The 48th SGRA Forum (the 14th Japan-Korea Asia Future Forum) was held at the National Olympics Memorial Youth Center in Yoyogi, Tokyo on February 7. This forum was co-sponsored by ‘SGRA Research Association for Asia Initiative’ and ‘Japan-Korea Asia Future Forum’.  I like to report the status quo and the problem of the dynamism of rapid economic growth in Asia from a viewpoint of building of logistic systems.   The writer reported about dreams for the future of Asia and the present under the title “Asian Highway Network and Regional Integration” – its status quo and problems – “. Ten years ago, I, as a member of National Institute for Research Advancement (NIRA),　 a Japanese national think tank which has been participating in research and policy recommendation about the “North-East Asian Grand Design” which is a joint project among NIRA, Korea Research Institute for Human Settlement (KRIHS), and National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC).  KRIHS and NDRC are think tanks of Korea and China. I have been studying for a few years now about the future, the present and the problems of the integrated logistics in North-East Asia, especially the Asia-Highway Network, Japan-Korea Undersea Tunnel Plan and　“North-East Asian Logistic Network Plan”.   “Asian Highway Network” which aggregates Asia into one has been proposed and promoted by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP).  Thirty-two countries from Asia and Europe have already signed the participation agreement among these countries　as of the year 2004. Starting from Nihon-bashi, Tokyo (AH1) at the east end to Istanbul at the west end, Asian countries will cooperate and together develop and realize their dreams of peace and prosperity. Of the total length of 141,714 km, 26,699 km in China were designated to the “Asian Highway Network.” The traffic network is planned to expand through the continental region of China, to Southeast Asia, West Asia, Central Asia, North Asia and Russia.   An important idea which provides a strong impact for materialization of the Asian Highway Network was proposed by China’s General Secretary, Xi Jinping .  It is called “One Belt, One Road” (一帯一路).  China would utilize the “One Belt, One Road” idea as a new axis for the growth of its present economy, so-called “New Normal” (新常態), developing together with the Asian countries as a new developing “Belt”.   In China, they call the present situation which shows a slowdown of its economy since the spring of 2014 as “New Normal” and the Xi leadership calls for the realization and acceptance of the actual situation of the Chinese economy. Based on such situation, the leadership announced economic strategies and reforms. In the economic and diplomatic relations with other countries, they announced “New Asian Grand Design” (newly coined words by the writer) by the “One Belt, One Road” slogan and are putting it into practice.  This is a new economic and diplomatic strategy of the Xi Jinping Administration. If this plan will progress as planned, the power composition of Asia would change significantly.   The phrase “New Normal” was first proposed to show a new direction of the Chinese economy for a soft landing after a slowdown. But, as long as I have watched the economic and political diplomacy during the latter half of 2014, “New Normal” has been used as new diplomatic strategy of international relations which exceeded the original meaning of just new normal economic condition. Together with “New Normal”, General Secretary Xi Jinping proposed “One Belt, One Road” when he visited countries in Central Asia and South Asia where he appealed for the realization of these ideas..   “One Belt, One Road” is considered as a strategic turning point in the new Asian order from the strategy of “Look East” to “Look West”.  In other words, relations with the advanced countries like Japan and Korea and their strategic value, which China has regarded as important until now, have lowered in importance. And India, Southeast Asia and Central Asia, instead, will be targets of strategic development by China. India and China are now the two “Elephant and Dragon” in Asia in the sense  not only of economic development but also politically and diplomatically. They think “Elephant and Dragon” will be the center of the future world.   I think such Chinese changes in diplomatic policy and the strategies for the world and Asia would cause negative impact in international relations and economic cooperation in North-East Asia. This is a big change for me – a “North-East Asian” - in the sense that it casts a shadow over my “Dreams and Hopes”.   Mr. Takao Kubo, a scholar of international relations, pointed out in his mail magazine  (“Orta” No.133 dated January 20, 2015) “A sign of reversal of North and South / East and West which progresses simultaneously – thereby accelerating the diastrophism of the world –“, signifying that “American hegemony is declining, the reverse of the North and the South (Advanced countries vs. Developing countries) and the reverse of the East and the West (Asia vs. America and Europe) in the world politics are developing.” (to be continued)   (Li Gangzhe / Professor, Hokuriku University)     Translated by Kazuo Kawamura English checked by Mac Maquito   SGRA Kawaraban 451 in Japanese (original)

