I’m going to permit myself to indulge in a bit of non sequitur posting this week, and instead of bringing attention to the latest in the continuing debate on the merits (or lack thereof) of Abenomics or polling ahead of the House of Councillors election, I am going to look at baseball – specifically the issue that arose earlier in the week regarding the balls currently used by Japan’s baseball league and overseen by the Nippon Professional Baseball Association.  On Tuesday Commissioner Kato Ryozo, when speaking to the Player’s Association (but not team managers or owners), revealed that the balls that had been used in games since the beginning of the season in April (and manufactured by Mizuno) were not to standard and had a higher degree of resistance when hit (meaning that they travel further, sometimes up to a metre beyond previous measurements) (J).

This news did not come as a great surprise to either fans or the players themselves, who noticed since the start of the season that the number of home runs being hit far outstripped those of the previous two seasons when regulations for more ‘pliant’ balls were introduced to prevent teams from indulging in home run derbies (J). What has made this case so special is that until Tuesday the NPB had been telling fans and the media that there were no differences between the balls used this year and those from last year. In order to justify the increase in homers, coaches put it down to a smaller strike zone, meaning that pitchers who had gotten used to a larger strike zone as a result of the introduction of the ‘3 and a half hour rule’ (to end games early in case of shortages in electricity) were making it easier for batters to belt the ball all over the field by pitching to areas now outside the strike zone.

Needless to say, the revelation from the Commissioner himself that this wasn’t the case at all didn’t go down too well with either players or fans, who swamped the NPB homepage with complaints (around 4000 by Thursday, according to the Sankei Shimbun)(J). It, of course, has raised questions as to why the NPB did not address concerns early in the season and conducts tests to ensure that the balls were standard, with some claiming that the NPB allowed the balls to be used to draw in fans, thereby boosting ticket sales (a claim the NPB denies). It also raises questions regarding the number of home runs scored so far this year, and whether the number of home runs an individual player has scored so far this year should be eliminated from their professional record (“Sorry Matt Murton – that homer at Koshien on April 30 giving Hanshin the lead over Hiroshima was rigged”).

If there are any winners from this state of affairs, they are most definitely the pitchers of various teams who have had to grin and bear it as yet more and more of their pitches sailed over outfield fences. Some might have even begun to doubt their throwing abilities, and with it their livelihoods as professional league pitchers. While home runs are all well and good as part of the game, they shouldn’t be held up as the only method of scoring, as they are, and no offence to batters, the ‘dumbest’ (or most certain, depending on your point of view) form of run scoring available in the game of baseball. Hitting short infield bouncers, or ‘Texas leaguers’, and then using a combination of steals and base running ensures a more exciting, dare I say, a more strategic form of baseball than just ‘swinging for the fences’ and hoping for the best.

Ultimately the NPB will offer its apologies and life will move on, but its silence in the face of mounting evidence of use of non-regulation balls will affect its image, and with it the reputation of Japanese baseball for fairness.  So far Association Chief Shimoda Kunio has offered his resignation, although no word on whether Commissioner Kato will follow suit. Given that this involves Japanese teams, resignations are considered the most appropriate means of making amends for mistakes (with reinstatement coming some time afterwards). If Commissioner Kato remains where he is, the level of complaints against the NPB will merely escalate and may impact on revenue from games. If that happens, Kato will be shown the door, but the damage will already have been done, as Darvish Yu (currently with the Texas Rangers) fears in this piece. Not good, NPB, not good.

This week was punctuated by the speech by PM Abe on Tuesday outlining the third `arrow` of the three-pronged strategy aimed at bringing about growth in the Japanese economy. According to PM Abe`s speech (J), the third part of `Abenomics` consists of encouraging private industry to invest in developing economies (particularly those in Southeast Asia and Africa), promoting the use of the internet for international sales, the formation of a `regulatory reform committee` to examine how Japan`s domestic regulations might be modified, and the creation of a `special economic district` to encourage multinationals to set up shop in Tokyo. It must be said, however, that the content of this speech was met with far less enthusiasm than PM Abe`s previous announcements. As Kishi Hiroyuki outlined in this piece (J), PM Abe`s strategy does not actually bring about any substantial reforms to the pre-existing Japanese economic model, as many of the suggestions put forward by private industry to government-sponsored focus committees (a reduction in corporate taxes, further reform to labour laws, and fundamental reform of the agricultural sector) were not included in the latest strategy.

Of course, the possibility remains that PM Abe is merely biding his time until the outcome of the House of Councillors election on July 21 is known, after which he may have the numbers to push through with more substantial changes to the Japanese economic model (among other considerations). Indeed, one fear that many in the business sector have is that once the LDP/Komeito coalition have control of both houses, PM Abe will become distracted by issues concerning constitutional reform and cultural matters. Uncertainty about the stability of the yen is also creating waves, for MOF`s figures released on the 3rd of June showed that despite a rise in net operating profits in the manufacturing sector (by 21.9% in the first quarter of this year), actual sales dropped by 6.6% compared to the same quarter last year (J). What emerges is a picture of an economy whose profits are being driven by a weaker yen but which is not expanding through a greater volume in sales. The manner in which Japanese stocks have risen and dropped over the past week is a reflection of those figures, for while there is some confidence that Japan`s economy is growing, there is less certainty that the economy has the means to promote growth over the four quarters.

