Category: The Americas

Japanese Peruvians: the rest of the story

The recent Fujimori ruckus reminds us of the often-forgotten diversity in Latin America. Besides Native Americans (yes, they live in South America, too), there are about 90,000 people of Japanese ancestry living in Peru.

Japanese immigration to Peru started in 1899 with a boatload of 790 people, arriving in Callao to make a new living as sugar plantation workers. But, as in the United States and other American countries, immigration ended in the early 20th century, and a wave of anti-Japanese sentiment swept the country in the 1930s (when Fujimori’s family entered the country), culminating in mass riots in 1940. Although Peru waited until 1945 to declare war on Japan, the government froze Japanese assets immediately after Pearl Harbor, confiscated Japanese-owned property, and deported some Japanese individuals to U.S. concentration camps beginning in 1942. Even after the war, it was not until 1955 that assets were un-frozen, and Japanese could not enter Peru until 1960 (and were even then subject to strict quotas and eligibility requirements).

Of course, by then, the job market in Japan was much better than in Peru. But Peruvians in Japan were few and far between… until 1987, when Tokyo began issuing visas for ethnic Japanese in South America to return to Japan as workers (a practice called dekasegi). And the Peruvian population swelled in response: from 500 in 1985 to 10,000 in 1990. Despite the unimpressive Japanese economy of the 1990s, Peruvians in Japan quadrupled in number between 1990 and 2000. Brazilians grew by a similar proportion.

Now, there are 55,000 Peruvians in Japan, making them the #5 foreign nationality after Koreans, Chinese, Brazilians, and Filipinos. Since most are ethnic Japanese (or at least pretending to be), they are hard to distinguish from natives, especially when they speak the language and have Japanese names (as they commonly do). There are enough in the major cities that you’re likely to meet a few if you hop around enough bars and clubs.

So while Fujimori’s story is far from usual, finding a Japanese in Peru or a Peruvian in Japan is far from unusual.

Happy turkey day

Some thoughts from Christopher Hitchens in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal (print edition, which I only read when travelling by air):

Considering Thanksgiving, that most distinctive and unique of all American holidays, there need be no resentment and no recrimination. Likewise, there need be no wearisome present-giving, no order of divine service, and no obligation to the dead. This holiday is like a free gift, or even (profane though the concept may be to some readers) a free lunch—and a very big and handsome one at that…

It is the sheer modesty of the occasion that partly recommends it. Everybody knows what’s coming. Nobody acts as if caviar and venison are about to be served, rammed home by syllabub and fine Madeira. The whole point is that one forces down, at an odd hour of the afternoon, the sort of food that even the least discriminating diner in a restaurant would never order by choice.

You know, he’s right on that last part. Facing a cooler of cheesecake and pumpkin pie at Costco the other day, I picked the pumpkin pie with no deliberation. And although pumpkin pie is tasty, I would have picked the cheesecake on any other day of the year, again with no deliberation. That’s cultural brainwashing at work. Not that I’m complaining; pumpkin pie is like autumn leaves, the sort of thing a year wouldn’t be complete without.

Saru to Media: Did you even read Bush’s speech?

“Bush to China: Grant religious, civic freedoms” That’s the headline from a Yomiuri online story today. A quick glance at google news headlines reveals more of the same:

“Bush pushes China over freedoms” (CNN)

“Bush rebukes China on freedom” (MSNBC)

“Bush tells Beijing to model itself on ‘free Taiwan’” (Independent, UK)

And so on, and so on.

Unquestionably, the President’s speech in Kyoto on the 16th was intended to send a message (several, actually) to China and it no, not all of it was soft. Yes, he cited Taiwan as having “created a free and democratic Chinese society.” Yes, he put China in category 2, those “other Asian societies [that] have taken some steps toward freedom.” And yes, he did mention “worshipping without state control” and to “print Bibles and other sacred texts without fear or punishment.” In short, he did allude to some of China’s shortcomings in the area of freedom and democracy and there is little doubt that Beijing heard this loud and clear.

