BETWEEN
FOUR WORLDS: CHINA, RUSSIA, JAPAN AND AUSTRALIA;
BETWEEN FOUR CAREERS: DIPLOMAT, ECONOMIST, JOURNALIST AND
JAPANOLOGIST;
BETWEEN
FOUR LANGUAGES: ENGLISH, CHINESE, RUSSIAN AND JAPANESE
Chapter
19a
BACK TO
AUSTRALIA?
1.
The J.P.Keating Scholarship Fiasco
2. Battling the Bureaucratic Sludge
3. Tokyo Spies
4. The End of the Road
Meanwhile
my problems with the Australian official presence in Tokyo
were continuing.
Apart from only two brief periods when ex-Foreign Affairs
colleagues were ambassadors (Geoff Miller and Rawdon
Dalrymple), I was to remain generally excluded from any
Embassy contact other than the annual Australia Day
event.
The exclusion policy did not bother me too much (though as
mentioned earlier, my children when young were to be mild
victims).
I could reconcile it with my standard rationalization,
already in danger of serious overuse, namely that if some
outfit does like your existence then that proves it was a
fairly undesirable outfit to begin with and thank God you
did not get involved with its existence to begin
with.
Which is fine enough as it is. But what happens when it
sneaks round and bites you on your existence?
1.
The J.P.Keating Scholarship Fiasco
After
eight years of political posturing, including wrecking any
chance of an intelligent policy on Aborigines, Bob Hawke
had moved on to other pastures.
He was replaced in 1991 by a media-creation - an alleged
Labor Party whiz-kid, John Paul Keating.
I knew little directly about Keating, other than a fatuous
letter he had once written to some journal of opinion,
criticizing my criticisms of the man who had done such
damage to any hope of a resources policy towards Japan,
namely former minerals and resources minister, Rex
Connor.
Keating had naively seen Connor as a great Australian
nationalist fighting to protect the Australian national
interest from Japanese resource depredations, at a time
when everything should have been done to lock Japan into
Australian resource supply. (Japan’s steel industry
subsequently moved some of its supply sources to other
nations, like Brazil.)
As prime minister, Keating’s main claim to fame was
to flip-flop in the other direction.
Instead of Connor-style restrictions, he now saw
liberalizations as the great answer to Australia’s
problems. Some of them did some good. Most of them ended up
doing much damage (including ‘the recession we had to
have’, and fouling up the banking system).
Even more than most others, Australians seem unable to
think mid-road – that policies do not have to be
dogmatically one-sided, that some balance can usually
be sought between conflicting needs.
That,
for example, we can both protect our resources AND
encourage foreigners to help us develop them.
Instead,
and as I saw in my experience with Bill Hayden (see
previous chapter), we have flip-flops. Policy A is
the flavour of this month. Its opposite, Policy B, becomes
the rage a few months later.
From
the excessive Puritanism of the fifties Australia
flip-flopped to the open slather pornography of the
sixties.
From White Australia exclusivity, and keeping out people of
clear benefit to Australia, suddenly it became
Multicultural openness and allowing in people bound to
create problems.
Earlier, Keating had been known for saying that Asia was
the place you flew over en route to Europe and
America.
But now that Asia had become the flavor of the month, he
condescended to take more interest, especially towards
Japan, then Asia’s dominant nation.
He came several times to Tokyo, and with much pomp.
(I was never invited to any of the high-level Embassy
ceremonies to greet him, even though I probably knew more
of the Japanese at the receptions than any of the Embassy
people.
(But once again, if some outfit wants to ignore your
existence….)
The
J.P.Keating Scholarship Offer
To
prove the importance Keating attached to Japan, the Embassy
announced proudly that it was offering a generous
J.P.Keating scholarship for one, and only one, bright,
up-and-coming Japanese academic who would do PhD quality
research at the ANU in Canberra, and later go on to serve
as the foundation for the development of Japan-Australia
economic studies in Japan in the future.
I was impressed by the offer. Just possibly this would lead
to a breakout from the usual stable of second-rate Japanese
academic hacks who together with those non-Japanese
speaking Japan ‘experts’ at the ANU, had
dominated academic ties with Australia.
I was soon to discover just how wrong you can you be.
…….
The Embassy official in charge of the scholarship offer was
also in charge of the Australia-Japan Foundation office in
Tokyo.
I never saw much of him, even though one of his main jobs
was supposed to be promoting Japan-Australia academic
relationships and I think I was as involved as any
other Australian in the world of Japanese
academia.
