The Power of Words and of Democracy, Japan, and Sarah Palin

I remember a few years back during the Good Ol' Days we had ... a George W. Bush as president of the White House. I didn't really appreciate what people meant when they believed the United States was the country most dangerous to world security and stability at that point in time yet. (See my post America the Dangerous). By the way, just as in the post below, please send me corrections. I would hate to think that I would be propagating something untrue.

Ahh. Those were the good ol' days. The U.S. economy was booming (after a sharp, but short-lived contraction after 9-11). Well, the U.S. President at the time, George W. Bush was in Japan for a summit with then Japanese Prime Minister Koizumi (I guess those were the good ol' times for Japan too... at least on a relative basis, considering the past twenty years now).

Oh, and on a side note, for those thinking the decline of the LDP and the recent dissolution of the Diet in Japan after the humilitating defeat of the ruling LDP in recent elections in Tokyo is the start of a new multiparty democratic regime in Japan.

Think Again.

Compare how Shinjiro Koizumi (former Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's son has been "annointed" to succeed his father). This is straight from the Japan Times (Kim Jong Un is the son of Kim Jong Il reported to succeed his father once he returns to Mount Paekdu as the next ruler of the North Korean regime) :

"And, as Aera pointed out, the strategy for making sure Koizumi Junior gets the seat is strikingly similar to the one currently being carried out in North Korea. Even if Shinjiro is Koizumi's second son and not his third, he's 28 years old, the same age as Jong Un and Hidetada when they were picked for their jobs" ("My son, I give you power over the people" : Japan Times).

Anyways, well, when George W. Bush was in Japan, he did something amazing; he confused the word "devaluation" with "deflation." You see, Japan had been experiencing problems of falling prices -- deflation, for a very long time and it was the biggest issue in Japan at that time. So, if he were to meet the Japanese Prime Minister, it would be quite natural to talk about U.S. backing for Koizumi's strategy to flight deflation.

But, during the press conference after the summit:

"A remark by US President George W Bush about "devaluation" in Japan has caused confusion in the currency markets. The yen fell as some traders interpreted the comment as meaning the US favoured a devaluation of the Japanese currency" ("Bush gaffe hits yen" : BBC)

His exact words were:

"He [Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi] said I want to make it very clear to you exactly what I intend to do and he talked about non-performing loans, the devaluation issue and regulatory reform and he placed equal emphasis on all three" (Feb. 18, 2002).

The problem, you see, though, is that there was no devaluation issue at the time (Where, the U.S. would tacitlty approve a Japanese policy of trying to rid deflation by the Japanese Central Bank lowering the value of the Yen versus the Dollar -- in effect, exporting Japan's economic problems, which of course, the U.S. was not in favor of).

Ironically, that is exactly what the U.S. seems to be doing. But, more on this perhaps some time in the future since I just started studying this (it's basically what the second half of the course I am taking about is: EC321: Money and Banking), so in all fairness I don't really have an informed opinion.

But, on paper though, the U.S. enjoys an Exorbitant Privilege as the U.S. enjoys the ability to issue debt in her own currency (dollars) andat lower comparative interest rates (for example, treasury bills are considered safe debt to own) so depreciation is much more beneficial to the U.S. than say it would have been for Japan (but on a personal level, I think Japan should be commended for not depreciating her currency during this time when competitors in China and particularly South Korea went through a period of protracted depreciation, either explicitly (Korea) or implicitly (Japan)).

Of course, the fact that he "misspoke" cost like I believe a sharp drop in the value of the Yen, but the fact that one wrong word by this President led to billions of losses (or gains) by investors who were taking George W. Bush's words seriously is/was a pretty scary thought -- Thank God that there is no chance of a Palin adminsitration:

"This bombshell was unexpected, and makes it highly unlikely that she will ever be president" ("The passing of Palin" : Economist)

Anyways, when I first read that I just couldn't believe it. How on Earth could this not have gotten more media coverage? No, not with respect to Sarah Palin. That's more like (How on Earth could she have gotten so much media coverage?) But, more interestingly, here's this word that when spoken recklessly and carelessly by one person it has the power to affect all those that take him/her seriously -- especially if we are speaking of billions, well trillions, of yen.

America the Dangerous?

On a more serious note, I noticed a couple articles in the news that makes me want to explain the other side … the view of the United States as a “normal” nation where the behavior of the nation isn’t explained by how America wants to expand “democracy” or rid “tyranny.”

This is a view I picked up living in Korea and I also hinted before at how shocked I was at the level of Anti-Americanism seen in Korea. How could it be that so many people of the same shared heritage (and, of course, of the same 족(族)) could hate America ? The country gives so many opportunities to so many different countries and is so goddamn beautiful (미국, 美國). On a side note here: One of my favorite lines in Korean, “아름다운 미국을 어떻게 싫어 할 수 있어 ” or “How could you hate Beautiful America?”

