Contents

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

73

Memoir ofProfessor Benedict Anderson

50th Anniversary of CSEAS

SEASIA 2015

Looking Back over 50 Years

The SEASIA 2015 Conference:
A Watershed in Southeast Asian Studies

Kono Yasuyuki

No.

Janus Isaac V. Nolasco

Three Cheers for the Hare that Did Not
Stop Running to Take a Nap:
In Celebration of the Life of Benedict
Anderson (1936–2015)
Kato Tsuyoshi

003

026

CSEAS Celebrates 50th Anniversary

038
Interview with Late Professor Benedict Anderson(1936–2015)

Hayami Yoko

Southeast Asian Scholars at the Edge
Loh Kah Seng

004
Commemorative Speech for the Ceremony
Celebrating the 50th Anniversary of CSEAS

The Life of a Research Institute (Kenkyu-sho
no Inochi)

043
Keynote Speech at SEASIA 2015

Towards a Region of New Nations
Wang Gungwu

Tachimoto Narifumi

005

029

Interview with Former Director Ichimura Shinichi

Keynote Speech at SEASIA 2015

Looking to the Past, Inspiring the Future

Region and Academe in Turbulent Times

Mieno Fumiharu

Pasuk Phongpaichit

010

034

Front cover: Professor Emeritus Benedict Anderson at Siam Square, Bangkok, January 2015 (Photo by Courtesy of Anan Krudphet)

Editorial
In 2015, the Center for Southeast Asian Studies (CSEAS) witnessed a number of milestones in its history. The first was the 50th anniversary of thefounding of CSEAS. The second was the fruition of several years of work that culminated in the first international conference of the Consortium forSoutheast Asian Studies in Asia (SEASIA) in December 2015. These two events ran back to back, were attended by present and past faculty, colleagues,
and friends and presented an unprecedented opportunity for scholars of Southeast Asia to meet in Kyoto. They also allowed CSEAS to cement its
position as one of the major research institutes for Southeast Asian Studies not just in the region, but globally. This special newsletter issue pulls together
keynote speeches and interviews from past directors, Professors Tachimoto Narifumi and Ichimura Shinichi. It also offers two keynote speeches fromour conference by Dr. Wang Gungwu and Dr. Pasuk Phongpaichit. On the second day of our conference (December 13, 2015), many were saddened
to learn that Professor Emeritus Benedict Richard O’Gorman Anderson passed away (1936–2015). A much loved and respected scholar of Southeast
Asia, Professor Kato Tsuyoshi offers us a final reflection on his long friendship with Ben. Associate Professor Loh Kah Seng also provides us with aposthumous interview with Ben on historical research in Southeast Asia.
The Editors

Looking Back over 50 Years
Kono Yasuyuki  Director, CSEAS

This year marks the 50th anniversary of the Center
for Southeast Asian Studies (CSEAS), which wasestablished in 1965 as the first national levelresearch center attached to a university. During thelast half-century, the center has achieved numerous
successes in its mission to promote interdisciplinary
research on Southeast Asia, which have received
high praise both in Japan and internationally.
Today, the center serves as a hub for Southeast
Asian studies and has earned the respect of researchers around the world. The center is the result of theextraordinary efforts of our predecessors and faculty, made possible through long-standing support
from the university, relevant departments, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science andTechnology (MEXT), the Japan Society for the
Promotion of Science (JSPS), and both the Japaneseand international research community. Here, I
would like to again express my heartfelt gratitude to
all who have contributed to the success of theresearch center.
Fifty years is a long tenure for a research institute.
During this time, CSEAS has persisted in its mission as a research institute set up by the university
to open up new frontiers of scholarly research. Overthe last half century, CSEAS, focusing on the diversity and dynamism of Southeast Asian nature andsociety, has worked diligently to identify the central
issues of Southeast Asian studies and appropriate
approaches to challenge them through interacting

deeply and persistently in region through multiple
perspectives.
According to our predecessors, in the first half ofthe center’s 50-year history, from the 1960s to the
1980s, CSEAS was full of passion and enthusiasm.
At a time when scholarly overseas research was still
not common, each overseas trip for fieldwork
yielded new ways of thinking and the presentationof countless research results.
In the 1990s, MEXT began to offer full-fledged
support to large-scale research projects. CSEAS wasproactive in applying for such support and played aleading role in a project titled “Toward an Integrated Approach to Global Area Studies: In Searchof a Paradigm for a Harmonized Relationshipbetween the World and Its Areas” (FY1993–96)
and a project titled “Making Regions: Proto-Areas,
Transformations and New Formations in Asia andAfrica” (FY1998–2002). The results of these various
research projects were collectively designated“Southeast Asian Studies,” and a substantial effort
was made to develop theoretical and conceptual
frameworks for this new discipline, leading to the
publication of the Lecture Series: Southeast AsianStudies (Koubundou, 1990–92) and the Encyclopedia of Southeast Asia (Koubundou, 1997). Thesedevelopments at the end of the 20th century were
evidence of CSEAS’s steadfast progress towards its
goal of interdisciplinary Southeast Asian areastudies.
What has pushed us to grow even further now
that we have entered the 21st century is the evolution of Southeast Asian society itself.
In the early part of the 21st century, we haveseen the rise of numerous problems that threaten
the very existence of human society: these include
degradation of the global environment, the expansion of economic disparities and poverty, religious
and cultural conflicts, the spread of infectious diseases, and natural disasters. These issues are interrelated and, as such, efforts aimed at addressing onlya single issue have limited impact. We have reacheda point where it is necessary to rethink the idea ofdevelopment of human society based on abundantresources, a stable environment, and a robust social
order that supported the development of humansociety in the 20th century. Southeast Asian society,on the one hand, is following aspects of the 20thcentury pattern of societal development, but is also
developing a pluralistic society in which many dif-ferent groups coexist, supported by resilient andsoft governance, a flexibly structured society basedon mutual prosperity and mutual aid, and circulatory use of the environment and resources. In addition, it is striving to achieve the harmonious coexistence of diverse groups and religions and to carryout economic development in a manner that
reduces economic disparities.
This growth in Southeast Asia highlights theimportance of presenting the efforts of Southeast
Asian societies to the rest of the world. Humansociety of the future will not be based solely on theknowledge and experience fostered by a part of theworld including Western countries and Japan but,will progress towards a truly diverse society that isin harmony with nature when the experiences,challenges, and wisdom of different regions aroundthe world are brought together. It is with this inmind that the Consortium for Southeast AsianStudies in Asia (SEASIA) was established in 2013
in order to facilitate closer collaboration between
researchers based in Southeast and East Asian countries on studies related to the development ofSoutheast Asian society. Furthermore, in the Global
COE Program that began in 2007, under the banner of research on the sustainable humanosphere,
we have focused on the identification and theorization of development paths based on the rich natureand flexible societies of the tropics. We are also
working to promote linkages between CSEAS
research and cutting-edge science and technology
research and to facilitate cross-over with area studies
research of other regions around the world.
The Association of South-East Asian Nations(ASEAN) Economic Community (AEC), with apopulation of 620 million and an annual grossdomestic product (GDP) of 2.57 trillion USD, wasestablished in December, 2015. With this development, Southeast Asia’s presence in the international
community will increase dramatically. Scholarly
research on ASEAN has expanded rapidly at universities in Southeast Asia. In response to thesechanges, our goal at CSEAS is to further develop
our core strengths and to continue to carry out
interdisciplinary research that integrates science andthe humanities while working with collaborators
beyond the academic community for an international audience.

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73003

CSEAS Celebrates 50th Anniversary
Hayami Yoko   Professor, CSEAS

The Center for Southeast Asian Studies was officially founded in 1965. On December 11th, 2015,
we celebrated its 50th anniversary at the International Science Innovation Building on the Main
Campus.
In his opening address, our Director Kono
­Yasuyuki expressed gratitude towards our predecessors and others to whom we owe for their support
and cooperation over the decades, and introduced
how our research evolved over the last 50 years. He
then referred to the global threat to the sustainability of human society, and what Southeast Asianstudies has to offer in the face of this. Finally, hepronounced our aspiration towards the future.
With the rising profile of Southeast Asia in theworld, we will enhance our cooperation within Asia
seeking a trans-disciplinary approach to strengthen
our presence. Then, representing the president of
Kyoto University, Executive Vice-President Minato
Nagahiro gave a speech in which he first explained
the developing position of CSEAS on Kyoto University campus over the five decades. Then, he
expressed the expectations towards our Center incontributing towards President Yamagiwa’s policy ofinternationalization and promoting innovation
studies, and cooperation with the Kyoto University
ASEAN Center in Bangkok.
We received speeches from four distinguishedguests. First, Director Ushio Norifumi of the Scientific Research Institutes Division, Research Promotion Bureau, Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) referredto the role of CSEAS in the face of the founding of
ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), andexpressed high expectation towards our Center, tofurther enhance the interdisciplinary character ofour research (via a written message read by his Division’s Deputy Director Okamoto Kazuhisa). Dr.
Shirokizawa Yoshiko, Executive Director of theJapan Science and Technology Agency (JST) introduced the new program led by our Center on“Japan-ASEAN Science and Technology Innovation
Platform: Promotion of Sustainable Development
Research.” She expressed expectation towards ourCenter’s wide international network in promoting
science and technology innovation towards social
contribution. Thirdly, Professor Tsuda Toshitaka,

004

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73

Representative of the Council for Research Institutes and Centers of Japanese National Universities
mentioned the severe situation faced by academic
institutions of the humanities and social sciences
today, and how collaboration between the naturalsciences and humanities/social sciences is truly
urgent in solving problems such as peace construction and global environment, and our Center’s
expected role in this collaborative endeavor. Finally,
Director Iizuka Masato of the Research Institute for
Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo
University of Foreign Studies (TUFS) referred to
the 50th anniversary of his own institute in the previous year, and how, as research institutions of areastudies, we have together evolved over the half century in cooperation, and how he looks forward tofurther cooperation in the future.
Then, Professor Tachimoto Narifumi, Presidentof the National Institutes for the Humanities(NIHU), and former director of CSEAS gave amemorial lecture titled “The Life of a ResearchInstitute.” He expounded on the “Life” of CSEAS
as a research institute in past and future, explicating
its characteristics, and how it has held as its objectof research, Southeast Asia as a region, or someform of “totality” and expressed his pride in theCenter’s achievements. Yet at the same time, heencouraged us towards further invention or metamorphosis into the future. This, he said, should
involve firstly, a shift in our research paradigm, andsecondly, some action towards structural reform.
Finally, he concluded that the research paradigm is
not the ends but the means towards enriching
humanity as the goal of any academic endeavor.
The ceremony was successfully concluded by ourformer Director, Shimizu Hiromu as master of ceremony. Then, there was a performance of celebratory Balinese dance on stage, adding to the festivemood.
The ceremony was followed by reception in thefoyer. Professor Aoyama Toru, President of theJapan Society for Southeast Asian Studies gave aspeech celebrating the Center’s 50th anniversary
and spoke about his own experiences as a scholar of
history at the Center. Then, Professor Sunait­Chutintaranond, Chairperson of the Governing
Board of the Consortium for Southeast Asian Studies(SEASIA) spoke in appreciation of the Center’s rolein initiating the consortium and sponsoring the first
SEASIA conference. Professor Inaba Kayo, Executive Vice-President of Kyoto University gave thetoast, speaking of her own recent adventures inSoutheast Asia, and her expectations towards ourCenter.
The participants enjoyed both company andconversation. During the reception, video messages
from past visiting fellows and other friends of theCenter were played on a screen, as well as a slide
show introducing the Center’s 50 years, and there
were panels introducing our current research andactivities.
There were 230 participants for the ceremony
and reception, almost full to capacity in the halland foyer. The 50th anniversary booklets, prepared
for this occasion, one in English and one in Japanese, were handed to all the participants and thecelebration was successfully concluded.

Commemorative Speech for the Ceremony
Celebrating the 50th Anniversary of CSEAS
December 11, 2015 at the Kyoto University
International Science Innovation Building

The Life of a Research Institute(Kenkyu-sho no Inochi)
Tachimoto Narifumi
President, National Institutes for the Humanities
Former Director of CSEAS (1998–2002)

Introduction1)
In commemoration of CSEAS, which has existed
now for half a century, I would like to talk about
the “Life of a Research Institute.” The Japaneseword “inochi” (roughly translated as “life”) has various meanings and can be used in various ways. One
interpretation can be the “repetition of every living
moment in sustained tension.” While objectively
inochi is finite, subjectively, it is understood as
being continuous and without end. Observed objectively from the outside, there may be many research
institutes that could be written off as approaching
their date of expiration, or having generally outlived
their usefulness. Looking at the title of the speech
today, one might get the impression that I am goingto talk about the life span of CSEAS. However, I
don’t intend to imply the sense of “life-span” by theuse of the word “life” in the title. Rather, I use it in
the sense of “driving force, vitality” or “something
more important, quintessential.” In this sense, I
want to invoke the phrase inochi atte no monodane(where there is life, there is hope). The phrase isnormally used in the sense of “live, as it is all over
if you die.” But here, I emphasize a more fundamental sense of life as “sustained tension perceived
as a repetition of every living moment,” or the“quintessential is crucial.”
Life is something that dwells inside each individual, human or creature. However, I hope this talkwill be understood not as an effort to discuss something noble, like the idea of scholarship or a personal stance toward scholarly research, but rather asa reflection on the life of an organization known asa “research institute.” While we cannot deny thereality that the life of every being is discontinuousand awaiting death, life itself—the actuality oflife—never dies, and continues as long as living
creatures exist.

I Research on Southeast Asia
(barabara de issho=unity in diversity)
I would like to start this talk with the idea of collapsing the diverse region called “Southeast Asia”
into a form that can be a subject of research. The
Tonan Ajia Kenkyu-jo (Institute for Southeast
Asian Studies) or the former Tonan Ajia Kenkyu
Senta (Center for Southeast Asian Studies) (bothreferred to in English as CSEAS) was established 50
years ago. We need to understand this in the historical context.2) With the end of the World War II in
1945, former colonies started to emerge as independent states and began to follow their aspirations toform nation states. In 1955, the Asia-Africa Conference was convened in Bandung, Indonesia. This
year marks the 60th anniversary of this momentous
gathering. In the last few years, we’ve also observed
the 50th anniversaries of the founding of the Institute of Developing Economies, as well as the
Research Institute for Languages and Cultures ofAsia and Africa at Tokyo University of Foreign
Studies. Before CSEAS was officially founded, there
was already a system for sending students to Southeast Asia, towards developing human resources.

Thankfully, I was able to study at the University of
Malaya and had the chance to experience in person
the day in 1965 on which the current Republic ofSingapore achieved independence from Malaysia.
There are many other research institutes in Japan
which hold geographical regions as their targets ofresearch, such as the Slavic-Eurasian Research Center of Hokkaido University, the Institute forAdvanced Studies on Asia (for East Asian Studies)of University of Tokyo, and the Institute for Researchin Humanities of Kyoto University (which had
been divided into departments covering China,
Japan, and the West) to name just a few. However,
CSEAS was the only one that declared to comprehensively cover the humanities, social sciences, andnatural sciences in order to understand the region
as an object of “Area Studies.” In all senses, it can besaid that the establishment of CSEAS was ahead of
the times.
The concept of Southeast Asia as a unit hadstemmed from the idea of binding the region as ageographical division, as observed from the outside.
However, the region started to emerge as a subjective regional community, presumably when
ASEAN-10 was founded in 1999. After 16 years
since then, the so-called ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) is about to be agreed upon at theend of this year. The intent is to achieve an ASEAN
community by 2020, united under the slogan “OneVision, One Idea, One Community.” Not only does
the regional community called Southeast Asia exist
as a reality, but the designers of this vision are try-

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73005

Commemorative Speech for the Ceremony Celebrating the 50th Anniversary of CSEAS:

The Life of a Research Institute (Kenkyu-sho no Inochi)

ing to demonstrate how active it is as an actuality.
Will the myth of the modern nation-state—independent states based on the premise of territories—
be overtaken by the founding myth of the newcommunity? Or, can multiple myths coexist acrossdifferent levels of society and geography? To keep
our finger on this pulse, we need to keep our eyeson Southeast Asia from a global perspective. Indeed,
our subject “Southeast Asia” has transformed itself
from diverse multiple objects to a unity.
Much the same is true of the situation surrounding
researchers involved in Southeast Asian studies.
When you take a look at what each of those scholars is doing, you will notice that most of them are
not necessarily interested in “Southeast Asia as aunity.” With partial interests, such as on the delta,
the islands, earthquake, geology, rice cultivation,
agriculture, economy, lifestyle, religion, or language,
and so much more, as required by their own fieldsof specialization, they have, however, come togather as a group. I suppose that these people came
together not to study “Southeast Asia” but simply
because the object of research driven by their disciplinary interests happened to be in Southeast Asia.
The fact is, however, that CSEAS has regarded
joint research as the primary mode of research fromthe very beginning. Through interchange and communication between scholars of different disciplines, and above all, through the experience of collectively relating to Southeast Asia as a region
through fieldwork, they have been able to achieve
the momentum needed to assume the unit ofSoutheast Asia as a research object.
Nonetheless, integrating the totality of Southeast
Asia and regarding the region as a research object
remains challenging. This is because the totality was
not there from the beginning, and one is first facedwith the difficulty of defining the range of that
totality. There is also a methodological issue concerning which aspects and elements should be integrated. At the same time, one must explain what
can be revealed by the integrated perspective. Thus
the following question can be asked. Even if the all
the parts can be integrated as a whole, what value is
produced by observing this integrated whole?
With regard to the matter of totality, I recall an
episode of several visually impaired people getting
together to understand the identity of the famous
huge animal—the elephant—, using only theirindividual senses of touch. This story may have several interpretations, but I would like to take it as ananalogy for total and partial recognition. I consider
that one implication of this episode is a very common misrecognition that we make—the misunderstanding in which you take only the part you know
as the entire entity. The problem faced is not just a
problem of being visually impaired; the misrecognitions of people in general, not to mention scholars,is pervasive. We tend to forget that Southeast Asia
is not already there as a reality, like the elephant.
There is no one who is visually “un-impaired,” whocan see the total reality and correct misrecognitions.

006

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73

Setting aside the question of whether or not weshould regard the Southeast Asian region as a totality, or if it is even feasible to grasp it as such, I think
there have been two continuous undercurrents, or
two complementary streams, in our approach toresearch in CSEAS. These are the integration of thetotality and analysis of the parts. These two streams
represent different research styles, that of “analyzing
the region,” and that of “searching for an integral
image of the region.” With regards to these two
approaches, I refer to three essays3) on Southeast
Asia which appeared together in the Gakushi-kai
Kaiho (学士會会報 : Newsletter of Gakushi-kai) thissummer. The first one was trying to grasp the totality, while the second was an “orthodox” research
paper of individual analysis, which could also havebeen done outside of Area Studies. In the third, thetheory of the small population world was rejecting
the simplistic dichotomy between the previous two.
These three papers symbolize the two streams mentioned above very well.

II Tracking the 50 Years of Analyzing Regions
The question whether to dissect the region and­analyze and understand issues within it, or, to bindthe region together and weave and integrate a totality, has been an earnest search for the identity of a
research institute of area studies.
CSEAS was initially founded as a center. At thattime, all research centers were attached to faculties
and research institutions had to be legally ordained.
Nevertheless, Kyoto University had established aresearch center, a virtual institute, detached fromfaculties but located in the university, without going
through a legal change. Since then, many research
centers have been established.
Our ardent wish from the very beginning, tosecure a mechanism for cultivating human resourcesof the next generation was achieved with the inauguration of the Graduate School of Asian and African Area Studies (ASAFAS/大学院アジア・アフリカ地域研究研究科) in 1998. The word “kenkyu (research)”
repeated twice in the Japanese title, trumpets Area
Studies. The degree conferred by this graduate
school is the degree “in Area Studies” (“Ph.D. in
Area Studies”).
In general, faculties are the main vehicles for cre-ating and delivering graduate education and training. However, the case of ASAFAS is groundbreaking because there is no other example of a research
center playing a central role in the educational
activities, as CSEAS and the Center for African
Area Studies do here.
In April 2004, the Center was turned into a
research institute affiliated with the university andits name was changed to the Institute for Southeast
Asian Studies. This change occurred alongside thecorporatization of national universities. However, as
the English name “Center” for Southeast AsianStudies was already established and internationallyrecognized, we did not touch the English name,choosing instead to maintain the word “Center”
with the acronym CSEAS. This sends the message
that our tradition has continued from our founding
until now, even though the Japanese name has beenchanged to “Institute.”
Into the 21st century, in addition to our changeof status to an institute, we played a role in bringing
in an external organization (Japan Center for Area
Studies) to establish the Center for Integrated Area
Studies (CIAS) in Kyoto University in 2006. Thischange was also a declaration of intent that Kyoto
University would be claiming Area Studies as aleading field of the university.
As already mentioned, in its advocacy of Area
Studies, CSEAS has had various characteristics in
its research style from the outset of its establishment. In a word, the premise of interdisciplinary
research it performs is integration and analysis frommultiple perspectives. Our second Director Iwamura
Shinobu defined the three axes of research as “onthe spot (On-site, field-based research),” “contemporary,” and “integrative.” Although the words inthis expression have changed, I think this spirit has
been handed down to this day. Perhaps this is thedestiny inherent to the field of Area Studies.
Even though we characterize it by multiple perspectives of analysis and integration, depending on
the questions raised and the framing of it, Area
Studies can be divided between a discipline-based
regional analysis on the one hand, and, a comprehensive research with a bird’s-eye view of the region
as totality, on the other. When I say divided, I do
not mean to say that there is a dichotomy, withpolar opposites. Between the two, there should be aCommemorative Speech for the Ceremony Celebrating the 50th Anniversary of CSEAS:

The Life of a Research Institute (Kenkyu-sho no Inochi)

continuous spectrum of research styles. However, if
you stand firm on the ground of analysis, theframework of Area Studies is no longer necessary.
So long as we advocate Area Studies, there should
be integration towards totality, otherwise, theundertaking will no longer be scholarship.
A bird’s-eye view4) normally means that a complex totality is viewed from above, like a bird. In
this case, we refer to a systematic perspective thatconceives a totality and confirms its perfection andadequacy.
To think that Area Studies was carried out internationally since the time when the exchange rate
was 360 yen to the dollar, and considering the budget allocation for Humanities and Social Science atthe time, it was indeed a veritable “money-eater.”
From the preparatory stage of its establishment,with the system of Grant-in-Aid for Scientific
Research (Kaken) yet to be consolidated, the Center
accepted donations from the Ford Foundation andsought matching funds from domestic industry. It
was thanks to the tireless efforts of our predecessors(including former Director Ichimura Shinichi, who
is here today), we managed to carry out and continue our operations. If not for this, I think CSEAS
would not be what it is today.
Along with the consolidation of Kaken researchfunds, the Center acquired external funds such aslarge-scale Kaken, and was able to construct a tradition of collaborative research, extending its networks outwardly into and beyond the region. I
believe this was more than just steadily confirming
its raison-d’être as an organization, but demonstrating itself as a model of how a research institution
should be.
During the 1970s, the Center acquired largescale Kaken subsidies, under the framework ofinternational research. After the 1990s, it has continuously obtained large-scale Kaken, from Priority
Areas Research, the COE program, the 21st Century COE, and the Global COE program, based on
the idea that Area Studies would bring about breakthroughs in the humanities and social sciences.
International collaborative research, emphasizedfrom the very beginning, is another area of contribution being made by CSEAS. This has been done
primarily by operating “the International Programof Collaborative Research” (IPCR), establishedwithin the university as Joint Use/Research Centers
for universities nationwide.
These efforts have culminated in the establishment of a “Consortium for Southeast Asian Studies
in Asia” (SEASIA) in 2013. This research network
brings together 10 institutions in the leading Asian
Universities and other organizations in Southeast
Asia. I am looking forward to seeing this consortium at work in the SEASIA symposium on Dec
12–13, 2015.
In this sense, despite being small and located in auniversity, we can say that the activities carried out
by CSEAS since the time of its foundation, areentirely comparable to those at inter-university
research institutes like the National Museum of

Ethnology.
The achievements of CSEAS are something to be
proud of, and I expect that many more activities
will flow out of SEASIA. However, some believe thecommon-sense life expectancy of research institutes
to be 30 to 50 years. This is, perhaps, because inJapan there were times when research centers were
designed to be revised or even abolished every 10
years. Even today, national university corporations
are going through processes of revising their aims
and objectives every six years.
As is the case with education, we should challenge the idea that there is a life limit for research
institutions. This is particularly so if we consider
the field of research, that is humans and humansociety. At the same time, a research institution
should always be in a process of invention (creationand inventiveness) of traditions that will last as longas human beings continue to exist. If we simply
sing out the self-righteous message that the humanities and social science are the base of all academic
studies, we may relegate ourselves to irrelevance. We
must continuously present proof of transformations
that demonstrate how we are “living better” and notjust “alive.”
In retrospect, though we were probably unawareof this in the beginning, CSEAS seems to have gone
through changes in a cycle of about 10 years.
Through conscious and unconscious efforts in thesecycles, CSEAS has continued to grow through therevitalization of its life energy. Moreover, as indicated in the title of the 50th anniversary publication, Southeast Asian Studies in the 21st Century (21世紀の東南アジア研究), there may be some developments of great significance that go hand-in-handwith the milestone transformation from a research
center to an institute.
Personally, I have high hopes that CSEAS will
not just go through a small- or middle-scale revision, but it will accomplish a grand metamorphosis 5) (transformation) or rebirth (samsara), byinventing new traditions on this milestone occasionof the 50th Anniversary. I believe this is an opportunity to fundamentally assess the health of Southeast Asia or Area Studies. As the accumulation ofknowledge on Southeast Asia becomes increasingly
detailed and precise, there may be future voices
arguing that individual sciences or a multi-disciplinary approaches are sufficient, that there is noneed for a regional framework in order to understand our research objects. Perhaps this is considered by some to be an inevitable outcome of scientific progress, which would deny the need forresearch defined by regional issues to exist. The
potential for this type of criticism was already wellunderstood by the first generation of founders, as
they left the ports of disciplines without knowing
where the ship is heading. The destination of Area
Studies was never a clear point on the horizon; it
was always in journey.