And
as mentioned earlier I had been closely involved in setting
up the Foundation.
But at the time that did not matter much since I was even
busier than usual with my various Japan activities..
Almost every day saw me heading off to some lecture site,
often at the other end of Japan, or some committee meeting
in Tokyo.
Writing commitments were also heavy, and this was in
pre-computer days when you had to type and retype
everything laboriously on a typewriter.
If I had had an experienced and committed office secretary
I might just have been able to hold everything
together.
But such were few.
Finding
An Office Secretary in Japan
To find a secretary I had had to rely on newspaper ads.
They produced dozens of responses requiring dozens of
interviews.
Most
applicants were quite unsuitable. They seemed attracted
mainly by the alleged glamor, freedom and exoticism of
working in a foreigners office. Even so you had to go
through the routine of testing them.
Sometimes I felt that the time I spent looking for
secretaries might even exceed the amount of time I saved by
using their services.
In short, losing a secretary and then having to go
out and find another was a major disaster.
To
have such a disaster imposed on one deliberately by an
Embassy whose job was supposed to be to help, or at least
not to obstruct, fellow Australians trying to make out in
Japan was an even greater disaster, as I was about to
discover.
Losing
a Secretary
At
the time I had managed to find a pleasant enough young lady
willing to work for me. She had just finished two years
getting an MA in Brisbane.
She helped get my office into some kind of order. But her
main concern, as she admitted frankly, was to find herself
a nice husband, preferably Australian.
Working for me might provide some contacts in that
direction, she hoped.
She was to achieve that ambition, but in a way neither of
us would have predicted.
------
Suddenly I discovered that she had been awarded the
J.P.Keating scholarship.
I was astounded. Her only academic qualification was an
extremely shallow MA thesis on Japanese management from the
less than heavyweight Griffith University in
Queensland.
I had read it hoping to glean some information on a topic
of my own interest and had found absolutely nothing of
academic or research value.
During the year or so she was working for me she showed
little interest in trying to develop or maintain any
academic contacts in Japan, or anywhere else, or even
to follow up on her original research interest.
I assumed that she simply saw the J.P.Keating Scholarship
as a way she could get back to Australia, enjoy the good
life there and maybe even find that husband.
And that is what seems to have happened. For soon after her
arrival in Australia she disappeared from the radar
screen.
Certainly she has never reappeared in Japan to carry the
banner for Japan-Australia academic studies.
And
for all this, I had to suffer the complete disruption of my
office activities?
Embassy
Plots?
Needless
to say I wanted to check out the background this
disaster.
For not only had her sudden departure caused me some very
serious inconvenience. What I wanted to know was how a
person like her with minimal academic achievement in the
past, and zero academic involvement in Japan at the time,
could possibly have been chosen for such an important
scholarship.
Was it deliberate- yet another Embassy attempt to make life
difficult for me in Japan? Or was it just another example
of Embassy incompetence?
I confronted the Embassy man responsible.
Did he realize that references were needed for academic
appointments or scholarships? And since the lady had no
academic attachments in Japan how had she got any
references?
How had he managed to avoid contacting probably the only
person in Japan who could comment on her academic
abilities, namely myself?
Worse, why had the entire exercise been carried out behind
by back, with every care taken to make sure I did not know
about it?
(She said she had been told by the Embassy to keep things
secret from me while the selection process was
underway.)
Said Embassy official seemed quite unflustered by my
questions.
The Embassy had called widely for applicants, he said. She
was the only respondee. So she automatically qualified. No
references needed.
And how had the Embassy sought applicants?
It had advertised in the media and had sent letters to
universities calling for applicants.
Did he realize that universities in Japan usually ignored
advertisements and letters, that personal contacts were
needed and that it had long been his job as the person
running the Foundation office to have such contacts?
No response.
2.
Battling the Bureaucratic Sludge
I
decided to try to get to the bottom of it all.
I wrote to the then ambassador, Ashton Calvert, an
intelligent man with an ability very unusual for an
Australian ambassador in Japan – some knowledge of
Japanese, even if not very good Japanese.
I knew his reputation for hawkish attitudes during a
previous posting to Washington. But he also seemed to have
some integrity; he had been one of the two officials
involved in the 1976 reversal of the foolish
Menadue/Whitlam decision to reject a friendship treaty with
Japan.
We had had some interesting and frank talks about
Australian policies in general.
But now he was quite happy to abuse whatever integrity he
had had in my eyes, with a reply worthy of a hack
bureaucrat - that he was sure that all the correct
procedures were followed, that the person selected was an
excellent choice, and that he was certain she would
contribute greatly to future Japan Australia academic
relations etc.etc.
