US-Japan relations: Koizumi’s
gift to beleaguered Bush
Against the backdrop of Japanese ban on the import of American beef, North Korean long-range missile test threat, Iran's resumption of enrichment of uranium, and the growing influence of China, the visit of Japanese prime minister Junichiro Koizumi to the United States from June 28 to June 30 was very significant indeed. This was Koizumi’s last meeting with George W. Bush as the Japanese premier as he is scheduled to step down in September this year when his term as president of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and premiership will expire…. Koizumi’s high-profile visit – a farewell visit by him – speaks volumes about the depth and dimension of relations between the two strong allies, America and
Japan, writes Mohammad Amjad Hossain
The relations between the United States and Japan date back to 1853. On July 8,1853 four black ships led by USS Powhatan and commanded by Commodore Matthew Perry, anchored at Edo (Tokyo) Bay. The commodore appealed to the Japanese government to open sea ports to foreign ships and break away from isolation. The cherry blossoms festival in fall in Washington, DC every year commemorate the signing of peace and amity between the United States and Japan in 1854 initiated by Mathew Perry. The Japanese government presented three thousand cherry plants sometime in 1912 as goodwill gesture to cultivate friendship with the people of the United States.
The dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki of Japan by the US in retaliation against Japan's bombing of Pearl Harbor, America's Pacific fleet on December 07, 1941, created irritation in the relations between the two countries. At the end of the Second World War when the Japanese imperial power was defeated at the hands of the allied forces, the US and Japan again became friends and have since been maintaining the strongest alliance in the Asia-Pacific region. The US still maintains military bases in Okinawa Island, Japan.
Against the backdrop of Japanese ban on the import of American beef, North Korean long-range missile test threat, Iran's resumption of enrichment of uranium, and the growing influence of China, the visit of Japanese prime minister Junichiro Koizumi to the United States from June 28 to June 30 was very significant indeed. This was Koizumi’s last meeting with George W. Bush as the Japanese premier as he is scheduled to step down in September this year when his term as president of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and premiership will expire.
Apparently out of political consideration to the Republican President Bush whose public approval rating is at the lowest ebb, the Japanese government has decided to lift the ban on the import of American beef although with certain strings have been attached. As a part of the strings, Japanese officials from the ministry of farm and health will inspect 35 US meat-making facilities that export beef to Japan.
The import of beef will only be resumed on the recommendation of the Japanese inspectors if US slaughter houses maintain safeguard measures. The resumption of import of American beef will be taking place in view of the threat given by a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the US Congress. They said on June 20 that they would introduce a bill empowering the US treasury department to impose punitive tariffs on Japanese imported goods if Japan failed to resume import of beef to the US by August 31, 2006.
Japanese premier was given a rousing reception at the White House. He is reputed as a great friend of President George W Bush as the premier joined Bush’s campaign on war on terror by sending Japanese troops to Iraq, violating constitutional provision of Japan and ignoring strong popular opposition. Now that Koizumi's term of office is nearing to an end, the Japanese government has decided to withdraw troops from Samawah province in Iraq where they are engaged in humanitarian and reconstruction works, but to continue to provide assistance for United Nations' reconstruction of Iraq and on-going activities of the Multi-National Forces. This was announced by the Japanese Prime Minister at a joint Press conference with President Bush at the white House on June 29. President Bush also acknowledged the decision and praised the Japanese soldiers for their contribution towards reconstruction of a province in Iraq. By joining hands with Bush administration, Koizumi has lost political clout in Japan. The majority of the Japanese people opposed war in Iraq.
Welcoming Japanese Premier Koizumi at the White House President Bush said, ‘Japan and the United States have built a strong alliance and a close friendship. Decades ago, our fathers looked across the Pacific and saw adversaries, uncertainty, and war. Today their sons look across that same ocean and see friends and opportunity and peace’. The Japanese Prime Minister acknowledged the close cooperation that he received from the American president in strengthening their bilateral relations which, he hoped, will continue in future.
Japan is the third largest donor for reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan. In Iraq, Japan has contributed towards reconstruction of a province and continues to contribute to UN activities in the country. Japan and the United States are cooperating to address different issues of common concerns, which includes North Korean nuclear weapons programme, global economic problem and terrorism.
President Bush and premier Koizumi discussed the growing influence of China in the region, North Korea's missile test threat, global war on terror and economic relations between the two countries. Since the trade is in favour of Japan, president Bush urged the Japanese premier to resume import of American beef as early as possible. Last year Japan's export to the United States was $ 197 billion while US's export to Japan stood at $ 50 billion. Japan is the United State's third largest trade partner. And Japan is the largest buyer of treasury bonds of the United States to help support the biggest-ever budget deficit in American history.
