IDEAS, Page 81Teaching Japan to Say NoIn a provocative new book, maverick legislator Shintaro Ishiharatells his countrymen to be more assertiveBy Shintaro Ishihara
He is the kind of man many Japanese admire -- handsome and well
tailored, an avid yachtsman and tennis player, successful
politician and novelist. But what makes Shintaro Ishihara, 57, one
of the most popular figures in Japan these days is his unapologetic
view of the country's pre-eminence on the world stage. As a
corollary, he warns the U.S. that its days as a leading economic
and industrial power are numbered and that it ignores Japanese
interests and sensibilities at its peril.
Ishihara, an outspoken intellectual, first rose to national
prominence in 1955, when he published a popular anti-Establishment
novel, Season of the Sun. Elected to the Japanese Diet in 1968, he
has since served as Transport Minister and head of Japan's
environmental agency. Earlier this year, he voiced his strongly
nationalistic views in a 160-page volume called The Japan That Can
Say No. The book has gained considerable attention in his own
country and caused some dismay in Washington, where it is now
circulating in an unauthorized bootleg translation.
Co-authored with Sony Chairman Akio Morita, the book was aimed
mainly at Japanese readers. In his chapters, Morita echoes much of
what he has said elsewhere about America's slothful business habits
and loss of competitiveness. But it is Ishirara's chapters that are
the most contentious. He asserts that Japan now holds the
technological balance of power in the world. The Americans may own
the missiles, for example, but they cannot fly straight without
Japanese semiconductors. Japan, Ishihara argues, must use its
technological leverage to assume its rightful place in the world.
No longer must the country walk a respectful, and silent, three
steps behind the U.S.
Although Ishihara does not champion the notion of Japanese
racial superiority, he argues that race has been a crucial factor
in shaping America's "biased, incorrect views" of Japan. "The
modern civilization built by whites is coming to a close," he
writes, "and I feel that this is adding to the irritation of
Americans." He adds that the U.S. is "becoming hysterical because
a crucial part of military technology is controlled by an Asian
country."
The book, like Ishihara, is decidedly blunt. That in itself is
a novelty: most postwar Japanese thinkers, obsessed with war guilt
and appreciative of America's magnanimity during and after the
Occupation, have largely preferred a cautious, indirect approach
when writing about relations with the U.S. But the new
assertiveness shown by Ishihara intrigues many Japanese citizens:
in a recent poll, his name placed third among likely candidates for
the prime ministership. Many political insiders feel he is too
controversial to get the top job. But Ishihara himself insists that
"Japan needs a leader who can say yes or no clearly," as he told
TIME's Seiichi Kanise in the following interview.
Q. Your book The Japan That Can Say No, co-authored with
Morita, is generating controversy in Washington. Are you surprised?
A. I told the Japanese publisher that the book should be
published in the U.S. so that Americans could better understand
what Japanese are thinking. But someone circulated a pirated
translation, a clear infringement of copyright. The book is
basically written for Japanese readers, to tell them that it's time
for Japan to stand up and speak its mind. I mention at one point
in the book that Japan could drastically change the world balance
of power by selling advanced computer chips to the Soviet Union.
This is a very provocative thought, even to me. But I had to say
it.
Q. Why?
A. Let me explain. I was in Washington two years ago, right
after the U.S. Government slapped punitive tariffs on Japanese
electronics goods over the semiconductor issue. The mood was
hysterical. At a party an American politician told me that because
the U.S. and the Soviet Union were moving closer together, the
world power balance had shifted, and Japan was no longer very
important. He had the nerve to tell me that the Americans and the
Russians share the same identity because they are white. Well,
that's fine. But if Moscow is looking to Washington for high
technology, Japan is the country that has it. The Soviet Union is
free to choose between Japan and the U.S. for high technology, just
as we are free to choose between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. In
fact, the U.S. can't make reliable one-megabit chips. Japan is the
only country that can mass-produce high-performance semiconductors.
When I said this at the party, the Americans turned pale. But let
me remind you that I was only responding to American threats that
Soviet-American detente left no room for Japan.
Q. Is that why Japan should be more assertive or, as you put
it, stand up and say no?
A. Well, of course. But at the same time we have to say yes on
many issues. First of all, we -- particularly politicians -- should
say no to some groups of people at home. For example, Japan's
distribution system is a shambles. The Japanese Fair Trade
Commission is a den of Finance Ministry bureaucrats in collusion
with industries. It's perfectly understandable that the U.S. got
frustrated over some trade issues.
Q. You sound very conciliatory.
A. I believe in talking out problems between Japan and the U.S.
But the Foreign Ministry, which sets the tone for negotiations,
must stand firm in expressing Japan's position. For example, the
U.S. claims that our keiretsu-ka (vertical integration) of banks
and other financial institutions is outrageous. I don't agree. It's
an idiosyncrasy of the Japanese economy. But unless we make the
structure of keiretsu-ka clear to all, the Japanese market remains
very unfair to people who come from abroad to do business in Japan.
Q. But what you say. . .
A. Just listen to me first. If Americans who hold shares in
Japanese companies demand American-style management at
stockholders' meetings, we must clearly say no. That's what we did
recently to T. Boone Pickens, a man with a disreputable reputation.