And at that the friendly contacts that we had had earlier
were terminated, abruptly.
It
Gets Worse
It was a disgusting affair, and not just for the reasons I
have already given.
The aim of the scholarship had been to promote
Japan-Australia academic relations. But it had been handled
in a way that not only guaranteed there would be no
beneficial impact on Japan-Australia relations.
It
had also managed to do great harm to the one Australian
closely involved with the Japanese academic scene, namely
myself, then president of Tama University and in need of a
private secretary even more than usual.
Without wanting to seem too paranoiac I had to assume the
whole exercise was either deliberate or bureaucracy gone
mad, with those nice people at the ANU cooperating.
And
sure enough those nice people at the ANU were involved. -
as if they had not done enough damage in the past to mess
up my life.
I
wrote to the Department of Employment, Education and
Training (DEET) which had had final responsibility for the
scholarship granting.
Back
came an official letter from one Roger Peacock, First
Asssistant Secretary:
"The
selection panel, with no vested interest in the only
candidate, assessed her as suitable for the award. They
were, no doubt, influenced in this decision by the
Australian National University's assessment that the
candidate had a good academic record, useful practical
experience and was well equipped to undertake a PhD program
at that University."
Oh
yes? So well-equipped as to disappear almost from the
moment of arriving in Australia?
But
par for the course, coming from those nice people at the
ANU who also believed you could study Japan without knowing
the language.
Bureaucracy
Gone Mad
Not
just the ANU was at fault. In part I was looking at
the bureaucratic nightmare Canberra had become, with
individuals only interested in complying with Canberra's
bureaucratic procedures.
Provided
the paperwork was all in order. it did not matter what the
results were. No one would ever get round to checking
results anyway.
The
Embassy people felt no embarrassment about the fact that
they had had only one applicant for a scholarship that was
supposed to change the entire basis of the Japan-Australia
academic relationship (not to mention the fact they had
messed up my office).
They
had done all that was required of them, followed the
correct procedures (even though they were irrelevant in
Japan) and that was that.
It
was the same in the reporting from the Embassy (or the
little I saw of it), whether on the economy, the politics,
the education or what have you. Provided the writer stuck
to the conventional wisdom of the moment he/she would get
Canberra brownie points.
No
matter if it was all proved wrong later on.
There
were no prizes for original ideas.
That
the Canberra bureaucrats, and even Calvert in Tokyo, could
go along with the Keating award fiasco without any sense of
guilt or remorse simply because all the procedures had been
followed shows a breakdown of national
commonsense.
3. Caution
- Spies at Work
My
angst also lay elsewhere - from the resurgence of my old
Vietnam War traumas.
I had long known that the Embassy had become a refuge for
several ex-Vietnam War intelligence types who, having
failed to extract enough finger-nails to gain the
information needed to win the Vietnam War, had had to be
recycled somehow or other.
A
number of them ended up in the Australian Embassy,
Tokyo.
Clearly none of them would be enamored with an anti-Vietnam
War type like myself. And one of them happened to be the
embassy person handling the J.P.Keating scholarship
offer.
How was a background of intelligence activities in Vietnam
supposed to qualify one for academic/cultural work in
Japan?
Maybe it provided a convenient slot for continued spy
activity. Or maybe, since the Vietnamese had very
understandably expelled these finger-nail pullers from
their country, the man had to do something else in
life.
Yet another of these people had ended up as a top Embassy
official allegedly handling trade matters. He traveled
widely amid rumors (which my official contacts did not
deny) that he was controlling Australia’s spy network
in much of Asia.
I did know for a fact that he was active in making sure
Clark was excluded from Embassy activities.
The Embassy had long displayed a plaque praising the
services of another one of these ex-Vietnam types who had
ended his career working on the premises – Simpson
VC. His main achievement had also involved the killing of a
large number of Vietnamese.
But I guess I should not have been too surprised.
Australia’s conscience over Vietnam was about as
outstanding and noble as Japan’s conscience over
China.
In that sense they make a good pair when it comes to
foreign affairs (as I discuss in the next chapter).
Keating had praised Australian military bravery in a battle
where pinned-down Australian troops had done little more
than call in heavy artillery and gun-ships to wipe out
several hundred Vietnamese peasant soldiers.
This was the1966 so-called battle of Long Tan, which
Keating was lauding even as he was claiming Australia
needed to look more to Asia, and Vietnam.