But, his message could have just as easily been interpreted as one of economic determinism – “if you continue economic liberalization, you will have not choice but to become more democratic.”

In this sense, it was more a statement of facts, not of demands:

“In the late 1970s, China’s leaders took a hard look at their country , and they resolved to change. They opened the door to economic development — and today the Chinese people are better fed, better housed, and enjoy better opportunities than they ever have had in their history.”

“As China reforms its economy, its leaders are finding that once the door to freedom is opened even a crack, it can not be closed. As the people of China grow in prosperity, their demands for political freedom will grow as well.”

“…men and women who are allowed to control their own wealth will eventually insist on controlling their own lives and their own future.”

“X” follows “Y.”

As harsh as it got was this suggestion:

“By meeting the legitimate demands of its citizens for freedom and openness, China’s leaders can help their country grow into a modern, prosperous, and confident nation.”

To describe it as “telling” China to become more free, “rebuking it” about a lack of freedom, or even “pushing” it on freedom seems a bit of a stretch to me and it misses the subtlety (and frankly, we should be thankful to see some from this administration) of the speech. Looking at the text, it’s clear that the only things Bush said China “needs to take action to ensure” are the correction of its current account surplus, greater protection of intellectual property rights, and a move towards a flexible, market-based exchange rate system.

Bush even made some concessions to China. After the Taiwan section of the speech, reaffirmed the one China policy. He recognized the “important role China has assumed as host of the six-party talks.” And finally, he closed the speech with a nod to Chinese history, recognizing that they were around a long time before Jefferson and Lincoln.

It could have been a lot worse.

Two Reasons to Love Washington


(Please forgive the rambling, Schumin-esque post. This is about as exciting as my life gets these days.)

Reason 1: I stop by American University, my alma mater, last weekend to catch up on some research.

Feeling hungry, I decide to stop by the university dining hall to see if it has changed at all. Now, at AU most customers of the dining hall pay using their student IDs, which are connected to their overpriced meal plans. As I stand in line, I remember how annoying it was to be stuck with 30 leftover meals at the end of every semester because I didn’t feel like eating from the same limited menu for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

When my turn comes at the register, I tell the lady I have to pay with a credit card. She is confused — from the looks of things, this may not have happened yet in her career as a dining hall cashier.

But thankfully the “middle class African American college boy” behind me is ready: “I got it,” he says, letting me know “it’s cool” with a cocksure nod of the head.

“Really?”

“Yeah.”

“Wow, thanks,” I say as the register lady swipes his ID.

Free lunch for Adamu!
Continue reading Two Reasons to Love Washington

Is this Fujimori’s “plan?”

Fujimori’s hop through Chile comes in a convenient window, as the Chilean government is changing its procedural laws on extradition, and it isn’t clear which regime should control his case. From yesterday’s Miami Herald:

Under Chile’s old judicial system, extradition hearings could take up to two years, because judges were required to do the grueling work of investigating facts. If those rules are applied, Fujimori would miss his date with voters. The new system simplifies the process by requiring judges in extradition cases only to review evidence presented by attorneys, which would cut the time to an estimated four to six months. That could free Fujimori or send him back to Peru before the elections.

And, by the way, he didn’t fly through Atlanta and Mexico City, as previously reported, but instead took a private plane and stopped in Tijuana. Apparently, he was in and out before the Mexican government even knew what had happened. The immigration inspectors in Tijuana have been fired.

Congress v. Constitution, chapter 942

[11:09] Wade: I love it when Congress acts unconstitutionally
[11:09] Joe: ?

In a 49-42 vote, senators added the provision by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., to a sweeping defense policy bill. Under the provision, Guantanamo Bay detainees would be allowed to appeal their status as an “enemy combatant” one time, to the Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. But they would not be able to file petitions known as writs of habeas corpus, which are used to fight unlawful detentions, in that or any other U.S. court.