There’s a double meaning here and another opportunity to poke fun at Japanese. The Chinese characters used to represent the United States in Chinese and Korean literally mean “Beautiful Country/Nation (美國).” In Japanese, it isn’t (米國). In both, Korean and Japanese (not sure in Chinese), but anyways, the characters for “beautiful(美)” and “rice(米)” are homonyms. So if the Chinese characters that the Japanese language uses were to be pronounced in Korean, it would still be the same (미국 whether it’s美國 or米國). And, if the Japanese language were to call America “Beautiful Country” rather than “Rice Country” as Chinese and Korean do, then everybody in Japan would still be able to understand. Those island savages…

Anyways, to the meat of the post: America is also basically a giant island nation bordered by two much smaller countries to the north and south and an ocean to the east and a “vast ocean (太平洋)” to the west. So, basically the United States has no natural competitors (well, minus a Brazil one day) and dominates an entire hemisphere (half a planet) to herself. And as the Pat Buchanan wing of the Republican Party advocates and has advocated since the birth of this nation, the United States can always hide behind the two oceans with the most powerful navy in the world (Unfortunately, I believe this is why Japan fought a war with the U.S., for the control of the ocean. Consider that Japan has gotten everything the island nation wanted during World War II except for that).

Since the United States controls the oceans and has the most powerful navy in the world and has a string of allies in East Asia, it gives the country one huge advantage: very far-flung borders.
So, the effective border between the United States, and say, North Korea, is the DMZ and the East Sea (Sea of Japan) (For China, it’s even worse. The effective border between the U.S. and China is Japan down to South Korea down to Taiwan – So, that’s why Taiwan is so important to China/U.S.). The United States can attack North Korea from South Korea or Japan or even off the waters near North Korea in the East Sea or (Sea of Japan) without fear of reprisal. North Korea has to launch unreliable missiles over thousands of miles just to hit a Hawaii or Alaska.

But, now, let’s take a look at it from the South Korean perspective:

If you are living in Seoul, particularly Sinchon (신촌), then there’s a good chance a war between the U.S. and North Korea (for a second imagine, that it’s only between the U.S. and North Korea and while the U.S. and South Korea may be allies in name or nominal allies, it’s not in the South Korean or for that matter in any nation’s interest to see her capital destroyed) would not be seen as such a good thing. The reason I mention Sinchon in particular is that there was a study that said a North Korean attack on South Korea would lead to 99% of the people in Sinchon dying in the first fifteen minutes (Of course, I can’t cite the exact study, but hey this is a blog). So, actually, if you’re studying at Yonsei or Ehwa Universities, then there’s a good chance you might be done for. The point is that while a North Korean missile must travel thousands of miles before it can actually hit U.S. territory, the economic and political capital of South Korea is just fifteen minutes away from North Korea.

This can lead to some serious misunderstanding between the United States and South Korea. While the U.S. may think it to be perfectly rational to simply consider an airstrike on a North Korean nuclear facility, South Korea would think it to be utterly crazy. I mean from South Korea’s perspective, how on earth could somebody consider launching a war that would immediately destroy Seoul (half of all Koreans in South Korea live in Seoul and neighboring Gyeonggi province). So, before certain Korean-Americans and other commentators in America are quick to judge South Korea as a disloyal and ungrateful nation, it would also be natural and quite fair to expect that the United States understand and consider South Korea's concerns or else the United States would be the disloyal and arrogrant nation. Anyways, while North Korea has been in the news a lot recently (well up until Iran stole the limelight and the Obama Administration is tackling a real concern -- health care), the United States definitely did respond to North Korean threats by:

1. Upgrading Missile Defenses in Hawaii, which while it may sound ludicrous, it also serves a domestic propaganda function -- President Obama is “taking action” (Ahh, I miss President George W. Bush; well not really, but at least some of his phrases. I am a registered Republican by the way).
2. And, while none of the major newspapers in the United States seems to have covered it, the United States conducted a missile test too. Well, China, South Korea, and, of course, North Korea’s state run news agencies did (American newspapers aren’t state run right?) Basically, while the U.S. president wants Americans to know things are being taken care of (Hawaii), the U.S. wants North Korea to know that "Hey we got hundreds of these missiles that work and isthey are very, very accurate -- to within 6 m? -- and can carry three nuclear weapons at once."

“The Minuteman 3 was fired from Vandenberg Air Force Base during a six-hour
window that started at 3:01 a.m., carrying three unarmed re-entry vehicles that
hit their targets near the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands, some 4,200
miles (6,720 kilometers) away, the Air Force said” (Xinhua).

Anyways, it's not the type of thing I believed a "good" country like the United States would ever do and maybe it's just coincidental. After all, the United States loves to bomb things. Before the United States gave up possession of Dokdo/Takeshima(독도(獨島)/たけしま(竹島)) and Senkaku/Diaoyu islands, the United States used both as bombing ranges (A link for this will be provided one day). Anyways, America at the same time actually does believe she is a force for good.

South Korean President Lee Myung Bak is "taking action" as well as South Korea is building up a missile defense system of her own. South Korea is buying a lot of weapons from the United States:

"South Korea plans to acquire 40 new surface-to-air missiles within the
month for its Aegis destroyer, a military source said Sunday" (Yonhap).

Anyways, that's South Korea's view.that is how the United States can be seen as a "normal" nation that takes behavior not based upon what is right or wrong, but what on her interests. Interestingly, and what I believe will and has been a recurring theme in American (and World) History is that the United States and, moreover, Americans genuinely believe that what is in America's best interest is also good for the world. They call it naivete in Europe. I call it optimism and a product of the Enlightenment.