Trouble in the East China Sea

The upcoming presidential election has seen the revival of our country’s politicians’ favorite past time: China-bashing. A reliable way to secure votes, we have seen both parties decry the fast growing economy, accusing them of “cheating” in trade with the United States, denouncing their greedy communist leaders of exploiting the people and violating human right’s laws. In some ways, politicians are trying to paint it like the giant red specter that hung over the heads of Americans in the Cold War. This fear of China is not just unique to the atmosphere surrounding our elections though. These past few months have seen two of our biggest allies (and trading partners), China and Japan, go head to head over a few rocks in the sea.

 

Since the Japanese Constitution was rewritten and became pacifist after World War 2, Japanese-Chinese relations had cooled off quite a bit. Japan apologized to the world for the atrocities committed by its people during World War 2 (though the depth of apology is still a matter of contention between Japan and South Korea), and China’s economy boomed, and became Japan’s largest trading partner. With China’s exponential expansion has come its incredible demand for natural resources and naval control. In recent years, China has snapped up a huge portion of natural resource exports, fueling such economies as Brazil, Russia, and Australia. This is where the sparse outcrop of rock that the Chinese call the Diaoyus  (literally meaning “fishing islands) and the Japanese call the Senkakus (with the main island also meaning “fishing island”).

 

After Japan became under US occupation 1945, the islands came into the hands of the United States. In 1972 though, the Okinawa Reversion Treaty was passed and the islands officially were given back to the Japanese. This is also the time that China and Taiwan began claiming ownership of the islands. Whether this was because of pure nationalism concerning these islands which had been recorded on Chinese maps since the Ming Dynasty, or opportunism since a 1969 UN survey confirmed potential oil and natural gas reserves surrounding the islands, the result is the same. Tensions have flared and the relations between the two countries have soured.

 

Violence erupted in China against Japanese people and companies when the Diaoyu crisis reared its ugly head, causing a huge response. Currently Japanese officials at Toyota, Nissan, and Honda are pacing their offices after they were forced to shut down several factories due to increasing violence on Japanese workers and Japanese companies. They are losing massive amounts of revenue, not only because of the decreased output, but because China accounts for 15% of Toyota’s profits, and 25% of Nissan’s. The tension isn’t only affecting large companies, but entire cities. Huge amounts of tourists flock to Japan each year, pouring millions of dollars to the tourism industry and huge amounts of profit to the Japanese airlines. Protests throughout China and Japan have prompted government officials to take action, including the rash ones of the right-wing mayor of Tokyo.

 

Recently, Mr. Shintaro Ishihara, the mayor of Tokyo, attempted to purchase the Senkakus from their private, Japanese owner in order to secure the islands for the Japanese people.  This prompted the government to try and buy the islands themselves, to keep them out of the hands of such an extreme politician, and risk angering China further. The meaning of this action was lost on the Chinese people though, who were immediately expressed their outrage that Japan thought they could buy the islands that were rightfully theirs. The scale of the Japanese anger over this will be decided next election when Mr. Shinzo Abe will run against incumbent Yoshihiko Noda. Mr. Abe was briefly Prime Minister from 2006 to 2007 until a member of his cabinet committed suicide and he resigned. He is now back as the candidate for the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and he has come back angry. He has been noted for not only playing down Japanese war crimes committed in World War 2 (including the controversial topic of sex-slavery of Korean women), but now has also picked up the issue of the Senkakus, giving the people exactly the nationalist, far-right China-bashing they want to hear. Mr. Abe has said that he wants to reform the Constitution, allowing Japan to actively defend their territory and exercise its naval power. Mr. Abe looks strong in the polls, and may very well win the upcoming election. With such a volatile Prime Minister for Japan, we can only hope tensions do not escalate beyond control.

 

Currently the US has stated that it has no opinion of the Diaoyu/Senkaku’s ownership, but increased military power in South-East Asia has sent the message to China that America will not let this go much further, or let China harm Japan. Such disputes may become more and more common as China keeps encroaching further into the territory of its neighboring countries. This very issue prompted the first Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit ever to fail to issue a joint communiqué. China is tearing apart Southeast Asia and soon it will come to a head. Whatever happens then, hopefully America, the world, and the world economy will be ready for the reprocussions. 

-- Isabelle Lorion

http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/life/Mosquito#p005fq51

What do you guys think?

The Applying Student Who Doesn't Stand a Chance

My sister just entered ninth grade at a public pilot school in Boston.  She is a student who is every day challenged by her autism and, in that way, more sensitively molded by her educational environment than most of her classmates.  I am very proud of her, and thankful towards all the wonderful teachers we shared for making it this far.

As a former public school student from Massachusetts and, especially, as my sister’s older brother, I am concerned with what the outcome of this 2012 Presidential Election will mean for our nation’s educational system. 

 
I didn’t have to do much research to see that President Obama knows what he’s talking about.  The president’s White House web page proudly displays a complete and detailed summary of his plans and successes in such areas as reforming and expanding the Head Start program (a program I have personally seen the good of while working at Head Start Allston-Brighton) and securing a diverse force of teachers.  By signing the Education Jobs Bill in 2010, he provided states with ten billion dollars in emergency funds, enabling schools to keep their teachers in the face of severe budget cuts.  And as part of the American Jobs Act and the American Recovery and Reinvestments Act of 2010, the nation’s schools have been equipped with modern tools, facilities, and curriculums.

 
The Obama administration has also laid out specific plans to encourage parents in their children’s education, and forge teacher-parent relationships, doubling the funds for this initiative.But educational reform under the Obama administration has not been an entirely federal, “top-down” approach as Romney charges.  By offering rewards for states whose students perform highly in certain areas, the administration has encouraged incentives to improve between states.  The president has thus been able to use his exclusively executive powers to boost education and transform educational reform into a new, exciting endeavor.

 
The official White House website also boasts two other files as part of their education initiative: “Support for Higher Education” and “Education for the Future.”  The very presence of these titles was enough to inspire me to tears.

Mitt Romney’s site for education reform made me cry too….

 
Hidden away in small-print, not even displayed on the campaign’s main page, is the link labeled “Education.”  Upon clicking on the link, I was led to a one page list of the most obvious and undeniable statements concerning education: “Reward Great Teachers,” “Improve Curriculums,” etc.  But I was horrified to realize that these deceptively link-looking titles were not links to further information at all.  Romney’s page lacks the “innovative” features that are repeatedly promised throughout his website, giving more detail on President Obama’s plan to address education reform than his own

 
So let’s look at his record.  As governor of Massachusetts, he seemed more interested in enforcing his own conservative agenda than promoting the well-being of students, restricting sexual health and foreign language instruction.  In fact, Gov. Romney seemed less interested in introducing “innovative” educational reform than signing bills proposed by the popular legislature into law.  Instead of forging a strong base of teachers, Mr. Romney attempted to crush unions of teachers and professors in high schools and community colleges.  Per capita funding for school systems also fell.

 
Currently, both candidates are providing Americans with an idea of how they regard the education system on the campaign trail.  President Obama has spent vastly more time since the beginning of his 2012 campaign in public high schools and universities than Mr. Romney has.  And, during the October fifth presidential debate, Mr. Romney was pressed to utter the word “education” even once.

 
I am terrified that a man like former governor Romney is this close to the Presidency.  But as Election Day draws near, only one thing is clear: When it comes to successful education reform, Mitt Romney is writing a paper on a book he’s never read. 

-- Thomas MacDonald