keted Capitol Hill to defend the company’snsale of critical submarine partsnto the Soviet Union—^and many of the instancesnof influence peddling recountednin Pat Choates’ 1990 Agents of Influence.nIf Mr. Crichton were rewriting hisnbook today, he would no doubt add somenmention of the latest scandal involvingnJapanese trade: on April 1 Japan’s largestnmilitary electronics manufacturer, JapanesenAviation, pleaded guilty in U.S. FederalnCourt to selling illegally to Iran navigationnequipment for fighter jets. JapanesenAviation had been contracted by Honeywell,na deal the State Department approved,nto make the parts only for Japan’snfleet of F-4 fighters. The Japanese companynagreed to pay a $IO-million criminalnfee, $5 million to the State Departmentnfor administrative costs, and tonaccept a one-year ban on receiving anynadditional export licenses from the UnitednStates. The penalties are the highestnever imposed for export violations.nBut the most interesting and no doubtncontroversial sections of Rising Sun are thenexplanations of the cultural differencesnbetween Japan and the United Statesnand the alarming examples of the extentnto which Japan has penetrated America’sncultural infrastructure. On Japanesenracism:nThe Japanese think everybodynwho is not Japanese is a barbarian.nThey mean it, literally: barbarian.nStinking, vulgar, stupid barbarian.nThey’re polite about it, becausenthey know you can’t help thenmisfortune of not being bornnJapanese. But they still think it.nOn the differences between Japanese andnBritish and Dutch investment in the UnitednStates:nYes, it’s true that the British andnthe Dutch both have larger investmentsnin America than thenJapanese. But we can’t ignore thenreality of targeted, adversarialntrade as practiced by Japan—nwhere business and governmentnmake a planned attack on somensegment of the American economy.nThe British and Dutch don’tnoperate that way. . . . And, ofncourse, if we want to buy a Dutchnor English company, we can. Butnwe can’t buy a Japanese company. .nOn the free trader’s retort that the bal­nance of payments with Japan is dropupon he negotiated for an English-lanping:guagenvolume of his portion of thenbook—^Akio Morita having dissociatednOf course it only looks better be­nhimself from the project because of thencause they don’t export so manyncontroversy—along with some ad­ncars to us now. They make themnditional chapters to be published bynhere… . They’ve stepped up pur­ Simon and Schuster. The book appearednchases of oranges and timber, tonin January 1991, and was widelynmake things look better. Basically, reviewed by the American media. Butnthey treat us as an underdevel­nmuch has happened since that time tonoped country. They import ournmake a reappraisal of Ishihara’s viewsnraw materials. But they don’t buy both prudent and productive, not leastnour finished goods.nof which is the wider dissemination ofnhis ideas with the recent release of anOn Japan’s penetration of American ed­ paperback version of his book.nucation:nAt one point in Rising Sun, fictionalnSenator John Morton says, “You know,nJapanese companies now endownsome day an American politician is goingntwenty-five professorships atnto do what he thinks is right, instead ofnM.I.T., far more than any othernwhat the polls tell him. And it’s going tonnation. … At the University ofnlook revolutionary.” To the annoyance ofnCalifornia at Irvine, there’s twonthe mling elite in Washington and Tokyo,nfloors of a research building thatnboth nations now have such “revolu­nyou can’t get into unless you have tionary” figures, and they represent notna Japanese passport. They’re doing further politics as usual but a desire fornresearch for Hitachi there. Annfundamentally changing the course ofnAmerican university closed tontheir respective countries. They are PatricknAmericans. … You know they al­ Buchanan and Shintaro Ishihara.nready own ten American colleges.nThe similarities between the two mennOwn them outright. … So [innare striking. Both are strong and pug­ncase of a backlash against Japan]nnacious characters—Buchanan the youngnthey can be assured of the abilitynboxer brawling with a cop, Ishihara thento send young Japanese tonbrass kid of occupied Japan provoking U.S.nAmerica.nsoldiers with his refusal to step aside inndeference to allow “the new conquerors”n”The Japanese are not our saviors,” con­ to pass. Both men abhor the politicallyncludes Mr. Crichton in his afterword. fashionable and opt instead for frank andn”They are our competitors. We should free discussion, and both as a consequencennot forget it.”nhave been denounced as reactionary,nTrade and competition betweennAmerica and Japan was the subjectnracist, and ultranationalist (these beingnthe kindest and gentlest of the epithetsnhurled at Pat Buchanan). And both mennof the 1989 Japanese best-seller The Japan have challenged their country’s rulingnThat Can Say No: Why Japan Will Be First political class by calling for a new na­nAmong Equals. The book was a series of tionalism and a return to a foreign andnspeeches given by Sony chairman Akio domestic policy explicitly based onnMorita and by novelist and longtime Lib­ national prosperity, security, andneral Democratic Party leader Shintaro self-interest. One might think that thenIshihara. They frankly criticized Ameri­ statement, “Without nationalism—anca for meddling in Japanese affairs, en­ strong sense of roots and identity—therencouraged Japan to reassert its will in Pa­ cannot be internationalism, only ancific affairs by using its vast wealth and shallow cosmopolitanism,” came fromntechnological know-how, and urged the Pat Buchanan or a Chronicles editor, butncountry’s leadership to quit playing “lit­ it is classic Ishihara. Whether it bentle sister” to a patronizing and enfee­ Buchanan’s America First or Ishihara’snbled Uncle Sam. The Pentagon caught Japan First, both policy platforms stemnwind of the book and arranged for a boot­ from fervent patriots proud of their ownnleg version of it to be circulated in cultural and national heritage.nCongress, after which a fury of anger This is not to deny the many trade andnswept over Capitol Hill. Ishihara con­ foreign policy issues over which both menntended that the outrage was the result of as heads of government would doubtlessnthe Pentagon’s shoddy translation, where­ disagree. Indeed, Washington would donnnJUNE 1992/29n