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73007

Commemorative Speech for the Ceremony Celebrating the 50th Anniversary of CSEAS:

The Life of a Research Institute (Kenkyu-sho no Inochi)

III Expectations towards a Metamorphosis
Now, I would like to move on to talk about themetamorphosis of CSEAS, which I am expecting,or in other words, it is about the renewal or incarnation of the life of CSEAS.
It has already been several years since the University Reform Implementation Plan and National
University Reform Plan have been implemented,
and the third mid-term target and mid-term planwith a cycle of six years will be starting from the year
2016. In accordance with the reform plans forced
from outside, I assume you have already formulated
the strategic objectives under the new vision for thethird mid-term target and mid-term plan, rather on
your own initiative than urged by external requirements. I am aware that there might be some overlaps, but please allow me to make some remarks on
this as an outsider describing it as two challenges.
The first challenge is a paradigm shift.6) When I
mentioned the two research approaches—analysis
and integration—, I discussed how the assumptionthat the region “Southeast Asia,” is a reality to be
integrated as a totality. This is in itself a fiction or afabrication. Rather, the question of what constitutes
a totality should be at the forefront of questions.
This means it is impossible to designate certain
areas and name them a totality from the outset, but
it can be considered (tentatively) as such. Therefore,
we must constantly relativize what we consider as a
total “region.” This means there is a need for
CSEAS, as an institute, to shift from the region as
the “paradigm of place,” to, “region” as a paradigmof fluidity, cyclicity, linkages, flows, and networks.
As can be seen in an old adage, “Human culture isdeveloped by transportation” (Miyazaki Ichisada),
region is about transportation, mobility, and migration. In terms of systems, we are referring to a shift
from a static to a dynamic and fluctuating system.7)
Yet regardless of electronic media, the phenomenonof mobilities is now an indispensable point of viewin all aspects of our life. Cultural aspects such as thedrifts of meanings or ideas, as well as transfers andchanges that accompany, them should not be overlooked. More importantly, this means a mobilities
paradigm8) that would inevitably include the axes oftime and space and play an integral role. By referring to the axes of time, I do not mean it is possible
to instantly analyze long-term waves and cycles
through this paradigm.
There are various points to be overcome in themobilities paradigm and by confirming these andconcentrating on the paradigm itself, we might beable to deal with conflicts within globalization,nationalism, and localization. At the same time, we
hope that this paradigm will offer us a way to criticize a civilization that brings about conveniences,while utilizing the conveniences that have arisen via
the super modern and postmodern.
Focusing on relations, flows, and trends also
requires a shift in research styles. One of them is thenecessity of a kind of mobility that goes beyond theacademic disciplines, stretching out into society. It

008

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73is not “interdisciplinarity”—one centered on collaboration and cooperation between different disciplines—, but in the sense of transcending disciplines and at times, academism, that can properly
be described as a transdisciplinary orientation.9) A
science that benefits humanity; a science forhumanity; one serves the reconstruction of the systems of knowledge. This is not simply academism
as praxis, but unification of knowledge and praxis,
backed by academic scholarship. Incidentally, theword “trans-” contains the meaning of mobility andmovement and includes the nuances of “going
beyond” or “transcending bounds.” Nothing isaccomplished by withdrawing oneself into an individual discipline. We must hope we can transcend
fusions and move toward meta-knowledge.
I do not intend to deny Area Studies by shifting
the paradigm from “place” to “mobilities.” Rather,
this shift will invigorate Area Studies. Amid theincreasing voices of globalism, it can also allow us
to demonstrate why area studies as a transdisciplinary study of place carries us into the future.
The second challenge is voluntary structuralreform to correspond to and support the above paradigm shift. As with a pupa that transforms into abutterfly, it is an organizational metamorphosis thatis needed (changing the original form).
Of course, CSEAS should properly make use of
Kyoto University’s university-wide organizational
reform, but it needs to internally re-orient itself andpave its way for the metamorphosis. In other words,
it needs to share the paradigm shift first within theinstitute and then to transform itself into an organizational body that can make it possible. In a sense, itis the voluntary structural reform of the organization.
If we talk about the visibility of CSEAS, thoughinternal reorganizing alone might seem insufficient,changing the most visible signboard, i.e. the name,requires deliberation. Along with reorganizationand integration within Kyoto University, there
might emerge a need to change names. There will
be a significant difference, depending on whether it
focuses on Area Studies or Southeast Asia.
There might be the possibility of changing thename according to the subject area: “Asia,” “Oceania,” “Asia-Africa,” “Asia-Oceania,” or “Global.”This is something we have been discussing for agreat number of years. Setting Southeast AsianStudies at the core and adding the areas of focus forcomparison to Asia, Eurasia, Africa, the New Continent, and the World is another possible strategy.
There could be other classifications such as thetropics. Even if we clung to the name of the area as“Southeast Asia,” there will be an increasing needfor the research framework to relativize both Japan,
the country where researchers belong, as well asSoutheast Asia, the selected area of focus.
On the other hand, it is also entirely possible toseek a new name that transcends the concept of“Area,” such as Southeast Asia, or to put it anotherway, one that recognizes “the paradigm shift from
Place to Mobilities.”
Putting aside the name issue, Area Studies is anacademic domain, in which various science disciplines, especially the humanities and social sciences
should be based, and generally speaking, it is vitalnot only for future security, but also for humansecurity and for the future of Japan. When dealing
with organizational reform, we should pay due consideration to these issues and the spirit of Area
Studies should be at the core of the reform.

Concluding Remarks
CSEAS and the concept of area will both be framed
by a “story,” the motif of which is the paradigm.
In association with “Inochi atte no mono dane”(where there is life, there is hope), which I mentioned in the beginning, the “seed” (tane/dane) of
the new story will be the redefinition of CSEAS’philosophy and the paradigm shift. It might also be
equivalent to the invention of new traditions. As
the fate of culture for the sake of human lives; tradition, innovation, and the creation of culture will be
never-ending tasks. For academic practice situatedin society, it is of the utmost importance to apprehend the spirit of an epoch or better said epochality(and simultaneously, epoch-making-ness). The
alleged demand towards scholarship today is, challenge, comprehensiveness, internationalization, andmulti-disciplinarity. My hope is that CSEAS will,
while critically assessing the epochality of suchdemands, regenerate itself like a phoenix by advocating a paradigm shift accompanied by a newly
formulated trans-disciplinary research style.
What is most important is this. In order to fully
convince people outside that we have changed,
there is no other way than to show them the results
as firm proof. However, before transforming theexterior such as philosophy, method, and name, if
people inside do not change themselves CSEAS will
be nothing more than a pie in the sky. The mostimportant thing when people change, will be the“Kokoro” (heart, spirit or mind), aspiration of everyone in the organization. “Kokoro” refers to a vision,and the way to realize it will be the paradigm shift.
I have emphasized a paradigm shift, but paradigm itself is nothing but a method and it is not a
purpose. We must always keep our focus on our
original purpose. I assume that the purpose of a
research institute is to devote itself towards resolving the fundamental agency of human phenomena
and simultaneously to make use of those findings tonourish appropriate developments in science andtechnology; to show economic effects, political stabilities, and the wealth of life.
Though not mentioned today, please try not toforget the essence of academism, science, and theedifice of the human intellect. Education andresearch are two sides of a coin. It is my hope that
CSEAS will continue to engage in the role of activating education, while demonstrating uniquenessas a research organization, and conclude my remarkson this occasion of the 50th anniversary of CSEAS.

Commemorative Speech for the Ceremony Celebrating the 50th Anniversary of CSEAS:

The Life of a Research Institute (Kenkyu-sho no Inochi)

Notes1) Citation from Shin-Meikai Kokugo Jiten『新明解国語辞典』[New-clear-understanding Japanesedictionary] , 5th edition (1997). Concerning
eternal life, Reality/Actuality, refer to Kimura(2015). As for sections I and II, refer to CSEAS
50th anniversary publication (in Japanese),
Southeast Asian Studies in the 21st Century(2015).
2) The timeline for the historical background ofSoutheast Asian Studies and changes in theregion can be summarized as:
Colonization and the emerging concept of“Southeast Asia,” “Nanshin-ron (Japan’s
advance and invasion of the southern
regions)”
End of WWII, 1945 (the time of emerging
independent states, towards nation states)
Asia Africa Conference 1955 (modernization,
decolonization)
Founding of various research institutes for
Asian researchInstitute of Developing Economies 1960
Research Institute for Languages andCultures of Asia and Africa at Tokyo
University of Foreign Studies 1964
Official founding of CSEAS 1965
ASEAN (five countries) 1967 (developmental
dictatorship, democratization, decentralization)
End of Vietnam War 1975; Cold War (1945–89) and its end
ASEAN-10 1999; AEC 2015 (globalization)3) The three essays appeared in a recent issue of aJapanese journal Gakushi-kai Kaiho『学士會会報』[Newsletter], No. 914 (2015-V).
Shiraishi Takashi 白石隆, Tonan Ajia no Genjo
to Tembo, Tairiku-bu/Tosho-bu 東南アジアの現状と展望（大陸部/島嶼部）[Status and prospects of SEA, continent areas/island areas].
Tsubouchi Yoshihiro 坪内良博, Tonan Ajia no
Shakai, Shojinko Shakai 東南アジアの社会（小ogy of Group Theory in the mid-1990s. Nowadays, engineers of University of Tokyo haveestablished the Bird’s-eye View Engineering
Institute, and even the word “Fukan-gaku (俯瞰学：Bird’s-eye View Studies)” exists.
5) “Metamorphosis”: 1) from Ovid’s Metamorphosis
in Greece; 2) In the modern period, biology—a
profound change in form from one stage to thenext in the life history of an organism; geology—the process by which metamorphic rocks areformed; 3) Goethe introduced the concepts“metamorphosis” and “prototype” to innovate
plant morphology; 4) (Tachimoto’s usage) Whenthe essence or the fundamental phenomenon(inochi, life) is unchanging, but the outward
modification, leap/progress, evolution is apparent,
that is metamorphosis.
6) “Paradigm” exemplum or common frameworkof thinking (Tachimoto’s usage) especially aframework that is shared among a communityof researchers, and becomes a guiding principle
in research.
7) This is not about a system of structural/functional analyses, but a perspective of focusing on
the process, like in Sociology of Process advocated by Nóbert Elias.
8) “Mobilities” movement and transition, mobility
and change in a person, thing, information or
idea (Urry 2015; Lefebvre 2000; Greenblatt 2010).
9) “Transdisciplinary”: Human science that integratively apprehends a phenomenon with something like inductive deduction at the level ofpractice-norm-value. “Trans” includes the meaning not only of creation of a new discipline thattranscends disciplinary areas, but of further pursuing a new mode of academism that “transcends
academism.” Knowledge of facts presupposes
knowledge of value. There emerges a stance(trans-science) that starts from academism but
transcends it towards society. This was translated
as “cho-gakusai-sei” 超学際性 for the first time in

the Japanese edition of Edgar Morin in 1985. In
English, there was an entry in the Oxford English
Dictionary, 2nd edition (1987), but the term
first appeared in 1972. Similar terms include
inter-disciplinary, cross-disciplinary, or multidisciplinary, among others. Since “trans” meanstranscendence, it has totally different connotation from simply multiplying or connecting disciplines. As in “transhumance” which refers to
the seasonal movement of a herd, trans- implies
movement, or moving across to the other side
(Cf. Nicolescu 2002; Tachimoto 2013).

References
Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University
京都大学東南アジア研究所. 2015. Nijyu-Issei kino Tonan Ajia Kenkyu: Chiiki Shakai heno Hassin
21 世紀の東南アジア研究――地域社会への発信[Southeast Asia in the 21st century]. Kyoto:
CSEAS.
Greenblatt, Stephen. 2010. Cultural Mobility: A
Manifesto. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Kimura Bin 木村 敏. 2015. Karada, Kokoro, Seimei
からだ・こころ・生命. Kodansha Gakujutsu Bunko.
Lefebvre, Henry. 2000.The Production of Space,translated by Hideharu Saito in Japanese. Tokyo:
Aoki Shoten Publishing Co.
Nicolescu, Basarab. 2002. Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Tachimoto Narifumi 立本成文，ed. 2013. Ningen­kagaku toshiteno Chikyukankyogaku: Hito to Tsunagaru Shizen/Shizen to Tsunagaru Hito 人間科学としての地球環境学――人とつながる自然・自然とつながる人 [Global environmental studies as humanics].

Kyoto: Kyoto Tsushin.
Urry, John. 2015. Mobilitis: Sociology of Transportation, translated by Naoki Yoshihara and Hirotaka
Ito in Japanese. Tokyo: Sakuhin-sha.

人口世界）[Southeast Asian society, small
population world].
Kato Kumiko 加藤久美子, 1873 Nen no Kudeta:
Mekongawa Churyuiki no Taizoku Kokka
Shipusompanna no Oi Keisho Arasoi 1837年のクーデター――メコン河中流域のタイ族国家シプ
ソンパンナーの王位継承争い [The 1837 coup:

The struggle over royal succession in the Tai
State of Sipsong Panna in the mid-stream
Mekong Region].
4) “Bird’s-eye View Approach” was first mentionedby Yoshikawa Hiroyuki from the standpoint ofGeneral Engineering in explanation for an anal-

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73009

Interview with Former Director Ichimura Shinichi

Looking to the Past, Inspiring
the FutureInterviewer: Mieno Fumiharu (Professor, CSEAS)

February 18, 2015 at Gakushi Kaikan in Tokyo

Professor Ichimura Shinichi joined the Center for Southeast Asian Studies (CSEAS) in 1968 and from 1969, for a period of 10 years, he devoted
his time to strengthening the research foundations of CSEAS on many fronts. Professor Ichimura was one of the first generation of Japanesescholars to travel to the U.S. and receive a PhD (MIT) in the post-war period. After producing a remarkable body of work on dynamic growthmodels and macroeconomic models of the Japanese economy, he participated in the founding of CSEAS. While dedicating himself to both thefields of economics and social science, he was, in a broad perspective, at the forefront of creating the research foundations for multidisciplinary
Southeast Asian Studies. These efforts formed one origin of Southeast Asian Studies in Japan, and moreover produced mutual exchanges between
Japan and the U.S. as well as between countries in Southeast Asia.
In celebration of the 50th year of the founding of CSEAS, Professor Mieno Fumiharu interviews Professor Emeritus Ichimura Shinichi on theearly days, the hardships, and different episodes as well as his connection with the region. Professor Ichimura shares his views on the past andpresent. This interview is accompanied by a list of his life works (up to 2015).

Mieno: You assumed your post in 1968, right after the establishment of CSEAS
and worked as a director for 10 years, between April 1969 to March 1979. To
begin with how did you came to pursue Southeast Asian Studies?
Ichimura: My academic career started as an ordinary economist with greaterinterest in economic theory when I graduated in 1949 from the faculty of
economics at Kyoto University and found a job as a research associate at
Wakayama University. In the same year, I passed the examination for the
GARIOA fellowship of the US government, so in the following year, 1950, I wasable to pursue graduate studies at Columbia University and further at MIT withother fellowships to obtain my PhD degree in 1953. My dissertation was on
Nonlinear Theories of Business Cycles. Clearly my interest remained inmathematical economic theory. Then I returned home to teach at Wakayama
University. In 1956, I moved to Osaka University, occupying a position in the
Faculty of Economics, which a few years later was expanded to the Institute ofSocial and Economic Research (ISER) under the leadership of Professor Takata
Yasuma (1883–1972).
During those 12 years at ISER, my professional interest gradually shifted to

010

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73

empirical studies of the Japanese economy. I was fortunate in participating in andguiding a government Project of the Interindustrial Table in Japan from the very
beginning and published its applications: The Structure of Japanese Economy(Ichimura 1957). Soon with the support of the Kansai Economic Federation, I
headed another project to pioneer in producing an authentic Inter-regional
Input-Output Table in Japan and published its applications for regional analysis
as the Japanese Economy and Regional Economy (Ichimura 1958). In 1959–60 I
was invited to lecture on mathematical economics at Johns Hopkins University.
When I came home, ISER had been given a research grant by the Rockfeller
Foundation to invite any outstanding economists from abroad. I proposed toinvite Professor Lawrence R. Klein (1920–2013) and under his guidance westarted a big project to construct an Osaka ISER Model of Japanese Economy. As
it turned out, the construction of a large macro-econometric model of a national
economy was very difficult and time-consuming in data collection andcomputation of equations even with the best computers available in Japan andthe U.S. back then. In 1961, I was elected as a fellow of the Econometric Society
and became a professor next year. In the early 1960s I devoted my entire energy
to nothing but the construction and estimation of important blocks of this ISER

Interview with Former Director Ichimura Shinichi

Looking to the Past, Inspiring the Future

model, competing with the Brookings Model in the U.S. In 1967–68 I was
invited to the University of California, Berkeley to teach mathematical economics
and econometrics, and in 1968–69 to the University of Pennsylvania, as Prof.
Klein kindly told me, mainly to complete the Osaka ISER Model. In Berkeley I
finished the construction of the monetary sector and completed the entire ISER
model. In Philadelphia, I tested, over and over again, the workability of theModel as a whole, modifying many parts of our system of equations. It was atedious and attentive process of hard-work, particularly because I had to linearize
all the non-linear endogenous variables and produce a matrix to be converted. I
completed this process with the best computer at the University of Pennsylvania
and made our dynamic multipliers of Osaka ISER Model available in Working
Papers of Wharton Econometric Forecasting Associates (WEFA), University ofPennsylvania and ISER, Osaka U. They are available now in Macroeconometric
Modeling of Japan (Ichimura and Klein 2010).
Early June 1967, I came home after two years abroad, when Professor Iwamura
Shinobu (Mongol History; 1905–88) of the Institute for Research in Humanities
and Professor Inoki Masamichi (Political Science; 1914–2012) of the Faculty of
Law at Kyoto University came to see me. They told me about a plan at Kyoto
University to establish a new institute for Asian Studies and asked me to becomeits director. They enthusiastically explained that while the institutes of AsianStudies in Western countries predominantly focused on political and economic
problems, scholars at Kyoto University were conceiving a different approach to
Asian Studies in aiming at a more comprehensive Area Research including thestudies of the region’s natural environment, eco-system, and culture as well as its
political economy. They seemed hopefully to cover social, natural, and medical
sciences as well, so far as they are relevant to the development of the region.
Naturally I asked why they chose me for this challenging position to direct the
research institute. They mentioned three reasons; firstly, I was a graduate from thedepartment of Malay Language, Osaka College of Foreign Languages (now theFaculty of Foreign Languages, Osaka University). Secondly, I had already publishedan article of development economics as an Economic Commission for Asia andthe Far East (ECAFE) Monograph so that I might be interested in development
economics. Thirdly, my international experiences were very suitable to guide thisinternationally oriented institute. Nobody else was more suitable for the position.
However, I told them that my knowledge of Indonesian had deteriorated somuch that I could not even read the newspaper without a dictionary. My
knowledge of development economics was just at the level of standard text books.
I may be known as an economic theorist and econometrician but not as an expert
on Asian Studies. My international association and experiences may be very usefulfor the new institute. As such, I asked to be given some time to think it over.
True, soon after I came back from the University of Pennsylvania, I told someclose friends that I might become more interested in Asian underdeveloped
economies rather than Japan. This was because Japan in the late 60s appeared tohave already become very prosperous, and I felt that economics could makegreater contributions by studying other Asian economies.
As a matter of fact, my motivation to choose economics as my life’s work at theage of 21 was to contribute something to save Japan from postwar poverty, so myconcern with the issue or North-South problems was very deep in my heart.
Nevertheless, until then I had specialized in economic theory and applied
econometrics under given circumstances. Therefore, even before the visit of Prof.
Iwamura and Prof. Inoki, I was feeling somewhat uneasy in continuing a standard
trajectory as an economist, while being satisfied with good publications ineconomic theory, Input Output analysis and macro econometric modeling ofJapan before any comparable models in the U.S. In fact, I was contemplating toswitch the area of my own research from Japan to Asian countries after
accomplishing one more work on Japanese business cycles, particularly inventory
cycles. As soon as I came home in 1967, I began a re-estimation of inventories in
the government statistics. Then all of a sudden came the offer from Kyoto. Had
its timing been after the research of inventory cycles was completed, I would haveaccepted the offer with little hesitation.
Moreover, I thought of the heavy obligation at the age of 43 to take on thepost of director of an interdisciplinary research center. Obviously I expected also
the strong objection from my colleagues at Osaka University such as Director
Yasui Takuma (1909–95) and Professors Nikaido Fukukane (1923–2001),
Tatemoto Masahiro (1924–97), and Hatanaka Michio.
Meanwhile, I learned about an increasing trend in the West and Japan toward
establishing institutions for Asian Studies and recognized North-South issues as
one of the most challenging problems of the late 20th century. I would havetackled it someday. However, that someday came too early. It took me a little
more than a month to make up my mind and in the end I decided to accept theoffer. The prime reason was a voice from within telling me: “if I do not take it
now, there might be no next time for some top university in Japan to tackle
contemporary Asian Studies,” and “if you are willing to undertake it, do it fromthe beginning and realize what you really want to do.” I deeply regret, though,that my decision was a heavy blow to my best friends at ISER.
Mieno: Would you please tell us how CSEAS came about to be established at
Kyoto University and what was the background to its establishment?
Ichimura: The key architect in designing the concept of this Center for Southeast
Asian Studies (CSEAS) was Professor Iwamura Shinobu. He was a rare specialist
on the socio-economic history of Mongolia and an experienced field researcher
on such dry regions as Persia and Mongolia. However, before I share his
contributions, I must talk about a special circumstance at Kyoto University backthen. That was the students’ and some leftish faculty members’ movements
sweeping the campus of major universities in Japan. They opposed theconfirmation in 1970 of the U.S.-Japan Security Pact and the U.S.’ continuationof the Vietnam War. At Kyoto University they took up also the Ford Foundation’s
grant for CSEAS as an additional target to object to. For Kyoto University toestablish a new research institute, the plan must be approved by the University
Council. Fortunately, the majority of faculty deans and institute directors’
professors supported the Center’s establishment. The central figure who took on
the role of resolving this controversy at the university council was Professor
Okuda Azuma (1905–99), dean of the Faculty of Agriculture then. He soon
became the President of Kyoto University and pushed the plan to create CSEAS
officially and establish it with the approval of the Ministry of Education in 1965.