Does “Regional Revitalization” go well?  I do not know exactly what they are doing?  What crosses my mind are “Yuru-kyara” (heartwarming characters) and promotion videos for “Machi-okoshi” (revitalization of towns).  However, by such means only, how do people who are living in central Tokyo know about people who are living in regional towns? Are there any people in central Tokyo who like to visit regional towns? Does the population in regional towns increase?  Regional revitalization is not an issue of regional towns; rather, it is a national issue. The national government sets up “Headquarter for Revitalization, Town, People and Job” (Headquarter) and local governments are also working out their own plans for revitalization.   For example, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications is promoting a policy which expedites moving the young people to regional towns, naming the policy “Cooperation Units for Regional Revitalization”. It helps people find jobs and houses in regional towns. If they like to start a business there, they shall be also supported financially. Usually, such scheme is implemented for a few years only, but according to the data of the Headquarter, as of the end of June 2015, about 60 percent of the people , especially the young, who have been moved, continue to stay in the same towns.  I think this project is successful since there are actual results already.   Another scheme called Continued Care Retirement Community- (CCRC) was announced by the Expert Committee, according to the data of the Headquarter.. This scheme supports the aged retirees who are living in the Tokyo metropolitan area or big cities when they voluntarily move to regional towns. It is great that the program provides life-supports to the aged even after their relocation. Thus, the aged can stay healthy and keep an active life in their new community. The scheme also aims to maintain a system that will provide medical and personal care to the aged when needed. I think the scheme is helpful and can give a chance to the aged who, after their retirement, are hesitating to decide to live peacefully in regional towns.   Despite a lot of such good programs for regional revitalization, why do I feel a big gap between big cities and regional towns? I am now living in a regional city and I very seldom to go to Tokyo for my job.  During my going to and returning from Tokyo, I feel a big difference in temperature (not in climate but in feeling) between Tokyo and regional towns. Tokyo is an energetic city.  We cannot feel any dullness there, having a lot of visitors for sightseeing and anticipating the Olympic Games five years later. On the other hand, I do not feel in my town, any atmosphere that people like to revitalize their home town.   It is not so effective when programs for regional vitalization or revitalization are worked out by the government alone. It is important that inhabitants of the region are living happily, able to extend their life-span, and invite, by themselves, outsiders move into their region. For example, if regional residents ask advertising agencies in Tokyo to prepare promotion videos for local revitalization and upload these in “YouTube”, they have to pay certain fees to the agencies in Tokyo. That is reversing the logical order of things. This would not be the case, if the residents, themselves, had prepared the promotional materials. The advertising agencies should, at least, return whatever materials have been prepared by the residents. In this case, the residents should customize those programs, which the government has prepared for them to meet the local situation. Vitalization or revitalization starts at the place actually being operated. There are already differences between areas which are being vitalized/revitalized and areas which do not have this program. It may be my selfish supposition that successful regions for revitalization may be those places where are conveniently accessible to/from Tokyo, as a result of the residents’ efforts.   A sense of urgency is required for regional revitalization hereafter.  I am afraid that if regional residents fail to keep up with the current revitalization movement, the  depopulation of their regions would advance immediately.  Regional revitalization will depend on whether the residents of these regions shall take the initiative or not..   (A full-time lecturer, Kyoai Gakuen University)     Translated by Kazuo Kawamura English checked by Mac Maquito   SGRA Kawaraban 464 in Japanese (original)

Please see below for the Call for Proposals CLICK HERE

I remember well about a week when the former President, Lee Myungbak, visited “Takesima-island” in August 2012.  There were three incidents at that time：(1) a visit to “Takeshima” by President, Lee Myungbak; (2) his statement demanding an apology from His Majesty, the Emperor: and (3) a Korean soccer player holding a placard saying “Takeshima belongs to Korea” during the Japan-Korea match at the London Olympic Games. I had the impression that news and public opinion in Japan about Korea changed a lot after these incidents. I also remember well that I was surprised at such a rapid change.  Relationship between Japan and Korea worsened thereafter up to the present day.   Many people asked me if there were no such incidents like the Takeshima visit by President Lee Myungbak, the relationship between Japan and Korea would be different, not like the present. I do not think so. I think there were fundamental issues which both countries have had as pending for a long time and the visit by President, Lee Myungbak was just the turning point. Moreover, I think it is public opinion in Japan, rather than in Korea, that changed a lot. .   Public opinion in Korea has been taking a critical attitude toward the Japanese Government on an issue on the History (historical perceptions) since the founding of the Republic of Korea. It is an old issue. The presence of Korea in Japan was not so significant before the “Korean-wave” and the Japanese media did not report much about news in Korea. Korea was called “NIES” (Newly Industrializing Economies) by the 1990’s and its economic influence was not so strong as we have experienced during the IMF Financial Crisis.   