It is not clear whether the controversial issue of withdrawal of US troops from Okinawa Island in Japan, which drew protests from the citizens of Okinawa for crimes committed by US troops, was discussed during the meeting, but the statement issued by the White House said ‘two leaders welcomed establishment of common strategic objectives of February, 2005 as well as the conclusion of watershed agreements to transform the alliance agreements, including the most significant realignment of US and Japanese forces in decades, constitutes historic steps forward that make the US military presence more enduring and effective’. According to the plan, US marines will be moved from Okinawa to Guam, US territory in North Pacific Ocean, in an attempt to quell unrest in Okinawa Island as a result of crimes, accidents, land use and noise associate with US troops. That is a diplomatic achievement for the Japanese premier. The two leaders appreciated the increasing political, security and economic cooperation between their two countries as a result of ballistic missile defence cooperation and legislation in Japan to deal with contingencies.
President Bush also admitted that the presence of Japan in the UN Security Council is necessary in the interest of the world body to maintain peace in the world.
As a gift President Bush and first lady Laura Bush took Koizumi to Memphis, Tennessee, the home town of Elvis Presley, on June 30. Koizumi, a fan of Elvis Presley, performed Elvis's tune song –– I want you, I need you, I love you –– to president Bush on his birthday last year at G-8 summit in Scotland.
At Memphis, Koizumi was so exited to be in the midst of the memories of the rock and roll idol that he began to sing Elvis's song: Love me tender and wise men say, only fools rush in. Draping his arm around Lisa Marie, only daughter of Elvis, the Japanese prime minister sang: Hold me close, hold me tight. Elvis's wife, Priscilla, was present. Memphis in Graceland is one of the five museum houses in the United States which attracts hundred of thousands tourists every year.
Koizumi’s high-profile visit –– a farewell visit by him –– speaks volumes about the depth and dimension of relations between the two strong allies, America and Japan.
Mohammad Amjad Hossain former diplomat, writes from Virginia, USA
Indian English
The English teacher ranked above teachers of the vernaculars and of mundane subjects like geography and geometry. In Ray’s film we have a glimpse of a self-assured teacher holding forth on metonymy and synecdoche to a bewildered class. There were teachers of composition who asked their pupils to write down English expressions and learn to use them in their writing – gems like ‘hither and thither,’ ‘last but not the least,’ ‘from the bottom of my heart,’ ‘with all the emphasis at my command,’ ‘nip it in the bud.’ So naturally we had people who said that the hand which rocked the cradle kicked the bucket. Debating societies were a great nursery in the use of cliché, writes HY Sharada Prasad
In this age of globalisation and outsourcing of services, we are told that India has the advantage, particularly over China, of a large young population educated in the Bhasha of the Raj. But our English has its own flavours, some of which are now recognised and appreciated in the writings of our young writers who are held in high regard. Sometimes, however, old snobberies refuse to fade away. A few weeks ago a girl who had ‘topped the board examinations’ was denied admission to a prestigious school because her spoken English was thought to be not good enough.
Twenty years ago I had written an essay on Indian English, which I am reproducing below. As an old practitioner and connoisseur of Indian English, I will be grateful if readers could tell me in what ways Indian English has changed over these last two decades.
* * * * *
Collecting examples of Indian English is one of the pastimes of our upper classes. In our country the upper classes are also those who pride themselves on their mastery of English. They definitely are Miss Mitford’s U.
There is never any dearth of samples. They come from many quarries — the editorial and advertisement sections of newspapers, office notifications, everyday correspondence and conversation, school and college textbooks, teachers’ lessons, speeches of politicians. You are pestered by so-and-so’s co-brother for help in getting a quarter allotted, or to put in a good word to the incharge of his office. Different different people, you are reminded, have different different tastes. A young man assures you that his teacher loves him like anything. Even an old connoisseur of Indianisms like me was a little taken aback when, on praising some Assamese sweets, I was entreated to ‘taste also our alkaline preparations.’ During my Bombay days long ago, I was puzzled to hear a book being described as ‘sufficiently boring’ — until I discovered that ‘sufficiently’ was used as a synonym for ‘very.’
An Indian writing on Indian English is bound to provide many examples of it himself, without being aware.
What is Indian English? Professor Dhurjati Prasad Mukherjee of Lucknow, that versatile scholar of yesterday, began his book on Indian music by remarking that to understand Indian music one must keep in mind that it is Indian and that it is music. Indian English could perhaps be defined as a language written or spoken by Indians in the belief that it is English. The spelling is English. The tone and spirit may not be.