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73011

Interview with Former Director Ichimura Shinichi

Looking to the Past, Inspiring the Future

Prof. Iwamura cooperated with Prof. Inoki in designing the direction ofresearch plans of CSEAS at the formative stage. They were familiar with Western
scholars’ research projects in underdeveloped countries. At that time, academic
circles in the West were discussing “area research” or “area study” as a new research
field. Leading researchers were, however, those who had been involved in Oriental
Studies or associated with the training of colonial officials in the East before
WWII. Due to meeting the needs of the time, their area study was intended toorganize knowledge for policies for postwar Asia. The government and foundationsin the U.S. also approved large budgets to support such research institutes as
Cornell University and others. Central to their research was political science.
In Japan, however, the situation was very different. As for Asian Studies before
and during WWII, the Research Department of Manchurian Railway Co. was
the most authoritative and had been conducting a full-scale research on China,
while collecting large amounts of documents and materials. Just before Japan’ssurrender, important materials and documents were shipped back to Japan anddispersed to Yamaguchi, Kyushu, and other Universities. Their staff were alsotransferred to those institutions. These and other streams of researchers, who hadrecognized the importance of Asian Studies, served as a driving force for thegovernment to create the Institute of Developing Economies (Ajia Keizai
Kenkyusho) in Tokyo in 1960.
In academic circles, the University of Tokyo had the Institute for Oriental
Cultures (after 2009, the Institute for Advanced Studies on Asia), and Kyoto
University had the Institute for Research in Humanities. Both have emphasized
Chinese Studies. Kyoto University added another department of Occidental
Studies. The research in both universities remained with an emphasis on historicalstudies. I heard that at the University of Tokyo there was another area-oriented
stream in the College of Liberal Arts. Its language teachers of English, German,
French, and others did not only study literature but also history, society, andculture. I also heard of some professors planning to form organizations of Area
Studies by language groups. I do not know what happened to the plans later.
The interest in Asia at Kyoto University was more widespread including many
faculties and it was comprehensive. In Medical Science, for instance, there wereresearchers of Tropical Diseases, just like in Taipei Imperial University. Amongthem was Professor Nishiura Mitsugu (1920–85) and his group who devoted
themselves to research on leprosy, which was found quite common in Burmasince WWII. In the Faculty of Engineering, there were specialists on black ore, akind of ironstone peculiar to Akita prefecture in Japan and Indonesia. The Facultyof Agriculture had many researchers, who had conducted Tropical Agriculture
and Forestry in Indonesia, Thai, and the Philippines during WWII, regarded
Asian Studies as essential to their work. The Faculty of Science was in charge ofGeography and their great scholars had a strong orientation toward fieldwork.
They had thoroughly explored and travelled different regions of the AsianContinent up to the Himalayas since WWII and in the postwar periods. They
were well known as a group who assembled to embark on Antarctic Exploration.
They are also the ones to have established the Institute of Ethnology Science(Minzokugaku Kenkyusho) later. One famous leader, Professor Umesao Tadao(1920–2010) argued for a unique “Ecology of Cultures” or “Ecological View ofHistory.” He had already been practicing fieldwork all over Asia during the war.
Everyone was sure that if those brilliant scholars or their disciples could be
mobilized, we could expect outstanding Asian Studies. However, the problem waswhere to start from. Since China was still in a state of civil war, Southeast Asia
appeared as the only opening. As a measure to explore any possibility, theuniversity council decided in 1963 to set up a “committee for Southeast AsianStudies.” I heard that they initially had a wider Asian region in mind. Just at thattime the Ford Foundation suggested establishing a research center related to Asia.
The University of Tokyo and Kyoto University were the first to be called on. I do
not know if any other universities received the same request. I heard that the
University of Tokyo turned it down in view of the expected backlash from leftist
students and some faculty members who had already started the anti-Vietnam
war movement. (President Kennedy dispatched the US forces to South Vietnam
in 1960.)
At Kyoto University, however, many professors shared the opinion that theymight ignore such international political affairs in connection with establishing a

012

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73

research center, because Asian Studies were long-lasting activities and should beconsidered as more important than politics. We thought that political economy
required due attention, but our interests in Southeast Asia and China were muchbroader and long-lasting. Thus, Prof. Iwamura summarized the views of leading
scholars at Kyoto University to guide the direction of research at CSEAS under
three principles, namely;
1. We combine the area studies of human and social sciences with those ofnatural ecology.
2. We emphasize contemporary studies.
3. We emphasize field surveys rather than textual reading.
When I came to CSEAS and learned about these principles, I whole-heartedly
agreed.
Mieno: Would you please tell us about the challenges you faced when you
assumed your post and how you tackled them during the 10 years of your service
as director?
Ichimura: The greatest challenge at first was fostering capable specialists. In
Japan then were very few specialists available working on Southeast Asia. Thus,
my first task was to contemplate the adequate composition of specialized fields
for CSEAS and in what order we could realize this. Needless to say, we hardly
had a fixed plan. I decided to sail out with the uncertain hope of training future
core academics in several essential fields such as agronomy, ecology, sociology,
anthropology, economics, and political science. We publicly solicited postgraduate students not only from Kyoto University but also from all over Japan with thepromise of fellowships for doctoral courses in the best universities. Simultaneously I asked my friends to recommend young staff to study abroad and work on
Southeast Asia later.
However, I required every student who passed the first test to visit Southeast
Asian countries; tour around for a short period of time; and report what he/sheobserved to me. This was an adequacy test for candidates. During this period, I
did inspections to see how they lived and what they studied. I met their teachers
and asked about their impressions of our students. It was to show them the realityof less-developed countries in Asia and to see if they could adjust themselves tothe tough environments of Southeast Asia and carry out research work. We sent
only those who passed the exam to postgraduate schools in the West. They all
became great scholars. We asked those who failed in the exam to abandon
Southeast Asian Study. Among this generation, Professors Tsubouchi Yoshihiro
and Tachimoto Narifumi later assumed the post of director.
We never applied this attitude uniformly to everyone. Before I took office,there were Professor Motooka Takeshi (1915–82) and Associate Professor Ishii
Yoneo (1929–2010). Some younger staff were recruited with graduate training at
Kyoto University. Even for those I tried to find some European University for
their further learning and international experiences or some universities to visit
for similar purposes. In the case of Prof. Motooka, we permitted his long-term
leave, right after the start of CSEAS, to Indonesian government and the FAO(Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), judging that it
would be of great benefit to CSEAS in the long run. Although Assoc. Prof. Ishii
was very proficient in Thai language and an authority on Buddhism and politics
in Thailand, we told him that so long as he was aspiring to be an academic, hewould greatly benefit by having an opportunity to interact with important
European scholars in the early stage of his career. As he agreed, I consulted with
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Tokyo and made a decision to admit his
two-year leave to SOAS (School of Oriental and African Studies) in London
University as a local researcher of the Ministry. Research associates Fukui Hayao(young agronomist on rice growing in Thailand) and Tsuchiya Kenji (1942–95,
working on the nationalist movement in Indonesia) went to study at National
Agricultural College, Wageningen (now Wageningen University) and Leiden
University respectively in the Netherlands. There are many other similar caseswith other staff. I tried to do my best in giving the similar chances to mycolleagues until around 1975. Then, Tsubouchi came back from the University ofMichigan, Tachimoto from the University of Chicago with PhDs. Many others
became full-fledged scholars and returned home oneInterview with Former Director Ichimura Shinichi

Looking to the Past, Inspiring the Future

after another. With the presence of about 10 splendid scholars, the atmosphere in
research conversations at the center completely changed. Even when foreigners
were invited, they could carry out discussions in English. It provided acomfortable environment for those foreigners as well. People from Southeast Asia,
who had attained their PhD and returned home, were also happy to come to
CSEAS even for three months. Having seen international academic exchange
getting on track, I thought my work was almost done.
Mieno: I have heard that in the 1960s setting up local offices overseas in Bangkok
and Jakarta was the first of its kind as a national university and was not easy torealize.
Ichimura: The difficulties are two-fold: financial and legal. The Bangkok office
had already been set up before I assumed the post. The expenses were provided by
the Ford Foundation’s grant. In Thailand, there were no regulations for a foreign
university to set up its local office. However, in Indonesia, I was told that they
had not given legal permission to build a branch office to any foreign university.
The Ford Foundation was the only one that had been granted the permit for acertain period of time. I held several discussions with universities and government
authorities and finally went further to obtain consent from a minister to rent a
residential house as a non-official Jakarta liaison office for CSEAS. However, there
were some more difficulties in setting it up.
To lease a house, it was customary to make the two-year advanced rent
payment. How could we possibly handle it with our annual budget system inJapan? Next was our transportation for daily living and field research. We neededa jeep. But it was very expensive, because the import tax was 100 percent. What
you could buy with one million yen in Japan would cost more than two million.
We had no such budget. Moreover, due to the foreign exchange control, at thetime we could not send foreign currency from Japan. Searching for a way to solve
this problem, I consulted with a Toyota Tokyo branch office manager. Our deal
was to pay at the Tokyo office and get the car delivered in Jakarta.
It was also difficult to employ a housekeeper and a driver. The Japanese
Ministry of Education could not spare any of their budget for this purpose legallyto let us use it outside Japan. I held talks with the Director General of theuniversity department, Ministry of Education. Finally thanks to his wise decision,
it worked out by applying the rule mutatis mutandis for special institutes like theDisaster Prevention Research Institute to be allowed for spending outside Kyoto
or their domestic observatory facilities.
Mieno: I heard that the grant we received from the Ford Foundation right after
the establishment was suspended due to trouble on campus. What was the role ofexternal funds?
Ichimura: CSEAS received Ford Foundation’s grants twice; first $350,000––rightafter establishment, and second, $300,000 in 1968. The trouble with the
opposition groups was about the second grant after I became director. In the caseof the first grant, there was some objections as I already mentioned, but they were
overcome, as CSEAS was much less politicized, covering science and medical
studies, so that it had little ideological opposition. When members of the Ford
Foundation visited Kyoto to meet Professors Okuda, Iwamura, and Inoki, thediscussion were friendly and they came to the conclusion that they would receive
a grant over a three-year period. We utilized the funds as an initial endowment
mainly for fostering Southeast Asian specialists as I described.
Soon after we received the second grant from Ford Foundation, however, thecampus of Kyoto University was thrown into utter disorder by radical student
groups and extremely leftish faculty members, to the extent that many classrooms
were prevented from teaching in and university council meetings had to be held
outside the campus. Even the deans of many faculties became at least temporarily
compromising with anti-American discourses. Thus, the university council itself
made a blunder of violating its own the long- established rule: “never discuss thesame matter again” (Ichiji fusaigi no gensoku). Thus, President Okuda, having
approved and received once the second grant of the Ford Foundation with theagreement of University Council, had to return the remaining amount of about

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73013

Interview with Former Director Ichimura Shinichi

Looking to the Past, Inspiring the Future$200,000. As a director, I was furious and extremely sorry about the wholeprocess and protested bitterly to the University Council and President Okuda,
who personally expressed his deepest regret and promised me to do his best incompensating this great loss of CSEAS.
CSEAS was already in the full swing training young staff and carrying out
research projects in Southeast Asia. How could I stop all of these and call themback as the director? The only way out I could think of was, under my own
responsibility and without involving Kyoto University at all, to petition a Japanesefoundation and Ford Foundation to share half and half a donation for Southeast
Asian Studies. Luckily the Kansai Economic Research Center (KERC a non-profit
foundation in Osaka which had supported ISER, Osaka University and the
managing director Kato Yoshio and Chairman of Board, Ashihara Yoshishige[1901–2003]) readily agreed and wrote a proposal letter to the Ford Foundation.
They sent a representative to confirm the proposal and negotiate the details of a
grant to KERC. Thus, we restored the lost research funds of $200,000 to fully
continue our original plan with no changes. You can imagine how grateful we all
were. I would say that thanks to this additional support of both foundations, wewere able to swiftly lay the foundations of CSEAS.
I would like to add a few words about the strict accounting of those external
donations. Japanese Ministry accounting was strictly managed and accurately
reported as “Trust Accounts” (Inin Keirikin) every year by CSEAS’s accounting
section head. I myself prepared reports in English all by myself and sent them to
the Ford Foundation and KERC every year, as I had promised. Both foundations
were very respectable and never complained about my reports, except for a polite
letters saying “Thank you for sending your accurate accounting reports.” We
repeat our hearty appreciation for their generosity.
Mieno: The 1970s was a time when CSEAS underwent a rapid expansion ofresearch chairs and staff. Were there any difficulties with this?
Ichimura: I had a hard time figuring out the composition of research chairs andtheir priority to materialize. For instance, my first request was a chair for
population research, since no national university had the chair. It was given
immediately. As we increased our chairs to the fifth then sixth, our justification
for additional chairs became increasingly competitive with other universities.
Soon I discovered that few institutions overseas like Cornell University did notserve as a model. I had a series of discussions on Area Studies within CSEAS andresearchers abroad, but that is still a challenge for successors.
A composition of chairs in a certain institute is important, originally due to thebalancing of research fields and education as well as integrating special researchoutcomes. This is similar to the composition of courses in teaching faculties.
Since “area study” was a new field, its appropriate methodology had been argued
abroad and I also wrote several articles on the subject. For the reason of a lack ofbetter integration, I felt some kind of encyclopedic approach could be acompromise. When I was a director, I paid due attention to this problem tobalance various research fields. In reality, however, balance was maintained often
through the restructuring process of Kyoto University after my retirement in1988. That is what it seems to me.
For the realignment of research fields at CSEAS, leadership will be required.
Without having a leader, who had properly pursued his learning, and with somedirectors switching every few years, it may be difficult to create a strong
institution.
Furthermore, an institute is not a place where individual researchers or small
groups can work, following their own individual interests. The institute has its
own objectives and missions. How to achieve a collaborative mission should befully acknowledged among the professors before conducting their own research. If
a part of them would simply carry out their individual research, without gaining
approval from other scholars, it could lead to the self-destruction of the institute.
Organizing a special research project that joins faculties and institutes can beadvised. Our institute requires a comprehensive vision to focus on the issues thatlie in Southeast Asia. Our institute exists for this sake.
Mieno: During the last 20 years, Southeast Asia has seen a great transformation

014

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73in its society and economy, which are the subject of much research. What is youropinion about relations between changes in time and the mission of our institute?
Ichimura: I think that an institute is not something that should pursue the same
field forever. Once research in a certain field has made considerable progress, thenwe can say enough is enough and switch to pursing other fields. Although
research on Southeast Asia was originally about underdevelopment study, reality
has changed. As the nature of regional issues change, our research approach must
do so too.
At an extreme, if there arises a situation in which regular political scientists andeconomists are studying in their faculties on this, then we can stop operating as
an institute of Southeast Asia. With Natural Sciences, for instance, there had once
been a laboratory on the radar at MIT but they also stopped operating, saying
there were private enterprises studying the same thing. The same is true with
Food Science. I think that is the way it should be. In that sense too, a research
institute is not a place where individuals are allowed to conduct their research on
their own. When they find the mission of the institute no longer suitable to theirpersonal interests, then that should basically be the time for them to quit. Still, if
the institute would not be able to introduce them to another laboratory, which
they could move on to, this could create a sensitive situation. This often happensin the area of Natural Sciences which experience rapid changes. There might befewer cases like this in the field of Social Science and Humanities, while Area
Studies might fall in the middle.
Mieno: Thank you very much for sharing your serious thoughts on the future of
the institute. Though we are celebrating our 50th anniversary, you are the one ofthe people who worked as a director from the time of its establishment for aperiod of 10 years. I hope that we can continue to turn to you for yourcontinuous favor and kind guidance for the future.

References
Ichimura Shinichi 市村真一. 1957. Nihon Keizai no Kozo: Sangyo Renkan Bunseki
日本経済の構造――産業連関分析 [The structure of Japanese economy]. Tokyo:
Sobunsha.
―――. 1958. Nihon Keizai to Chiiki Keizai: Kinki Chiiki Sangyo Renkan Bunseki
日本経済と地域経済――近畿地域産業連関分析 [Japanese economy and regional
economy]. Tokyo: Sobunsha.
Ichimura, Shinichi; and Klein, Lawrence R., eds. 2010. Macroeconometric Modelingof Japan. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co.

List of Monographs and Collected Papers of Ichimura ShinichiThis is a list of monographs and main articles and essays by Shinichi Ichimura in the area of economics and related sciences on Japanese andAsian issues. In this list the titles in non-English are translated into English. The original languages are indicated after the published year by
the signs such as ( J ): Japanese; ( C ): Chinese; ( F ): French, ( I ): Indonesian, and ( S ): Spanish. Notes on author column: S-auth = single

author = S. Ichimura; Co-auth = with other authors; Ed = edited and written by S. Ichimura; Co-ed = edited and written with others; Sp =supervised. The names of co-author or co-editor are given at the right-hand corner of the title column.

I. Monographs
No

Year

Title

1

1951 ( J )(National Income and Resources)

2

1953

3

Author
(N. Kamakura)

Publisher

Co-authKobundoAn Inquiry into Nonlinear Theories of Economic Fluctuations

S-authMIT Dissertation

1954 ( J )(The Structure of Economic Circulation)

S-authSobun-sha

4

1957-1 ( J )(The Structure of the Japanese Economy: Input-Output Analysis)

S-authSobun-sha

5

1957-2

The Historical Development of Economic Dynamics

S-authJapan Science Council

6

1958-1 ( J )( Japanese Economy and Regional Economy)

Sp

Sobun-sha

7

1958-2 ( J )(Applications of Interindustrial Study)

Ed

Yuhikaku

8

1960-1 ( J )(The Future of Japanese Economy)Sp

Yuhikaku

91960-2 ( J )(The Future of Okayama Prefecture)Sp

Okayama Pref.

101960-3

Programming Techniques for Development

Co-authECAFE

111962 ( J )(Missions of Educators)

Ed

Japan Education Association

12

1964 ( J )(Euro-American Education and Japanese Education)

S-authSobun-sha

13

1965 ( J )(The Japanese Economy in the World)

S-authChuokoron-sha

14

1968-1 ( J )(Books Recommended for Contemporary Students)

Co-ed

Kodan-sha

15

1968-2 ( J )(Management Methods in Computer Age)(Translation)

Sp

Nihon Keizai Shimbunsha

16

1969 ( J )(Twenty Recommendations for University Reform)

Co-ed

Sobun-sha

17

1970 -1 ( J )(How to Comprehend the Contemporary World?)

S-authKodan-sha

18

1970-2 ( J )(Economic Power on Trial)

S-authNihon Keizai Shimbunsha

19

1970-3 ( J )(Readings in Econometric Models of Japanese Economy)

Co-ed

Toyokeizai Shimpo

201973 ( J )(Thinking of Southeast Asia)

Ed

Sobun-sha

21

1974-1 ( J )(Southeast Asia: Nature, Society and Development)Tr ← {28}Ed

Sobun-sha

22

1974-2 ( J )(Economic and Political Trends in the Soviet’ Bloc)

Co-ed

Sobun-sha

23

1975-1 ( J )(The Economic Development of East and Southeast Asia)Tr ← {24}Ed

Sobun-sha

24

1975-2The Economic Development of East and Southeast Asia

Ed

U of Hawaii Press

25

1975-3The Regional Economic Survey of the Province of South Sumatra, 1970–71Co-auth

LIPI, Jakarta; and CSEAS

26

1975-4 ( I )(Indonesia: Various Issues and Events)(Koentjoronigrat)

Co-ed

Obor, Jakarta

27

1976 ( J )(In the Stream of History)

S-authSobun-sha

28

1977-1

Southeast Asia: Nature, Society and Development

Ed

U of Hawaii Press

29

1977-2An Econometric Analysis of the Japanese Economy

Co-ed

Japanese Society for Asian Study

30

1978

Econometric Models of Asian Countries I

Ed

Association of Development ResearchInstitutes in the Pacific and Asia

31

1979 ( J )(Economic Development of Communist China)

Sp

Sobun-sha

32

1980-1 ( J )( Japanese Firms in Asia)

Ed

Toyokeizai Shimpo( J. Tinbergen et al.)(Aida; Nagai; and Uno)

(M. Kohsaka; and T. Yoshida)(M. Tatemoto)(M. Inoki)(K. Thee)(L. R. Klein et al.)(Translation of ①)

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73

015

No

Year

Title

Author33

1980-2

Econometric Models of Asian Countries II

Ed

Association of Development ResearchInstitutes in the Pacific and Asia

34

1981 ( J )( Japanese Education: Ideals and Sufferings)

Ed

Sobun-sha

35

1985-1( J )(Wishing to Normalize Japanese Education)

S-authSobun-sha

36

1985-2 ( J )(Searching for the Course of Japanese Economy)

S-authSobun-sha

37

1985-3

Econometric Models of Asian Link

Co-ed

Springer Verlag

38

1988-1 ( J )( Japanese Style Management Rooting in Asia)

Ed

Toyokeizai Shimpo

39

1988-2The Challenges of Asian Developing Countries

Ed

Asian Productivity Org.

40

1988-3

Indonesian Economic Development

Ed

JICA

41

1988-4 ( J )(The Political Economy of Contemporary Japan)

(M. Kosaka)

Co-ed

PHP Inst.

42

1989-1 ( I )(Indonesian Economic Development)

(S. Odano)

Co-ed

U of Indonesia Press

43

1989-2The Political Economy of Fiscal Policy

(Urrutia; and Yukawa)

Co-ed

UN University Press

44

1993-1The Role of Japan in Asia

S-authICS Press45

1993-2

Econometric Models of Asian-Pacific Countries

Co-ed

Springer-Verlag

46

1994-1 ( C )( Japanese Economy, Development and International Relations)

S-authBeijing UP

47

1994-2 ( J )(Transitional Economies in Asia)

Co-ed

OIU

48

1998-1

Political Economy of Japanese and Asian Development

S-authSpringer-Verlag

49

1998-2 ( J )( Japanese Style Management in China)

Ed

Toyokeizai Shimpo

50

1999-1

East Asian Economic Development

(F. G. Adams)

Co-ed

Praeger Pub.

51

2000

Econometric Modeling of China

(L. R. Klein)

Co-ed

WSPC

52

2001-1 ( J )(Foundation of Economics)

(2001–04 text editions)S-authSobun-sha

53

2003-1

Interregional Input-Output Analysis of Chinese Economy

(H. J. Wang)

Co-ed

WSPC

54

2003-2 ( J )(Political Economy of Japanese and Asian Development)Tr ← {48}S-authSobun-sha

55

2003-3 ( J )(Economics of Harbors and Regions)

Sp

Taga Shuppan

56

2004-1 ( J )(Interregional Input-Output Analysis of Chinese Economy)Tr ← {53}Co-ed

Sobun-sha

57

2004-2 ( J )(Asian Development and Decentralization)Tr ← {58}Ed

Kitakyushu City

58

2004-3Development and Decentralization in Asia

Ed

Kitakyushu City

59

2004-4 ( J )(Who Has Defended the Japanese Education)

S-authSobun-sha

60

2005-1 ( J )(Asian Automobile Industry and China’s Challenge) (Yoshimatsu; Liu; and Findley)

Sp

Sobun-sha

61

2005-2 ( C )(Interregional IO Analysis of Chinese Eco.)

