Conclusion
The history of non-communist East Asia can therefore be seen as the result of the influence of both the Pacific War and the Cold War. Within Japan the dire outcome of the Pacific War inculcated a desire among the populace never to repeat the follies of that conflict.
This led to an ingrained distrust of militarism and an emphasis on the need to respect consensus. Thus, although both Japanese conservative politicians and the United States sought to ensure that Japan played a full role as an ally in the Cold War, domestic opposition meant that this did not come about. Japan’s significance within the Cold War was not, however, limited to a security role, for it was also a key element in the economic strength of the Western alliance. As such, the United States keenly sponsored its growth within the Bretton Woods system, and this, allied to the ingenuity of Japanese businessmen and bureaucrats, sparked Japan’s phenomenal economic growth. Japan thus developed during the Cold War period into an anomalous entity — a purely economic superpower.protectionism
The practice of regulating imports through high tariffs with the purpose of shielding domestic industries from foreign competition.
At the same time, South Korea and Taiwan were themselves transformed into economic powerhouses. Here too historical and political factors played a key role. Anchored in one of the ‘hottest’ regions in the Cold War, these two states had to strengthen themselves to cope with the external threat, and thus invested heavily in economic growth. In this their success was shaped both by their experience as colonies within the Japanese Empire and by the immense support provided by their superpower sponsor, the United States, which tolerated their protectionism and provided them with access to the vast American consumer market.
The rise of East Asia as the fastest-growing regional economy in the world was therefore crucially influenced by historically specific factors, and the success of the ‘developmental state’ model needs to be seen in this light.
This in turn suggests that the idea that the East Asian model of development can readily be adopted by other developing states is surely mistaken, for it is not easy to replicate the conditions that existed within the region. Moreover, the fact that in the 1990s both Japan and South Korea experienced a marked economic downturn also suggests that the ‘economic miracle’ had been closely linked to the certainties of the Cold War years and that without this prop, the future success of the ‘developmental state’ was considerably less certain.Recommended reading
There are a number of general introductions to the history and politics of Japan since 1945. Probably the best of these is J. A. A. Stockwin, Governing Japan: Divided Politics in a Major Economy (Oxford, 1999), but see also W G. Beasley, The Rise of Modern Japan (London, 1990), Dennis Smith, Japan since 1945: The Rise of an Economic Superpower (Basingstoke, 1995) and Chushichi Tsuzuki, The Pursuit of Power in Modern Japan 1825—1995 (Oxford, 2000). An important study that links security issues with domestic politics is John Welfield, An Empire in Eclipse: Japan in the Postwar American Alliance System (Atlantic Highlands, NJ, 1988). A good edited collection dealing with various aspects of modern Japan is Andrew Gordon (ed.), Postwar Japan as History (Berkeley, CA, 1993). The best introductions to Korea since 1945 are Bruce Cumings, Korea’s Place in the Sun: A Modern History (New York, 1997), Adrian Buzo, The Making of Modern Korea (London, 2002) and Michael Robinson, Korea’s Twentieth Century Odyssey (Honolulu, HI, 2007). On Taiwan, see Murray Rubinstein, Taiwan: A New History (New York, 1999) and John Copper, Taiwan: Nation-State or Province? (Boulder, CO, 1999).
On the occupation of Japan and the effect of the American reform policies, see Michael Schaller, The American Occupation of Japan: The Origins of the Cold War in Asia (New York, 1985) and John Dower, Embracing Defeat: Japan after World War II (New York, 1999). Japanese politics in the period immediately after the end of the occupation are dealt with in Tetsuya Kataoka’s interesting study, The Price of Constitution: The Origin of Japan’s Postwar Politics (New York, 1991) and the classic analysis of the 1960 crisis, George Packard, Protest in Tokyo (Princeton, NJ, 1966).
The Vietnam era is the subject of Thomas Havens, Fire across the Sea: The Vietnam War and Japan, 1965—1975 (Princeton, NJ, 1987). Modern Japanese politics are covered by B. Richardson, Japanese Democracy (New Haven, CT, 1997), Gerald Curtis, The Logic of Japanese Politics: Leaders, Institutions, and the Limits of Change (New York, 1999) and Glenn Hook and Gavan MacCormack, Japan’s Contested Constitution: Documents and Analysis (London, 2001).A number of studies deal with American-Japanese relations during the Cold War, the most notable being Roger Buckley, US—Japan Alliance Diplomacy, 1945-90 (New York, 1992) and Michael Schaller, Altered States: The United States and Japan since the Occupation (New York, 1997). Okinawa as an issue in American-Japanese relations is covered in Nick Sarantakes, Keystone: The American Occupation of Okinawa and US-Japanese Relations (College Station, TX, 2000). Other aspects of Japan’s foreign relations are covered well in Sadako Ogata, Normalization with China: A Comparative Study of US and Japanese Processes (Berkeley, CA, 1988), Victor Cha, Alignment despite Antagonism: The US-Korea-Japan Security Triangle (Stanford, CA, 1999), Michael Green, Reluctant Realism: Japanese Foreign Policy in an Era of Uncertain Power (Basingstoke, 2001) and Glenn Hook, Hugo Dobson, Julie Gilson and Christopher Hughes, Japan’s International Relations: Politics, Economics and Security (London, 2001). Japan’s attitude towards the security question is covered in Michael Green, ArmingJapan: Defense Production, Alliance Politics and the Postwar Search for Autonomy (New York, 1995) and Peter Katzenstein, Cultural Norms and National Security: Police and Military in Postwar Japan (Ithaca, NY, 1996).
The best place to start in the debate about the reasons for Japan’s phenomenal economic growth is with Chalmers Johnson, MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925-1975 (Stanford, CA, 1982). Refutations of his ‘developmental state’ thesis can be seen in Daniel Okimoto, Between MITI and the Market: Japanese Industrial Policy for High Technology (Stanford, CA, 1989) and Kent Calder, Strategic Capitalism: Private Business and Public Purpose in Japan (Princeton, NJ, 1993).
An important study of the American sponsorship of the Japanese economy is Aaron Forsberg, America and the Japanese Miracle: The Cold War Context of Japan’s Postwar Economic Revival, 1950-1960 (Chapel Hill, NC, 2000). A useful survey of the developmental state thesis is Meredith Woo- Cumings (ed.), The Developmental State (Ithaca, NY, 1999), but see also Robert Wade, Governing the Market: Economic Theory and the Role of Government in East Asian Industrialization (Princeton, NJ, 1990) and Stephen Haggard, Pathways from the Periphery: The Politics of Growth in the Newly Industrializing Countries (Ithaca, NY, 1990).For South Korean and Taiwanese economic growth, see Thomas Gold, State and Society in the Taiwan Miracle (Armonk, NY, 1986), Alice Amsden, Asia’s Next Giant: South Korea and Late Industrialization (New York, 1989), Hyung-A Kim, Korea’s Development under Park Chung Hee: Rapid Industrialization, 1961—1979 (London, 2003) and Jung-en Woo, Race to the Swift: State and Finance in Korean Industrialization (New York, 1991). For political developments see D. Oberdorfer, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (Reading, 1998), Whan Kihl Young, Transforming Korean Politics: Democracy, Reform and Culture (Armonk, NY, 2005) and R. L. Edmonds and S. Goldstein (eds), Taiwan in the Twentieth Century: A Retrospective View (New York, 2001).
For advice on further reading, see Warren Cohen (ed.), The Study of AmericanEast Asian Relations on the Eve of the Twenty-First Century (New York, 1996).