A great deal of importance is attached to English in India. The end of the Raj and all the frenetic efforts of Rashtra-bhasha Raj-bhasha champions to install Hindi in its place have not gone far. India may have constitutionally ceased to be part of the empire. But culturally and intellectually it is still very much part of the English speaking world. That is the tag attached to India in the world of international publishing.
An Indian feels very pleased when a foreigner compliments him on his fluency in English. He does not pause to explain that after all he had studied it for the larger part of his school years. The man with poor or no English finds the going hard — in finding and holding a job or in climbing the social ladder. A Kamaraj is still a rare phenomenon. A good part of Ramakrishna Hegde’s national acceptability is due not just to his mental subtlety but the sophistication of his English prose. Clipped English, a pipe and a safari suit enable one to sail past the security checks. Dhoti and mother tongue are at a disadvantage. In the services, whether civil or military, mastery of English is almost as good an aid to promotion as ability to manipulate the political superiors.
For a long time education in India has been equated with mastering the complexities of English. With the proliferation of public schools and convents there are more people who can do this today, although the quality of English in governmental schools has declined. Legislators who wear khadi and vote Hindi send their children to English schools. Even dancers have now to pay more attention to the eely idioms of English than to bol tans and sollukattus. The ustad who said that anyone who had learnt English could not do justice to the words of the khayal because his or her lips have become a beak, is definitely a figure of yesterday.
It is no surprise that among the so-called educated classes, fathers and sons carry on correspondence in English nine times out of ten. Even top literary men write letters in English rather than in their mother-tongue. A letter in English is believed to get prompter attention.
The Prime Minister gets a letter which says: ‘We consider our pious duty for pardon for taking humble liberty while putting forward our suave submission taking away few precious moments of these times overburdened with various other more important national as well as international problems being dealt with the highest order of perspicuousness, a rare evergreen divine gift adorned on His Excellency.
‘In the past, many a dignitary of our country, had been considerate and kind enough to irrigate encouraging feelings and moods to our hard-working labourers engaged in opencast mines, on every occasion of annual day celebrations, but this year our workmen have earnestly expressed their heart-felt feelings to listen to His Excellency.
‘On our persuasive advice to our workmen that His Excellency is unimaginably overburdened with highly delicate problems and situations, our workmen have expressed their gratefulness in case His Excellency is pleased to hand over soothing message to be read over to them under the auspicious 20-Point Programme.’
A schoolbook tells students: ‘Let us go around and see. On all sides you see nothing but fields. The soil is blackish and has lots of clay in it. In some fields you find bajra and in some others you find groundnuts. But most of the fields are cotton fields. How beautiful the cotton plants are! Do you see those tiny little balls? They are cotton balls. After sometime they burst to be picked up immediately, otherwise it will get spoiled. So during these days you will find hundreds of women collecting cotton from the fields. How quick they are! What a fun! White cotton comes out of this black soil.’ (Environmental Studies — a textbook for Class III, NCERT)
My office is asked: ‘Will you please include my name in the list of participants to discuss national problems with the PM — RAJIVJI. Who will be the answering authority during the forthcoming TV-JANAWANI PROGRAMME to be released in near future?
‘PROGRESSIVE WRITERS & TELENTE ARTISTS — both can be equally accountable for society revolutionary brain-track; why the sky-scrapping difference in terms of the public-image building?’
It would be wrong for me to cite mere illiteracies as examples of Indian English. You can find any number of atrocious illiteracies in the writing of Englishmen and Americans. Not all who are born of British or American parentage are proficient in the use of English. In fact one of the problems experienced by our scholars and scientists who teach in the US and Canada is the incapacity of their students to express themselves coherently or correctly in English.
An Indian picks up English through many sources: the school, Indian newspapers and magazines, foreign newspapers and journals, radio, television, films, posters, hoardings, advertising leaflets. The teaching of English was a serious business in schools in the old days. It was the first language. The English teacher ranked above teachers of the vernaculars and of mundane subjects like geography and geometry. In Ray’s film we have a glimpse of a self-assured teacher holding forth on metonymy and synecdoche to a bewildered class. There were teachers of composition who asked their pupils to write down English expressions and learn to use them in their writing — gems like ‘hither and thither,’ ‘last but not the least,’ ‘from the bottom of my heart,’ ‘with all the emphasis at my command,’ ‘nip it in the bud.’ So naturally we had people who said that the hand which rocked the cradle kicked the bucket. Debating societies were a great nursery in the use of cliché. The opponents flogged the dead horse, whereas we were always right, logically and psychologically. There were models of leave letters and applications which had to be learnt: ‘Being given to understand that a vacancy of a clerk exists in your office under your benign self, I humbly beg to apply for the same.’