(Chinese tr. by Li Shantong)

Co-ed

Zai-Kei, Beijing62

2006-1 ( J )(Econometric Modeling of China)Tr ← {51}Co-ed

Sobun-sha

63

2006-2 ( J )(My Postwar 60 Years)

S-authNaigai News64

2008-1 ( J )(Revised Fundamental Law of Education and Teachers Attitude)

S-authKogakkan U Press

65

2008-2

Decentralization Policies in Asian Development

(R. Bahl)

Co-ed

WSPC

66

2009

Transition from Socialist to Market Economies

(T. Sato; W. and James)

Co-ed

Palgrave-Mcmillan

67

2010

Macroeconometric Modeling of Japan

(L. R. Klein)

Co-d

WSPC

68

2011 ( J )(Macroeconometric Modeling of Japan)Tr ← {67}Co-ed

Nihon Keizai Shimbunsha

69

2012-1 ( J )(Japan’s Two Problems: Royal Law and the Long Recession)

S-authKokumin-kaikan

70

2012-2 ( J )(Unless Royal Family Law Is Revised, No Prince Will be)

S-authFujiwara Shoten

71

2015

Japan and Asia: Economic Development and Nation Building

S-authWSPC72

2016 ( J )(Benevolent Teachers and Beneficial Friends)

S-authSobun-sha(M. Ezaki)Indonesian Tr ← [40](Y. Matsumoto)(Se Wen, ed /trans.)(K. Miyamoto)(tr. by S. Nagao)(M. Doi, ed.)(R. Bahl)(in prep)① Liu, T. C.; Eckstein, A.; and Galenson, W. (eds.), Economic Trends of Communist China, Aldine, Chicago, 1969.
016

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73PublisherII. Articles and Essays
1949 and 50s
No

Year

Titles of Articles

Published Places

1

1949 ( J )(Hicks’ Theory of the Firm)

Studies in Modern Economic Theory, 12

1951-1A Critical Note on the Definition of Related Goods

Review of Economic Studies3

1951-2 ( J )(Changes in Taste and Demand: J.R. Hicks vs O. Lange)

The Economic Review, 67-4/5 (May)41951-3 ( J )(The Multiplier Analysis of Changing Process)

The Economic Review, 68-1/2/3(September)51953-1

A Note on the Concept of Consumers’ Surplus

Econometrica, 21-3( July)

6

1953-2A Tentative Non-linear Theory of Economic Fluctuations in the Purely Competitive
Economic System I, II

The Economic Review (Oct. 1953 and Apr.
1954)

7

1954-1

Toward a General Nonlinear Dynamic Theory of Economic Fluctuations

Published in ①

8

1954-2 ( J )(From Analyzing Dependence on Trade to Non-linear Programming)

The Economic Review, 5-2 (April)91954-3 ( J )(The Determination of National Income Level Reconsidered)

The Economic Theory, No. 19 (May)101954-4 ( J )(Three Note on Non-linear Cycle Theory)

Economic Studies Quarterly, 5-1/2 ( Jun)

11

1954-5 ( J )(Economic Growth Theory: Introduction)

Published in ②

12

1954-6 ( J )(On Economic Growth Theory)

The Economic Theory, No. 21(May)13

1954-7 ( J )Fundamental Disequilibrium of the Japanese Economy and the Structure of World Trade

Economic Analysis (MITI), 16

14

1955-1

Notes on Non-linear Business Cycle Theories

Osaka Economic Papers, March

15

1955-2 ( J )(A Critical Note on Hicksian Business Cycle Theory)

Economic Theory, No. 25 (May)16

1955-3 ( J )(Three Notes on Input-Output Analysis)

Economic Studies Quarterly, 6-1/2 (December)17

1956-1 ( J )(Some Calculated Findings of IO Analysis of Japanese Economy)

The Statistical Research Association

18

1956-2 ( J )(Shortage of Resources and Nation’s Capacity)

The Economic Theory, No. 33

191956-3 ( F )(Expansion Economique et Cycles)

Published in ③

20

1957-1 ( J )(Economic Growth and Business Cycles)

Published in ④ (August)21

1957-2 ( J )(An Analysis of Reinvestment Cycles)

Osaka U Economics, 7-3 (November)

22

1959

Factors Proportions and Foreign Trade: The Case of Japan

(M. Tatemoto)

Review of Economics and Statistics

Notes: Most departments of economics in Japanese Universities publish the journals of their own: Kyoto U : The Economic Review; Wakayama U: The Economic Theory
and so on.
① Kurihara, K. (ed.), Post-Keynesian Economics, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, 1954.
② Takata, Y. (ed.) ( J ), Studies of Economic Growth, Vol. I, Yuhi-kaku, Tokyo, 1954.
③ CNRS (ed.) ( F ), Les Modeles Dynamiques en Econometrie, Paris, 1957.
④ Takata, Y. (ed.) ( J ), Studies of Economic Growth: Growth and Stability,Vol. III, Yuhi-kaku, Tokyo, 1957.

1960s
No

Year

Titles of Articles

Published Places

23

1960-1The Structure and Growth of the Japanese Economy

24

1960-2 ( J )(The Structure and Growth of the Japanese Economy)

Published in ①

25

1962 ( J )(Demand and Supply Functions of Money)

Economic Studies Quarterly, 12-2

26

1963-1

A Dynamic I-O Model of Japanese Economy

ISER Discussion Paper, Osaka U

27

1963-2 ( J )(To Improve the Long-Term Forecast of Japanese Economy)

Published in ②

28

1964-1

A Quarterly Econometric Model of Postwar Japanese Economy: 1951–59*

Osaka Economic Papers (March and July)

29

1964-2 ( J )( Japanese Export Functions: 1952–59)

30

1964-3 ( J )(On Identities in the Monetary Sector)

Economic Studies Quarterly, 14-2

31

1964-4

A Quarterly Econometric Model of Postwar Japanese Economy: 1952–61*

Osaka Economic Papers ( July)32

1964-5 ( J )An Estimation of the Demand for Water in Tokyo

33

1964-6 ( J )(Fundamental Problems of Economic Growth)

Published in ③

34

1964-7 ( J )(The Interwar Period of the World Economy and Analysis)

Published in ④

(S. Miyano)(E. Eguchi)(Y. Shinakai)

ISER Discussion Paper, Osaka U

Economic Studies Quarterly, 14-2

Sangyo Keikaku Kaigi (September)

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73

017

35

1965

A Model of Regional Planning

Published in ⑤

36

1966-1An Econometric Model of Domestic Migration and Regional Economy

The Regional Science A. Papers

37

1966-2 ( J )(A Comment on the Relations between Price and Money Wages)

Published in ⑥

38

1967

Dynamic Properties of the Osaka Econometric Model of Postwar Japanese Economy:
1952–61
(L. Klein)

ISER Discussion Paper ( June)

39

1968

Factors for Rapid Economic Growth

Published in ⑦

40

1969-1 ( J )(A Comment of Ono’s Measurement of Philipp’s C.)

Published in ⑧

41

1969-2An Econometric Analysis of Postwar Japanese Economy-III: Detailed Discussion of the
Osaka Model

CSEAS Discussion Paper, No. 4

42

1969-3An Econometric Analysis of Postwar Japanese Economy-II: Outline of Osaka Model

CSEAS Discussion Paper, No. 6

43

1969-4An Econometric Analysis of Postwar Japanese Economy-VI: Compilation of Data*

CSEAS Discussion Paper, No. 7* All these papers are the products of a joint project, co-authors are L.R. Klein, S. Koizumi, K. Sato and S. Shinkai.
① Morishima; Shinohara; and Uchida (eds.) ( J ), New Economic Analysis, Sobun-sha, Tokyo, 1960.
② Shinohara; and Uchida (eds.) ( J ), Explorations of Japanese Economic Policies, Toyokeizai Shimpo-sha, Tokyo, 1963.
③ Kumagai; Yasui; and Nishiyama (eds.) ( J ), Lectures on Modern Economics, Sobun-sha, Tokyo, 1964.
④ Studies in Distribution Theory: Takata Memory Volume ( J ), Yuhikaku, Tokyo, 1964.
⑤ Papers & Proceedings of Regional Science Association, Vol. 1, U of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, 1965.
⑥ Tachi; and Watanabe (eds.) ( J ), Economic Growth and Finance, Iwanami, Tokyo, 1967.
⑦ Klein, L. R.; and Ohkawa, K. (eds.), Economic Growth, Irwin, New York, 1968.
⑧ Niida; and Ono (eds.) ( J ), Japanese Industrial Organization, Iwanami, Tokyo, 1969.

1970s
No

Year

Titles of Articles

Published Places

44

1970

The Challenge of the Rising Sun

Quadrant, 14-6

45

1972-1The Present State of Research on Urbanization and Its Effects on Cultural Changes in
ASPAC Countries: A Bibliographic Survey
(T. Fukuchi; and N. Sakashita)

ASPAC Journal*

46

1972-2 ( J )(An Economic Survey of South Sumatra Province)

Southeast Asian Studies, 10-3

47

1973

Japan’s Stake in Asia

Published in ①

48

1974-1 ( J )(Problems with Japanese External Policies)

Published in ②

49

1974-2The Socio-Economic Behavior of Peasants in Java and Central Thailand
(K. Mizuno; Y. Tsubouchi, et al.)Southeast Asian Studies,12-3

50

1974-3

Japanese Entrepreneurship in the Early Stage of Economic Development

Asian Profile, 2-1

51

1974-4

Japan: The Rising Sun or the Sinking Ship: The Energy Problem and the Food Shortage

CSEAS Discussion Paper, No. 74

52

1974-5

Books on Japan: An Assorted Bibliography

The Japan Foundation

53

1975-1

Interdisciplinary Research and Area Studies

Journal of SEA Studies, 6-2

54

1975-2The Future Pattern of Japanese Economic and Political Relations with Southeast Asia
(T. Yano)

CSEAS Discussion Paper, No. 81

55

1977-1An Econometric Analysis of Japanese Exports and Imports

Published in ③

56

1977-2

A List of Quantitative Models of the National Economies in Asian Countries (M.
Ezaki)ADIPA Inf. Service, No. 17

57

1978-1 ( J )(The Image of Japan in the History Texts in Asia)

ESSO Oil Grant

58

1978-2Multinational Corporations and Development Financing

Published in ④

59

1978-3

Argentine Economy and the World Food Market, Especially the Asian Market, Ten
Year’s Perspectives

CSEAS Discussion Paper, No. 102

60

1979-1 ( J )(Social Development and Agriculture in Asia)

Southeast Asian Studies, 17-2

61

1979-2 ( J )( Japanese Economy)

International Encyclopedia Britannica

62

1979-3

Econometric Models of East Asian Developing Economies and Asian Link Model

Southeast Asian Studies,17-2(T. Yano)* Asia Pacific Quarterly of Cultural and Social Affairs was published by Asia Pacific Center in Seoul.
① Taylor, A. (ed.), Perspectives on US-Japan Economic Relations, Ballinger, 1973.
② Kaizuka; and Yasuba (eds.) ( J ), International Environment and Economic Policy, Nihon Keizai Shimbunsha, Tokyo, 1974.
③ Kosobud; and Minami (eds.), Models of the Japanese Economy, 1977.
④ ECPD, National Financing of Economic Developing, Beograd, 1978.

018

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73

1980sNo

Year

Titles of Articles

Published Places

63

1980-1

Southeast and East Asia in 1980

News Week; CSEAS Discussion Paper, No.
108

64

1980-2On Linking National Econometric Models of Japan, US and Southeast Asian Countries

Southeast Asian Studies, 17-4

65

1980-3

Institutional Factors and Government Policies for Appropriate Technologies in Southeast
Asia

ILO Working Paper, September

66

1980-4

Japan and Southeast Asia

Asian Survey, 20-7

67

1980-5 ( J )( Japanese Economy, 1979)

Encyclopedia Britannia, 1980

68

1980-6The East and Southeast Asian Economies in 1980–1981

Business Week, October

69

1980-7The Impact of Climatic Change on Human Society

WMO Conf. in Guangzhou

70

1980-8 ( J )(Problems of Developing Countries)

Economics Encyclopedia, Toyokeizai

71

1980-9 ( J )(Economic Security)

Published in ①

72

1980-10 ( J )(A Study on the Cultural Communication with Asia)

Report to Osaka Prefecture Government

73

1980-11 ( J )(Cooperate with Human Capital Accumulation)

The JERC Monthly, May

74

1980-12 ( J )(Oil-Energy Problems and Japanese Security)

Inst. for Security and Peace; Published in
{36}

75

1980-13 ( J )(Transfer of Appropriate Technological and Institutional and Cultural Factors)

Published in ②

76

1981-1

Japanese Industrial Restructuring Policies, 1945–1979

CSEAS Discussion Paper, No. 106

77

1981-2A Comparative Study of Green Revolution and Rural Development in Asia

Southeast Asian Studies, 18-4

78

1981-3 ( S )Economic Growth, Savings and Housing Finance in Japan

Conf. at Cartagena, Colombia

79

1981-4

Economic Growth, Savings and Housing Finance in JapanThe Journal of Economic Studies, 8-3

80

1981-5

Japanese Firms in Asia

Japanese Economic Studies, 10-1

81

1982-1

Debt Accumulation, Oil Crisis and International Financing

Published in ③

82

1982-2The Global Energy Problems and Japanese Crisis Management Policies

Published in ④

83

1982-3Moving up the Market: Transformation of Industrial Structure and Economic Policies

CSEAS Discussion Paper, No. 113

84

1983-1 ( J )(Indonesian Economic Development and Its Relations with Japan)

Kansai Economic Research Center85

1983-2 ( J )( Japan JV’s’ Management and Labor Relations)Kansai Economic Research Center86

1983-3 ( J )(An Interim Report on French-Japan Trade Conflicts)

Kansai Economic Research Center87

1983-4

Institutional Factors and Government Policies for Appropriate Technologies: Survey
Findings in Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines

ILO World Employment Program
Working Paper, No. 110

88

1983-5

US-Japan Economic Problems

US-Japan Security Conf. on Asia and thePacific, Marina del Rey

89

1983-6Competition and Cooperation among Western Pacific Basin Countries

The Korean Journal of International Studies,
14-3

90

1983-7An Econometric Analysis of the Philippine Economy: Policy Simulation (W. Manalac)Southeast Asian Studies, 21-2

91

1983-8Comments on Kaya-Onishi’s Project and the Future of ESCAP LDC

Published in ⑤

92

1983-9Industrial Policy in Japan

93

1984-1 ( J )(How to Go beyond the Breton Woods)

Published in ⑦

94

1984-2 ( J )(Second Interim Report on French-Japan Conflicts)

Kansai Economic Research Center95

1984-3

Economic Growth, Competition and Cooperation in Asian Countries

CSEAS Discussion Paper, No. 118

96

1984-4

Debt Problems and the World Economy: Perspectives in the 1980s

Dinar (Kuwait), 1-4

97

1984-5

Debt Problems of Developing Countries: The Asian Perspectives

Pacific Economic Papers, ANU, November

98

1984-6An Econometric Link System for the East and Southeast Asian Countries, Japan and theUS(M. Ezaki and M. Shibayama)Southeast Asian Studies, 22-3

99

1985-1

Japanese Management in Southeast Asia: Introd.

Southeast Asian Studies, 22-4

100

1985-2

Debt Accumulation Problems in Developing Countries

CSEAS Discussion Papers, No. 119

101

1986-1 ( J )(Debt Accumulation in Asian Countries)

Kansai Economic Research Center

102

1986-2 ( J )(The Present and the Future of Japanese Style Management)

Kansai Economic Research Center(F. G. Adams)

Published in ⑥

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73019

103

1986-3 ( J )(Characteristics of Asian Economic Development)

Published in ⑧

104

1986-4

Japanese Management in Indonesia

Southeast Asian Studies, 23-1

105

1987-1 ( J )(Factors Changing the World Economy, 1)

TORay Economic Letters, 3106

1987-2 ( J )(Factors Changing the World Economy, 2)

TORay Economic Letters, 4107

1987-3 ( J )(The Issues in the Fourth National Dev. Plan for Osaka)

Speech at the Kansai ERCenter

108

1987-4 ( J )An Economic Overview of East Asia

KERC; Published in ⑨

109

1988-1 ( J )( Japan and the World in the 20th Century)

Published in {42}1101988-2 ( J )(Management and Labor Relations in Japanese Firms in Asia)

Kansai Econ Research Center

111

1988-3 ( J )(Our Request for National Land-Use Plan: Past and Future)

Speech for Subaru Forum112

1988-4

The Pattern and Process of Asian Economic Development

Published in {39}113

1988-5Development Strategic Study for Wu Xi Region

Published in ⑩ UNCRD (September)

114

1989-1 ( J )(Integrated Computer Program for US-Japan Modeling)(Sugiura, Ezaki, and Shibayama)

Published in ⑪ to MOE

115

1989-2 ( J )(Problems for Economic Cooperation in the 90s)

International Cooperation Study, 5-2

116

1989-3

Japan’s Role in Asian Economic Development

OIU Working Paper, No. 1

117

1989-4The Choice of Appropriate Technology and Socioeconomic Factors and Government
Policies in Southeast AsiaOIU Journal of International Studies 1-1;
Published in {48}118

1989-5

A Conceptual Framework of the Political Economy of Policy Making

Published in {43]① Eto, S. et al. (ed.) ( J ), World Peace and Security, Hara-shobo, Tokyo, 1980.
② Watabe, T. (ed.) ( J ) , Southeast Asian World, Sobun-sha, Tokyo, 1980.
③ Ostojic, N. (ed.), International Financing of Economic Development, Beograd, 1982.
④ Eichhorn, W. (ed.), Economic Theory of Natural Resources, Physica-Verlag,Wurzburg-Wien, 1982.
⑤ Hickman, B. (ed.), Global International Economic Models, North-Holland, the Hague, 1983.
⑥ Adams, F. G.; and Klein, L. R. (eds.), Industrial Policies for Growth and Competitiveness, Lexington Books, Lexington, 1983.
⑦ Okita, S. (ed.) ( J ), North-South Problems, Chuokoron-sha, Tokyo, 1984.
⑧ Ishi,i Y. (ed.) ( J ), Structure and Change of the SEA World, Sobun-sha, Tokyo, 1986.
⑨ Ellison, H. J. (ed.), Japan and the Pacific Quadrille: The Major Powers in East Asia, Westview Press, Boulder, 1987.
⑩ Report to Wu Xi City and Enterprise Management Association by UN Center of Regional Development, 1988.
⑪ Report of Research Project to Ministry of Education (with Sugiura, Ezaki, Sadamichi, and Shibayama), 1989.

1990s
No

Year

Titles of Articles

119

1990-1The Role of Japan in Asia and Contributions of Her Private Enterprises

OIU Working Paper, 4120

1990-2

Economic Development, Education and Technological Progress

IT Conf.; OIU Working Paper, 6121

1990-3

Institutional Factors and Government Policies for Appropriate Technologies in Southeast
Asia

Published in ①

122

1990-4

Kansai’s Internationalization Is First with Asia

KANSAI, No. 1

123

1991-1The Role of Japanese Finance in the Global Economy

Milano Conf. of Italian Financial A.

124

1991-2Major Development Countries in Asia and OECDAt Banca Nazionale dell’Agricoltura

125

1992-1 ( J )(Some Proposals to Improve the US-Japan Relations)

Kyoto Conf. of US-Japan Leaders126

1992-2

Some Proposals to Improve the US-Japan Relations

Kyoto Conf. of US-Japan Leaders127

1992-3

Japanese Financial Markets and Monetary Policies

OIU WP, No. 30; published in ②

128

1992-4

The Pattern of Asian Economic Development and the Role of Japan

Speech at Shaw Coll., HK

129

1992-5

Japan’s Economic Growth, Domestic Restructuring and External Relations

Chung-Hua I. Conf. Paper, No. 24

130

1992-6The Monetary Policy in Japan

Published in ②

131

1992-7

Japanese and Asian Development

Invited Speech at ADB

132

1992-8Japanese Investment in Europe: Past, Present, and Future

Banca Nazionale dell’Agricoltura

133

1992-9Modeling and Development Economies

PEO Report134

1992-10

Japanese Style Management in East Asian Economies

Kansai Economic Research Center

135

1992-11

Korea’s Role in an Emerging Pacific-Asia Era and Her Relations with the US and JapanHK Conf. of the Asia Society

136

1992-12

Process of Technology Transfer in Some Developing Countries

ILO Report020

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73Published Places

137

1992-13Is the Japanese Financial Market in Crisis?

Banca Nazionale dell’Agricoltura

138

1992-14

A Proposal for Improving US-Japan Relations

Kyoto Conf. of US- Japan leaders139

1993-1 ( J )(Urgent Is Dissolving the North-South Problems)Published in ③

140

1993-2

Comment on Globalization and Regional Development

UNCTAD Conf. on Multilateral Coop for
Development in the 21st Century

141

1993-3

Policies for Economic Development

Asian Productivity Journal, 1-1

142

1993-4The Evolution of Taiwan in the New World Order

At an International Conf. in Taipei

143

1993-5

Regional Integration Issues in Asia

4th US-Koreaa Conf. AFTA after
NAFTA

144

1993-6

Varieties of Asian Growth and Political Change

Published in ④

145

1993-7

Regional Development Policies

Regional Development Conf. in Beijing

146

1993-8

Role of the US and Japan in a Newly Emerging Asia-Pacific Era

Conf. on Korea’s New Economic
Diplomacy147

1993-9A More Professional Approach

Contribution to Asia Foundation

148

1993-10

Comments on Fubei Province’ Report

Fubei Conf. on Regional Development149

1994-1 ( J )(My View; The China Problem in Asia)

Issues and Research, 23-7

150

1994-2 ( J )(Trends in World Order: Regional Integration and Japan)

Published in ⑤

151

1994-3 ( J )(NAFTA versus AFTA)World Economic Review

152

1994-4

Regional Differences in Industrial Structures and Potential Gaps in Chinese Economy

Conf. of Chinese Academy of Social
Sciences

153

1994-5

Cooperation and Security of Northeast Asian Nations

KIEP Conf. on Economic Cooperationand Security

154

1994-6On the Japanese Recession and Bank’s Un-repaid Credits

For Banca Nazionale dell’Agricoltura

155

1994-7

Japanese Strategies in East Asia: Economic Prosperity and Political Stability

Taipei Conf. on Asia-Pacific Collective
Security156

1995-1 ( J )( Japanese Economy and Business)

International Encyclopedia Britannica

157

1995-2 ( J )(Political Economy of Present Pacific-Basin)

Kansai Teachers and Friends

158

1995-3Is APEC Good for Asia?

Look Japan, May

159

1995-4

A Comment on D. Gallik’s Trends in World Arms Trade, Spending and Their
Implications

Published in ⑥

160

1995-5

Why Doesn’t Econometric Models Perform as Well as Before?

ICSEAD Workshop on Asian Link

161

1995-6

Pacific Rim Trade and Development: Historical Environment and Future Prospects

Contemporary Economic Policy, Western
Economic Association

162

1995-7

Economic Cooperation and Political Rivalry among Northeast Asian Nations in the 21stCentury

Inchon U Conf., ICSEAD Working Paper
95-4

163

1995-8A Theory of Economic Take-Off

The Nepal Times164

1996-1 ( J )(Make International Cooperation Our National Strategy)

Development Technology, 2165

1996-2 ( J )(Management of Japanese Firms in China)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 96-6

166

1996-3 ( J )(Conditions for Take-Off )National Economic Review,* 174-4

167

1996-4 ( J )(The China Problems in Asia)

Nihon, January168

1996-5Development Policies and Institutional Changes in Stages: Pathos and Logos ofDevelopment

CEG, ICRIER, AID Conf. in New Delhi:
Structural Reform in India

169

1996-6

Some Forces Shaping the Coming 25 Years: Prospects for Productivity GrowthPresented at ⑦170

1996-7

Agriculture, Industrialization and Trade in Economic Development: A Great Contribution of Professors Liang and Lee

Memorial Speech for Prof. Liang Kuo-siu,in Taipei August 16–18

171

1996-8Address for the Fifth Convention of East Asian Econ Ass, Bangkok

The 5th EAEA Convention in Bangkok

172

1996-9Management Style of Japanese Multi-National Co’s in China

EAEP (ICSEAD), Vol 8

173

1997-1 ( J )(Development of East Asia Is Not a Miracle)

Development Journal, 97-5

174

1997-2 ( J )(The View-Points of Asian Nation-Builders)

Mito History Journal 46 (May)175

1997-3Business is APEC’s Business

The Japan Times, December 24

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73021

176

1997-4

Comments on General Report on Pollution Problems in the Kantong Province, China

UNDP Conf. in Beijing; Pollution of Yellow
River Delta & Sustainable Development177

1997-5

East Asia in the 21st Century: Economic Cooperation and Political Rivalry

The 111th Inauguration Conf. of Ewha
Woman U.

178

1997-6

East Asia in the 21st Century: Economic Cooperation and Political Rivalry

International Studies Review, 1-1

179

1997-7Can Asians Share the Common Ideals in Their Religions?

