FCCJ contributor schooled by the Japanese!

[Mike Oxlong]

Treece's Treatises
How wrong I was. (satire)
Posted by James B. Treece on Feb 8, 2005

*How the government and other Japanese bodies corrected my mistaken thinking--for example, on the idea that obeying UN rules would bolster Japan's case for joining the UN Security Council.*
By Jim Treece

I was wrong.
With tongue firmly in cheek, I want to come clean on some mistakes in my thinking. I have been set right on all of these matters over the last year or so.

1. Fishing.
I have been under the mistaken impression that fishing grounds around the world were being depleted by over fishing and the use of gigantic fishing boats (factories, actually) that often throw away the species they catch but do not want.
Silly me.
The real problem is whales, according to a Japanese pro-whaling association. Too many whales.
Because of the misguided bans or limits on certain whale catches, an excess of whales are eating more fish, and thus causing the decline in fish stocks worldwide. Now I know.

2. UN Security Council.
Japan basically has three foreign-policy goals: keep overseas markets open to its exports, ensure a stable supply of the raw materials it craves, and gain a seat on the United Nations Security Council.
Towards that third goal, I mistakenly thought Japan would want to be seen as a defender and protector of the UN, its leadership in the world, and its role in promoting respect for international law.
Silly me.
In mid-January, Japan showed me how little I know about the path to obtaining a coveted position in the world. It deported a pair of Kurdish refugees, ignoring a public declaration by the UN High Commission on Refugees that the two deserved refugee status under international laws that Japan has endorsed. When the UNHCR complained about being ignored, the Japanese Foreign Ministry scolded the UNHCR for going public with its criticism.
(Memo to China: if you want to host a FIFA World Cup, I suggest you follow the Japanese example. At the next FIFA sponsored match, have a member of your national team assault a lineman. If the referee objects, publicly denounce the referee. This, according to Japan, will enhance your standing in the community of FIFA nations.)

3. Sumimasen.
When I was first studying the Japanese language, I learned that one can never say "sumimasen" often enough. The word roughly translates to "it is not over," but is used to mean "sorry." In common usage, I have heard people use it repeatedly, apologizing for bothering a store owner, for having a troublesome request, and so on.
How wrong I was.
According to Japanese politicians, especially those in the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, one should never have to say "Sorry" more than once. This especially applies to any wartime actions by the Japanese military on the Asian continent. Japan has formally apologized once or maybe even twice in the past, and countries like China and Korea should not expect any further expressions of contrition.
If the Germans want to apologize for the Holocaust every year, and every time a German politician visits Israel, that must be due to a fluke in the German culture or language. Japanese culture and language apparently has no need for saying sorry more than once.


4. Constitutional reform
I had always thought this was a code term, referring in fact to the desire of some Japanese to make legal the existence of the massive Japanese military. (Before the first Gulf War, Japan had a larger standing army than Iraq.)
When it became clear that the pro-reform crowd was going to include changes in the rules governing Imperial succession, I suspected that would be just the cover used to slip through a repeal of the (ignored) constitutional ban on a Japanese military.
Although I have not been completely convinced otherwise, the increasing seriousness with which the reform drafters are taking the succession issue gives me pause. I very well may have to recant my previous cynicism. The proof will come, I am sure, when the draft revision calls for the first-born child of the Emperor to ascend to the throne. What could be clearer than that? If, say, the law allowed a first-born female to become Empress only if there were no males, that could lead to all sorts of future complications in this age when women give birth later and later in their lifetimes. I am confident that the new law will make succession purely a matter of rank of birth, and completely gender neutral.
After all, if there is one thing I have learned from the mistakes of my prior thinking, it is that Japan values clear logic above all.
FCCJ website