Strong U.S.-Japan Alliance Needed in Asia

This year is the 70th year anniversary for the end of World War II, and this week Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited with President Obama in the United State. Following the end of WW2, the United States and Japan have become increasingly close allies, so much so, that it would be fair to say that Japan is one of the U.S.'s strongest allies. The article below iterates the following points as being positives for a strong U.S.-Japan relationship:

• Ensure allied defense capabilities in Asia against a possible Chinese threat.
• Allow the Asian-Pacific economy to grow under free-market principles
• Settle disputes through the rule of law, as opposed to conflict, and militarism. 

Japan wants to rebuild its military in order to maintain the status quo that the region has seen for the past 70-years. Japan, and the United States believe that a militarized Japan that can help defend the region will help continue the stability and prosperity that the region has seen.

Source: http://www.wsj.com/articles/asia-needs-a-strong-u-s-japan-alliance-1430329908

Triple Nuke Threat

Nuclear weapons is a major topic of debate, not just recently with Iran, but between an area of the world that is sometimes overlooked, South Asia. The countries of interest are that of Pakistan, India, and China. While Pakistan isn't considered monsoon Asia, I still think this is a relevant article given the relationship between Pakistan-India and Pakistan-China.

PM Modi, and China both claim that their respective countries have a "No Fire First Policy." As one could deduce, this means that their nuclear arsenals are to be used only in a defensive manner. Pakistan has also been increasing production on their warheads, as well as working on missiles that could carry warheads. This could pose a problem for India, as it's seen as a threat for Pakistan, and Chnia.

Since India's independence, India has done a good job of remaining neutral and a major proponent of "non-power bloc" politics. India has managed to avoid affiliation during the Cold War, and has remained relevant in a developing world. It will be interesting to see how India, and the rest of the region will fare over the years with a growing nuclear arsenal and whatever issues may arise.

Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-32289368

Abe's Push for Wages

According to this New York Times article, Japan has been in a bit of a slump for the better part of twenty years. More recently, Japan has witnessed an increase in inflation and taxes which negated an early slight increase in wages. Shinzo Abe, Japans Prime Minister has been meeting with major business leaders in an attempt to further increase wages among his people in order to stimulate the economy.What's interesting about this, is Japans political structure and government is heavily intertwined with business. I had learned in my Comparative Government class that Japan has a revolving door where businessmen often become ministers,then they move back to business, back to government, and so on. What consequences may result in Shinzo Abes government negotiating wages?

Abe of course can't ask for business's to increase wages for nothing in return. He's offered tax breaks for business. Whatever the means, the result needs to have some kind of impact. Graphs that accompany the article show the Japanese household income dropping over the past few years, especially that in 2014. During the same time period, consumer price inflation has increase dramatically, creating what could result in a major economic setback for Japan.

It'll be interesting to see how the Japanese economy will do over the next few years and whether or not Abe's government will be able to find a solution to the problem.

Source(s):

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/19/business/japans-businesses-respond-to-abes-push-for-higher-wages.html

U.S. SK Ambassador Attacked

U.S. Ambassador to South Korea Mark Lippert was slashed in the face today during a breakfast lecture by a Korean man. What is significant about this attack is the symbolism of the attack, as well as the words which the assailant said during and after being apprehended. According to the article, "YTN TV reported that the attacker shouted, 'South and North Korea should be reunified' as he lunged towards the Ambassador." In addition this, after his apprehension he was heard speaking of anti-war slogans.

Why does this matter though? America coupled with South Korea remains in war with North Korea still to this day over 50 years following the armistice agreement of 1953. North Korea is a authoritative nationalistic nation-state, and more frequently now more than ever has seen its people escape from the country into China and then seek refuge in South Korea. Despite being two nations at war, they are closely tied together and it really shouldn't be a surprise that both sides (especially the actual people of North Korea) would want the "war" to end.

On top of this, South Korea and the United States have been participating in defensive military drills as they have over the decades. North Korea has repeatedly seen this as aggressive in nature and usually retaliates with its own drills, or militarist rhetoric. With this then begs the question. Who does this attacker represent? Is this sentiment popular within both Korea's, or does it lean more with one side than the other?