Talk at New Education Ass. Osaka180

1998-1 ( J )(Analysis and Prospect of Asian Financial Crisis)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 98-6

181

1998-2On the Financial Crisis in East Asia

The Asia Pacific Journal of Economic andBusiness, 98-6

182

1998-3The Varieties of Asia-Pacific Experiences

183

1999-1 ( J )(A Passage to Asian Union)

Seiko, 651

184

1999-2 ( J )(From Inter-city to Economic Exchange)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 10-special

185

1999-3 ( J )(Prospect of East Asian Economy)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 10-2

186

1999-4 ( J )(The Value of Monarchy in Asian Crises)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 10-3

187

1999-5 ( J )(10 Years of ICSEAD)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 10-4

188

1999-6 ( J )(Environmental Issues and Inter-City Cooperation with Indonesia)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 10-4

189

1999-7 ( J )(Review Article: Clashes of Civilizations or Clashes of Nations)

AURORA, Vol. 15 (Spring)( J. Morley)

Published in ⑧

* National Economic Review is published by the economics department of Kobe University, Japan.
① Chatterji, M. (ed.), Technology Transfer in the Developing Countries, Palgrave Macmillan, London, 1990.
② Frattiani, M.; and Salvadore, D. (eds.), Handbook of Monetary Policy in the World, West Press, NY, 1992.
③ Nihon Keizai Shimbunsha (ed.) ( J ), My Capitalism, Tokyo, 1993.
④ Morley, J. (ed.), Driven by Growth, M.E. Sharpe, NY, 1993.
⑤ Japan Forum for the 21st Century (ed.) ( J ), The Political Economy of the World in Convulsion, Sagano-shoten, 1994.
⑥ Klein, L. R.; Lo, F-C. et al. (eds.), Arms Reduction: Economic Implications in the Post-Cold War Era, UN University Press, Tokyo, 1995.
⑦ OECD Conf.; Globalization and Linkages to 2020: Challenges and Opportunities for OECD, 1998.
⑧ Morley, J. (ed.), Driven by Growth, 2nd ed., The Sharp, 1998.

2000s
No

Year

Titles of Articles

190

2000-1 ( J )(Difficulty in Asian Long-Term Statistics Project and My Hope)News Letter: Asian LTSP, No. 16 (March)

191

2000-2 ( J )(Prospect of the Japanese Economy)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 11-special

192

2000-3 ( J )(Survey Report of Cargo Transportation in Yellow Sea)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 11-2

193

2000-4 ( J )(Introduction: A Study of Urban Transp. Issues in China)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 11-3

194

2000-5 ( J )(On Low Fertility Rate in Kitakyushu City)

Mayors/Governors Conf., Kitakyushu

195

2000-6The Success and Failure of Regional Development Policies in Japan

Jungjing Conf. on Great West Development; Published in {70}196

2000-7

Introduction: Survey of Econometric Models of China

197

2001-1 ( J )( Japanese Constitution in the 21st Century World and Japan)

Congressional Commission on ResearchInstitutions

198

2001-2 ( J )Japanese translation of [171]Viewpoint to East Asia, 12-1

199

2001-3 ( J )(Economic Development and Nation-Building)Viewpoint to East Asia, 12-2

200

2001-4

A Post-mortem Diagnosis of Asian Financial Crisis

Viewpoint to East Asia, 12-1

201

2001-5

A Post-mortem Diagnosis of Asian Financial Crisis

Published in {71}202

2001-6

Capacity Building for Environmental Problems in Kitakyushu

Report for Mayors/Governors Conf.

203

2001-7 ( J )(Difficulties in Asian Research and Education – Inaugural Lecture)

School of Asian Studies, Yamaguchi
University, Viewpoint to East Asia, 12-4

204

2001-8 ( J )(Prospect of Japanese Economy)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 12-special

205

2002-1 ( J )(The Problems Facing China)

Nihon, February

206

2002-2 ( J )(Prospect of Japanese Economy)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 13-special

207

2002-3

A Postmortem Diagnosis of Asian Financial Crisis

EAEP, Vol. 12

208

2002-4

Policies to Meet the Challenge of an Aging Society with Declining Fertility: Japan andOther Asian Countries

EAEP, Vol. 13-Special Issue

022

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73Published Places(L. R. Klein)

Published in {55}209

2002-5

Lessons from Indonesia: The First 25 Years of the New Order

Published in ①

210

2002-6The Japanese Economy in the 1990s

EAEP

211

2002-7 ( J )(How to Observe China: Introduction)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, November

212

2002-8 ( J )(Attention to Regional Differences in China)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, December

213

2003-1 ( J )(China and Chung-Kuo in Historic Perspective)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, January214

2003-2 ( J )(China is Continental Country; Japan is Oceanic Country)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, February215

2003-3 ( J )(The Problems Facing Chinese Economy I)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, March216

2003-4 ( J )(The Problems Facing Chinese Economy II)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, April

217

2003-5 ( J )(The Present State of Chinese Political Economy)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, May

218

2003-6 ( J )(A Brilliant British Reporter’s View on China)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, June219

2003-7 ( J )(Hong Kong’s Relations to Mainland China)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, July220

2003-8 ( J )(Hong Kong as a Step-Stone to China)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, August221

2003-9 ( J )(Some Symptoms for China to Change?)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, September

222

2003-10 ( J )(Historic Problems to China: Yasukuni Shrine Issue)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, October223

2003-11 ( J )(We Question the Spiritual Foundation of Chinese Nation)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, November

224

2003-12 ( J )(National Strategies of China and Japan in Turbulent Asia)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, December

225

2003-13 ( J )(Can East Asian Union Be Formed?)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 14-5

226

2003-14 ( J )(Politics, History and Religion)

Yasukuni

227

2003-15 ( J )(The Viewpoints of Asian Nation-Builders)

Mito History Journal, No. 46

228

2004-1 ( J )(China’s Political Economy before Reform and Open Door)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, January229

2004-2 ( J )(Ethnic Minority Problems in China—1)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, February230

2004-3 ( J )(Ethnic Minority Problems in China—2)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, March

231

2004-4 ( J )(Ethnic Minority Problems in China—3)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, April232

2004-5 ( J )(Ethnic Minority Problems in China—4 and the Taiwan Issues)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, May

233

2004-6 ( J )(Economic Development and Nation-Building in China)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, June234

2004-7 ( J )(Can China Be a Middle-Income Nation: Nation-Building 2)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, July235

2004-8 ( J )(Can China Be an Advanced State: Nation Building 3)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, September

236

2004-9 ( J )(What Kind of Country Will China Be Nation-Building 4)

Yamaguchi Monthly Report, October237

2004-10 ( J )(Book Review: Joe Stud Well, The China Dream)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 15-1

238

2004-11 ( J )(The National Strategies of China and Japan in Tumbling Asia)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 15-4

239

2004-12 ( J )(Three Blind Spots in Japanese Education Reform Policies)

Gakushikai Monthly

240

2005-1 ( J )(On the Revision of Japanese Constitution)

Speech at Koshi-Kai, September

241

2005-2 ( J )(I Question the Spiritual Life of Chinese Intellectuals)

Sankei Newspapers

242

2005-3 ( J )(Formation of East Asian Community and Education)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 16-4

243

2005-4 ( J )(Why Did the Level of Japanese Universities Fall So Much?)

Sotsutaku

244

2006-1 ( J )(Rapidly Changing World Circumstances and Japanese National Strategies)

Lecture at Coast Guard College245

2006-2 ( J )(Education to Revive Bushido Spirits)

Japan Education Association Series

246

2006-3 ( J )(Civilized Knighthood)

Speech at Kokumin Kaikan, Osaka247

2006-4 ( J )(History Cannot Be the Record of Politicians’ Assertions)

Nihon

248

2006-5 ( J )(Why Did Japanese Teaching Capability Weaken So Much?)Kansai Shiyu, August–November

249

2007-1The Asian Financial Crisis and Thereafter

Speech at Asian Mayors Conf. April

250

2007-2 ( J )(Monarchy and Two Kinds of the Republic: Problems of Confucianism)

Kansai Shiyu, March251

2007-3 ( J )(Policies to Reform Elementary, And Higher Education)

Sotsutaku252

2007-4 ( J )Education: Who Teaches What And How

Nihon

253

2008-1 ( J )(Be More Responsible and Prudent for Free Speech)

Nihon, October254

2008-2 ( J )(Professor Hideo Aoyama and Professor Yasuma Takata)

Seiheki

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73023

255

2009-1 ( J )(Who Is Really Responsible for World Financial Crisis 2008?)

Yamaguchi Monthly Review, January256

2009-2 ( J )(Seigo Funaoka: Japan in Asia Constellation)

257

2009-3 ( J )(Notes On Entrepreneurial Moral)

Kodo, March and April

258

2009-4 ( J )(Notes on Public Morality)

Kodo

259

2009-5 ( J )(Review Article: Decentralization Policies in Asian Development)

← {65}

Viewpoint to East Asia, 20-2

260

2009-6(Review Article：Transition from Socialist to Market Economies)

← {66}

Viewpoint to East Asia, 20-4

(Michio Okamoto)

Report to M. of Education① Mohamad Ikhsan; Chris Manning; and Hadi Soesastro (eds.), Mohamad Sadli at 80 Years: The Indonesian Economy in the New Political Era, Penerbit Buku Kompas,
Jakarta, 2002.

2010s
No

Year

Titles of Articles

Published Places261

2010-1 ( J )(A Survey of Macro-Econometric Modeling of Japan and Asia)

Viewpoint to East Asia, 21-4

262

2010-2

When and How Can Asia Play a Leading Role in World Order?

The Asian Economic Journal263

2010-3 ( J )(My Study of Indonesian and Research on Indonesian Issues)

Southern Cross, No. 10

2642010-4 ( J )(We demand PM Hatoyama to Resign and LDP to Reform)

Sankei Newspapers; Nihon, April

265

2010-5 ( J )Education, Science and Technology Are Essential to Restart a Nation

Nihon, March

266

2010-6 ( J )(Shigeki Nishimura and Economics)

Kodo

267

2010-7 ( J )(When and How Can Asia Play a Leading Role in World Order?)Viewpoint to East Asia, 22-4

268

2011-1

The Lessons of the Lost Two Decades of Japan to Korea

National Academy of Sc., Korea; Published
in ①

269

2011-2(My Memoire of Professor Wassily Leintief )

Sobun

270

2011-3 ( J )(On the Formation of Japanese Nation and Language)

National Language・Literature271

2011-4 ( J )(Domestic-Foreign Worries and Economic Weakness of Chinese and Russian)Nihon, October272

2012-1( J )(Meinecke’s Book Review; Marianne Weber, Max Weber)Geirin, No. 61 (April)273

2012-2 ( J )(On Greater East Asian War) 274

2012-3 ( J )(Difficulties to Revise the Royal Family Law and How to Overcome)Kan, Winter275

2012-4 ( J )(My Memories of Association with Mr. Michio Morishima)

Sobun, 5276

2013-1

Economic Development and Nation Building in Stages

Singapore Economic Review Conf. in
Singapore277

2013-2

Comments on Policies on Fertility Decline

World Demography Conf. in Pusan;
Published in {70}2782013-3 ( J )Review Sakharov: Progress, Peaceful Coexistence and Intellectual Liberty

Kan, Spring279

2013-4 ( J )Review Brzezinski: Grand Chess Board

Kan, Summer

280

2013-5 ( J )Review Toynbee: Civilizations on Trial

Kan, Autumn281

2013-6 ( J )(Anti- or Pro-Japan in Asian Texts: Korean History Text Parts Related to Japan
Translated (1))

Nihon, December

282

2014-1 ( J )(Review: P. Kennedy: The Rise and the Fall of Great Powers)

Kan, Winter283

2014-2 ( J )(Anti- or Pro-Japan in Asian Texts: Korean History Text Parts Related to Japantranslated (2)–(5))

Nihon, January–April284

2014-3 ( J )(The International Conf. Debating the Most Front Global Topics)

Chap. 9 in ②285

2014-4 ( J )(Obituary and Appraisal Dedicated to Professor Lawrence R. Klein)

Keizai Seminar, February–March

286

2015-1 ( J )(My Memories of Classmate Academician Liu Yuan Zhang)

Sobun, November287

2015-2 ( J )(Reflections and Opinions on the 70 Years after WWII)

Mito History Journal288

2016-1 ( J )(Reflections and Opinions on the 70 Years after WWII)

Nihon, January–March(Michio Okamoto)① The National Academy of Sciences, Stability and Growth of the Korean Economy in the New World Order, 2011.
② JERC Committee for 50th anniversary (ed.), Economists’ Postwar History. Nihon Keizai Shimbunsha, 2014.

024

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73Kan, WinterThe SEASIA 2015 Conference:
A Watershed in Southeast Asian Studies
Janus Isaac V. Nolasco
Managing Editor, Asian Studies: Journal of Critical Perspectives on Asia
Asian Center, University of the Philippines Diliman

The Southeast Asian Studies in Asia Conference
2015 (SEASIA 2015 Conference), which was held
on December 12 and 13, 2015 in Kyoto, Japan,
represents a watershed in the history of Southeast
Asian Studies. There have always been conferenceson and in the region, but SEASIA 2015 is arguably
the largest region-based academic conference focusing on Southeast Asia.
The SEASIA 2015 Conference embodies the pioneering and collaborative efforts of the Consortiumfor Southeast Asian Studies in Asia, whose membership includes 10 of the leading area-studies institu-

026

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73

tions in Northeast and Southeast Asia: the Center
for Asia-Pacific Studies (Research Center for
Humanities and Social Sciences), Academia Sinica;
the Institute of Asian Studies, Chulalongkorn University; the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI);
the Korean Association of Southeast Asian Studies;
the Center for Southeast Asian Studies (CSEAS),
Kyoto University; School of Humanities and Social
Sciences, Nanyang Technological University; Asia
Research Institute (ARI), National University ofSingapore; Institute of Asian Studies, Universiti
Brunei Darussalam; Asian Center, University of thePhilippines Diliman; and the Taiwan Association ofSoutheast Asian Studies. Together, they are “building on the imperative to promote region-based
Southeast Asian Studies” and aim to facilitate“research collaboration and networking” as well as
the sharing of vital information. The Kyoto conference is the first of the biennial SEASIA conferencesthat will be regularly held in the coming years.
True to the objectives of the Consortium, the
SEASIA 2015 Conference drew an impressively
large number of participants. The conference’s Callfor Proposals attracted some 813 proposals from268 institutions in 28 countries. The conference
itself was attended by 530 participants from all 10of the member countries of the Association ofSoutheast Asian Nations (ASEAN), along with
Timor Leste and 15 other countries in Northeast
Asia, the United States of America, and Europe.
Scholars from Southeast Asia formed the majority of paper presenters (40%), followed by Northeast Asia (37%), North America (10%), Europe(9%), and Australia and New Zealand (4%). The
conference covered a staggering range of topics discussed in 79 panels and over 250 papers, showcas-

ing the synergistic, inter- and multidisciplinary andcomparative approaches in the study of Southeast
Asia. Young and senior, leading as well as up-andcoming, scholars gathered to explore and debate awide array of topics ranging from the reconceptualization of Southeast Asian Studies in Asia to new
approaches to history and culture, from issues ofmobility, development, and the environment to law
and politics, economy, and the evolving regional
order.
The conference also hosted exhibits of the publications of partners and members of the Consor-

tium. On sale and display were books and/or journals by the International Institute for Asian Studies(in partnership with Amsterdam University Press);
the Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University; the Asian Center, University of the Philippines Diliman; and the National University ofSingapore, among others. Fifteen video documentaries were also shown during the two-day conference
to poignantly illustrate and personalize the issues
that Southeast Asian peoples face: labor, environmental and social degradation, land grabbing, gender, the sex industry, among others.

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73027

The SEASIA 2015 Conference: A Watershed in Southeast Asian Studies

The breadth of this scholarship and participation
testifies to the vibrancy of Southeast Asian Studies
within the region, and affirms just how far the field
has come since its origins during and as part ofCold War geopolitics; the conference provides asnapshot, albeit panoramic, of the present state of
the field, fitting enough for a conference held at the
Kyoto International Conference Center, which
offers a stunning view of mountains north of andaround Japan’s ancient capital.
At the same time, SEASIA 2015 Conference provided an opportunity to look back into the past andcast a forward glance into the future. In his speech,
Guest of Honor Mr. Fukuda Yasuo, former Prime
Minister of Japan, identified the challenges posedby the history question, by environmental degradation, and by aging societies to ASEAN and theregion more generally, and stressed the need forSoutheast Asianists to study the issues carefully andhelp come up with solutions to prepare the individual countries and the region for the future.
In his keynote speech, “Towards a Region of New
Nations,” Dr. Wang Gungwu, University Professorof the National University of Singapore, reflectedon the origins, significance, and future of Southeast
Asia as a region; he traced its development in theaftermath of World War II, moving from the emergence of ASEAN in 1967 to the future of Southeast
Asia in the so-called Asian Century. Stressing that“it is important not to forget” the history of theregion, he outlined the geopolitical context andimportance of Southeast Asia during the Cold War
and the “ideological battle between Communism

028

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73and Capitalism” and pointed out the endurance of
ASEAN as a 48-year-old regional organization. Professor Wang also described the contemporary significance of Southeast Asia as a maritime territory inwhat he labeled “the New World Order,” one that ischaracterized by globalization, and the rise of China
and India. Alongside these reflections on the region
were insights into divergent experiences of nationbuilding of various Southeast Asian states, and thereiteration of the productive tension arising fromthe fact that the concept of “region” was brought infrom outside Southeast Asia. Professor Wang
affirmed the potential of Southeast Asian Studies topromote dialogues across civilizations and countries
through in-depth analysis and comparisons, andthrough appreciation of the region’s complex,
hybrid histories and dynamics.
In the second keynote address, Dr. Pasuk Phongpaichit, Professor Emeritus of Chulalongkorn University, offered a personal reflection on the historyof Southeast Asian Studies. She talked about her
development as a scholar from the 1950s to the1970s, a period that saw her move from a small village in Thailand, to the capital, Bangkok, and into
Australia and the United Kingdom for graduate
studies in political economy. She then recounted
the various social, philosophical, and politicaltrends that affected her and others’ intellectual
development: the rise of development economics,
the emergence of the social sciences as a tool
thereof, the wave of democratic popular movements, and the damaging impact of postmodern
philosophy on scholarly work. Ajarn Pasuk also

painted a portrait of contemporary changes altering
the trajectory of and posing a challenge to scholarship: the end of the Cold War, the eventual dominance of global business and finance, the checkered
career of democracy, the growth of inequality, theeruption of violence, and climate change. Facedwith these obstacles and “the increasing complexityof our globalized world,” scholars, she exhorted,should do “interdisciplinary work,” think big, and“be engaged, be sensitive to the time and place,[and] be prepared to explore new avenues.”
Reminding scholars that knowledge matters and theneed to debate should be protected, she urged themto “maintain the optimism that change for the better is possible” and to remember that “your innovative ideas, writing, and agitation—as well as yourcourage—have never been so much in demand as
they are right now.”
In bringing together various Southeast Asianscholars, policymakers, and activists across andbeyond the region, the SEASIA 2015 Conference
featured a festive buffet dinner on Saturday,
December 12 that also saw taiko performances(Japanese drums) and presentations by maiko(apprentice geiko), who went around the dining hallto mingle with the conference participants. The
next SEASIA Conference has been slated for 2017,
and will be hosted in Bangkok by Chulalongkorn
University’s Institute of Asian Studies, Faculty ofArts and Department of Political Science. Buildingon the historic success of the inaugural conference,
the Consortium hopes to expand and deepen the
study of Southeast Asia in Asia.

Keynote Speech at SEASIA 2015
December 12, 2015 at the Kyoto
International Conference Center

Towards a Region of
New Nations
Wang Gungwu
University Professor, National University of Singapore

Thank you, Professor Liu Hong, for your kindassociation with KyoDai that I’m very proud of.

ASEAN Economic Community Establishedintroduction. His Excellency Yasuo Fukuda, distin-

I’ve not actually worked with the Center itself

guished guests, my colleagues, and friends, I feelbut it is, of course, extremely well known in the

Today I am going to talk on a subject arising fromvery honored to be invited to Kyoto University

region and we have been beneficiaries of the very

the announcement that ASEAN will be an eco-

(KyoDai), especially to this historic occasion ofdeep research which the Center has been conduct-

nomic community in 2016. People have worked­celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Center foring for the last 50 years. Let me just recall one par-hard for that cause for quite a while. It has finallySoutheast Asian Studies at KyoDai. I feel particu-

ticular feature that struck me at the time when thecome to pass and the announcement was made withlarly honored because this Center was the firstCenter was founded. When I visited it for the first

great pride and expectations. This is a happy

major center of Southeast Asian studies in Asia. I

time, I was immediately impressed by its coverage.

moment, the 50th anniversary of the Center, thehad the privilege of visiting it when it was first

It was not content, like most other centers, with

48th anniversary of ASEAN and the extraordinary

started and I still recall my meeting with Professor,

humanities and the classics and the studies of mod-progress for ASEAN to have come this far. The

at that time the Director, Ichimura Shinichi andern society, economy, and politics. The Center went

story of that progress has been told elsewhere andthen the later Directors, Professor Ishii Yoneo

beyond into the field of science, agriculture, engi-

there is no need to go over that here. What I(1929–2010), Professor Yano Toru (1936–99), andneering, technology, disciplines that to my knowl-

thought I should do is to use this opportunity whenof course Professor Shiraishi Takashi, all very distin-edge no other center for Southeast Asian studies

ASEAN has taken this historic step forward towards

guished scholars of the region and people I have a

had attempted to do. This is something extremely

a community and Southeast Asian studies atgreat admiration for and very proud to have known

important. For that reason, it seems to me that it­KyoDai celebrates its 50th anniversary to say some-for a long time.

remains one of the most distinguished and clearly

thing about the past, to review the past 50 years

The president of Kyoto University mentioned theunique institutions of its kind, the way it has drawn

and offer some reflections on what it means for thehistoric contributions of KyoDai to humanities

together such a wide range of scholars to work

region’s future.

studies. This reminds me that my first visit to Kyoto

there.

In particular, I want to review the word “region.”in 1960 was actually before the Center was estab-

I regret I didn’t have the privilege of studying or

The word is used quite casually today and in many

lished when I called on Professor Yoshikawa Kojiro

doing research there, but let me now congratulatedifferent settings. Because it is used so widely, we(1904–80) and his colleagues at the University. Of

the Center for initiating this Consortium foralmost take for granted that Southeast Asia is acourse I visited KyoDai because the Institute for theSoutheast Asian Studies in Asia, and especially theregion. But we need to remind ourselves how new

Research of the Humanities was very famous for its

organizers for bringing together such a large gather-

this is. The concept of a region that has political,

contributions to East Asian studies, particularly to

ing of Southeast Asian scholars from all over the

security, economic, and other connotations andChina studies by scholars like Professors Naito

world. Indeed I believe it is the largest gathering of

ramifications, is completely modern. As far as I

Konan (1866–1934), Shirakawa Shizuka (1910–

Southeast Asian scholars in one room that I haveknow, the word region had previously only been2006), and Kaizuka Shigeki (1904–87), whose

ever seen, so I would like also to congratulate theused by geographers and professional scientists, butworks were already classics of their field. It is an

Consortium for their work.

never had the kind of political connotations that it

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73029

Keynote Speech at SEASIA 2015: Towards a Region of New Nations

has today. There has never been a concept of aAsia, soon after the start of the Second World War.

support to fight for their independence and made it

region of Southeast Asia in the past. It was only

Between 1942 and 1945, they had begun to thinkinevitable that war would not be cold, but would

since the end of the Second World War that people

about the aftermath of the Japanese occupation of

become the hottest war anywhere for the next two

started to think in those terms. I was a schoolboy

the Western colonies. What would they do should

decades.

when the word “Southeast Asia” first appeared inthey win, when they returned to Southeast Asia?

With that, the dangers to the whole region were1945, and I remember being struck by its use for

One of the things they anticipated, which in fact

obvious. The predictions by British strategists after

the Southeast Asia military command that the Brit-

happened, was the process of decolonization.

1945, that this area could become a political vac-

ish set up in Colombo during the war.

Sooner or later, many of them began to realize, theuum when the imperial powers left and that otherOf course, before that we had other terms, like

European empires would have to end. The Japanese

powers would eye the region with great interest,

the Japanese and Chinese use of “Nanyo” andwar had transformed the nature of Asian develop-

turned out to be true. As a result, the Cold War“Nanyang” for the islands to the south of theirment and created a new situation whereby all

divided the region roughly into half. Various leaderscountries, and the British use of “the Far East” toempires have to be wound up. The British reluc-of the new states actively attempted to counter that.

refer to all territories east of British India. On thetantly expected that, and between 1945 and 1950,

It is well known that the Afro-Asian meeting inother side of the Pacific, the Americans would gen-it became obvious that it wouldn’t be very long

Bandung in 1955 was one of the efforts to engage

erally talk about eastern Asia or East Asia. Southeast

before all the Western empires departed from Asia.

other global players for that purpose. But when the

Asia never quite emerged out of the early discus-

On the other side of the Pacific, the Americans

Vietnam War developed into a deadly life and deathsions before 1945. There were some others as well.

anticipated that even earlier, not in terms of any

struggle between the two sides of the Cold War,The French used Indochina for the states that theykind of regionalism, but in the light of their own

those efforts turned out to be rather feeble andhad taken over, while other people used “Indo-conquest of the Spanish Philippines. Not wanting

ineffective.

china” to refer to the areas between India andto be imperialists, some of them worked out a time-

China. And, for a while, the Indians also used

table to leave and prepare for the day when empires“Greater India,” a name that became popularcame to an end. As it turned out, the Americans

among their historians before the war. Thus there

played a role after the war in helping the decoloni-

It was in the midst of all this that ASEAN was

were many terms but not “Southeast Asia.”

