PART III ASIA
Section 4 Conclusion
Mongolia has made great strides in its sometimes difficult transition to a market eco- nomic system. Institutions necessary for the functioning of a market environment have been established, laws and regulations that encourage competition while protecting public interest have been introduced and in recent years greater stability in the macro- economic environment have all contributed to creating an environment in which private enterprise can emerge and grow, and inward investment is encouraged. Also business people have confidence in their future, anticipating growth in profitability, investment and employment, all of which contribute to the alleviation of poverty. However the industrial development policy built on the population density, development of infra- structure and availability of raw materials of given local areas needs to be set, which has to be based on the current development situation of the local area and its development perspectives.
Within objectives the government has, first, to promote the SMEs to produce goods and services for domestic consumption on a large scale; second, to develop the export-oriented and import-substituting goods production in the domestic economy, based on a good infrastructure and high market capacity, and, third, to enhance the opportunity for devel- opment of industry and service through increased investment.
In summary, the way in which the transition has been embraced by Mongolians is, indeed, nothing short of inspirational. Certainly there will be problems along the way and nothing happens overnight (consider that Western economies have taken centuries to evolve to their present stage). There is no transitional model to follow and Mongolia is a country with a unique culture and with unique problems of an economic and political nature.
References
Baatar, S. and T. Dorj (2000), ‘Mongolia in brief ’, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Badarch, O. (2004), ‘Current situation of small and medium size enterprises and its prospects’, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Chew, S.B. and R. Chew (2000), ‘Public policy and entrepreneurship: the case of Singapore’,International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management,1.
Dana L.P. (1999),Entrepreneurship in Pacific Asia: Past Present & Future, Singapore, London and Hong Kong:
World Scientific.
Enterprise Restructuring Project Phase (2004), ‘Mongolia: a survey of business-enabling environment’, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Government of Mongolia (July 2003), ‘Economic growth and poverty reduction strategy’, p. 101.
Mongolian National Statistical Office (2004),Mongolian Statistical Yearbook – 2003, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Tserenpil, D. (2004), ‘The role of small and medium enterprises in the economy’,Money and Finance,4, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Sandra Pennewiss
Introduction
Much is known about entrepreneurship (Dana, 1999) and small business (Dana, 1998) in Japan. The indigenous Ainu of Japan, however, are a people less understood. As noted by Espiritu, ‘Traditionally, the Ainu hunted, fished, gathered, and engaged in subsistence farming. They also vigorously traded and forged alliances . . . The Ainu were important intermediaries among Japanese, Dutch, Chinese, Russian, Manchurian, and Korean markets’ (2005, p. 18).
Time changes as humans try to fight their way towards a better world. Past centuries were filled with the pursuit of conformity and mostly forced integration. Individuals were measured on standardized rules of conduct implemented by those of power or majority.
Any nation or individual who acted, behaved or could be singled out because of their physical traits were persecuted, suppressed and nearly extinguished.
I dare say that Woodstock and ‘flower power’ had a considerable impact on changing the world’s view and rules from conformity to individuality. With it awoke an interest in minorities and indigenous societies who held their difference, language and heritage despite persecution and deprival of rights. Despite decades of hard struggle on the part of human rights activists, there is still plenty of discrimination and wrongdoing even in highly developed countries. Fortunately the law and the majority are now aware and in favour of those who are smaller, weaker and often unable to protect themselves. Many have under- stood that, sometimes, the smaller a minority group the stronger is the need to protect their rights, heritage and skills, as it is through them that all our past is reincarnated.
One of the smallest communities of indigenous people are the Ainu, most of whom reside on the Japanese island of Hokkaido. In particular, the area of Sapporo is Ainu ter- ritory, meaning in their language ‘The land given by the river’. Ainu have great physical and cultural distinction from Japanese and other Asiatic nations. Physical traits include different skin colour, skull features and excessive hair growth, and culturally also the Ainu have little in common with other societies. They worship their own gods and practise old rituals and ceremonies. However the most remarkable factor seems to be their language, which exists only in spoken form. Ainu people do not have an alphabet. Skills, language, tradition and stories are passed on only through spoken transmission.
