Importing Diversity: Inside Japan's JET Program (46 page)

The Re-Asianization of Japan

The inclusion of Korean and Chinese JET participants is a manifestation of
larger regional dynamics. After deliberately remaining aloof from Asia for
four decades, Japanese leaders are being forced by new economic realities to
turn their attention back to their nearest neighbors. Under low-key government leadership, Japanese corporations are increasingly shaping an interdependent regional system of trade, finance, and production.4 While
many Asians are understandably uneasy about Japan's expanding role,
Japan's image in the region is nevertheless much better than it was two
decades ago. One high-level government study group suggested that Japan
could become a "culturally oriented industrial state" (i.e., a state possessing the economic but not military status of a major power) by creating new
economic relations with its Asian neighbors.5

South Korea is increasingly viewed not as an ancillary element in U.S.Japan relations but as a significant political and economic partner (and
competitor) in its own right. Japan has recently made overtures toward
overcoming the legacy of its past colonial rule by apologizing for past
transgressions and offering economic compensation. And while Chinese
bitterness lingers over Japan's joining with Western countries in imposing
sanctions over the Tiananmen incident, Japan still stands as China's top
loan source and second only to Hong Kong as a trading partner.' Within this context of growing economic integration, the JET Program has played
an important role on the individual level, both fostering new ties and
building on old ones. Thus when Chinese CIR Huang Bao zhong arrived in
Kagawa Prefecture in 1992, he was only the most recent in a long line of
exchanges between Kagawa and Shaanxi, beginning over 1,200 years ago
when Kukai (Kobo Daishi) studied at Quinlong Temple in the T'ang capital
of Chang'an (now Xi'an) and brought back to Japan something of Chinese
Buddhist culture and art. Even the governor and senior treasurer in the
prefecture took an interest in Bao zhong's stay, and after returning to
China he was closely involved in preparing for the 1994 signing of a
friendship agreement between the two districts. Since that time, Shaanxi
and Kagawa have sponsored at least ten exchange events each year.'

To be sure, the JET Program still caters primarily to recent college graduates from six English-speaking countries: the United States, the United
Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Ireland. Yet even among
these core countries there has been a significant change, as their own internal diversity is increasingly being represented in successful JET applicants. One longtime participant in the New Zealand selection process
notes, "Where at first they were almost totally of European origin, Kiwi
JETs are now of Pacific, Chinese, African, Middle Eastern, West Asian and
even Japanese ancestry. The success of these candidates is in itself effectively communicating to Japan something about New Zealand."8 This a far
cry from the program's early days.

But such growth in scale and diversity is bringing new problems. Now
that a JET participant is no longer the only foreigner in his or her school or
office, competition and friction between co-workers may arise. There have
been some reports of fallings-out between JET participants who share the
same office or school but who have different attitudes toward Japanese culture. Having other ALTs so close can also encourage a dangerous tendency
to rely too heavily on each other, as one former MEF (Mombusho English
Fellows) Program participant noted:

Because the number of JETs is so great now-I mean, you can swing a
bat virtually anywhere in Japan and hit two or three or them-just
having someone nearby has changed the whole feeling of the program.
When I was on MEF it was me alone in one prefecture so if I had a
problem, I called a friend in the next prefecture. That was as close as it
got. Otherwise, I had to rely on the Japanese to help me out, which, for
me, in retrospect was wonderful. Even at the time I never felt completely isolated or lonely, but now I think most JETs, unless they really make an effort to rely on the Japanese, can pretty easily get all the help
and information they need either through foreign friends on the program or through all the English information the prefecture puts out. It
seems like the prefectures have done so much to make the participants
comfortable that maybe the result is there's not much need for them to
communicate with the Japanese.

And as a larger number of countries participate, the criticism of the
American focus of the program has intensified. A high-ranking official in
the German embassy in Tokyo had this to say in the summer of 1995:

The ALTs from Germany are of very high quality for the simple reason
that there are so many applicants for each position [there were only
four assistant German teachers in 19951. When we contacted Gaimusho
and Mombusho officials about increasing the numbers, they told us
that the original JET Program was only meant for English language education and that we should be happy to be able to participate at all. "So
don't complain about the small number from your country"-that was
their message. But I continue to go there and tell them that internationalization should have tangible results, and if it is done, it should not
mean tightening your relations with the U.S. I mean, there are a few
other countries in the world-insignificant of course [laughter]-but
they are there. So we've strongly raised the objection against internationalization being a camouflage for the improvement of U.S.-Japan re-
lations.9

The growing presence of Korean and Chinese CIRs has also led to calls
to increase the use of Japanese as the common language among JET participants. Complaints such as the following began to be lodged with CLAIR:
"American English is not the only language; American culture is not the
only culture; even the United Kingdom or New Zealand has a culture entirely different from American culture; when it comes to Chinese or Koreans, they have a different language and a different way of thinking; this is
Japan, and being in Japan where the common language is Japanese, they
should use Japanese among them."10 Kim Chishyku, a Korean CIR in
Fukuoka Prefecture from 1995 to 1997, agreed on the need "to see more
consideration given to JET Programme participants from non-English
speaking countries."" As more and more Asian participants join the JET
Program, the huge gap between their linguistic competence in Japanese
and that of most participants from Western countries will likely receive
even more attention. CLAIR has already responded to this change by
printing a Japanese version of its monthly newsletter.