ASEAN Emerges

zation of the area. They encouraged the European

founded. We are reminded that ASEAN is 48 years

By the 1950s, the phrase was already widely used

empires to leave and assisted the setting up of newold, and moving now to a new integrated commu-

and books and articles began to appear with theindependent nations in what was to become thenity, at least towards an economic one. This shows

title, “Southeast Asia.” The first textbooks, in fields

region of Southeast Asia. In some cases, like thethe progress the region is making. It is becoming

like geography and history, emerged very soon

struggle for Indonesia, that was actually a great help.

central to the political and economic developments

afterwards. Before long, there were courses on theThus the concept of Southeast Asia, the idea thatin this part of the world and increasingly pivotal forregion taught in some universities. As far as I know,

it should be a region, was always linked to the fact

the whole of Asia. The way the world economy is

the first university that took it seriously and set upthat it consisted of a number of small territories

shifting from its center in the North Atlantic to thea division of Southeast Asian studies was the School

between two large and potentially powerful coun-

Pacific and Indo-Pacific oceans suggests that theof Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) at the Uni-

tries. It was widely expected that, after the victory

strategic importance of Southeast Asia would con-versity of London.

of 1945, China would regain its former position intinue to grow.

the world. And when India became independent,

What does that mean for the region? There areas the British knew they would soon be, it would

regions and regions. Without going into elaborate

become a major force on the other side. It was wellcomparisons, let me simply say that there are differ-

It is good for us to remember that British strategic

known that China’s traditional interest in Nanyang

ent kinds of regions and this is a very strange andthinkers very quickly took up the term Southeast

was largely commercial while ancient Indian influ-

unique one. Today we think immediately of Europe

ences included deep cultural and spiritual ties in mostand the European Community when we talk of theof the territories of the region. Although such past

ASEAN community, but ASEAN is not at all likelinkages were different in both these cases, they were

the European Community. And when we lookno less significant for the future. The rise of both

elsewhere at other efforts to identify and activate

powers would provide serious challenges to Britain’s

regional groupings, whether in Northeast Asia,ability to protect its extensive interests in Asia.

South Asia, parts of Africa or Latin America, we canStrategic Interests

That was the background to an area that became
one of important strategic interest to powers like

030

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73see that none of them have taken off the way that
ASEAN has.

Britain and the United States after the war. They

It is actually quite surprising how well ASEAN

saw the anti-imperialist forces converging with anti-

has done. When it started, it was not the whole ofcapitalist movements that threatened their global

Southeast Asia, only five nations within it. Thoseinterests and it was inevitable that the Cold War

five nations came together under very unusual con-would spread to Asia. That made the new nations

ditions; one might say almost accidental circum-of the region open to a larger ideological struggle

stances. One has to say that it had a lot to do withand it was soon clear that these nations could not

the Vietnam War, the hot Cold War in our neigh-escape being a key part of that War. As a result,borhood. But it also had something to do with thewith the victory of the communists in China, thegreat transformation in Indonesia following

war was focused on French Indochina. The

Gestapu, the 30 September Movement that led to­Vietnamese sought and received Chinese and Soviet

the overthrow of Sukarno. This enabled the militaryKeynote Speech at SEASIA 2015: Towards a Region of New Nations

led by President Suharto to return to power andlike Japan, Thailand, and China, started first to

before 1945, and was actually ready to materialize

shape a completely new Indonesia. And that madethink in those terms. Southeast Asian polities wereas an independent nation state long before the rest

it possible for the balance of interests, powers, andmostly colonies that did not have a chance to doof Southeast Asia.

strategic thinking in the region to shift decisively

that until after the Second World War.

At the other end, if I may use two extremely dif-away from multiple local disputes and conflicts.

In that context, what are these nations? Every

ferent examples, we see Myanmar and Siam. Myan-Thus was Indonesia able to join with Thailand,country in the region gave its highest priority to

mar was, in 1886, probably the last major kingdom

Philippines, and the new countries of Malaysia andbuilding the nation within the borders that theyof Southeast Asia to be overwhelmed by Western

Singapore, to form the Association for Southeast

inherited after 1945. But they were very different

imperialism. Its people never fully accepted any of

Asian Nations. This history is well known, but it isfrom one another. For example, let me take the one

the Western political values that the British brought

important not to forget the origins of this regionalthat people often forget because its first effort tobecause the British did not even treat it as a separateorganization and understand why it is not like any

build a nation was not successful: the Philippines. It

political unit but made the proud kingdom a mereother. Regions are not the same.

is important to remember that the Philippines wasprovince of British India. This was a matter of greatThis leads me further to stress that nations are

actually the first modern attempt to build a nation

regret to the Myanmar people. Bearing that inalso not the same. I say this in the context of an

in Southeast Asia. Its unique position came frommind, you can see how distant the Myanmar expe-

association of nations that began with only fivethe fact that it was continuously associated with therience was to that of the Philippines.

members, and took another 30 years before increas-

European West via the Americas. Those deep roots

In between, there is the very special case of Thai-ing that membership to the 10 that it is today. This

went back to the Spanish takeover in the sixteenthland, which was never a colony but sprang from thetwo-stage development of the region should not be

century. That was significant because, by the nine-

Kingdom of Siam, a traditional state that sought toneglected. It is an important reminder to us about

teenth century, generations of Filipinos were study-

become a modern state while responding to the

how this region came together. We need to be

ing the changes across the Pacific, including thepressures of Western colonial powers. But where didreminded how dangerous and delicate the situation

rebellions that were linked to the decolonization

it look for a model? The Siamese kingdom certainly

was at the time. In the ideological struggle between

process in the Spanish Empire in Latin America.

looked to Europe, but it also looked to Japan whencapitalism and communism, the region was sharply

The early Filipinos were aware of the European tur-it saw Japan successfully leading Asia to build adivided into two. It was within that context thatbulence behind that process, from the French Revo-modern nation state. The Siamese admired the Japa-

ASEAN was formed.

lution to the German revolutions. They were alerted

nese and wanted to establish something similar for

Thus it is not coincidental that the organization

to the events in Europe that enabled the Latinthe country. In comparison, their Vietnamese

had to await the end of the Cold War before it

American states to free themselves from Spanishneighbors responded by looking to China as well as

could expand its membership to cover all the states

rule and build their nation states.

to Japan. With leaders like Ho Chi Minh, theyof the region. Brunei had joined when it became

Thus the Filipino elites had the earliest knowl-looked even further beyond. After his years inindependent in 1984, so there were six. The addi-

edge of the modern state. People like Jose Rizal,

France, Ho Chi Minh looked to the Communists

tional four came at the end of the 1990s, almost a

Andres Bonifacio, Emilio Aguinaldo had a good

and to the Soviet Union. Inspired by the Russian

decade after the Cold War had come to an end. It

understanding of what a nation state should be like.

Revolution, he turned to an internationalist model,

was in this way that ASEAN moved from its forma-

The Philippines connections with Mexico were very

and this took him to a different kind of nationalist

tion in the face of a common enemy to an organiza-

close. The way Simon Bolivar led the southern

revolution, a nationalism driven by the ideals of ation with common interests, in particular, one with

American states to independence, followed by Mex-

communist international. Here was a very different

an emphasis on common economic interests. There

ico’s independence and its efforts to consolidate that

response altogether from the others.

were, in the background, factors like the rise ofnation state, was observed very carefully by the

The Malay archipelagic territories of the Dutch

China and the potential rise of India, both big

young Philippine leaders. They were the first inand the British saw something different again.

countries in the neighborhood. That made it even

Southeast Asia to try to put nation building into

Sukarno in Indonesia looked more inward and pro-more important for ASEAN members to realize

practice and create their own nation. The Katipu-

vided leadership for what he observed of the antico-that it should strive to be a region that speaks withnan that stood up against the Spanish was anlonial movements within the Dutch East Indies.

one voice wherever possible. Clearly, only by being

extraordinary effort at the time. No other place in

His comrade, Mohammad Hatta, however, learnt

an organization able to do that can it be credible

Southeast Asia could have done that. Elsewhere in

directly from Europe, with careful reading of Dutch

and influential. The region has come to a turning

Southeast Asia, there was resistance against Euro-history, how the Netherlands fought for indepen-

point. The expansion of ASEAN from 5, 6 to 10,

pean colonizers but that was fought in traditional

dence from the Spanish Empire. All that fed into

underlines the strategic importance of Southeast

ways either by rebel groups in places like Burma,

the complex Indonesian political arena and inspired

Asia as a region unlike any other.

Java in Indonesia, on the Malay Peninsula, and in

its own unique understanding of what its modern

Vietnam. Theirs were traditional groups thatnation state should be like.

What Different Nations

fought for very different goals. But the Katipunan

Notwithstanding the differences between colo-stood for the idea of a modern nation state. They

nies like Indonesia and Myanmar, not much could

I mentioned that nations are also different. The

were the first to actually think of themselves as ahave been done by either country were it not formodern nation is something very new. There was

future nation. They were ahead of everyone, but

the Japanese invasion of Southeast Asia and three

no such concept in the past, particularly in the con-unfortunately they failed. The Americans took overand half years of Japanese dominance or occupa-

text of a state, the nation state. This was a totallyfrom the Spanish and later offered a different modeltion. That war provided the opportunity to speed

new experience anywhere in Asia. All the countries

for nation statehood, the American model insteadup the departure of the imperialists, but, even morein Asia since the nineteenth century, with Japanof the Spanish colonial one, or the Spanish Euro-

important, provided the opportunity for a young

leading the way, have been adjusting to the building

pean one. Nevertheless that too was totally new togeneration of leaders to prepare themselves to buildof modern states. Countries already independent,

the region. It was taking shape for several decades

new nation states.

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73031

Keynote Speech at SEASIA 2015: Towards a Region of New Nations

Old World Renewed

North African, centered on the landmass between

twenty-first century, to the second stage of ASEAN’s

China and eastern Asia on one side and Europe anddevelopment, it will not be long before the central-

I think I have said enough to remind ourselves how

the Mediterranean on the other, with the rest of

ity of ASEAN is not a matter of whether the South-

these new nation states began, where their roots

continental Europe and Asia in between, including

east Asians want it or not. This region will be cen-were, how far distant they were, and how much they

the lands bordering the Indian Ocean. However,tral in the Indo-Pacific zone, a core-area between

have had to learn about one another when they dis-for the last 200 years, we have maritime empires.

the maritime powers and the Eurasian Old World.

covered that they belonged to the same region,

When I spoke earlier of the exceptional develop-

Maritime power hinges for now on the New

something never thought about before. Althoughment of the Philippines, it was because it was theWorld because its Pacific and Atlantic base is on

the idea came from outside, it highlighted the sig-

first state that actually looked away from Asia acrossboth sides of the United States whose dominance innificance of the struggle for dominance around.

the Pacific. This was when the rest of Southeast Asia

that realm could remain for a long time. This mari-Thus combining the states in the region was aimed

under colonial rule from Europe looked the othertime foundation remains the key part of the newat giving it a consolidated character, one that would

way, to the nation states of Europe. The difference

world order.

enable it to stand up to major powers like Chinaof having to face the New World for centuries deci-

For Southeast Asia, however, it is still part of theand India. There was an Anglo-American under-

sively shaped the way the Philippines was to

Old World that has for the past two centuries beenstanding that led to strong support given to ASEAN

develop. That has clear relevance to ASEAN’s

dismissed as backward. This world also includes thein 1967 and this support has continued, now

regional future.

progressive parts of a Europe that lost its nerve afterlargely led by the Americans. But what is remark-Now that the 10 nation states of Southeast Asia

the two world wars that nearly destroyed it. I am

able is the way the nations began by having a com-have come together as a region, what is this world

sure the Europeans would not agree here, but tomon enemy but are now moving towards a set oforder that the region is in? It is tempting to call it

most of us in Asia, they now look rather tired andcommon interests.

an Anglophone world order in which using English

unsure where to go as they face a whole lot of newThis is another side of the region’s story, its

as a common international language has made it

problems. I am not suggesting that Asia does notchanging place in a world order that is essentiallypossible for ASEAN states to communicate more

have problems too, but Asia is now on the ascentpost-1945. This world order has been in dispute

easily. That would also remind us that the region

after centuries of being dominated by the West.

ever since the Cold War questioned its nature. It

stemmed from links with the post-1945 settlement

Asians feel that they have learned so much from thewas not until the 1990s that a new vision replacedwith which the world order defeated the Soviet

West; they have benefited from the great discoveries

it by installing the United States as the sole global

Union and its allies.

the West has made; they have mastered most of

superpower. Since the 1990s, the world has lived

That world order is now being challenged. The

newest techniques in science and engineering aswith this new order but, in view of developments

economic center of gravity is moving from thewell as in economics and finance, and in the world

during the last two decades, it may not last all that

North Atlantic to the Pacific by the fact that China

of entrepreneurship. Asians have mastered justlong. The world is too big, and the Americans haveis rising and India’s rise is only a matter of time.

about everything that the West has to teach them.

discovered that it is not their responsibility to look

Given that, Southeast Asia can look forward to aThis is changing that part of the Old World toafter everybody even if they could. And so there istime when it will be at the heart of activities thatwhich Southeast Asia belongs. It is the part that is

now much ferment over whether there is in fact awill change the economic conditions of the world.

being renewed and transformed by New World

single world order.

With the shift towards Asia, the importance of thestandards and inspirations. We are now looking at a

Insofar as the current world order has behind it a

Indian and Pacific Oceans in the global maritime

region that could fundamentally change its nature.

maritime foundation, it is still something relatively

capitalist world makes Southeast Asia even moreThat is why we can talk about the region of new

new, a product of the eighteenth century. Today, we

significant. As we move away from post-1945 stra-

nations, even though we know there is still a long

use words like global and globalization loosely in all

tegic thinking to the economic interests of theway to go before that can be considered real.

sorts of contexts. We even try to date its origins to
the ancient past when being global covered a muchsmaller portion of the world. However, globalization now refers to the whole world being tightly
connected. This degree of interconnectedness stems
from the post-Columbus crossings to the New
World. It is the New World that made true globalization possible. And that was possible because of
the rise of maritime power. I will not go into thattransformation history. Enough to say that, after
the eighteenth century, there was one maritime
empire on which, as the British would say, the sun
never sets, a power that circled the globe by sea.
This maritime global empire was further
strengthened by the economic order of capitalism.
Capitalism went by sea, so to speak, and spreadaround the world looking for markets andresources, creating the new kind of globalizationthat we have been living with. Before that, recorded
history of the Old World was largely Eurasian and

032

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73

Keynote Speech at SEASIA 2015: Towards a Region of New Nations

Towards Common Intereststhat is a narrow and only a minimalist approachachieving that, then the people of Southeast Asia

towards what needs to be shared. There is much

will gain the self-belief that would bring them con-

Let me end with one example to show just how far

more than that. Although the goal may be some-fidence and give the region credibility in the eyes of

we have to go. For some time now, people havewhat beyond us, it is one worth aiming for. I amothers. That is something really worth working for.

talked about a Southeast Asian community. Theynot suggesting that the cultures and values of every

It is a great challenge for this region of 10 new

have said that, to be a real community, there must

country in Southeast Asia should one day be thenations that have started from such different back-be shared values. That sounds simple, but it is ansame. That is not a good idea, and I do not think it

grounds. To reach for such a high goal is probably

objective loaded with great difficulties. What do

is possible anyway. On the other hand, I do thinkover-ambitious, but I have always been an optimist

they mean by shared values? At one time, they werethat the desire to become better able to compre-

and do not know how to be otherwise. And, as an

thinking largely of shared political values, of having

hend, understand, and appreciate one another is

optimist, I say this challenge can be met.

the same kinds of political ideals, like democracy,

necessary if not vital, and that would be a valuable

human rights, and the rule of law. If we have that,step forward for all the nations in Southeast Asia. If

there would be shared values. But I have to say thatthey can achieve that, or move firmly towards

Thank you very much.

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73033

Keynote Speech at SEASIA 2015
December 12, 2015 at the Kyoto
International Conference Center

Region and Academe in
Turbulent Times
Pasuk Phongpaichit
Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Economics, Chulalongkorn
University

I am hugely honored by the invitation to give thiskeynote. I wish to congratulate everyone who has
helped to create this event. I salute its historical­significance. I confess, I am also terrified by the
responsibility.
The organizers asked me to reflect on what we
do. By “we” I mean academics working on Southeast Asia, wherever we were born, wherever we now
live, whatever disciplines we choose. But I meanespecially those who research, write, argue, attend
conferences like these, and sometimes shout about
our concerns because we care about the region, its
people, and its future.
I plan to do this in three phases. First, I willrevisit the time when I was starting my academic
career. Looking around this hall, I see some oldfriends and familiar faces of my own generation. I
want to remind them of how much has changed
over our academic lifetimes. For younger friends, I
want to hint how much change they can expect—
far more than in my generation. Second, I will
sketch a few major changes over the past 30 years—
economic, political, and intellectual—that havetransformed how we think and work. Finally, I will
outline some issues that would frame my thinking
if I were embarking on my academic career rightnow.

Looking Back: Development, Democracy,
and Knowledge
In my own education, from the 1950s to the 1970s,
I went from a small Thai village, to the big city of
Bangkok, and then to universities in the wide

034

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73world, in Australia and the UK. Looking back, I
realize this was an extraordinary journey. I believe
others of my generation here today went throughsomething similar. Before our time, this journey
had been confined to a very few—the very rich andthe very royal. But we were lucky—partly because
our own societies were becoming a little richer, andmore ready to invest in education; but also becausesome advanced countries were enjoying the greatpost-war boom, and were inspired by ideas of international cooperation and universal values.
What were the ideas shaping the academic environment at that time for those in the humanities
and social sciences?
Perhaps the single most important was “development,” at heart a very optimistic idea that we could
engineer a better future. “Development economics”
had been invented as a branch of the discipline, andwas being taught in universities all over the world.
“Developing countries” had become a new classification. Agencies from the UN and World Bank
were telling governments how to “develop.” And it
seemed to be working. With few exceptions, developing countries were reporting positive growth
rates, often spectacularly fast. They were carriedalong by the stable international economy underthe Bretton Woods system, the recovery boom after
the Second World War, and the liberation of energies following the collapse of colonialism.
Related to development, was the idea of “social
science,” which carried a belief that we could engineer better societies too. The pioneers of social
anthropology were a product of the late colonialera, but the subject took off as a university disci-pline from the late 1950s, and reached us a decade
later. At the university where I work, the subject
was first taught by a former French-CanadianJesuit, who helped set up a social research institute,and trained its first generation of researchers.
A third inspiration was the idea of democracy.
The idea had arrived in the region with the anticolonial movements. Looking around this region in
the 1960s and 70s, we saw mostly dictators and oligarchs, yet, what arrived in this era was a faith in
the possibility of popular action. This was inspiredin part by the student-worker movements in Europe
and Australia in the late 1960s, by the anti-Vietnam
War movement in the US, and by the explosion of
New Left writing by people reinterpreting Marx fora new era. Through people power, we could lookforward to a “democratic transition.” Thesethoughts inspired the multiplication of NGOs, andother forms of public activism. From this period,
scholar-activists have become a feature of ourregion, more so than in most areas of the world.
Finally, what strikes me about this period is theconviction that knowledge was a force for good, andthat hence the accumulation of knowledge—byresearch, analysis, theorizing, debate, conferences—
was a noble pursuit. Of course this thought was
especially appealing to those who could suddenly
find a place in the academy.
The one complicating and confusing fact amidst
all this optimism was America’s war in Vietnam,
Laos, and Cambodia. America dominated our perception of the world because America completely
dominated cultural production at the international
level, from Superman to Hollywood, from Elvis toKeynote Speech at SEASIA 2015: Region and Academe in Turbulent Times

Jonathan Livingston Seagull. America symbolized
the modern package of rights, liberties, democracy,
and prosperity—the holy grail of “development.”
But America was fighting an ugly war in our backyard, pitting its wealth and technology against asociety of poor peasants. And as part of this war
effort, America was supporting governments in our
region that represented the very opposite of themodern package of rights, liberties, and democracy.
I studied economics, and returned to teachdevelopment economics, but I was lucky to be
exposed to political economy in both Australia andthe UK. By “political economy” I mean the broad
proposition that economics makes more sense whenpolitics is taken into account. I was struck thatdesigning development policies for well-being,
equity, and justice that truly helped the disadvantaged was not so difficult, but getting such policies
adopted, implemented, and enforced seemed
impossible. Economics could not properly be separated from politics. This conviction led me to concentrate my research on the political economy oflabor, the sex industry, the illegal economy, corruption, and inequality, but also to study the social

forces that can bring about change, including labor
unions, social movements, and political parties.
Unfortunately, political economy has now become
an endangered discipline. The faculty where I studied in Australia was then called the faculty of economics and politics, but it changed first to economics alone, then to economics and business, and is
now the faculty of business and economics.

measures to control finance were imposed only aftera disastrous period for humanity. The smaller andweaker economies are the most vulnerable to thisinstability. After each crisis, here most obviously
after the Asian financial crisis of 1997–98, there issome discussion of controlling finance. But while
countries have installed better methods to defend
themselves, very little has been done to address the
problem at its root, at the global level, because big
financial conglomerates are so politically powerful(Lim and Lim 2010, 14).

and literature.
But in the study of society, the impact has been
two-edged. It has been easy to deconstruct theapproaches of structuralism and structural functionalism, to point out the essentialism and thecapture by grand narratives. But I have the impression that postmodernism has been better at knocking down than at rebuilding. The very terms, postmodernism and postcolonialism and postwhatever
all look to the past and not to the future. Sociology
and social anthropology seem to have become muchless attractive as fields of study, and also much lessproductive of radical ideas for bringing aboutchange.

Postmodern Revolution
My second big change is very different. This is theimpact of the postmodern revolution in philosophy
on the study of the humanities and social sciences.
This is a massive subject but here I will mention
just one aspect, which is the greater awareness of,and sensitivity to, the relationship between knowledge and power. This has produced some very exciting scholarship, especially in the areas of history

Ending the Cold War
Now let me move to the second part. I am going tooutline four changes. These are changes both in theworld around us, and how we think about thatworld. I don’t pretend that these four are comprehensive. This is a personal choice. They havestrongly affected me.
The first is the ending of the Cold War. This had
the enormous benefit of returning peace to ourregion, but it had knock-on effects which have beenless benign, in two ways. First, it led to the collapseof leftist thinking on a world scale, which opened
the way for the triumph of neoliberalism, meaning
an extreme belief in the importance of the market.