Ainu are self-employed fishermen, hunters and collectors by heritage. Centuries of per- secution, occupation, extortion and Japan’s drive to industrialize have nearly succeeded in their total extinction. Many Ainu who survived the various onslaughts were later forced into submission by an aggressive Japanese assimilation policy. The true number of Ainu living today seems to be a source of some disagreement. While Japanese research puts the figure at around 25 000, the Ainu Association declares it to be close to 200 000, despite the fact that today only around 200 follow the traditional ways.
The reason for such a discrepancy results from different ways of classifying Ainu descendants. Many Ainu were married to Japanese and over the generations have lost their
175
physical distinction; also they were forced to use Japanese names and language. Many emigrated and some are most likely unaware of their heritage. A great number may even conceal their origin in order to avoid still persisting discrimination. Both sides could equally be accused of using those statistics which best suit their own agenda.
In order to establish a way of determining the number of Ainu a common classification system would have to be agreed upon. Here of course two political interests collide. For the Japanese it would be advantageous to rate the number of Ainu as low as possible. Many political decisions are justified as being in the best interest of the majority or of the country.
A minority of 25 000 is easy to overrule, while a population of 200 000, even if a minority, would be a factor hard to ignore. Decisions about rights, land and reimbursements could be greatly influenced by the strength of numbers a minority group is claiming.
Historical overview
When the Wajin (Japanese) spread their power over the land of the Ainu, today known as Japan, they introduced advanced military tactics and weaponry that the Ainu were not able to match. Numbered at around 40 000, the Ainu were quickly driven back to the northern shores and forced to cross the waters that separate the Japanese mainland and the Island of Hokkaido. But even there Japanese quickly established firm control over land and life. The organized public swindling of the Ainu increased considerably under the Tokugawa Shogunate which lasted until the end of the nineteenth century.
One of the laws implemented to swindle the Ainu was the ‘Land-Lease’, a feudalistic system focused on fishing, hunting and timber rights. Free trade by the Ainu was restricted and trade zones were manipulated to assist the Wajin, who were free to exploit Ainu land and people as they saw fit. During this time the term ‘Ainu Kantei’ (Ainu calculation) was born, a synonym for a fraudulent trade method forced upon the Ainu people under the land-lease system. When trading fish, kelp and furs, Japanese used an unfair method of counting which gained them 12 pieces when they had to pay for only 10. They very simply counted ‘begin’, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10, ‘end’. Ainus who dared to protest were beaten.
Wajin were also granted wood cutting rights which cut the Ainu offfrom their tradi- tional way of life. The Ainu quickly ran up high amounts of debt which were then paid offthrough labour on the fish farms, which of course were owned by Japanese. The con- ditions were similar to those of slave labour camps. In order to increase profit the workers were severely restricted and forced to do the harshest of labour without sleep or rest.
Many died under the cruel conditions and those taken out of the camps were empty shells, without spirit and strength.
Another important element was the diseases brought upon the Ainu by the immigrating Wajin. Mass outbreaks of smallpox, cholera and syphilis caused an even more critical con- dition. People weakened and died one after another, the Ainu population quickly decreased and Ainu society was thrown into complete chaos. The collapse of the Tokugawa Shogunate, however, did not end the suffering of the Ainu people. The new government, called the ‘Meiji’, invented new ways and laws aiming at exploitation. The ‘Meiji’ estab- lished the ‘Hokkaido Colonization Commission’, which implemented the ‘assimilation policy’. The use of Ainu language was prohibited as well as Ainu manners, customs and traditions. Furthermore the use of Japanese names was forced upon the population.
In 1873, the Land Tax Revision Act declared land in Hokkaido ownerless, allocating it to the Imperial Household. The Ainu now faced the gravest situation possible, as even the
land on which their homes were built was taken away from them. In 1886, tides of colonists arrived in Hokkaido to claim land parcels. The Hokkaido Colonization Commission was renamed the Hokkaido Agency, responsible for handling the increased administration caused by the flood of Wajin settlers. All across the island the Ainu were forced from their homes and land and made to move into the mountains and areas in which no Wajin would ever consider worth living. Furthermore the Hokkaido Agency forced them to enrol in agriculture and unfamiliar farming tasks, instituted through the Meiji’s agricultural labour policy. Lack of food caused starvation and illness, which resulted once again in numerous victims.
In 1897, the enactment of the Undeveloped Hokkaido National Lands Disposal Act was introduced which was to be quickly followed by the Law for the Protection of the Hokkaido Aboriginals in 1899, summarized below.