The growing diversity of participating countries also makes it more
likely that JET participants will interact with and learn from different peoples within the program, and it is increasingly common for ALTs to report
that the best part of the program was getting to know their colleagues of
other nationalities. Some American participants have also been taken
somewhat aback to discover that their compatriots from other parts of the
world do not always have a high opinion of them. An interesting submission to the JET Journal in 1995 described the surprise of one American ALT
at hearing the term "American American" applied to some loud, boastful,
and self-absorbed JET participants from the United States. "What I did not
expect to be confronted with," she wrote, "was how some other westerners
stereotyped Americans."''- Her defensive letter in turn provoked a number
of responses, including one from a Welsh JET: "in my experiences, nonAmericans are far more informed on world issues than their inwardlooking American counterparts.... Your article just strengthens my belief
in the inadequacies, intellectual and cultural, of many American people.""
The result was an escalating game of "Which is the most ethnocentric nationality?"

The gradual addition of non-Western countries in the program suggests
that Japan is now willing to look beyond the United States and other Western nations in coming to terms with internationalization, and the proportion of American participants will no doubt continue to decline as Japan
broadens the scope of its "JET relations." But it is important not to overstate the trend. In the postwar era Japan has largely defined itself in relation to the United States, and by and large this mind-set persists.14 Japan
will likely view the United States as the embodiment of "Western" culture
and perceive "American English" as the most desired form of English for
the foreseeable future.

An Administrative Coup: Pension Rebates

One of the most dramatic turnarounds in program policy occurred in 1995
when the Health and Welfare Ministry, following a vote in the Diet, issued
guidelines that would allow short-term foreign employees of Japanese
government offices to collect a partial rebate on their pension contributions when they left Japan. The decision was hailed as a breakthrough by
CLAIR officials and JET participants alike, and it came after years of sustained pressure.

The possibility of pension reform had seemed slim indeed in the early
years of the program. The Ministry of Education had no interest in pursu ing the cause, and Wada Minoru tended to see JET participants' dissatisfaction as yet another example of their complaining about issues far beyond
their understanding: "The JETs and the program coordinators should not
get mad over the pension. It's not their specialty so they can't judge the issues involved. It involves very complex legal issues and it's not just an ALT
problem. It's part of the larger foreign worker problem." Yet CLAIR officials not only supported the ALTs but tried to use the Association of JET
Participants, and the "foreign pressure" it represented, to further the cause,
as a former AJET chair attested:

I remember on one of my visits to CLAIR the secretary-general took
me into his back room and said, "Look! They won't listen to us. I hope
you'll put some heavy pressure on this person in this ministry. Here's
his address: Write to him." So I told the AJET prefectural representatives to report this to their constituencies. I think it was the beginning
of a bombardment scheme, though whether or not it had the intended
effect, or if many letters were actually written, I'll never know. I would
like to think that we helped.

AJET's letter-writing campaign did eventually put the problem on the
radar screen of Health and Welfare Ministry bureaucrats. Behind the official administrative silence about pensions, which was long interpreted as a
refusal to entertain the idea of change, the wheels were slowly turning.

Conference Woes and Successes

Perhaps the most striking indicator of CLAIR's increasing efficiency and
responsiveness to the concerns of JET participants is the evolution of the
national-level conferences. Most contact with JET participants and local
Japanese officials occurs by phone, fax, email, or mail. Each year, however,
there are several events that bring together many of the major players in
the JET Program (except students) for several intense days. These nationallevel conferences include the Tokyo orientation (held during the first week
of August to welcome new JET participants), midyear block seminars (regional conferences designed to improve strategies for team-teaching and
work relations), and the spring renewers' conference (to reinvigorate JET
participants who have chosen to extend their contracts for an additional
year).15 Especially during the early years of the program, CLAIR and ministry staff typically spent months preparing for these conferences, and they
worked furiously during them.

Though the purpose of each of these conferences is slightly different,
the format and flavor are strikingly similar. All JET participants are provided with free transportation, meals, and hotel rooms, giving the entire affair the feel of a corporate working retreat. The program usually involves
an opening and closing ceremony, as well as keynote speeches by a Japanese ministry official and an invited guest; but the bulk of the time is spent
in workshops on topics ranging from team-teaching techniques to office
relations. Over a period of ten years I attended five of these conferences: a
Tokyo orientation, two midyear block seminars, and two renewers' conferences. Because of the logistical difficulties of convening such large numbers
of people and the potential for public confrontations among them, they
often make visible the conflicts among the various constituencies in the
JET Program.

The very first problem that had to be resolved was control of the
agenda. Early on it was decided that a strict division of labor between
CLAIR and the Ministry of Education would minimize friction, with the
result that each conference is divided into two consecutive sessions: the
first, on team teaching and educational matters, is sponsored by the ministry; the second, on broader program-related issues, is sponsored by
CLAIR. Compartmentalization of duties is rigid, and face-to-face interaction between ministry and CLAIR officials is kept to a minimum. At times
this reached almost comical proportions. At the 1989 Tokyo Orientation,
the agencies' offices were forty floors apart in the hotel, and one CLAIR official told me that the two sides met with each other exactly once during
the entire week.

Negotiating AJET's role in the conferences proved to be much more
problematic. Relying on feedback from its members, AJET compiled a long
series of complaints, most of which centered on the content of the workshops and the selection of speakers. The AJET Magazine, for example, carried a critical review of the midyear block conferences in 1988:

The Kanto Block Conference ... was a haphazard, ambulatory attempt
at professional orientation. Speakers were selected at random by some
far-removed body/bodies with scant knowledge of whom they were
conscripting for workshops. Residents of 500,000 + populated cities
were talking on "Life as a Rural JET"; those who had never administered a Teacher's Seminar were delivering presentations on it; in short,
planning and organization were poorly done, and the ensuing conference rendered about as entertaining as a circus and about as professionally beneficial as one.... Why were we not consulted upon for content and logistical support? ... Aside from CLAIR, AJET appears to be receiving little recognition and cooperation from any other administrative body despite the enormous effort we contribute on the program's
behalf.16