“For 200 years, ladies and gentlemen, in the law of armed conflict, no nation has given an enemy combatant, a terrorist, an al-Qaida member the ability to go into every federal court in this United States and sue the people that are fighting the war for us,” Graham told his colleagues. (AP report)

[11:11] Joe: hmmm

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it. (U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2)

[11:11] Joe: well, this is a "case of invasion," I guess
[11:12] Joe: not an invasion of us, but still . . .
[11:13] Wade: If Asahi Metal could be heard by the courts, I think the habeas motions for "unlawful enemy combatants" are definitely worthy of the federal courts

Now, the Supreme Court already said that enemy combatants can file habeas motions, and only Clarence Thomas dissented from the notion that enemy combatants get due process protection. Even with that fact aside, Graham’s quote makes no sense whatsoever. Its lack of logic is matched only by its lack of factual basis.

Though I’m no fan of terrorists, lawyers in the Senate should know better than this. You don’t mess with the Constitution, especially when the Supreme Court has just told you not to. Want to get rid of habeas corpus? Vote on a constitutional amendment. Call it the “Deprivation of Rights Amendment.” That’ll go over real well.

The latest from Pat Robertson

The school board in Dover, Pennsylvania decided to adopt intelligent design as an alternative to evolution. Earlier this week, all eight of its members were voted out of office. Pat Robertson responded that God might not save them from disaster as a result. Draw your own conclusion.

Fun fact: Robertson has a law degree from Yale. More fun fact, courtesy of rotten.com:

In a March 1986 speech to Yale University Law School, Robertson admitted one possible reason why he failed the New York Bar Exam (and thus, never practiced law): “When I was at law school, I studied constitutional law for a whole year. I read a thick book of cases on constitutional law. I did all kinds of research. But I confess to you, I never read the Constitution. I graduated without anybody asking me about that.”

Again, draw your own conclusion. I’d say this goes further to support the notion that the American religious right is powered by evangelicals, but thought through by Catholics.

Is Alberto Fujimori Japanese?

Following on Joe’s Alberto Fujimori post, I have some different issues that I would like to examine. Why is Alberto Fujimori being protected by the Japanese government? What legal rights does he have in Peru or Japan? What is his citizenship under the law of both countries? I think the best way to examine this is with a timeline of his life, and references to the appropriate law.

This is going to be a long one, so click below for the entire thing.
Continue reading Is Alberto Fujimori Japanese?

Chilling in Tokyo vs. political martyrdom

, Peru’s first president of Japanese ancestry, was managing to get some peace in Tokyo, where he’s a citizen and outside the scope of extradition treaties. But for some reason, he decided to fly back to South America. He says he wants to run for president again in 2006: the national legislature passed a law barring him from running until 2011, but he claims the law is unconstitutional. (You’d think it would be, assuming Peru has some sort of equal protection…)

Well, whatever his motive, here’s what happened: once he got to Chile, the authorities showed up at his hotel room and arrested him. He’s been denied bail and Peru wants him extradited; his supporters in Peru say that he has “a plan” and won’t be extradited. Whatever happens, he’s going to be in Chile for about four weeks, as that’s how long the criminal procedures in Peru are supposed to take. Chile has authority to hold him for up to two months before he is sent to Peru.

Peru has charged Fujimori with a number of nasty crimes, including supporting the FARC forces in Colombia, “disappearing” a few scores of students, and pushing a policy of forced sterilization for population control. The more plausible charges include millions of dollars’ worth of corruption and way too much zeal in going after terrorist groups, including the Shining Path guerillas and the MRTA forces that took over the Japanese embassy in Lima in 1997.

Make no mistake, though: Fujimori is not a demon in his home country. Peru is sharply divided over him. His supporters see him as a hero for liberalizing Peru’s economy and shutting down terrorist groups that made life difficult in the eighties. His opponents, including President Toledo, see him as a tyrant who stole from the people, handing back just enough to keep his popularity up. While he isn’t doing too well in the polls for president right now, he’s doing all right for someone who’s been campaigning illegally in absentia.

It’ll be interesting to see what kind of trial he ends up getting. Will it be a giant political show? Which charges will be brought, and which will be substantiated? Will he ever become president? Will he rot in a prison cell? Or will he spend his final days hawking ?