Article 1 grants all Ainu who devote themselves to farming 12 acres of land free of charge. However promising Article 1 might sound, this was nothing other than yet another more disguised way of swindling the Ainu and forcing them into submission, as they came with a given set of conditions as well as loopholes to benefit the Wajin.
1. The Ainu lost the right of fishing, hunting and wood cutting. Violators were arrested for poaching and the stealing of timber. Thus the Ainu had no alternative but to accepting the offer to take over land and start farming.
2. The land handed out comprised ground located in river beds, on slopes, the edges of cliffs or infertile soils, which would have been more than a challenge even to experi- enced farmers.
3. Ainu were not accustomed to farming and, no matter how hard they tried, their efforts were usually in vain, given their inexperience and the quality of the land.
4. Furthermore a clause was included that imposed the condition of cultivating the land within a period of 15 years. Failure to succeed resulted in the confiscation of the prop- erty, and most parcels were taken away from the Ainu in this manner.
All in all, the law was nothing more than a means to create cheap labour and to deprive the Ainu people, a fishing and hunting race, of their right to a free and independent life style. Most lost their land and ended up with high debts. The only way to make a day-to- day living was to become low-paid labourers for Wajin entrepreneurs or to try their hand at farming. This miserable situation has not changed much until recently. The Japanese are grudgingly restoring to the Ainu their natural rights, and these improvements have had to be fought for fiercely from within the system.
Ainu v. Goliath
Many hopes of peace, understanding and positive changes were connected with the birth of the new millennium and fortunately plenty of time is left for them to be fulfilled.
Looking at the development of the past 60 years, human inventions have moved with astonishing speed, while the word ‘meagre’ is a better term to describe humanitarian improvements, including Ainu rights and living conditions.
In 1935, certainly with nothing but good intentions, the government initiated a round table talk to revise the former ‘Aborigines Protection Act’. Japanese policy regarding the Ainu had undergone a swing from focusing on extortion to fast-track assimilation in order
to create Japanese hegemony. Japanese officials as well as scholars and prominent Ainu joined in discussing issues such as government welfare, employment, hygiene, education and life style.
Incorporated changes were passed in 1937 and, even if today they are seen as yet another means of depriving the Ainu of their natural rights, some alterations can be seen as posi- tive. The problem at the time was that the Japanese considered themselves superior to Ainu, and benevolent measures resulted in further reduction of Ainu rights and traditions.
Considering worldwide mainstream developments during the nineteenth century, though, Japan was not an isolated incident. Many nations at the time were caught up in the European influenced fad of Darwinism, revolving around the theory of race and racial inferiority. In some respects, the idea of a family state was merely the Japanese man- ifestation of a phenomenon common to all modern nation-states: the creation of an
‘imagined community’ linked, in this case, by fictive ties of kinship to the emperor.
Responses to policy changes among Ainu activists varied in many ways. Most accepted the assimilation course as probably the most realistic way of bettering the Ainu’s condi- tions even if it came at the cost of losing their heritage and uniqueness. But despite the given consent even pro-government Ainu complained of the mistreatment and discrimi- nation through both the state and individual Japanese citizens.
The Ainu activist movement as well as the aggressive governmental assimilation policy was suspended during the Second World War, but, as early as 1946, the Ainu established an organization that aimed at improving their situation through collaboration with the government. The main objects at the time included better welfare facilities and the provi- sion of higher education. The government acted as the supervising institution to ensure full collaboration until l969. By that time the Ainu rights movement had gathered strength and the collision of interests between the Japanese government and the Ainu became imminent.
The Ainu divided the organization and renamed it the Hokkaido Ainu Association.
Further issues were added to the association’s campaign, including the preservation of Ainu culture and traditions and above all the recognition of the Ainu as indigenous people, which would take nearly three decades to achieve. And while the Ainu were forced to speak Japanese, the rest of the world succeeded in heart transplantation (1967), walked on the moon and only when Dolly the sheep was cloned, in 1997, did Japan finally recognize the Ainu as indigenous. During this period Ainu activists filed lawsuits to the local govern- ment, as well as the UN, and actively promoted their interests to the world community.
In 1984, the association tackled another important goal, the abolishing of the
‘Hokkaido Aborigine Protection Act’ promulgated in 1899 by the ‘Hokkaido Agency’.
Among other things, the law forced the Ainu to adopt Japanese names and prohibited the use of the Ainu language.