More
Spies?
With heavy heart I set about the business of finding
another secretary – more advertisements, more days
wasted in fruitless interviews etc.
Then just as I was about to give up I had a call from
someone with seemingly excellent credentials – fluent
English, office experience, fast and accurate typing,
young, alert.
Even better, she had UK Embassy experience, and
recommendations.
But from the start she was strangely picky, checking my
work carefully and querying payments.
Soon after hiring her, on a day when I had to go to Kyushu
for a speech, I returned to find a letter of immediate
resignation waiting for me.
She had also arbitrarily taken money from my office
account, as wages allegedly due for the brief period she
had been with me.
The whole thing was puzzling.
Had she been set up by the UK Embassy to check out my
office and possibly cause me more problems?
And were the Australian Embassy people who had created my
earlier secretary problem involved?
The coincidences seemed too strong to be ignored.
Spy
Connections
I had long had problems with the Brits in Tokyo.
When working as a correspondent in the early seventies, a
UK Embassy press secretary had rung me to say the Embassy
was very impressed by my reporting.
Would I like also to make reports for them on the Japan
scene, with payment of course?
I knew this was a technique that both MI 6 and the KGB
liked to use. Inevitably the report writer would then be
drawn into a web of deeper intelligence activities.
I knew also that the Western spy agencies had long targeted
journalists in Tokyo.
I could happily say no.
….
But things did not end there.
For
some reason I was often being bothered by second-rate
Australian academics and various journalists also claiming
to be very interested in my Tokyo work. They would contact
me, asking if they could interview me in depth for some
article, thesis or book they were writing.
They too would waste a lot of my. inquiring deeply into my
research, activities etc. But invariably there would be no
article, thesis or book, not even a follow-up to say
thanks.
One of them – an Australian journalist struggling for
existence when I first arrived in Tokyo on my 1968 research
project - later had the honesty to admit that he had been
acting on behalf of his Embassy contacts.
His pretext then to come and check out my office was a
claimed interest to learn more about Japanese investment
overseas – a topic about which he had never written
before and has never written since.
(He
later went on to be a leading light in the Australian media
community, as did one or two others in the early generation
of Australian journalists in Tokyo.
(In
those days our hyper-active intelligence agencies had few
others to focus on. Non-Japanese speaking Australian
journalists desperate for sources and information were easy
recruitment meat.)
(Which
meant, of course, that those of us who could refuse their
blandishments were easy targets for attack.)
At
the Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan two journalists
with close and suspicious UK Embassy connections
(also non-Japanese speaking - these people seem
invariably to end up relying on embassies) seemed
keen to peddle rumors about my earlier Moscow existence,
rumors that could only have come from Australians or
British intelligence types.
They claimed they knew how the KGB had tried to blackmail
me with a video of my indiscretions.
Uh huh? Quite apart from the fact that my problems with the
KGB never involved blackmail, there was also the fact that
in the early 1960’s the video machine did not even
exist!
Journalist groups cry freedom of the Press whenever some
foreign government imprisons one of their colleagues.
That is all very fine. But I suggest they should first make
sure their ranks have not been infiltrated by people whom
some governments might have good reason to want to
imprison.
And they can begin with quite a few of the British,
American and Australian journalists roaming the
globe.
4.
The End of the Road
Taken together, and with some setbacks in trying to get
involved with Australian economic policy (which I relate
later), I was beginning to realize that my efforts to get
reinvolved with Australia were not going to get me very
far.
But
the coup de grace had yet to come.
False
Pride
It
began with my former employer, The Australian, sending one
Richard McGregor to Japan as its Tokyo correspondent.
McGregor was unusual in that he had learned some Chinese in
Taiwan (how that happened I am not sure) and was trying to
learn Japanese.
He wanted to be friendly and I was very happy to
reciprocate. Here finally, I thought, was someone on my own
wavelength.
Not only would he be able to follow up on my own efforts to
introduce Japan to the newspaper’s readers.
With his Chinese interest he would also understand some of
the problems I had had with the China lobby back in
Australia.
We would meet occasionally and I would try to push him in
the direction of good Japan stories.
I also made no secret of my upset over Canberra’s
China policies and earlier Vietnam War activities.
He made as if to agree with me, but I was wrong. He turned
out later to be yet another typically immature Australian
hawk and ended up with the UK Financial Times.
But
my problem with him was to be more immediate.
-------
One day he came to me saying he wanted to write up my
lecture circuit activities. He saw me as the successor to
an 19th century Australian who had been popular in Japan
for his rakugo (joke talking) performances.