With such ingredients was Babu English cooked.
– The Asian Age
Mexico’s democratic transition
still incomplete
by Mark Engler
As the results of the July 2 presidential elections in Mexico head to the courts, it could be several days or even weeks before the final winner is determined. The current vote counts have given a razor thin advantage to Felipe Calderón of the right-wing National Action Party (PAN), to which incumbent president Vicente Fox belongs. Still, with the margin well under one per cent and with irregularities in the vote-counting process being challenged, progressive former Mexico City mayor, Andrés Manuel López Obrador of the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD), might conceivably eke out a victory. While U.S. newspapers declare Calderón the winner, Mexican electoral authorities have yet to do so, recognising the tribunal that is reviewing disputes as the final arbiter for the race.
The past months in Mexico have been marked by a campaign of fear against López Obrador. What conservatives portrayed as a dreaded possibility is the very thing that would have done most to consolidate the country's transition to democracy: a peaceful passing of power across ideological lines.
When Vicente Fox won the last presidential elections in 2000, his triumph ended more than seven decades of one-party governance and disrupted some of the traditional patronage networks that had defined Mexican politics. Yet Fox furthered the same brand of market-oriented economic neo-liberalism promoted for two decades by long-ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party, which joined with the PAN to pass NAFTA in the early 1990s.
As in many countries throughout Latin America, neo-liberalism has failed to deliver for Mexico. Back when he was on the campaign trail, Fox promised that he would create economic growth of seven per cent per year; the actual average was 1.8 per cent. Even with the economy picking up in the first quarter of 2006, Mexico has not seen anywhere near the one million new jobs per year that Fox pledged. Instead, steep inequality, persistent poverty, and desperation have driven many Mexican immigrants north in search of opportunity in the post-NAFTA era.
Enter López Obrador. The center-left presidential candidate became a hugely popular figure as mayor of Mexico City by actually paying attention to the needs of the poor. He launched new public works and created pensions and subsidies for the elderly, single mothers, and the disabled. Through most of the presidential race, López Obrador polled as the clear frontrunner. He vowed to end special privileges and sweetheart contracts for the wealthy, to raise revenue by stemming an epidemic of elite tax evasion, and to expand his social programs nationally.
López Obrador's impending victory offered something fundamental for democracy: the possibility of real change.
In the months leading up to the election, López Obrador's political enemies fought his candidacy with relentless fear-mongering. Even after electoral officials reprimanded the PAN and forced the party to pull campaign advertisements that called López Obrador a ‘danger to Mexico’ and that asserted false links with Hugo Chávez, right-wing business groups threw the same sucker punch in round two. They funded a series of ‘non-partisan’ last-minute attack ads that showed images of the Venezuelan leader and, wink wink, stated that ‘Mexico doesn't need a dictator.’
Meanwhile, US pundits fanned the flames by spreading ominous accusations of ‘populism,’ and political consultants traveled south of the border to help plot the character assassination.
With all the conservative vitriol, you would never know that López Obrador has been consistently criticised from the left for his moderation. Social movement groups like the Zapatistas paint his social initiatives as stop-gap measures that wouldn't address the real dysfunction of the economic system. They contend that López Obrador has been too quick to affirm that Mexico will remain tied to the U.S. vision of a neo-liberal global economy and too hesitant to forge a distinct economic path. And they disparage him for his plans merely to renegotiate the sections of the North American Free Trade Agreement's that most hurt Mexican producers, rather than to scrap NAFTA altogether.
As López Obrador's supporters believed it would, Calderón's lead from preliminary tabulations narrowed as a full vote count progressed, but the conservative retained a slight edge. Now, an electoral tribunal will be reviewing disputes and making a final determination. The conduct at the great majority of polling places during last Sunday's elections was a far cry from in the bad old days of one-party government, when bought votes and stuffed ballot boxes were the norm. Still, the PRD has alleged serious irregularities in the vote-counting process. If evidence continues to mount it may well raise the specter of a stolen election for the wider Mexican public.
In that case, popular protests would be justified to prevent a repeat of the infamous elections of 1988, when blatant fraud was used to stop another progressive candidate from taking office.
A surge of action in the courts or on the streets may yet alter the results of this election. But for the time being, the country faces a less dramatic prospect: that the campaign of fear will have kept Mexico locked into the status quo, leaving its democratic transition incomplete.
July 7, 2006 by CommonDreams.org, July 7, 2006. Mark Engler, an analyst with Foreign Policy In Focus, can be reached via the web site http: //www. democracyuprising.com.
MAIN PAGE | TOP
|
|
