COMMENT Blair's Christian 'challenge' to
the East By Masayuki Tadokoro
"For the first time in centuries, the West
will have to come to terms with a seismic change
happening about it," Tony Blair, former British
prime minister, who recently converted to
Catholicism, said in explaining his belief in the
importance of religious faith.
"The East
is rising. At the least it will demand parity with
the West and perhaps more. But what values will
this daunting new world use to guide it? I believe
[that] in this world of rapid globalization where
power is shifting away from its traditional center
in the West, the world will be immeasurably
poorer, more dangerous, more fragile and above all
more aimless - I mean
without the necessary
sense of the purpose to guide it on its journey -
if it is without the strong spiritual dimension."
Blair apparently believes that the
Catholic or other Christian faiths should underpin
the "West" in meeting the challenges from the
"East".
From a Japanese perspective, the
"East" opposing a "West" represented by
Christianity sounds surprisingly anachronistic and
somewhat puzzling. I wonder if Blair is unaware
there are a huge number of Christians in the
"East". In fact, Christians in India outnumber
those in Britain. It is well known that former
Japanese prime minister Masayoshi Ohira and former
South Korean president Kim Dae-Jung were both
committed Christians, as is current South Korean
president Lee Myung-bak.
In both
countries, where the separation of politics and
religion is an established practice, their leaders
being Christian does not seem to have bothered
people in these "Eastern" countries.
The
question also needs to be raised, what is the
"East"? Is there such a thing as the East in the
first place? The "East" literally can mean the
huge area stretching beyond Turkey all the way
through to Japan and containing at least three
major traditional civilizations: Islamic, Indian
and Chinese.
It has always been the home
of a majority of the population on this planet who
have dauntingly different religions, cultures,
traditions and political systems, as well as
levels of economic development. Does it really
make sense to talk about the "East", except in the
sense that it is geographically non-European?
Challenge from the "East"? If this refers
to terrorist activities conducted by radical
groups such as Islamic fundamentalists, it is a
challenge for Japan as well. Japan has been under
constant low-intensity attacks from North Korea,
including abductions, drug-dealing, smuggling and
other organized criminal activities, whereas,
without historical baggage, Japan enjoys generally
amicable relations with the Islamic world;
terrorism there is, of course, a matter of
concern.
The economies of East Asia are
critically dependent on the stability of the
Islamic world for their energy supplies. Very few
in the "West" know that a revered Japanese
specialist in Islam who had translated Salman
Rushdie's controversial The Satanic Verses
was mysteriously murdered. (Rushdie has for years
been subject to an Islamic edict calling for his
death for the views on Islam expressed in the
book.)
I stress that terrorism and
fundamentalism are not limited to the
non-Christian "East". Does a resurgent,
authoritarian Russia and the alleged involvement
of Russian authorities in the murder of critic
Alexander Litvinenko in London represent less of a
challenge to the "West" because Russians are
Christian?
We also see all sorts of
illiberal intolerance in the "West" from
anti-immigrant racists and ultra-right political
movements, but also from some radical elements in
the anti-smoking, environmental, animal rights and
even human-rights movements who care for little
other than their own agendas.
Does Blair's
"challenge" refer to the economic rise of China
and India? If yes, so what? Is there any reason
that the Chinese and Indians must remain poorer
than already rich nations? It would be a much more
serious problem if the global capitalist economy
were to perpetuate the fate of poor countries.
True, incorporating vast rising economies
represents both opportunities and challenges.
Business corporations must compete with them,
their impacts on the global environment must be
addressed, and a way has to be found to meet
growing demands for natural resources. However,
this is exactly the same challenge that the
business communities, and the economic policies,
of both Japan and South Korea are facing.
Does the challenge mean a rapid rise of
undemocratic China, which seems to be driven not
by a sense of responsibility as a great power but
by hawkish nationalism comprising both traditional
imperial hubris and a sense of victimization by
imperialism from abroad since the 19th century?
Indeed! As recent events in Tibet have amply
demonstrated, China is still under a highly
authoritarian communist regime. The Maoist
extremism of the Cultural Revolution is long over,
but the regime itself has remained the same. We
would be terribly naive if we expected them to
show as much respect towards basic values as
liberal democracies in both Europe and Asia,
characterized by non-violence, civil rights, and
above all rules based on the consent of those who
are ruled.
Is this really a challenge
toward the "West"? This is exactly the core of
concerns for democratic Asia (for example, Japan,
South Korea, Taiwan and India). Take, for
instance, the confrontations between protesters
and huge numbers of Chinese nationals waving the
PRC national flag during the recent Olympic torch
relay in Japan, Korea and India, which contrasts
with the quiet state-controlled events in North
Korea and Myanmar. Is it really appropriate to
cram all of these countries into the single
category of the "East"?
It is unfortunate
that European leaders as well as the mass media
cannot even remember that there is such a thing as
democratic Asia that shares core values as well as
serious concerns with the "West".
By
talking in terms of the West and the East,
Europeans are wasting opportunities to work
together for the betterment of our common
concerns, such as the global environment and human
rights, as well as education, immigration, aging
populations and medical systems in our societies.
Unless Europeans start taking democratic Asia more
seriously rather than regarding it as a funny
imitator of modernity for which it claims (often
excessively) full credit, we might see a world
where Hindu activists' attacks on Spanish
bull-fighting are portrayed as heroic acts
protecting their sacred animal, and many Japanese
who grew up reading Beatrix Potter's children's
books will start denigrating such British national
pleasures as fox-hunting and rabbit-eating.
The coming G8 summit meeting in July can
be taken as an opportunity for Europeans to start
calling democratic Asians "we" rather than "they".
Masayuki Tadokoro is professor of
international relations at Keio University. While
his main field is international political economy,
he has been working in a variety of fields,
including Japanese foreign policy and
international organizations. His latest
publication is an edited volume, The Royal
Navy and Pax Britannica. The views expressed in
this piece are the author's own and should not be
attributed to The Association of Japanese
Institutes of Strategic Studies.
(AJISS-Commentary is an occasional op-ed
type publication of the Association of Japanese
Institutes of Strategic Studies (AJISS) consisting
of four leading Japanese think-tanks: Institute
for International Policy Studies, the Japan Forum
on International Relations, the Japan Institute of
International Affairs and the Research Institute
for Peace and Security.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