In the meantime this week also saw a number of parties begin to make their moves towards promoting candidates and policies for the Upper House election. While the Communist Party essentially changed nothing in their plans for keeping Japan stuck in an historical rut (the manifesto might more accurately be described as a plan for the status quo, with no prospect of growth and a reckless disregard for Japan`s current security environment – as seen here (J), the Restoration Party were spruiking the announcement that they had secured the services of Antonio Inoki as a candidate for the Upper House (J). This was not entirely unexpected, given that elections in Japan tend to attract celebrity candidates as a means of attracting voters to booths, and right now the Restoration Party needs all the PR assistance it can get. Inoki has previously served in the Upper House as a member of the defunct Sports Peace Party (1989), and was instrumental in having 41 Japanese released from custody after being captured in Kuwait in the opening stages of the first Iraq War, not to mention his role as a negotiator with North Korea (Kim Jong Il having been a fan of Inoki`s pro wrestling work).

This is where things could get dicey, as Inoki clearly has a more conciliatory stance towards relations with neighbouring countries than some of his Restoration Party colleagues. If it comes to pass that the Restoration Party supports changes to the constitution proposed by the LDP/Komeito in the Lower House but finds its Upper House representatives less willing to compromise, it will make for some very interesting internal party dynamics (and Inoki is unlikely to be intimidated by either Hashimoto or Ishihara). This is just the first stage in the announcement of candidates, hence just who is dredged up from among the masses to have their fifteen minutes in the political spotlight will become a regular talking point before the election. Celebrity candidates are a double-edged sword, however, as demonstrated by Tani Ryoko`s less-than-stellar performance as a Councillor for the DPJ and now the People`s Lives Party.  

On Wednesday last week I had the privilege (of sorts) to attend a community consultation meeting at the Australian National University on measures to help implement the aims of the “Australia in the Asian Century” white paper launched by the Gillard government in October last year. The purpose of this meeting, so we were told, was to give ideas to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) on the best means of reaching goals related to Asian literacy by 2025. What the meeting turned into, however, was a one and a half hour complaints festival primarily about the lack of funding for language education, and how the white paper had not recognised the contribution of migrants to improving Australia’s Asian education. As much as I support the ideas behind the white paper, I must say that community consultation meetings do not achieve much by way of results, mainly because of a trait among Australians (and possibly shared by those in other countries) to criticise and downplay initiatives before they have an opportunity to be heard or explored. As criticisms overwhelm enthusiasm for new projects, those projects are never explored, and the plans for them end up gathering dust on a shelf. It is an entirely frustrating experience to hear initiatives shot down again and again because they are “too expensive, too difficult, lacking detail, too detailed, too broad, too narrow, too exclusive, too inclusive” or just plain “unnecessary”.

Given this state of affairs, it seems clear that the aims of the white paper will not be realised in the time frame given. What the white paper is proposing is essentially the entire transformation of Australia’s ethnic and cultural identity, asking a predominantly Anglo-Saxon, Eurocentric, English-speaking population to embrace Asia in order to secure its future. As a majority of Australia’s history has been marked by a distinct aversion to forging closer ties with Asia, to overturn decades (if not centuries) of traditions founded upon Christianity, Roman and English law, European and American history and the dominant nature of English is asking a lot of the Australian population, all the more so when it appears that the government is not prepared to provide the resources to make its ambitions a reality.

A brief examination of mass media outlets in Australia does not give one hope that Australia is about to embark upon a radical transformation of its character. Commercial networks in Australia broadcast exclusively in English and show content that is overwhelmingly Anglo-American. The national broadcaster the ABC follows suit, with any ‘ethnic’ broadcasts confined to SBS, and even these are becoming fewer and far between (mostly 30 minute broadcasts of news bulletins from around the world in native languages throughout the morning).   The nation’s newspapers, those that have a readership of half a million or more, are in English. A majority of radio broadcasts (except for those made by SBS and community radio stations) are in English. Most websites and blogs (including this one) are in English. To diversify this level of linguistic domination will take a considerable degree of investment from the government of the day, however the fixation of the Labor government on trying to bring the federal budget back to surplus (a Sisyphean task, it turns out) means that the funding isn’t there to achieve the goals of a foreign language revolution in Australian society.

It all smacks of political expediency, especially considering the fact that there will be a federal election in Australia on September 14, and all predictions are that the current Labor government will be swept out of power. As the Coalition opposition have not given their support to the Asian Century white paper (as they hold their own policies towards Asia, which mostly involve boosting the number of students learning Asian languages – a partial solution to a much broader issue – an enacting a `new Colombo plan` to send thousands of Australian students to countries in Asia to absorb the languages and cultures of the region), it seems that the Australia in the Asian Century white paper is doomed to disappear with the government come September. It may still be referred to by committees on language education, or foreign affairs, but its usefulness will be limited.

The white paper will also be used to gauge just how overly optimistic the Gillard government was about regional security issues, and the idea that economic concerns would trump any lingering animosity between states over access to resources and territorial claims. Examples of resource sharing between Malaysia and Thailand have been spruiked by Foreign Minister Carr as proof that nations can put aside differences and pursue common goals, but only when the resources in question do not intertwine with territorial demands and there are no lingering concerns stemming from history. In the case of Asia such examples are rare, and it is optimistic to the point of negligence to expect this to become the status quo in the current regional climate.

While the Asian Century white paper has value in addressing the potential of Asia for Australia`s development, it is too focused on economic needs, does not address what the current state of Asian literacy is in Australia, doesn`t provide a plan or budget for reaching its goals, and so doesn`t offer any practical means of changing the monolingual, Euro-centred culture that defines modern Australian society. A society is a product of its past and present. Changing it for the future requires a considerable degree of forethought and investment which transcend political goals and short term gains. Only a government that has the ability for long term planning and a willingness to provide funding for its plans will create the change that both sides of politics recognise is important for the nation. It won`t happen under the current government, and it is unlikely to occur under its successor, either.