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Armistice_Agreement
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/03/04/us-ambassador-south-korea-attacked/24398911/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/secret-state-of-north-korea/

The Death Penalty in Asia

The death penalty is often a hotly debated topic here in America. In more forward thinking countries in Europe no such things exist. In fact, I personally believed the death penalty to be one of the contributing factors to instability and a deterrent for growth in a country. China, Japan, and other Asian countries may be able to rebuttal that notion though as their populations, economics, and military strength have grown over the years.

Needless to say though, as The Guardian article states, "The Amnesty International report...showed the death penalty has been maintained, and even re-emerged, in law and practice across the Asia-Pacific." What I found particularly striking was even some economic crimes were deemed punishable by death. I'm sure we could find some schmucks on Wall Street would be deserving of such a punishment...but I digress. The article goes on to maybe suggest terrorism as a catalyst for the increase in popularity of capital punishment in Asian countries. It's also important to note that while Asia has the most executions in the world, China more specifically executes more people than all of the other countries in the world.

So why might this region be so execution hungry? Are Asian teenagers growing up with Call of Duty and the dream of eventually joining a firing squad? I'm sure that's hardly the case obviously, and the answer may be found in something deeper whether that be a social norm formed from religion, history, culture, or perhaps a combination of all of the above. Regardless, if Asia wants to maintain its image as a front runner in global prosperity it should clean up its act regarding capital punishment.

Source(s):
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/25/asia-pacific-countries-most-prolific-users-of-death-penalty-amnesty-report-shows

Fighting Cyber Crime in Asia

There's been a lot of talk lately about cyber crime, and how to fight it. We can look back to the breach of Sony in which hundreds of emails, and other sensitive information pertaining to the company was leaked online. Just recently U.S. President Barrack Obama met with several prominent tech industry figureheads in the Silicon Valley, discussing the topic of cyber-security. Now, according to this article, Microsoft has targeted Singapore and built a "satellite station" which is used to monitor cyber crime.

The article goes into brief detail about Singapore's importance as a financial hub in Asia. Additionally, Asia is a common location of origin for malware, botware, and other nasty viruses that one does not want on their computer. As the globalization continues, we'll see more instances of U.S. companies expanding their reach into areas such as Asia. Singapore geographically and politically makes sense for this Microsoft satellite location due to the fact that it's in a central location in this "hub-type" area, and there is also an INTERPOL branch located there which can enact upon information that this security branch finds in regards to malware, child pornography, and other mischievous cyber crime.

Sources:
http://www.cnet.com/news/asia-could-be-the-next-hotbed-of-cybercrime-says-microsoft/

Sodomy in Malaysia

Sodomy in Malaysia, which is a predominantly Islamic practicing nation holds quite a long prison sentence if found guilty (up to 20-years). Turns out that the opposition leader to the current Malaysian government, Anwar Ibrahim has been convicted and found guilty of sodomizing a younger aide. Anwars side claims that the entire thing has been fabricated, and that the DNA evidence was tainted. The court refused to accept that claim, and proceeded to persecute him for the charge posed against him.

What's important here isn't necessarily if Ibrahim is actually guilty or not, it's the fact that sodomy in this country is illegal and holds such heavy imprisonment repercussions. Human Rights Watch had the following to say, which I agree with, "the conviction of Anwar Ibrahim after seven years of politically motivated proceedings under an abusive and archaic law is a major setback for human rights in Malaysia."

Human rights is one of the most basic and fundamental foundations to build a prosperous nation upon. Malaysia has seen its economy transform over the past decades from raw materials into a more diversified and technologically savvy modern one. Statistically speaking, countries in which capital punishment is prominent, women's rights are non-existent, and education is neglected in get left behind as other nations move forward. While sodomy doesn't compare to the aforementioned criteria, archaic laws that punish what should be a basic human right do hinder the ability for a nation to grow.