However, the situation changed in the 2000’s by the “Korean-wave” - with the rise of international enterprises like Samsung and the development of internet media. Interest in Korea has increased at the economic and public levels. Volume of information about Korea has also increased drastically. We can say the presence of Korea in Japan increased in the 2000’s because of economic and cultural exchanges between both countries.   As a result, many people have come to know that public opinion in Korea has taken an opposing attitude toward an issue on the History. In Japan, the year 2015 is the 70th year since the end of World War II, but, in Korea, many people do not understand yet the problem in the Colonial Time before the War were solved. Such “time difference” of recognition between both countries about an issue on the History was latent and deepened as the primary factor of conflict in the relations of both countries.   In order to improve such relations between the two countries, various measures are considered. For example, improvement of diplomatic relations at the governmental level, close cooperation at the economic level and increasing exchanges at the public level. But these ideas do not always improve public opinions of both countries. I think it is necessary, in order to improve fundamentally, to have mature discussions on an issue on the History or on relations of both countries before such exchanges.   In Korea, domestic discussion about Japan-Korea relations are not yet mature. Especially, an issue on the History is very delicate and it is difficult to say we had various discussions. So, I think we cannot yet find any settlement of the discussion on how to improve Japan-Korea relations concluding the issue on the History. For example, there is difference of opinions domestically about the concrete demand for Japan’s apology etc.. First of all, it is necessary to have a common discussion base in Korea where we can discuss about the various aspects of Japan-Korea relations. It is necessary also to make efforts to discuss calmly and to find a mutually acceptable common solution by ourselves about the issue on the History.  It is also necessary for Japan to understand how Korea recognizes and interprets the issue on the History and what kind of “time-difference” was brought about between both countries. In Japan nowadays, it is becoming possible to revise the constitution which might be a turning point historically in terms of national security. I think Japan is also in the turning point in its recognition of history or in diplomatic policy. Needless to say, these factors are basic and important problems to decide, as a nation ought to do.  We should not leave the discussion at the political level only, but it is also necessary to have a thorough discussion involving the general public.   After the deterioration of relations between the two countries, there have been anti-Korea demonstrations or “hate-speeches” against Koreans living in Japan. This situation came to the surface after diplomatic problems arose between both countries, but it was mainly a Japanese domestic incident.   Discrimination or violence against nationality or race would be possible not only against Korea but also against other minorities. We are now promoting internationalization and introducing labor from foreign countries. In such circumstances, I think it is necessary to study how we should confront such discrimination which is possible in diversified societies.   Please refer to the public-opinion poll by the Cabinet Office survey about Change of Attitude toward Korea.   (Assistant Lecturer, the Law School, Keio University)     Translated by Kazuo Kawamura English checked by Mac Maquito   SGRA Kawaraban 461 in Japanese (original)

On May 8, 2015, the 5th Japan-Taiwan Asia Future Forum was held under the title “120 years’ Japan-Taiwan Exchange through Japan Study” at National Taiwan University.   When we look back at the Japan-Taiwan relations over the past 120 years, how shall we reconsider our past experience before the War and legacy of the past?  What are  the characteristics present in the process of the reconstruction of Japan-Taiwan relations which met a lot of difficulties? What keywords will be necessary when we view the next 120 years? Basing on such awareness of the issues, we had 13 lectures and paper presentations and also had lively discussions.  Mr. Li Jia Jin, Chairman of the Association of East Asia Relations and Mr. Mikio Numata, Chairman of the Interchange Association, Japan addressed the Forum, which was a great success with more than 200 participants,   The forum was composed of three sessions: “international relations”, “study of languages and literatures” and “change of societies”.  We invited scholars who are active at the forefront in Taiwan, Japan, Korea and China, and they developed hot discussions from their innovative viewpoints.   Keynote speech was made by Mr. Yasuhiro Matsuda, Professor of Institute for Advanced Studies on Asia, The University of Tokyo on the subject of “Japan-Taiwan exchange：characteristics and change of its ‘double structure”’. He mentioned first that the relations of the first 50 years were on a suzerain state and a colony system. He pointed out that the  characteristics of “double structure” developed during the latter 70 years whereby two countries became independent of each other from a viewpoint of a manifestation of independence of Taiwan. The relations of Japan and Taiwan in the colonial period had such “double structure” as “the central government and the government-general” and “the society of Japan and Taiwan”.  He emphasized that it changed after 1952, through several years of transition, to “double structure” of “Japan-China relations on the governmental authorities concerned” and “Japan-Taiwan relations between societies”.  