Inequality and Conflict
In my third big change, I want to put several things
together in a group. They are: the disappointment
with democracy; the rise of inequality; and thereturn of violence. I will first use Thailand as an
example, because it may have wider implications forThis has had a devastating effect on economics.
Development economics has almost disappeared.
The Cambridge-Korean economist Ha-Joon Chang(2002) has described this brilliantly as “kicking
away the ladder,” cancelling the optimism that societies can engineer their own growth, and graduate
to first-world levels of prosperity and quality-of-life.
Jayati Ghosh (2015) has recently observed that theaim of the whole international development apparatus has shifted from “development,” meaning thetransformation of a society, to “poverty alleviation,”—cleaning up the worst mess of an unequal
and unfair world, not trying to change it.
The second knock-on effect of the end of theCold War has been the staggering growth of global
business and finance dominated by huge companies, shrinking space for government and community institutions to influence the way we live.
The expansion of global finance as a result offinancial deregulation from the late 1970s has
reproduced exactly the same conditions of instability and international conflict that prevailed in thelast era when finance capital was so strong, namely
the run-up to the First World War. At that time,

the region, before broadening it out.
Fifteen years ago, Thailand was seen as a beaconof democracy in Southeast Asia. It figured strongly
in the studies of “democratic transition” that mushroomed after the end of the Cold War. It had aworking electoral parliament, a rather free press, anactive civil society. The army seemed to be inretreat. But now, the results of four national elections have been overthrown. Political parties havebeen dissolved and politicians banned. The army
has made a coup twice. Thailand is now the only
country in the world with a military government
installed by a coup. Many people have been jailed
for long periods for thought crimes. The media andcivil society are cowed by threats. The country has
plummeted down every ranking for politicalmodernity. Though I am sorry to say it, I think thecountry’s stock in the world is at its lowest ever.
How did this happen, so quickly, and rather
unexpectedly? Let me sketch it in very simple terms.
Thailand’s rather successful economic development—tripling average real per capita income in

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73035

Keynote Speech at SEASIA 2015: Region and Academe in Turbulent Times

one generation—has led to big social changes. The
rural mass, with more income, more knowledge of
the world and soaring aspirations, has becomeaware of the great inequality in power, status, andthe distribution of public goods. And it has challenged for power to bring about change. The oldbureaucratic elite and the new urban middle classare frightened by this challenge because they willlose power and privilege. This conflict is damaging
the economy and obstructing progress in many
areas.
Behind this conflict in Thailand is a high level ofinequality—not just in incomes and wealth, but inaccess to power and rights of all kinds. On a world
scale, there has been a big rise of interest in inequality over the last few years. Every major international
agency has written a report about it. President
Obama made it the theme of his State of the Union
address last year. The Pope tweets about it. And
there has been a flood of books by economists,
political scientists, philosophers, and doctors. There
are two reasons for this surge. First, inequality has
been getting worse in many countries, particularlyin the US, and possibly on a world scale. Second,
many believe inequality lies behind rises in violence
and conflict, including the clashes of the ArabSpring, riots in European cities, and even (perhaps)
the Syrian crisis.
There is now a major industry on the analysis ofinequality. Joseph Stiglitz and others have blamed
neoliberalism, especially for destroying welfare systems and promoting corporate wealth. Thomas­Piketty claims there is an inbuilt tendency towards
inequality within capitalism. These analyses comefrom the advanced economies of the west. In Asia,
too, inequality has been rising, but I think thecausal factors are different here. In the development
era, economists promoted unbalanced growth in
the belief that inequality stimulated entrepreneurship, and those policies have never really beenrevised. Weak judicial regimes give scope to theruthless. Old ideas of social privilege have neverbeen properly challenged. And most governments
have paid ver y little attention to issues of
distribution.
The relationship between inequality and conflictis not straightforward. High or rising inequality
does not necessarily lead to conflict. Indeed, overthe period of rising conflict in Thailand sincearound 2000, inequality has actually been improving. But in the past, it was very high for quite along time. This seems to be the danger. In such
periods, people at the top of the pyramid get used
to the benefits and privileges of an unequal society.
When the fundamentals of the society then begin
to shift, there is a risk of conflict as these benefits
and privileges are at risk.
In many countries of the region, inequality has
been rising over the past decade. I fear we can
expect increased conflict in some of these countries
in the future.

036

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73Future of the Planet
My last big change is about the future of the planet.
This issue has come from nowhere over the past
generation, and is now arguably the biggest, because
it is deadly. Concern over the environment was justbeginning in the 1970s. We started to worry about
the ozone layer in the 1980s. Global warming cameinto the picture in the 1990s, and climate changeby the 2000s. In this region, awareness has lagged
behind the world because we don’t see and feel thechanges. In Europe, people understood global
warming when they could see the plants, birds, andinsects around them changing. In the US, more
extreme weather disasters have begun to convert
many. But here in tropical Asia, our sensitivity islower. We are used to tropical heat, so a little extra
is hardly noticed. We are used to the battering of
typhoons, and the drought and flood that result
from the unreliable monsoon, so more extreme
events are not so shocking. But it’s a global issue
that we cannot ignore.
There are two frightening aspects of the climate
issue. First, though the scientists have found out alot, there is a lot they do not know. Will the arctic
ice sheets melt, exactly how much might the sea
levels rise, and when? Second, we seem incapable ofdoing anything about it. The Kyoto Protocol was
agreed in this building 18 years ago this week.1) It
has had little impact on the trend of emissions,because the bigger countries were not committed.
President Obama—the most powerful man in theworld—made a strong commitment to action on
climate change, and achieved some reduction ingreenhouse gas emissions in the US, but has notaffected the worldwide trend. The current conference in Paris is an important step, but its outcome
remains very uncertain.
Behind this failure of commitment lies the powerof big global business, and its influence overstates—and especially the power of the powerindustry, something which people in Japan are very
aware of, especially after the Fukushima incident.
Other countries are not so aware, yet.
I became aware of this some years ago. At a conference in Thailand, I wondered aloud why a cooland damp country like Germany derived a muchlarger proportion of its power from solar than a hot,sunny country like Thailand. A representative fromthe electricity-generating monopoly replied that thequality of the sun in Germany was very high, while
the quality of our sun in Thailand was very low. He
said it with a straight face. I thought we had only
one sun in our universe. Some time later, a green
activist calculated that Thailand could provide forall its additional power needs by installing solar
panels over an area of semi-desert. The power
experts went bananas explaining why this was
impossible. More recently, the electricity monopoly
has come up with the idea that our grid cannot
accommodate more than a small supply of solargenerated energy. This is very clever, because it
makes the barrier a technical issue in a facility overwhich they have total control.
Recently one of my colleagues has been looking
at Thailand’s power industry (Nopanun 2016). It isa closed world. It is enormously lucrative. The people controlling it have a shared interest in upholding the status quo. Their job is to make profit forshareholders. They may be neither for nor against
solar. But they prefer to invest in centralized large
scale-systems that big firms can manage efficiently.
Thus the idea of solar is a big threat to them.
My last point about climate is that the impact formost of us will not be the direct physical changes,
such as the sea rising around us, but the social
impact of changes happening elsewhere, in the mostvulnerable spots. Moreover, these social impacts are
already happening but are difficult to relate withcertainty to climate change. Several experts havepointed out that the revolt in Syria began after afour-year drought in the country’s eastern region,
induced by climate change, which sparked an exodus of 1.5 million farming families to the cities(Femia and Werrell 2012; Goldstone 2015). Of
course, we cannot gauge how much the drought
was a cause of conflict. But the possibility that theunfolding social crisis in Europe is in part a resultof an ecological crisis in the Middle East illustrates
how complex, how difficult, and how big the consequences of climate change will be.

Looking Forward
Now let me wind up. I have sketched the issues
which influenced my work at the start of my academic career, and then those which are shaping mythinking now, towards the end of that career. My
first and simple point is that these issues havechanged enormously. The world has changed, andour intellectual equipment for understanding theworld has changed.
My second point is that the old ideas of “development,” “social sciences,” and democracy may now
be badly tarnished, yet they enshrined an optimism
about the future that was a powerful motivation ofboth research and activism. These same ideas need
to be reworked for a new era.
My third point is that the challenges facing theacademy have become tougher as a result of theincreasing complexity of our globalized world. The
barriers to the use of solar energy in our sundrenched region can serve an example. This is aproblem that involves science and engineering tosolve problems over storage and distribution, political economy to understand the role of the existing
power industry, and law and politics to plot thecourse of change to a new power regime. Within
the academy, this requires more interdisciplinary
cooperation.
A model for such cooperation can be found righthere at Kyoto University, in a project entitled “In
Search of Sustainable Humanosphere (meaning living environment) in Asia and Africa,” whichbrought together scientists, social scientists, andhistorians to think about the planet in a new way.2)

Keynote Speech at SEASIA 2015: Region and Academe in Turbulent Times

This need for interdisciplinary work and “bigthinking” is equally true for the other issues I havementioned—inequality, the domination offinance—and many more.
My fourth concluding point is that knowledge
matters, that academic research and debate needs tobe protected, and that we should never be discouraged. Very few politicians will admit to being influenced by something that an academic has said or
written. But somehow, whenever politics take anauthoritarian turn, academics are among the first to
be threatened. That has happened since the lastThai coup. Several academics have been called in for“attitude adjustment,” some on several occasions.
The junta announced it was going to cure inequality so we should stop talking about it because it
might cause division. When we were going to holda seminar, they threatened to surround the building
with soldiers so nobody could get in.
Earlier this year, the education minister in thecurrent Japanese government sent a letter to Japan’s
86 national universities, calling on them to take“active steps to abolish [social science and humanities] organizations or to convert them to serve areasthat better meet society’s needs.” Prime minister
Abe talked about promoting “more practical vocational education that better anticipates the needs ofsociety” (Grove 2015). Apparently 26 universities
agreed to make some reduction, but these decisions
may be influenced by falling applications andfinancial constraints. You will be pleased to hearthat Kyoto University informed the minister that it
would simply not comply.
The issues that I have chosen to describe arethose which appeal to a political economist. For ahistorian, or a political scientist, or a literature specialist, or an anthropologist, or a student of cultural
studies, the issues will be different, but the message
is the same. Be engaged. Be sensitive to the time
and the place. Be prepared to explore new avenues
and multidisciplinary researches. Maintain the optimism that change for the better is possible. Neverbe discouraged. Your innovative ideas, writing, andagitation—as well as your courage—have neverbeen so much in demand as they are right now!
Thank you.

References
Chang, Ha-Joon. 2002. Kicking away the Ladder:Development Strategy in Historical Perspective.
London: Anthem.
Femia, Francesco; and Werrell, Caitlin. 2012. Syria:
Climate Change, Drought and Social Unrest.
At http://climateandsecurity.org/2012/02/29/
syria-climate-change-drought-and-social-unrest/.
Ghosh, Jayati. 2015. From “Development” to“Poverty Alleviation”: What Have We Lost?
Frontline, September 4, 2015, at http://www.
networkideas.org/news/aug2015/Development.
pdf.
Goldstone, Jack. 2015. Syria, Yemen, Libya: One

Factor Unites These Failed States, and It Isn’t
Religion. At http://blogs.reuters.com/greatdebate/2015/11/30/syria-yemen-libya-onefactor-unites-these-failed-states-and-it-isntreligion/.
Grove, Jack. 2015. Social Sciences and Humanities
Faculties “to Close” in Japan after Ministerial
Invention. Times Higher Education, September
14, 2015, at https://www.timeshighereducation.
com/news/social-sciences-and-humanities-faculties-close-japan-after-ministerial-intervention.
Lim, Michael Ma Hui; and Lim, Chin. 2010.
Financial Crisis Has Thus Become More Frequentand Accentuated with the Dominance of Financeover the Real Economy. Nowhere to Hide: The
Great Financial Crisis and Challenges for Asia,
pp. 16–43. Singapore: Institute of Southeast
Asian Studies.
Nopanun Wannathepsakul. 2016. Network
Bureaucracy and Public-Private Firms in
Thailand’s Energy Sector. In Unequal Thailand:
Aspects of Income, Wealth and Power, edited by
Pasuk Phongpaichit and Chris Baker, pp. 97–119.
Singapore: NUS Press.

Notes
1) On December 11, 1997.
2) HP of Global COE Program, “In Search of Sustainable Humanosphere in Asia and Africa.” At
http://www.humanosphere.cseas.kyoto-u.ac.jp/en/.

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73037

Some years ago Ben promised me to quit
smoking; I was worried about his health because
he had a mild heart attack in 1996. As it turns
up in this photo, he must have been smoking‘behind my back’ heaven-only-knows-sincewhen! As I remember fondly, Ben was a wise man
but with his share of foibles.

At his Bangkok apartment, early 2015
(Photo by Courtesy of Anan Krudphet)Three Cheers for the Hare that Did Not Stop Running to Take a Nap:
In Celebration of the Life of Benedict Anderson (1936–2015)
Kato Tsuyoshi
Professor Emeritus, Kyoto University

When I think of Ben Anderson, I often think of
one of Aesop’s Fables, “The Tortoise and the Hare.”Yeap, it is the story about a slow-crawling tortoise
and a fast-running hare, and the former beating thelatter in a race because the hare was so confident of
winning and took a nap midway through the race.
There is a critical difference, though, between thehare of the fable and Ben: Ben never stopped running! Being not exactly a hare in the academic race,
I used to ruefully mutter to myself how unfair it
was that this hare did not want to take a nap evenafter his retirement, thereby not giving the tortoise
the slightest chance of threatening, let alone beating, him. There came a time, however, when even
Ben the hare finally had to stop running . . . to rest.
. . . Oops, I should not go too fast in telling mystory about Ben.
By way of self-introduction, let me explain first
how I got to know Ben. I went to Cornell University in the fall of 1968 to study sociology and

038

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73

Southeast Asian studies, and had Ben as an academic advisor in the latter field. Ben got his PhD in
1967, a year before my arrival at Cornell and wasjust appointed as a young assistant professor at the
Department of Government. Being the youngest
and newest faculty member, he was properly dressedin tie and jacket when I went to see him for the firsttime at his office. It was also the time when oldfashioned propriety still reigned on American college campuses. Girls’ dorms and boys’ dorms forgraduate students had been separate at Cornell until
their “integration” a couple of years prior to myarrival, and students at Law School and Business
School went to classes in tie and jacket. In any case,when Ben turned around to get some papers behind
him, I noticed there was something not proper in
his attire. His shirttail was sticking out from underthe end of his jacket. Seeing that, I secretly gave asmile of approval and thought I could get alongwith this guy nicely. Indeed, get along nicely we didfor all the years after our first encounter.
I went to West Sumatra in Indonesia in early
1972 for fieldwork. Ben was to visit me there as hehad never been to the land of Minangkabau people;
but he was detained in Jakarta and “famously”
expelled as all of us know. After finishing my fieldwork, I got back to the United States in late 1974.
The Ben I knew in 1968 and the Ben I saw in 1974
were different. In 1968 he was in tie and jacket. In
1974 he was all in blue jeans. His favorite wasdenim overall. Can you imagine Ben in denim
overall? In winter he wore a denim jacket with thicklining, the kind worn by cowboys of the Marlboro
Country. I suspected he must have been having a
mid-life crisis or something and groping for a new
identity. Pablo Picasso went through the Blue
period, then the Rose period, and eventually
through cubism. Ben in 1968 was in the period oftie and jacket. In 1974 he was in the period ofjeans. Can you guess what his later period was? Yes,

Three Cheers for the Hare that Did Not Stop Running to Take a Nap:
In Celebration of the Life of Benedict Anderson (1936–2015)

it was the period of T-shirt, short pants, and sandals
with his sweet and often mischievous smiles (Fig. 1).
When I got back to Cornell from fieldwork, myscholarship was about to end, and Ben kindly took
me in as a free lodger at his house in Freeville outside Ithaca. During my stay at his house there werea few more occasional “lodgers,” such as one of hiscolleagues who was divorced from his wife and evena collie (!) whose owner moved from Cornell to auniversity in New York City and could not immediately find an apartment that allowed her to keep
the dog. If I am not mistaken, the collie stayed with
us for more than one year.
These two-plus years with him at Freeville were
one of the most wonderful times in my life. I
enjoyed countless hours of intelligent and not so
intelligent talks we had, driving to our offices at the
now legendary 102 West Avenue where the office of
the Cornell Modern Indonesia Project was located,barbecuing in the summer with other officemates—
mostly fellow graduate students who had comeback from fieldwork in different parts of Southeast
Asia—at a park near Cayuga Lake, going shoppingand cooking together, drinking and having dinner,enjoying seasonal dancing parties at his house with
the Rolling Stones’ “Satisfaction” blaring (thankheavens, Ben’s house was in the countryside), andseeing Ben fall into a doze in the middle of ourconversation near the fireplace at winter night. You
see, Ben was somewhat of an insomniac; I could
sometimes hear him walking around the second
floor of his two-story house in the wee hours of themorning and he usually got sleepy early at night
due to the lack of proper sleep.
It was because of his influence that I wrote mydissertation in a way I had not expected to. American sociology in my graduate school days tried, perhaps still tries, to be “scientific.” It meant, among
other things, that American Journal of Sociology,
American Sociological Review, and other famous
sociology journals in the US had no articles published without tables or results of statistical testing.
When I came back from fieldwork, I was armed
with piles and piles of filled-out questionnaire
sheets whose results were to be coded, punched into
IBM cards, and processed through computer for
statistical testing (I feel so ancient writing this!).
Ben did not say anything about what I was doing.
However, after two years of my analyzing fieldwork
data, doing literature survey, and dissertation writing, I had the following to say in the preface of mybook of 1982 on the matrilineal Minangkabau ofWest Sumatra, which had grown out of my dissertation of 1977:
Special thanks are due to Benedict R. O’G.
Anderson, who, as teacher and friend, taught me
the importance of appreciating Indonesiansociety for itself rather than merely using it as asample to theorize about. It is primarily becauseof his influence that I have written a book that is,in the terms of contemporary sociology, rather
unconventional. (Kato 1982, 12)

For one thing, the final product was far more
historical than initially planned and it even incorporated mythology that, as I came to see it, indicated Minangkabau cultural conceptualization of
their history. How much could a neophyte sociologist trained in the US go astray and become so“unscientific”?
I went back to Japan at the end of 1976. In thesummer of the following year Ben visited me andAjarn Charnvit of Thammasat University, who wasthen a visiting scholar at Center for Southeast AsianStudies of Kyoto University. The three of us madethe most memorable trip, cycling along the southern coast of Shikoku Island for about 10 days. We
were in our mid-30s to early 40s and had fun likekids; enduring heat under a straw hat; quenching
our thirst with beer (admittedly not part of kids’fun); having leisurely dips in the sea whenever andwherever the fancy took us (bicycling is freedom!);competing against each other to see who could
cycle up first to the top of an arched bridge; staying
at countryside accommodations, selected on thedaily, random basis from a guidebook of Shikoku

guesthouses (minshuku), and enjoying sumptuous
seafood dinners they provided. In the pre-Internet
age with no access to popular ratings, even hitting aguesthouse with so-so dinner was as much fun as
hitting a jackpot. One time we had lunch at a small
eatery. When we came out of the place, Ben was
surrounded by giggling high-school girls. In a far
corner of a remote island in Japan of those days
people had never seen a “real Caucasian” in the flesh
as it were, and they wanted to have Ben’s autograph!
(The girls were sufficiently civilized or timid not topoke at Ben’s flesh with their fingers.) Naturally he
was quite embarrassed but gracious as well as
amused enough to comply with their request.
Moving fast forward, it was after the late 1990s
when Ben half-retired and later completely retired
from his professorship at Cornell that we began tosee each other rather regularly again. I visited him a
few times at Freeville in the summer and Ben often
stopped over in Kyoto on his way from the US to
Bangkok, where he stayed half of the year, or theother way around. Traveling to onsen (hot springs)
was part of our adat (custom) whenever Ben cameFig. 1 At a Mall in Bangkok, Late 2014 (Photo by Courtesy of Anan Krudphet)

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73039

Three Cheers for the Hare that Did Not Stop Running to Take a Nap:
In Celebration of the Life of Benedict Anderson (1936–2015)

to Kyoto. Among these encounters I specificallywant to talk about my visit to Freeville in the summer of 2008. This visit was for preparing the Japanese translation of Ben’s “memoir” that was to belater published in Japan in 2009. I am sure many
people would want to know how it came to be
published in Japanese, not in English, and how theidea of this book had been conceived to begin with.
It was the book Ben never intended to write. Its
idea came from Endo Chiho, a young female editor
at NTT (Nippon Telegraph and Telephone) Publishing. Chiho was a great fan of Ben and she was curious
to know what kind of books the European intellectual who wrote Imagined Communities read in his
formative years and throughout his academic career.
She approached Ben for the first time on thebook project in April 2005 when he attended aninternational conference in Tokyo. He was notenthusiastic at all about the project. He reasoned
that none of his revered teachers wrote such books
and thought he should follow their example.
Besides, to quote him, “great books are much more
important than the people who write them.” In any
case, he said, he had always been far more interested
in, and curious about, the big world and its history
than in and about himself (Anderson 2009, 1).
Unfazed by Ben’s reluctance, Ms. Endo, bless her,approached him again in November 2007, this timewith me beside her as a Yojimbo or “muscular
councilor,” so to speak, when Ben stopped over in
Kyoto on his way from the US to Bangkok. You
know, Ben had this soft spot for young people. He
always wanted to help them. I don’t know if Endo
was aware of this but in their second meeting she
begged him to write the book for young Japanesescholars and graduate students who aspired to beacademicians. That did the trick. He finallyrelented, saying he had many good friends in Japanand this could be one way of thanking them fortheir friendship. There was one condition: it would
be a Japanese edition only without any English one

Fig. 2

Cover of “Out of the Coconut Half-Shell”

040

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73in the future, because he said he would be too
embarrassed to see his life story printed in the language he could read. It was agreed that I would
translate the manuscript into Japanese.
It was Endo who provided the basic frameworkof the book, asking Ben to retail his childhood, his
experiences at Cambridge and Cornell, and histhoughts on area studies, fieldwork, the importanceof comparative studies, and interdisciplinary studies. On my part, I asked him to add a concluding
chapter on his experiences after retirement; I myself
was approaching retirement then and wanted toknow how he could maintain his intellectual curiosity and be so academically active after retirement. I
had thought that retired professors were likely tovegetate in the rocking chair.
Ben started writing in spring 2008 in Bangkok
and sent me chapter by chapter via email between
April and June each time he finished one of them.
The last chapter was done in mid-July. Ben was
already back home in Freeville by then and I had
just arrived there a day earlier. I was to spend amonth with him to go over the manuscript and ask
him whatever questions I had about it. It turned
out that I needed a lot of clarification about his
family history and also had to ask him many questions about Classical Studies and European history
both of which were not my cup of tea.
My stay in Freeville was most enjoyable and educational. It was like a one-month-long personally
tailored tête-à-tête seminar, one session in themorning and the other in the afternoon everyday,with a glass or two, sometimes more, of margarita
and light conversations thrown in before dinner.
Ben had brought back the cocktail recipe of margarita after attending the International Congress ofOrientalists in Mexico City in August 1976 when I
was still staying with him, and it became “ourdrink” for summer whenever I stayed at Freeville.
Ben encouraged me to insert into the Japanesetranslation whatever extra information that, in myopinion, might help Japanese readers better understand his writing. As a matter of fact I did so rather
freely, drawing a lot from what I learned throughthe “seminar sessions” with him. In this sense theJapanese edition of his “memoir” was to become
more than a “right-to-left” translation of the English manuscript.
It was only in the last couple of years that I cameto realize how much that month-long stay at Freeville in 2008, together with my involvement in thetranslation of the “memoir,” had influenced my
postretirement life and academic interests for thelast several years. Not that he told me I should beinterested in this or that. Yet the daily “seminar sessions” definitely awakened, without my realizing it,
my curiosity about so many new things and especially made me more appreciative of the importanceof history and comparison in looking around mydaily life (e.g., Japanese clothing, cooking, anddwelling) and at the world in general. Thus, inaddition to comparative historical studies of Japan,
China, and Korea on which I recklessly started

teaching about 10 years ago à la bicycle riding, thatis, keep on pedaling or studying lest I fall, I am now
very much interested in learning the histories ofEurope, the US, and Latin America, all in connection with the history of “development ideology.”
One is never too late or too old to start new thingsin life. Ben was a living proof of that.
Getting back to the “memoir,” Ben had placed“My Good Luck” at the head of each chapter title
as some sort of identification mark: “My Good
Luck Introduction” or “My Good Luck Fieldwork,”for instance. I thought “My Good Luck” would not
do as a book title, although it was one of the themes
running through the manuscript. After getting backto Japan, I mulled over this question and eventuallysuggested to Ben that we title the Japanese translation as “Out of the Coconut Half-Shell” (“YashiGara Wan no Soto-e”). It is related to an Indonesian(and Thai) proverb, katak dibawah tempurung or “afrog (caught) under the (overturned bowl made of )coconut half-shell,” which was mentioned in the
manuscript. It describes the situation where thefrog, unable to get out of the coconut half-shell,
gradually begins to feel comfortable under it andeven thinks the space inside it is the entire universe.
“Out of the Coconut Half-Shell” meant to tell thefrog that it should not be the case. For a long time
Ben did not want to call his “memoir” “autobiography”; “memoir” was the closest he was willing toconcede to as its designation. After we decided on“Out of the Coconut Half-Shell” as the memoir’stitle in Japanese, Ben was gleefully referring to it as“the Frog book.” I am happy to say that Ben liked a
lot the front cover design of the Frog book (Fig. 2).
Ben eventually changed his mind about not having the Frog book published in English. It was, I
think, sometime in the fall of 2014 and his brother
Perry was instrumental in finally persuading Ben tocome around on this. I spent July 2015 at Freeville,
ostensibly to help him prepare a manuscript for the
English edition. (He for some reason began fondly
to refer to Freeville as “Free Village” from aroundthis time, which had not happened before as far as I
remember.) If truth be told, my role was more likehis margarita buddy in the evening when he got
tired of sitting in front of the computer. I understand that the English edition, which is a revised
and partly expanded version of the Frog book, with
my additions for the Japanese readership removed,
will be published by Verso in May 2016 and titled
A Life Beyond Boundaries: A Memoir. It is uncanny
that, after all, Ben would not get to see his autobiography published in his mother tongue.
One important message Ben wished to convey
through the Frog book was that aspiring young academics needed to get out of socially imposed orsometimes self-imposed boundaries in their thinking prescribed by institutional structures of the university, disciplinary segmentation, and narrowminded nationalism (which, unlike earlier
antidynastic and anticolonial nationalisms, scarcely
share crossnational solidarities), if they wanted to
be intellectually creative and simultaneously resist

