military might to national security.
The nuclear arsenals of the United States and the Soviet Union can
be unleashed only at the risk of mutual annihilation and are thus, for all
intents and purposes, useless. In the past, it was suggested that this state of
affairs rendered the quality and quantity of conventional weapons all the more
crucial. Yet the United States lost the war in Vietnam, and the Soviet Union -
even while spending 12 per cent of its GNP on armed forces - was unable to win
the conflict in Afghanistan. In light of these ironies, people have begun to
question the point of accumulating military firepower, personnel and technology
beyond a certain point.
Thus many of the fundamental economic, political and military
assumptions that have dominated the postwar era are crumbling. Yet Japan
continues to uphold the orthodoxy of the modern nation-state and modern
industrial society, and to cleave to policies predicated on these principles.
The gap between global trends and the contemporary Japanese mind-set is steadily
widening.
The so-called structural impediments talks between Washington and
Tokyo are designed to help close this gap. In the course of the initial
discussions, the focus inevitably shifted from Japan's economic policies to its
social systems. Soon it is bound to become apparent that the problems run even
deeper. At issue is the basic value system of postwar Japan.
In the past four decades or so, Japan has operated on the basis of
three basic values: efficiency, equality and safety. Policy-making during this
period has been essentially a matter of balancing the demands of these three
principles.
In the case of environmental policy, for example, this meant
weighing the imperative of protecting public safety and health against that of
maximizing industrial efficiency. In regard to taxes it was a question of equity
versus efficient revenue collection. Opinion leaders debated long and hard over
the priority of one principle over another. In the meantime, however, a host of
other important human values - freedom, choice, enjoyment, courage, and so forth
- were virtually forgotten.
By thus focusing the energies of a relatively homogeneous
population on a few simple, clear-cut values, Japan achieved a high degree of
economic efficiency and industrial competitiveness. Indeed, seen in this light,
its postwar success is hardly surprising. But the people have paid for this
achievement with their own personal freedom, range of choice, and ability to
enjoy life. Within the confines of contemporary Japanese society, their wealth
cannot buy happiness.
Japan's tendency to sacrifice the freedom and happiness of its
people in the cause of economic preeminence hardly endeared it to its trading
partners. But as a member in good standing of the Western bloc, the country was
viewed as more of an asset than a threat, and efforts were made to accommodate
its idiosyncrasies. From here on out, however, it is Japan that will have to do
the accommodating.
A significant number of people knowledgeable about Japan have now
begun to argue that cultural differences are no excuse for unfair policies. It
is, in my view, becoming increasingly apparent that Japan's postwar culture is
indeed at odds with the emerging world order - and Japan bashing can only
escalate.
It is time for we Japanese to take matters in hand and overhaul
the society we have so labouriously built up since World War II. History has
already shown us what can happen when we carelessly allow global trends to pass
us by. We would do well to heed the
lesson.