I was not too impressed by the rakugo connection but said
yes.
Deep down I was keen to have someone reporting back to
Australia about what I was doing in Japan.
I could help me greatly in my efforts to reconnect, I
thought, foolishly.
A
Trip To Osaka
So that he could see I was into something more serious than
rakugo I invited him to come to Osaka with me and watch a
speech I was due to give there to some company’s
employees.
En route, there and back, I could also give him some
background on how I found myself in the lecture circuit
business, thinking this would help his story.
I also found time to expand confidentially on some of the
things we had discussed briefly at earlier in Tokyo
meetings – about my problems with the Whitlam regime,
with the China lobby, the ANU etc.
He was, after all, a colleague (I too was still doing some
writing for The Australian). I saw it as a chance to fill
him in on some of my background.
It never occurred to me that he would abuse these
confidences. Apart from anything else, he was not taking
notes or recordings.
…
Some months later I got the ugly result.
Splashed as the lead item in The Australian’s weekend
magazine was a piece that said very little about my lecture
circuit life. But it did say a great deal about the
confidential details I had given him about other things,
both during the Osaka trip and before.
If he had quoted me accurately and in context I could have
lived with the result. But that was not to be.
He had distorted whatever he could to make it look as if I
was a bitter and twisted refugee from Australia, demonized
by Vietnam.
I had, he said, been run out of Foreign Affairs in 1965 for
opposing Vietnam policy.
(In fact, as mentioned earlier, I had in 1965 at the very
young age of 29 been asked to become Australian
representative on the UN Disarmament Commission in New
York, and had turned this down in order to resign, partly
over Vietnam, with Foreign Affairs hoping I would return
after my university studies.)
I was, he said, employed as a teacher of Japanese at Sophia
University.
(In fact, as mentioned earlier, I was a professor of
economics and comparative culture who also ran a very
successful course in Japanese economic readings. I had told
him how pleased I was with the way the course had
encouraged students to self-learn. He had twisted this to
make it look as if I was employed by the university solely
to teach Japanese.)
And so on.
Worse was the way he had made some of my very personal
remarks about various people and events look as if I had
given them to him in a formal interview.
It was journalism at its Murdoch, irresponsible,
gutter-press worst.
In my friendly confidential talk with him I had for example
referred to someone as a ‘little shit.’
He had then quoted me as if I was saying this in a formal
interview.
(Fortunately it backfired since anyone of journalism
commonsense could realize that he was abusing a confidence,
that no one would use this kind of language in a formal
interview.
(Colleagues told me they were distressed both by the
bitchiness of the article, and the fact that it was even
published.
( Unfortunately this Murdoch ‘little shit’ was
to come close in realising his objective, however, which
was to destroy me as a possible rival for space in the
Australian media.
(Subsequent requests from Australia to write or comment
were few.)
Legal
Action
A friendly Sydney lawyer (yes, they do exist) was also
distressed by the article. He offered to take action on my
behalf.
But he advised against seeking damages. He knew how the
Murdoch people operated in the law courts.
He offered to provide the needed lawyer's letter, with a
demand the errors of fact corrected in print, which was
done.
Even
editors at The Australian had been forced to realise
some atrocity had occurred.
But
as always with these things, the damage had been done. And
later some foreigners in Japan running a small anti-Japan
cottage industry were to use the article, without
permissions or corrections, in a rather vicious attempt to
try to damage my reputation there after I criticised their
cottage industry efforts.
----
Later I discovered that it was my nice friends in the
Australian Embassy and some of their hangers-on who had
been feeding McGregor with distorted anti-Clark material
and encouraging him to write.
The Empire had struck back, and with a vengeance.
It was typical of something I look at in detail in the next
chapter – the Australian ‘tribal’ need to
denigrate fellow Australians who have been able to survive
by their own efforts in Japan.
'You're
not one of our mob, mate' is the mentality.
Starting from their own inability to relate to Japan, they
feel tribally impelled to conclude that there is something
either sick or sad with any Australian who can relate
– who has chosen to live in Japan, learn the
language, raise a family and make a career there.
Yet it was not always like this. The educated
Australians I had known in the past had been more normal.
Something has happened in the past two decades, to
the point where the 'tribal' mores of the general
population have begun to affect the educated classes who
should know better, and who in the past did know better.
It
is a topic of great interest to me, and not just because of
what it has done to complicate my life in Japan. I
explore it in more detail in the next
chapter.
Please
join the Online Forum for Discussion
about this
Chapter.