Three Cheers for the Hare that Did Not Stop Running to Take a Nap:
In Celebration of the Life of Benedict Anderson (1936–2015)

Fig. 3 
At Wat Wuang, Ang Thong Province, Central Thailand, May 13, 2015 (Photo by Courtesy of Anan Krudphet)the onslaught of academic professionalization andglobalizing influences of American English and
Google search engine.
In one place in the concluding chapter of the
Frog book he writes:
For a very long time, different forms of socialism,
anarchist, Leninist, New Leftist, social
democratic provided a ‘global’ framework inwhich progressive, emancipationist nationalism
could flourish. Since the fall of ‘Communism’ in
its Stalinist-Maoist forms, there has been a global
vacuum, partially filled by feminism, environmentalism, neo-anarchism, and various otherisms, fighting in different and not always
cooperative ways against the barrenness ofneoliberalism and Machiavellian ‘human rights’interventionism. But a lot of work, over a long
period of time, will be needed to fill the vacuum.
This is the task to which young scholars canmake vital contributions. (Anderson 2009, 274)
He concludes the book with the slogan “Frogs of
the world unite! You have nothing to lose but yourcoconuts” (ibid., 282).
I wrote a long afterword to the Frog book andended it with a Waka poem, a classical form of Japanese poetry consisting of “5–7–5–7–7” units with a
total of 31 syllabic units; in contrast, Haiku poetry
consists of “5–7–5” units with a total of 17 syllables. Below I write my Waka in Romanized Japanese and provide a rough but literal English translation (ibid., 300):
Atogaki-wo
Afterword
Shitatame umashi Just completed Sweet
Saké-wo hoshi
Saké drunk up
Tomo-tono tabi-ni	To journey with my dearfriendToh-ten-wo utsu
Put a comma
When composing this Waka, I obviously had
thought that there were still many more years tocome for us to resume the joint intellectual journey.
However, even the tireless hare eventually had toquit running to take a well-earned rest; I hereby
reluctantly put a period to our journey.
Ben left me a lot of joyful memories and funnystories to chuckle about. As some of you may know,
one small book he put out in 2012 is titled The Fateof Rural Hell: Asceticism and Desire in Buddhist
Thailand (Anderson 2012). It is about this Disney-land-like hell recreated at a Buddhist temple in central Thailand. Before going into hell, however, letme make a little digression and talk about the devil,
for the discussion of hell, I feel, will not be complete without first paying due respect to the devil.
Fortunately one of Ben’s works comes in handyon this matter too. With the cooperation of twoother people, he translated from Spanish into Tagalog and English and published Ang Diablo sa Filipinas ayon sa nasasabi sa mga casulatan luma sa Kastila/ The Devil in the Philippines according to ancient
Spanish documents (De los Reyes 2014). The original material is a “horror story” written and published in the late 1880s by Isabelo de los Reyes,
who, among many hats he wore, was the first Filipino folklorist. It largely consists of exchanges
between two Catholic priests about the “superstitious” belief in evil spirits, witches, sorcerers, and soon common among the “natives.” The catch of thestory is that the exchanges revolve around actual
records on these topics left by four friars between
the late sixteenth century and the first half of theeighteenth century. Isabelo depicts the friars andthe clergymen, as much as the “natives,” as deathly
afraid of these malevolent forces—or newly

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73041

Three Cheers for the Hare that Did Not Stop Running to Take a Nap:
In Celebration of the Life of Benedict Anderson (1936–2015)

invented folklorish presences if we follow Isabelo’s
intimation—that were objectified as the “Devil”
and “Satan” according to Catholic teaching andthus were “imagined presences” shared by both thecolonizers and the colonized. Spanish colonizationof Latin America and the Philippines took placearound the time of the Spanish Inquisition (fromthe late fifteenth century to around 1800) withwitch-hunting in tow. I would not be surprised if
the friars lived in a mental world where witches anddevils, whether Castilian, Filipino, or otherwise,
were very real to them, irrespective of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment that transformed
mental frames in other parts of Europe. I got the
impression that Ben drew enormous pleasure andsatisfaction translating the story from the fact thathe sent me a copy of it soon after it was out in
Manila. That was not the case with the book onhell, possibly because its satisfaction did not measure up to that of the Diablo or because it was published in India and not easy to get hold of an extra
copy for me.
So, what about the imagined hell at the Thai
temple? Ben told me that one of the female statues
represented in hell at the temple was a housewife
burned in fire (Fig. 3). Her sin? She was, according
to the explanatory plaque, lazy and did not prepare
breakfast for her husband. He said one never knew
for sure for what sin one might be thrown into hell.
He added that the hell was far more fascinating
than the paradise. I guess his observation is somewhat akin to what is meant by the famous opening
lines of Tolstoy’s (1960, 1) Anna Karenina: “Happy
families are all alike; every unhappy family is
unhappy in its own way.” I keep wondering if hewere now somewhere up there or down there comparing “real hell” and the Disneyland-like hell of
the Thai temple. We do not have to worry if hemight be in hell. He told me another of his great
discoveries about hell: interestingly hell is “sectarian”
in its “membership,” that is, only Buddhists get into
the Buddhist hell, Muslims into the Muslim hell,and so forth. There is no religious mix-up in hell.
And if I may dare say, there is no hell for Nonbelieversor . . . paradise for that matter, only Mu or Nothingness, a Zen Buddhist term often associated withSatori (Enlightenment), which Ben had picked up
from his good friend, the late Tsuchiya Kenji of Kyoto
University, and turned into one of his most favorite
expressions ever, no matter with or without Satori.
Ben passed away in Batu, Malang, at around
midnight of December 12, 2015 (officially on
December 13). It goes without saying that all of us
who have known Ben are sad to see him gone butat the same time we will all be happy, I am sure, if
we know as I do that he breathed his last peacefullyin his sleep in his beloved East Java after having visited two Candi or ancient Hindu temple ruins heliked most, in retrospect, as if to bade goodbye tothem, in the company of three devoted friends who

042

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73attended to him dearly at his last hours. He wascremated on December 19, his ashes scattered in
the Java Sea the next morning. When the urn of his
ashes was released into the sea at a more than oneand-a-half-hour distance by boat from the shore, ayellow butterfly appeared from nowhere, and in ashort while was joined by a few more.
Kotsu-tsubo-wo
Ashes
Toki-hanachi-taru Freed
Una-bara-ni
Into sea
Ki-i-roki-cho-no
A yellow butterfly
Ma-u-sugata Ha-e	Its dancing image etched in
the air
No doubt there will be many obituaries written
about Ben praising his invaluable scholarly contributions of “global significance,” surely citing Imagined Communities, for instance. What amazes me
and impresses me most about Ben, though, is thekind of works he took the trouble to bring out into
the world, the Diablo book for one, because hefound them interesting and worthwhile to be
republished or translated into English. One primary
example is the republication of Indonesia dalem api
dan bara (Indonesia in Flames and Ashes) written
by an author under the penname Tjamboek Berdoeri
or Thorny Whip (Tjamboek Berdoeri 2004). The
saga of Ben’s personal involvement in the book,whose beginning dates back to the time of his first
fieldwork in Java in the 1960s, is recounted in the
final chapter of the Frog book (Anderson 2009,
254–261). The mysterious writer turned out to be
Kwee Thiam Tjing, a well-known Sino-Indonesianjournalist (1900–74) who “came from an old EastJava Chinese family stretching back many
generations.”
The book was originally published in 1947 and,after almost 60 years, republished in 2004 with
Ben’s introduction and a large number of footnotes,
of course all in Indonesian; it was followed by anedited book titled Menjadi Tjamboek Berdoeri (To
Become Tjamboek Berdoeri) in which are compiled
articles written by Kwee between 1971 and 1973
(Kwee Thiam Tjing 2010). It was Ben, the “scholarof world renown,” who labored to resurrect toIndonesian readership, including that of ChineseIndonesians, the books and their author, who,
according to Ben’s description, “was proud of thefact that he could not read Chinese characters, andfelt himself to be an Indonesian patriot” (Anderson
2009, 257). What his effort must have meant to theChinese Indonesian community in general and thatin East Java in particular was evident to me
throughout Ben’s funeral in Surabaya; I thought tomyself what more a student of area studies could
wish for as a token of unworldly worthiness andheartfelt appreciation of his or her works.
I have already overshot a great deal the amountof space allowed for this writing and so will no longer say what a terrific teacher Ben was. I am sure all

the students who studied under and with him
would vouch for that in their own words. As mylast tribute in celebration of his life, I just want to
add what a wonderful human being Ben was. He
shunned arrogance, self-promotion, and authoritarianism, both in principle and practice. He wasalways on the side of the young, the weak, andminorities, and cared for and about people close tohim. He was the kind of person whose deeds—not
only what he did but also how he did it—make you
believe in the goodness of human beings and want
to search for something or anything good inside
you to have it grow so that it will be sociallymeaningful.
OK, Ben, wherever you might be now, I imagine
you must be feeling ticklish and uncomfortable inthe shower of praises, so I stop here and say “Farewell” to you “with a comma” . . . until I see you
again. . . . Darn, I am going to miss you, Ben.

References
Anderson, Benedict. 2009. Yashi-Gara Wan no Soto-e
ヤシガラ椀の外へ [Out of the coconut half-shell],translated by Tsuyoshi Kato. Tokyo: NTT
Publishing.
———. 2012. The Fate of Rural Hell: Asceticism
and Desire in Buddhist Thailand. Calcutta:
Seagull Books.
De los Reyes, Isabelo. 2014. Ang Diablo sa Filipinas
ayon sa nasasabi sa mga casulatan luma sa Kastila/ The Devil in The Philippines According toAncient Spanish Documents, translated by Benedict Anderson, Carlos Sardiña Galache, andRamon Guillermo, with annotations. Mandaluyong City: Anvil.
Kato, Tsuyoshi. 1982. Matriliny and Migration:
Evolving Minangkabau Traditions in Indonesia.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Kwee Thiam Tjing. 2010. Menjadi Tjamboek Berdoeri:
Memoar Kwee Thiam Tjing [To become Tjamboek Berdoeri: A memoir of Kwee Thiam Tjing],edited by Arief W. Djati and Ben Anderson,with an introduction by James Siegel. Jakarta:
Komunitas Bambu.
Tjamboek Berdoeri. 2004. Indonesia dalem api danbara [Indonesia in flames and ashes]. Jakarta:
Elkasa.
Tolstoy, Leo. 1960. Anna Karenina, translated byJoel Carmichael. New York: Bantam Dell.

Note
Reprinted, with minor alterations, from Kato Tsuyoshi,“Three Cheers for the Hare that Did Not Stop
Running to Take a Nap: In Celebration of theLife of Benedict Anderson,” Philippine Studies:
Historical and Ethnographic Viewpoints Vol. 64,
No. 1, March 2016, pp. 178–191, with the permission of the Ateneo de Manila University.

Interview with Late Professor Benedict Anderson (1936–2015)

Southeast Asian Scholars at the Edge
Interviewer: Loh Kah Seng (Assistant Professor, Sogang University)

This interview on the perils and taboos of historical research in Southeast Asia came out of failure—failure to persuade Ben Anderson to come toa 2010 conference in Singapore on researching and teaching controversial pasts in Asia. Yet the failure sparked a lively conversation between Ben
and me on the subject. It led to this interview over email two years later when I was a postdoctoral fellow at CSEAS, with encouragement andcontribution from another fellow Jafar Suryomenggolo. In the interview, Ben shares his thoughts on writing difficult histories in Southeast Asia,
both in his time and in the present day—issues that are close to Southeast Asian scholars who look to write and speak about their researchbeyond the ivory tower.

Loh Kah Seng (LKS): Hi Ben, what are the taboos of academic,
particularly historical, research in Southeast Asia (SEA)? Debates in SEA
about the state, communist threats, monarchy, religion, race, andhomosexuality come to mind, all of which differ from academic
discourse in the West.
Benedict Anderson (BA): In the US and in Europe there are very few
taboos (in the traditional sense) anymore. In the technical sense, somestill exist. If you are an academic writer, the taboos are jokes andwitticisms, deliberately using slang, dialects, straightforward language
rather than professional argot.
But the taboos only apply really to the swarm of non-profitmaking
university presses and professional journals. Out in the big world,
almost anything is possible if the publishers think there is a market. The
US is a special case since the universities belong either to particularstates, or to private corporations. There is no National University, andWashington itself has only second or third rate universities. Professors
there are not civil servants, whereas in Europe there are many state
universities with high prestige where professors are effectively civil
servants. Status is therefore higher, and the thumb of the state is felt
once in a while. Religious groups are generally weak enough or
discredited enough not to be able to create taboos. But this condition israther new—that is to say, it came into existence after centuries of
struggles, right up to WWII.
Nonetheless Western scholars working on regions like SEA are ofcourse really affected by SEA taboos, enforced by local states andpowerful lobbies. Funders are usually unhappy if the local regimes/
veto-groups are angry, and they often don’t want to give research grants
for this reason. Students are afraid of not getting grants and being
denied visas. There is also the peculiar status of languages. If one writes
in English, you have a better chance of the work surviving into
publication, because the ruling groups don’t read much in English
except at the policymaking level and they assume that the toiling masses
can’t read such books anyway. When I asked Malaysian filmmaker Amir
Muhammad whether he had trouble with his collection of stories bygays and lesbians, he laughed and said: No, the UMNO (United Malays
National Organization) gang never read if they can help it, especially
not whole books. Let alone English language books.

LKS: Are taboo subjects historically and culturally determined, e.g. arethey constructed to maintain the legitimacy of “theatre states” in SEA?
BA: There are such taboos based on traditional institutions, but most of
today’s taboos come from contemporary regimes and lobbies. It is
harder today to write about the region’s militaries, polices, the Church,
Islam etc., than it was 40 years ago. State archives are much moreguarded/shredded than was the case earlier. One reason why so many
historians write on the colonial period is that the colonial archives are
90% open.
LKS: How far is history (and academic research as a whole)“controversial” in Southeast Asia? There are surprisingly few clear casesof historians getting into trouble (such as your experience in Indonesia).
Does this mean that most critical scholars have been co-opted by their
host states and have supported nation-building projects? Or haveacademics simply treated the issue as an elephant in the room?
In Indonesia, only a few history books written by Indonesians havebeen banned: Pramoedya Ananta Toer’s Haokiau di Indonesia (banned
during the Soekarno years) and Slamet Muljana’s Runtuhnya Kerajaan
Hindu-Jawa dan Timbulnya Negara-Negara Islam di Nusantara (by the
Soeharto regime). Other historians like Nugroho Notosusanto haveused history to legitimise the Soeharto regime.
BA: My sense is that history actually faces more taboos than politicalscience, because history covers vast pieces of human time, while thelatter is usually about the present and very recent past of which living
readers have their own experiences and opinions. The biggest problem is
actually local nationalism—Indonesian historians have created a whole
range of national heroes who actually didn’t think of themselves as
Indonesians or even heroes. Pramoedya was the only man to invent theconcept of pra-Indonesia—in other worlds, Indonesia emerged only inthe early twentieth century. Everything before that is pre-Indonesian.
Indonesians know very little about Srivijaya—“discovered by Dutch
scholars around 1905” but not mentioned as such—but they love theidea because Srivijaya goes back to the eighth century—and nations
want long lineages. Dutch scholars in the early twentieth century wrote
quite a lot about homosexuality in the Indies (pedophilia actually)—
CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73043

Interview with Late Professor Benedict Anderson (1936–2015)

Southeast Asian Scholars at the Edge

based on the study of old documents and anthropological studies, but
most Indonesians think homosexuality was a poison brought by the
Dutch.
The historian who writes a book of quality about earlier Javanesecultures including attitudes and practices about homosexuality would
have a tough time. The same would go for a serious history of theCatholic church up to our time.
Science books don’t last very long while histories often survive
decades and have more and deeper effects. The same is true of Islam.
Indonesia’s best known history of Islam starts with the first two
centuries in the Middle East then jumps to Indonesia in the eighteenth
century, There is no later Islamic history in the Middle East and Asia
generally, and no earlier history of Islam in Indonesia.
LKS: To what extent are academics, particularly historians, involved in
the practice of the “S” word—self-censorship? Are academics in dangerof losing their social voice and relevance to NGO activists, investigativeand citizen journalists, bloggers, and independent filmmakers?
BA: All these groups are subject to self censorship. But SEA scholars
have the most to lose—since a large number of them are civil servants,
many have political access to the rulers, and have a high social status(i.e., they have titles such as Professor, Colonel, Doctor). So they are
more timid and more often think of themselves as the “benign” part of
the ruling groups. They don’t go to jail and, are rarely murdered.

LKS: At risk of perpetuating a divide between Asia and the West, isthere a real difference between how disagreement is received in the tworegions? Do Western and local scholars working on sensitive issues in
SEA face different challenges?
BA: This is a complicated problem. The “Look West” idea starts withadvanced research in the West by SE Asians. In retrospect, it can beunderstood as a kind of paradise. Calm campuses, fabulous libraries
covering much of the world, not-too-feudal teachers, and years of theeasy life. No Southeast Asia library can compete, campuses are rowdy,
everyday society a constant interferer, teachers are often vain andsemi-feudal, there are sideline jobs as well as campus politics etc.
Conversely, Western researchers often find a different kind of “paradise”
in Southeast Asia, where everything is new (good/vile), exciting, andthey have a “white” social status.
A Western worked-out thesis by a Southeast Asian is the result of agreat deal of work, including learning new languages, trying to write inEnglish: monitored by decent, but critical supervisors. The
circumstances are such that it is very hard for them to write a second
serious book, due to time, money, but mostly motivation. So thetemptation is strong to live on their “laurels.”
There are academics who in their heydays have written a great thesis
but after that nothing comparable. Hence, the turn to university
politics: the fight to become dean, or vice-provost and so on.
In the West, on the whole it is the second book that is crucial because
the young professor has to do it as entirely self-produced, no longer
dependent on the support and criticism of his or her mentors. Anothertendency in SEA is to publish collections of articles for newspapers andmagazines—which almost never happens in the West. The problem isthat though these little books often sell well, they very rapidly becomeout of date.
A final problem is language competence. The Philippines is a vivid
example. People like the Filipino José Rizal (1861–98) learned to read
Spanish, French, German as well as English, and, of course, if they grew
up in Manila, Tagalog. The importance of multilingualism is not merelythat one has access to many different sources and archives, but also links
to the outer world. In the Philippines, Spanish died out more or less in
the American period, Tagalog improved its attractions, but also at thecost of Ilokano, Bisayan and so on. Hence, there is a huge amount ofnavel-gazing.
It is only very recently that young Southeast Asian scholars havestarted to try to learn their neighbors’ languages. Very few have goodaccess to the immensely aged Chinese and Japanese archives. Ditto
serious Arabic.
LKS: How far does Singapore stand apart from other countries in SEA
in the practice of academic freedom?
BA: My view of the situation in Singapore is that it is very much like its
neighbors, just richer. The program of making the National Universityof Singapore a world-class university is a phantom, and money alone
will not make it happen. Maybe I don’t keep up any more, but I am still
looking for an awesome book written by a Singaporean scholar. The
motivation behind the program is money (foreigners will flock there
some day) and status, not quality or originality.

044

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73

Interview with Late Professor Benedict Anderson (1936–2015)

Southeast Asian Scholars at the Edge

LKS: What is the likely future for independent research and academic
freedom in SEA? Is there hope that taboos will fade as society matures?
BA: One has to hope, of course, and remember that “academic
freedom” came very late in European and American history, and there
too there is no guarantee that it will persist. The commercialization of avast number of universities is having really bad effects.
LKS: Alternatively, was your generation of committed academics—both
foreigners and locals—exceptional in the optimism towards academics
as agents of change, e.g. those who came to SEA through the Peace
Corps program? After postmodernism, globalization and thecommodification of education, and the political and economic crises in
the region, are we seeing a new breed of academics in SEA who not onlyshun political and social engagement, but also prefer to look beyond thestate to transnational, cultural, and funding-friendly studies?
BA: I don’t think my generation was uniformly activist. For all of us in
the US especially, but also elsewhere, the vector was the Vietnam War,with also the 60s general politico-cultural upheavals. We were ordinary
people living in an unordinary period. It was difficult to be bored;
rebellion was in the air. I think this was comparable to the situation
Southeast Asians experienced in the period 1910–40. By mistake, theUS educational elites created the concept of “area studies” for their own
purposes, but it had an unintended effect. Almost no courses that we
took were focused on a single country: Religious change in Southeast
Asia; Minority ethnic groups in Southeast Asia; Bureaucratic
centralization in Southeast Asia, and so on. You could say we weretrained as “comparativists.”
In this case, we had an advantage over East Asian studies, where notmuch comparison was developed because of the allure of and hugearchives on China and Japan. But gradually this comparativism declined
under pressure from professionalism, money, years of study etc., so thatmost Southeast Asianists today effectively study only one country.
The study of languages has been declining for a long time. When I
first came to Cornell in 1958 all students had to show they could read

French and German/Spanish. Ten years later, only one language was
required. Twenty years later there was no general competence inlanguages. Now American is all-dominant and you can read plenty ofscholarly books whose bibliographies are all in American and are
published in America.
I am not fully convinced that “relevance” to contemporary problems
is really the right way to think about academic work. Some great works(and how we need them now!) are really like-time bombs, i.e., notmuch practiced when published but very influential 25 years later. John
Sydenham Furnivall’s brilliant short book called The Fashioning ofLeviathan: The Beginnings of British Rule in Burma, on the early
formation of the colonial state in Burma, was published in the 1930s,
but didn’t have its effects till the 1980s.
American scholars are vulnerable to “theoretical fashions” and to thelaughable idea of “cutting edge” research, i.e. hopelessly “presentist.”
Students are forced to study mainly “the latest.” So departments rarely
offer courses in the history of political science, anthropology, history,
and so forth.
The fine old idea that you will only realize a book is great when you
read it for the second time is almost lost. I also suspect that one canlearn from the parable of the diseased ill oyster producing the pearl.
Times of grave crisis are often very productive. The current world
financial crisis should be something like that, especially if it spreads toAsia. The coming ecological crisis should have the same effect.
One reason why Singapore’s riches are deleterious is that people live
comfortably and think even more comfortably, and often, one knows
arrogantly. Pain is often the best stimulus.
I often think that I was lucky to be kicked out of Indonesia from
1972–99. It hurt enormously, for years I couldn’t bear to listen to
gamelan music. If this pain had not come I probably would haveremained an Indonesia expert throughout my career. So I moved on to
Thailand and later the Philippines. You can see the effect if you compareJava in a Time of Revolution; romantic, nationalist, one country, out in
1972; and the 1983 publication of Imagined Communities, ironic, muchless one country-nationalist, and fully comparative. All in just 11 years.
LKS: Thank you, Ben.

CSEAS NEWSLETTER

No. 73045

Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University, 46 Shimoadachi-cho, Yoshida, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan
Tel: +81-75-753-7302 Fax: +81-75-753-7350
京都大学東南アジア研究所 〒606-8501 京都市左京区吉田下阿達町46046

Editors: Mario Lopez, Shitara Narumi
CSEASof
NEWSLETTER73
Date
Issue: SpringNo.
2016〈編集〉マリオ・ロペズ

Tel: 075-753-7302

Fax: 075-753-7350

設楽 成実

ISSN 2185-663X