Published: August 26, 2009
TOKYO — In the post-Cold War period, Japan has been continually
buffeted by the winds of market fundamentalism in a U.S.-led
movement that is more usually called globalization. In the
fundamentalist pursuit of capitalism people are treated not as an
end but as a means. Consequently, human dignity
is lost.
How can we put an end to unrestrained market fundamentalism and
financial capitalism, that are void of morals or moderation, in
order to protect the finances and livelihoods of our citizens? That
is the issue we are now facing.
In these times, we must return to the idea of fraternity — as in
the French slogan “liberté, égalité, fraternité” — as a force for
moderating the danger inherent within freedom.
Fraternity as I mean it can be described as a principle that
aims to adjust to the excesses of the current globalized brand of
capitalism and accommodate the local economic practices that have
been fostered through our traditions.
The recent economic crisis resulted from a way of thinking based
on the idea that American-style free-market economics represents a
universal and ideal economic order, and that all countries should
modify the traditions and regulations governing their economies in
line with global (or rather American) standards.
In Japan, opinion was divided on how far the trend toward
globalization should go. Some advocated the active embrace of
globalism and leaving everything up to the dictates of the market.
Others favored a
more reticent approach, believing that efforts should be made to
expand the social safety net and protect our traditional economic
activities. Since the administration of Prime
Minister Junichiro Koizumi (2001-2006), the Liberal Democratic
Party has stressed the former, while we in the Democratic Party of
Japan have tended toward the latter position.
The economic order in any country is built up over long years
and reflects the influence of traditions, habits and national
lifestyles. But
globalism has progressed without any regard for non-economic
values, or for environmental issues or problems of resource
restriction.
If we look back on the changes in Japanese society since the end
of the Cold War, I believe it is no exaggeration to say
that the global economy has damaged traditional economic activities
and destroyed local communities.
In terms of market theory, people are simply personnel
expenses. But in the real world people support the
fabric of the local community and are the physical embodiment of
its lifestyle, traditions and culture. An individual gains respect
as a person by acquiring a job and a role within the local
community and being able to maintain his family’s
livelihood.
Under the principle of fraternity, we would not implement
policies that leave areas relating to human lives and safety — such
as agriculture, the environment and medicine — to the mercy of
globalism.
Our responsibility as politicians is to refocus our attention on
those non-economic values that have been thrown aside by the march
of globalism. We
must work on policies that regenerate the ties that bring people
together, that take greater account of nature and the environment,
that rebuild welfare and medical systems, that provide better
education and child-rearing support, and that address wealth
disparities.
Another national goal that emerges from the concept of
fraternity is the creation of an East Asian community. Of course,
the Japan-U.S. security pact will continue to be the cornerstone of
Japanese diplomatic policy.
But at the same time, we must not forget our identity as a
nation located in Asia. I believe that the East Asian region, which
is showing increasing vitality, must be recognized as Japan’s basic
sphere of being. So we must continue to build frameworks for stable
economic cooperation and security across the region.
The financial
crisis has suggested to many that the era of U.S. unilateralism may
come to an end. It has also raised doubts about the permanence of
the dollar as the key global currency.
I also feel
that as a result of the failure of the Iraq war and the financial
crisis, the era of U.S.-led globalism is coming to an end and that
we are moving toward an era of multipolarity. But
at present no one country is ready to replace the United States as
the dominant country. Nor is there a currency ready to replace the
dollar as the world’s key currency. Although the influence of the
U.S. is declining, it will remain the world’s leading military and
economic power for the next two to three decades.
Current developments show clearly that China will become one of
the world’s leading economic nations while also continuing to
expand its military power. The size of China’s economy will surpass
that of Japan in the not-too-distant future.
How should Japan maintain its political and economic
independence and protect its national interest when caught between the United
States, which is fighting to retain its position as the world’s
dominant power, and China, which is seeking ways to become
dominant?
This is a question of concern not only to Japan but also to the
small and medium-sized nations in Asia. They want the military
power of the U.S. to function effectively for the stability of the
region but want to restrain U.S. political and economic excesses.
They also want to reduce the military threat posed by our neighbor
China while ensuring that China’s expanding economy develops in an
orderly fashion. These are major factors accelerating regional
integration.
Today, as the supranational political and economic philosophies
of Marxism and globalism have, for better or for worse, stagnated,
nationalism is once again starting to have a major influence in
various countries.
As we seek to build new structures for international
cooperation, we must overcome excessive nationalism and go down a
path toward rule-based economic cooperation and security.
Unlike Europe, the countries of this region differ in size,
development stage and political system, so economic integration
cannot be achieved over the short term. However, we should
nonetheless aspire to move toward regional currency integration as
a natural extension of the rapid economic growth begun by Japan,
followed by South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong, and then achieved by
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and China. We
must spare no effort to build the permanent security frameworks
essential to underpinning currency integration.
Establishing a common Asian currency will likely take more than
10 years. For such a single currency to bring about political
integration will surely take longer still.
ASEAN, Japan, China (including Hong Kong), South Korea and
Taiwan now account for one quarter of the world’s gross domestic
product. The economic power of the East Asian region and the
interdependent relationships within the region have grown wider and
deeper. So the structures required for the formation of a regional
economic bloc are already in place.
On the other hand, due to historical and cultural conflicts as
well as conflicting national security interests, we must recognize
that there are numerous difficult political issues. The problems of
increased militarization and territorial disputes cannot be
resolved by bilateral negotiations between, for example, Japan and
South Korea, or Japan and China. The more these problems are
discussed bilaterally, the greater the risk that emotions become
inflamed and nationalism intensified.
Therefore, I would suggest, somewhat paradoxically, that the
issues that stand in the way of regional integration can only be
truly resolved by moving toward greater integration. The experience
of the E.U. shows us how regional integration can defuse
territorial disputes.
I believe that regional integration and collective security is
the path we should follow toward realizing the principles of
pacifism and multilateral cooperation advocated by the Japanese
Constitution. It is also the appropriate path for protecting
Japan’s political and economic independence and pursuing our
interests in our position between the United States and China.
Let me conclude by quoting the words of Count
Coudenhove-Kalergi, founder of the first popular movement for a
united Europe, written 85 years ago in “Pan-Europa” (my
grandfather, Ichiro Hatoyama, translated his book, “The
Totalitarian State Against Man,” into Japanese): “All great
historical ideas started as a utopian dream and ended with reality.
Whether a particular idea remains as a utopian dream or becomes a
reality depends on the number of people who believe in the ideal
and their ability to act upon it.”
Yukio Hatoyama heads the Democratic Party of Japan, and
would become prime minister should the party win in Sunday’s
elections. A longer version of this article appears in the
September issue of the monthly Japanese journal Voice.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/27/opinion/27iht-edhatoyama.html?pagewanted=all