The year 1991 marked a first victory when Japan had to recognize the Ainu as a minor- ity group, on the basis of UN Article 27, but despite this it refused to accept the Ainu as indigenous until a court ruling of the Sapporo District court in March 1997 which granted them the protection of their aboriginal culture. Since then many improvements have been made and the Ainu have taken their rightful place among the world’s community of indigenous people. They participate in expositions and further their cause inside Japan by insisting on a better image in history books and lessons. Government programmes have helped to reduce unemployment; loans and support are granted for Ainu students to enrol
in higher education. Ainu culture, language and ceremonies are being researched and pro- moted among the Japanese. Nonetheless there is a long way to go until being Ainu does not result in discrimination and prejudice. Unfortunately there is still a common inferior awareness among the majority of Japan. Especially worrying are accounts of discrimina- tion or racial remarks when they are committed by government officials or prominent persons, or when made public.
In 2001, two members of the Japanese Liberal Democratic Party, Muneo Suzuki and Takeo Hiranuma, publicly stated in separate speeches that ‘Japan is an ethnically homoge- nous nation.’ Hokkaido representative Muneo Suzuki called Japan ‘One nation with one language, one ethnicity; the Ainu are now completely assimilated.’
A Japanese unofficial website displays an A to Z lexicon which includes a reference to and advice to visit the Ainu village in Hokkaido, ‘where these primitive people may be seen in their native surroundings’ (http://www2.gol.com/users/hefej/ainufr.htm). Kenichi Kawamura, an Ainu activist, says, ‘They call us “dojin” – it’s not a very nice word’, refer- ring to the Japanese word for an aborigine which relates to the meaning of vulgarity or uncleanness.
A government study undertaken in 1986 and again in 1993 has clearly shown a decline in discrimination and, hopefully, further actions will promote this trend (Table 14.1)
Another, not less important, issue is the provision of higher education which could result in employment in better paid jobs and, hopefully, the creation of businesses among the Ainu. About 87.4 per cent of Ainu attend high school, but only 11.8 per cent enrol in university (including junior college) well below the proportion of the youth that enter high school (96.3 per cent) and university (27.5 per cent) in municipalities where Ainu reside.
The low level of education could partly be put down to the existing working conditions.
However there is no reason why any worker should be paid more than one of Ainu origin,
Table 14.1 Decline in discrimination
1986 (%) 1993 (%)
‘Personally experienced discrimination’ 23.1 7.3
‘Know of someone’ 48.5 10.1
‘Have not experienced discrimination’ 22.1 62.0
‘Unsure’ 6.3 14.0
‘Refused answer’ — 6.6
For those who answered positive, ‘where did discrimination took place?’
‘In school’ 42.0
‘Marriage-related’ 23.2
‘At work’ 17.9
‘Other’
How did the discrimination manifest itself ?
‘Singled out as Ainu’ 25.0
‘Ridiculed’ 17.0
‘Other’
Source: Hokkaido Development Board.
as unfortunately still seems to be the case. Also public assistance (38.8 per thousand) could be reduced with programmes promoting entrepreneurship and better professional training. The numbers clearly show that Ainu are occupying mostly low labour positions:
33.6 per cent primary industry (22.2 per cent fishing), 32.4 per cent secondary industry (22.3 per cent construction), 32.0 per cent tertiary industry (13.1 per cent service).
Some Ainu, however, make a living in the tourism industry, which is perceived in both positive and negative ways. Some resent the fact that Ainu ‘sell out their heritage’. The achieved, even if initially unintended, outcome though is that tourism promotes their culture and, secondly, establishes areas of entrepreneurship and independence.
Today museums and exhibitions have taken over the educational part and the shops selling Ainu products have resorted to wood carvings and the traditional Ainu clothing.
An annual contest shows some of the talent the Ainu have to offer, which makes one realize how fortunate the world is not to have lost such amazing craftsmanship and cul- tural treasure.
References
Dana, Léo-Paul (1998), ‘Small but not independent: SMEs in Japan’,Journal of Small Business Management, 36(4), October, 73–6.
Dana, Léo-Paul (1999),Entrepreneurship in Pacific Asia: Past Present & Future, Singapore, London and Hong Kong: World Scientific.
Espiritu, Aileen A. (2005), ‘Ainu’, in Mark Nuttall (ed.),Encyclopedia of the Arctic, New York: Routledge, pp. 18–19.