He ended his keynote speech with a question: how does the rise of China affect the Japan-Taiwan relations and it will be a key issue how the Taiwan people understand the independence of Taiwan.   The first session was held on the theme “Japan-Taiwan relations under the change of political circumstances and international relations” by adjunct Professor, Wu Mi Cha,Department of History, National Taiwan University, as Chairperson. We discussed about “120 years’ Japan-Taiwan relations” from three viewpoints; Taiwan, Japan and China. The following three essays were announced in the session: “From “Colonial Mother Country” to “International Relations” – Change in the Cultural Independence in Taiwan and Japan-Taiwan relations – “ by Mr. Li Cheng Ji, Assistant Professor, Department of Literature of Taiwan, National Cheng Kung University; “Japan Study in Taiwan and Taiwan Study in Japan in the early days of the post War by Professor Makoto Kawashima, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, the University of Tokyo; and“120 years’ Taiwan-Japan relations from the viewpoints of China” read for Wang Jian, Researcher of Institute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Science.   Every essay was exciting and it was an epoch-making event for scholars and researchers of Japan, China and Taiwan to have convened in one place to discuss about “Japan-Taiwan relations”.   The theme of the second session was “Review and View of Japan Study – Language and Literature –“ and was divided into (A) “Literature / Culture” and (B) “Language / Study of Language”. Chairperson of the first session was Professor Fan Shu Wen, Head of Department of Japanese Literature in Japanese Language, National Taiwan University. Three essays were presented: “A Study of Japanese Modern Literature” by Huang Cui E, Assistant Professor, Department of Foreign Language, Fu Jen Catholic University;  “A Study of Japanese Classical Literature in Taiwan – the past, the present and the future“: and “Japan Study in Taiwan – about its thought, culture and history –“ by Lan Hong Yuen, Assistant Professor, College of Humanities and Social Science, National Chiao Tung University. The session was very various. We studied Japanese literature from remote ages to modern ages by “an axis of time” and put our thoughts together by “an axis of field”.   In the (B) session “Language / Study of Language”, Professor Lin Li Ping, Department of Japanese Literature in Japanese Language, National Taiwan University, was the chairperson. Mr. Lai Jin Que, professor, Department of Japanese Literature and Head of Foreign Literature, Soochow University presented his report “Study of Learning Japanese Language in Taiwan on data”.  Ye Shu Hua, Dean of Foreign Language, National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology, discussed “the present and the prospect of Study of Japanese language in Taiwan – at an international symposium –“(study of Japanese language and learning by Japanese language by use of a keyword, data and symposium).  Professor Shin Chung Kyun, Department of Japanese language and Japanese literature, Chunbuk National University (Korea) made an interesting report under the title “History of the study of Japanese language in Korea –Study of old time Japan in Chosun (old Korea) time and now- “   The third session, “The change of societies in Japan and Taiwan and an aspect of their exchanges”, focused on “the change of societies” and “an aspect of cultural exchange” in the history of Japan-Taiwan exchanges. Three essays were reported under Chairperson, Mr. Zhang Qi Xiong, Associate Research Fellow, Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica.   Mr. Yukihito Sato, Ph.D. Institute of Developing Economics – JETRO, clarified the dynamism of reproduction of cooperative relationship among enterprises of both countries  from economics viewpoints under the title “Reproduction of trust and cooperation among enterprises in Japan and Taiwan” referring to several examples.   Mr. Zhong Shu Min, Assistant Researcher, Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica, from a viewpoint of identity, reported his reconsideration of an exchange between a Japanese who was born in Taiwan and Taiwan society under an interesting title “Foreign land where I took root becomes my homeland”.   Mr. Wu Rui Ren, Assistant Researcher, Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica, analyzed, from a viewpoint of historical sociology, a phenomenon of linkage of right-wing nationalists of Japan and Taiwan by means of manipulation of historical ideology of realists.   The theme of the last general discussion was “A view on Japan-Taiwan relations of 21st Century”. Under chairperson, Professor Xu Xing-ging, Department of Japanese Literature and Chief of Japan Center, National Taiwan University, six scholars, Fan Shu Wen, Masashi Tujimoto, Yasuhiro Matuda, Makoto Kawashima, Wu Rui Ren and myself who represent each fields, attended.  Each of us spoke about our Japan-Taiwan relations and the way of Japan studies during this 120 years first and indicated a direction hereafter.   Starting from Professor Yasuhiro Matsuda who rated this forum as “High level”, many participants also rated this forum high.   I hope our discussion this time will contribute to build a new “Japan-Taiwan relations”.   As to the result of survey, please refer to http://www.aisf.or.jp/sgra/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/taiwan2015anketo.pdf   As to photos of the forum, please refer to http://www.aisf.or.jp/sgra/photo-gallerly/2015/3236/     （Adjunct Professor, National Taiwan University）   Translated by Kazuo Kawamura English checked by Mac Maquito   SGRA News in Japanese (original)