America is in decline because of American managers who only care
about their short-term gains so that they can boast about them at
the next shareholders' meeting. Japanese managers use shareholders'
meetings to explain their long-term plans and ask shareholders to
bear with limited dividends. Japan has succeeded in rebuilding its
economy because it has kept its idiosyncrasies, that is to say,
management philosophy, labor-management relations and
company-shareholders relations based on humane feelings. We don't
have to change those characteristics just to please the Americans.
Q. Then why does Japan make concessions in response to U.S.
trade demands?
A. It's because our postwar stepchild mentality hasn't changed.
Because bureaucrats and politicians feel that Japan owes the U.S.
so much in return for the country's postwar rehabilitation they
acquiesce even when the Americans are unreasonable. I think it's
time for Japan to move away from this slave mentality. Japan is the
only country that is developing practical uses of superconductivity
and, I believe, will master the technology in ten years. Then Japan
will be at the center of industry. Japan must repel any attempt by
the U.S. to prevent it from becoming more self-assertive.
Q. Are you saying that you expect Japan to take global
leadership on the strength of its technology?
A. Yes, absolutely. When you look back at history, you'll see
that new technologies build new civilizations. Technology
determines the quality and quantity of the human economy. The
medieval age gave way to the modern age because of the art of
navigation, the invention of gunpowder and Gutenberg's art of
printing. Now the modern age has come to a close because of nuclear
power and electronics. I think Japan will be one of the major
players that will build a new world history. It can't be done by
Japan alone. Active interaction with other countries will enhance
technological developments. In this respect the U.S. will remain
Japan's most important partner. There's no doubt the U.S.'s
position as a global leader will continue. But from the Japanese
viewpoint, the U.S.'s desire to keep Japan or other countries in
the palm of its hand is annoying. The Americans should
dispassionately put the present world in historical perspective.
Their failure to do so will jeopardize not only their future but
also that of the rest of the world.
Q. In your book, you say that the U.S. dropped atom bombs on
Japan but not on Germany because Americans were racially prejudiced
against the Japanese.
A. We should remember that racial prejudice was a factor. Ask
Asians, Hispanics, Indians or blacks living in the U.S. whether
whites are racially prejudiced or not. They would just laugh at the
question. They would all answer yes. Whites are understandably
proud that they undeniably have built the modern era. But the
problem is that this historical pride has evolved into arrogance
and racial prejudice against nonwhites. Now a nonwhite race, the
Japanese, is catching up with the Americans and taking over the
lead in advanced technology. The fact is not easy for Americans to
swallow. I understand it's humiliating. But the time has come for
Americans to give up foolish pride and racial prejudice. Japan
overcame its humiliation (after World War II) to become what it
is today. The Americans say the Japanese have become arrogant, but
in my opinion, the racially prejudiced Americans are much more
arrogant. Don't misunderstand me here. I personally like the
Americans. I admire American society for its dynamism.
Q. When Japanese like yourself speak up, the U.S. reaction is
often that the prewar nationalistic Japan is returning.
A. I think that's arrogance on the part of the U.S. They think,
or rather they want to believe, that the Japanese people are
incapable of formulating their own global ideal. So when we do
speak up, they become so irritated that they label it a revival of
the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. That's an antiquated
argument.
Q. This new self-assertiveness on the part of Japan is often
regarded in the same light as ultranationalism. How different is
it?
A. Are there ultranationalists in Japan? No, there are no
ultrarightists in Japan. Some thugs play old-time songs and parade
on trucks in the streets, but they are not rightists. If there were
true rightists in Japan, many politicians would have been
assassinated.
Q. In the last chapter of your book, you urge Japan to become
a key part of Asia. How?
A. Japan's franchise is Asia. I think Japan should assume
greater responsibility than the U.S. or Europe in the development
of the Asian region. It is extremely unpleasant to watch the U.S.
drive a wedge between Japan and other Asian countries by
propagating the idea that the U.S. military presence is preventing
Japan's invasion of the region. In combining the human capital of
the New Industrialized Countries of Asia with Japan's high
technology and knowledge-intensive industry, Asia could become a
powerful economic bloc.
Q. That would require Japanese initiative. Is Japan ready for
a new leader? Some say you have a chance to become Prime Minister.
Is that possible?
A. I don't know if the U.S. would like the idea. All I can say
now is that Japan needs a leader who can say yes and no clearly.
With such leadership, Japan could win the true trust of the U.S.
Politicians must speak up. Japanese politicians are lazy and
inattentive. Today Japanese politics depends on bureaucrats who
lack imagination and are defensive. Government leaders are
reluctant to take up anything before the matter is thoroughly
worked out by bureaucrats.
Q. There's an argument that Japan is unique and that it cannot
change without external pressure.
A. It's fine to be unique. Japan doesn't have to ruin its
corporations and economy by following the steps of the U.S. or
European countries.
Q. Are the Japanese unique?
A. The Americans are unique, and so are the Japanese. As for
the question of whether the Japanese are a superior race or not,
I think only our achievements can tell. The Japanese are excellent
at connecting a new idea with merchandising. We may be unique in
