A blog in idleness

Jung Chang's recent book about Mao Tse-tung is getting a lot of attention. Though I haven't read it yet, it reportedly exposed true Mao and exploded myths of him.

The International Herald Tribune reported that President Bush finished reading the book. Though the article doubts that the book will have any influence on Bush, I hope that he understands how the Father of present Chinese Communist Party was cruel and autocratic and infers that the Party might not have change its core culture yet.

According to The International Herald Tribune, the U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice mentioned that she would shift more American diplomats to developing countries. She also has an interesting plan to use internet as a tool of diplomacy.

The State Department will also set up "virtual posts," where people can visit a Web site and chat online with U.S. diplomats, Rice said. "This digital meeting room enables foreign citizens, young people most of all, to engage online with American diplomats who could be hundreds of miles away," Rice said, adding that Internet diplomacy would be a cost-effective way to expand U.S. presence in a country.

Generally, it is difficult to flexibly deploy human resources in bureaucratic organizations. As Rice mentioned, this redeployment intended to move away from the vestiges of the Cold War and would be equivalent to the transformation of American military. Considering nearly 15 years has already passed since the end of the Cold War, this move might be late; however, this shift is necessary and right. Since 9/11, internatinal politics has been mainly about security. But, at the same time, "development" is becoming more and more important in a sense that development of developing countries would eliminate the seeds of future terrors. Actually, even in internatinal economy, development is the main theme. For example, the official name for the Doha Round of WTO negotiations is Doha Development Agenda (DDA); the main theme of the round is about the development of developing countries throug expanding world trade; and the round actually started because of the sense of crisis in the international community immediately after 9/11.

Secretary Rice accurately understands the current tide of international politics, and she emphasizes developmental aspects of world affairs. Her philosophy is reflected on her term "Strategic Development Alliance" in her address in Japan and Japan-U.S. joint statement . I don't know how much Japanese diplomacy has changed its shape in terms of the deployment of bureaucratic human resources, but if it hasn't changed yet, I hope Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan would begin its transformation in accordance with the change of DOS.

Two events in this week reminded me of the fact that Japan is an economic giant but also a political dwarf in the international community.

The investigation to Livedoor, a Japanese company, had nagative impact on markets all over the world. The news in the U.S. about Livedoor and system problems in Tokyo Stock Exchange seems bigger than any other Japan related news I've heard in the U.S. for one and a half years. It is probably bigger than the news about Koizumi's landsliding victory in last summer.

At the same time, Japan appears out of the inner circle of international politics over the Iranian nuclear program even though Japan is a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council and it has historically unique stakes in Iran.

Now, Japan is struggling to become a political power. To attain it, Japan has to get a permanent membership of the Security Council and become a "normal country" in thte field of international security.But there are lot of things what Japan can do without these conditions. I think Iranian issue would be one of the test cases of Japanese diplomacy. I believe that Japan can do more on the issue of Iran than it did on that of Iraq before Iraq war.

The wisdom of the ancients is sometimes highly suggestive for those living in the 21st century.
George Washington's Farewell Address in 1796 is one of the wisdom.This address is said to be mainly drafted by Alexandar Hamilton, the representative of Federarlists, and it consists of two important themes: the warning about partisan struggle between the Federalists (Hamiltonian) and the Anti Federalists (Jeffersonian) and the recommendation for American people to keep a distance from Europe. The latter theme is regarded as the root of isolationism in American foreign policy.


This bible of isolationism argues like this:

-In the execution of such a plan nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations and passionate attachments for others should be excluded, and that in place of them just and amicable feelings toward all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur.

-likewise, a passionate attachment of one Nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite Nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite Nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the Nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained; and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, (who devote themselves to the favorite nation,) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

-The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connexion as possible.

- There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.


Ofcourse, today's U.S. foreign policy no longer embrace this kind of isolationism ostensibly, but Washington's (or Hamilton's) insights into the essence of interenational politics tells us a lot. We cannot count on favors of other nations.

Though the phrase "there can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation" sounds natural and obvious, the words of Washington sounds ironic and somewhat fresh to me, considering the situation of Japan in the system of the Japan- U.S. security treaty .
What wisdom should we extract from this address for the relationship between Japan and the U.S.?

A certain progress was made in the Hong Kong ministerial conference. It was good news that the conference did not break up unlike the former conferencec where trade diplomats saw a disastrous failure of negotiations.
The Doha Round, however, is still on the verge of a failure. Withouth each nation's strong commitment and political will, the negotiations would soon collapse.

2006 will become a siginificant year of the Doha Round. One of the main reasons is that Trade Promotion Authority(TPA) in the U.S. will expire in 2006. Under this authority, congresses can only accept or reject the results of trade negotiations as a package. So, after TPA's expiration, It will be difficult that President Bush makes pollitically sensitive decisions on trade matters.

I hope every member country will make efforts to conclude this difficult negotiation in this year. The U.S., EU, and Japan especially carry the responsibilty of this agenda. I hope they will compromise each other over their agricultural interests for broader interests of the world.