Sources:
Article
Malaysian Economy / Basic Information

Asian Air Travel

Looking at the news over the past year, one may say that air travel in the Monsoon Asia region is risky. We've had a slew of unfortunate accidents ranging from Malaysian Airlines who had a flight vanish over the Indian Ocean, and another shot out of the sky above Ukraine, as well as two TransAsia flights and one AirAsia flight. So this begs a question, is it safe to travel via air in Asia?

One side argues that it is not safe to travel in Asia through the air. That Asia is still a developing region (which it is), and therefore its standards in air travel and safety are lower. While it may be true that the safety standards are lower, in the grand scheme of things it still is relatively safe. Especially when we compare travel in Asia to that of Africa as one of maps in the article below will present.

After reading both sources, my own personal conclusion is that air travel in Asia is safe. While we have seen an increased amount of air tragedies in this region, it still is an extremely small portion when compared to the total amount of flights.

Sources:
Risky Asian Flights
vs.
Asian Flights Still Safe

Palm Oil in Southeast Asia

Palm oil is a product in wide use in much of Africa, South America, and Southeast Asia as a common cooking ingredient. It's easily available, especially so in Southeast Asia (namely Singapore), making it a cheap product. Couple that with it's natural durability, and one can see why people would go to great lengths to harvest palm oil in the most efficient manner, despite it harming the environment, and the people living in the area.

The article linked below goes into detail about a "haze" that lingers around Singapore. It isn't consistent, it comes periodically throughout the year. Now, we might think this is the infamous "toxic clouds" that we hear of in China, but no, this is different. This haze is created by the burning of peatlands (that's a form of decayed vegetation), which then gets cleared to grow trees to produce the palm oil. The scary thing is, no one knows the health risks of this haze because it hasn't been studied. Unlike car emissions, or industrial exhaust (that has some regulations but let's be honest there really isn't much), peatland burning has absolutely no regulations, and no one understands the dangers of it because it (before the commercialization of palm oil) hadn't happened near an urban landscape.

With the cultivation of palm oil, a highly sought out after cooking product is made. However, with that, comes health risks such as heart failure, asthma, and other respiratory issues that we find out over time. Habitats for animals native to these lands are being destroyed as it's cleared for palm oil crops. Are the extra profits really worth the destruction of the lands? Are they worth the potential health risks that we're learning with time because we simply "don't know" what will happen? This problem isn't isolated to just Southeast Asia, Singapore or Indonesia. It's a problem in any developing country, and we saw it in the past with the industrialization of the West. The question is, will Asia repeat history, or will they refine industrialization and paint it with a cleaner picture than the fog and haze that currently inhabits our imagination as we ponder what industrialization looks like.

Sources:
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150123-the-killer-haze-choking-asia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_oil

Japanese Pacifism Revised

I'm a history major, and personally enjoy reading about conflicts, whether they be small or full-scale war. After doing a research report on Japanese aggression in Manchuria before and during WW2, I decided it would be interesting to take a look at Japan's military in the modern era. What I found was not entirely unexpected given the lack of Japanese military news, although it is important to note that Japan did make a historic change in military use in July of 2014.

Following WW2, Japan had banned its military from fighting abroad after 1945. Its military would only be used in self-defense. Japan's Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe passed legislation that would allow Japan to participate in "collective self-defense." The United States was particularly happy with the Japanese policy shift, whereas China was not content. China has been the dominating military power in the Asia-Pacific region, and with Japan being added to the equation, the balance of power could be threatened. 

I think this is a good move for Japan, it's been over 60-years since the conclusion of World War II. The threats in today's world contrast those of the past greatly. With new non-nation-state actors such as ISIS and Boko Haram its even more important for nations such as Japan who share similar beliefs as the United States to participate in the global preservation of peace. More specifically, from what I've read, and my own personal intuition suggests that with such a high Muslim population, Indonesia could become a potential "breeding ground" for Islamic Extremists. Having Japan as an ally that can flex its military strength in the region, or as more desirable; gently guide Indonesia as to how to fight extremism should be seen only as beneficial to the Pacific and the world as a whole.

Sources:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/01/us-japan-defense-idUSKBN0F52S120140701

http://www.dw.de/thousands-from-central-asia-joining-islamic-state-report/a-18203785