TOKYO —

Recently, NHK ran a “News Watch 9” item on the eradication of goats and lizards on Chichijima Island in the Ogasawara group, far to the south of Tokyo. Apparently the animals are both foreign introduced species and over many years they have caused substantial environmental damage—to the extent that the lizard is killing off local butterflies and other insects at a rate which is endangering the ability for nature to cross-pollinate island plants.

While trying to protect the local flora and fauna is an admirable pursuit, what was striking during the NHK program was the repetitive mention of the exterminators’ role to “remove these foreign species“—with the emphasis on the Carolina lizard in particular. Although the commentator didn’t say WHO introduced the lizard, given its obvious name, the audience would have to imagine it was the Americans while they administered the territory.

So that got me to thinking. Believing that NHK is fundamentally a political organization, when you hear a seemingly innocuous message repeated to the point of it becoming a rant, you can’t help thinking: “So, who is this piece of propaganda serving?”

And although you may think it’s a stretch, I think the answer may possibly be found in Japan’s four to five island border disputes to the north, west, and south of the main
islands.

You’ve no doubt heard about Japan’s disputed border islands in the news on a regular basis. They’re a great reason for the rightists to get out in their trucks and decry the Russians, Chinese, and Americans. There are the disputed Kuril Islands to the north of Hokkaido, where Japan wants three islands back from Russia; the Senkakus to the far south, near Taiwan; and the Takeshimas to the west, near Korea.

In most cases, these islands are uninhabited and often not much bigger than rocks—with very little economic value above water. But what’s underneath is of vital importance to Japan. The Senkakus in particular provide Japan with the right to claim a huge territorial zone that includes potentially rich oil deposits in the East China Sea.

The reason why Japan is even having these disputes goes back into history. After the Meiji Restoration in the mid-1800s, the Japanese went on a crash course to modernize themselves. One thing they took a lot of interest in was the techniques used by other world powers to create and establish colonies. Back then, and this is my simplification of some complex law, if an island was inhabited and administered, then it belonged to whichever country was administering it. If the island was uninhabited, however, then the real owners became those who claimed sovereignty first, and had the where-with-all to defend it for an acceptable period of time.

This led to the Japanese government embarking on a number of military adventures and colonization programs to move populations into areas that might otherwise be disputed. They also created elaborate histories and claims of discovery and thus ownership of far-flung islands.

A classic case of the thinking at the time was Japan’s rapid and massive colonization of Hokkaido in the face of fears that Russia might beat them to it. Any Ainu resistance to being overrun was quickly dealt with, they were then forced into a repressive asset and cultural
management program. As a result, their rights were effectively removed and their culture almost destroyed. Of course, none of this was unusual for that era, and the motto “Might is right” was practiced everywhere.

After an overzealous adoption of the colonization construct led to the disaster of WWII, and after its defeat, Japan was required by the American victors to give up most of its non-core possessions and had its territory defined as the main island group plus an envelope encompassing the Ryukyus and Yaeyamas to the south (although under U.S. administration). The idea was that Japan could then negotiate for any other smaller islands on a case-by-case basis with its neighbors—something which has turned out to take a few more generations yet to resolve.

Which brings us back to the Ogasawara islands. Several months ago a local minister here in Tokyo, Rev Ken Joseph Jr, who is familiar to many readers as the person behind the JHELP disaster relief organization, was invited by some Ogasawara people to visit and investigate their claims that rather than being Japanese, they are of American and European lineage, have lived in the Ogasawaras much longer than the Japanese population, and are now being
discriminated against by the Japanese government.

While this would be a strange tale—Western settlers in Japanese territory several hundred years ago when Japan was supposed to be closed to all foreign contact other than the
Dutch and Chinese traders, the tale of present-day discrimination is not surprising at all. After all, the government only removed its own discriminatory control of Ainu assets in 1997, after most of them had seen their tribal identity lost over 100 very tough years.

Anyway, Rev Joseph traveled to the Ogasawaras and came back with a story of European whalers then a colonist ship landing in the Ogasawaras in the early 1800s, indeed, long before the Japanese settled the place, and the sailors set up a small township called Port Lloyd on Chichijima—then called Peel Island.

The Ogasawara island chain is about 1,000 km south of Tokyo and was considered remote enough that even though the Japanese knew of its existence in the 17th century (and possibly earlier according to Japanese claims), they did not see fit to do anything with the islands until the Meiji Restoration, by which time they had been claimed first by the British in
1827, then subsequently through a $50 land purchase by Commodore Matthew Perry (of Black Ship fame) by the Americans around 1853. In between these two dates, in 1830, a small group led by Nathaniel Savory, an American from Massachussetts, settled Chichijima Island. They consisted of several Europeans, 15 or so Hawaiian islanders, and not a Japanese person in sight.

The fact that there were non-Japanese living in the Ogasawaras well before the Japanese arrived with their thousands of colonists in the late 19th century could potentially create a sticky situation, should anyone care to note that according to the laws at the time, land masses which were not uninhabited were supposed to remain the possession of whomever was administering the territory. Japan could say that no one was administering the islands,
which technically is true since the locals didn’t want outside interference.

However, looking at the history books, the British did attempt to write up a set of laws for the islands and the local residents did fly the British flag in Chichijima—showing that they considered themselves British subjects. The Americans went even further in establishing a legal claim when Perry bought land from Savory—establishing that the commodore recognized his ownership, and Perry subsequently appointed Savory as the local governor.
Further, the community at that time adopted a constitution—which should have proven that they were properly administered.

Luckily for Japan, the British renounced their claim to the Bonins in 1861 as part of a larger deal for a Japanese alliance, while the Americans decided in 1968 to return the territory, also as probable “payment” for loyalty in U.S. military and political endeavors elsewhere in the region. Unfortunately, no one thought to ask the original settler descendants on Chichijima Island what they thought of the proceedings.

So it is with these thoughts in mind, and particularly with the assimilation efforts of Tokyo to deal with other “ill-fitting” cultures (such as the Ainu and to a lesser extent the Ryukus), that I believe the NHK program was a subtle effort to shape public opinion about eradicating
literally and figuratively anything foreign in the Ogasawaras that might interfere with claims on the island chain in the future. Although they were talking about troublesome lizards, one wonders if the descendants of the original settlers are not seen as being equally annoying
and troublesome.

Latest 15 of 27 Total Comments Show All

• 

  Apsara at 07:58 PM JST - 2nd July

  There are loads of islands in New Zealand where introduced or "foreign" species have been eradicated in order to help preserve the native flora and fauna, but I haven't heard anyone suggesting that this means we are racist.

• 

  notimpressed at 09:40 PM JST - 2nd July

  fair enough, apsara, Im from NZ too, and your right. It has more to do with the history of that island, as well as Japans track record, I think trying to attach it to the introduced species angle probably is an excuse to bring up the other issues with this and other islands around Japan. All too little too late in that respect, and yeah, it is natural and smart to eradicate invasive species, so although the angle the writer has chosen may look like a conspiracy theory, and may be a stretch, there is still a history of what he is talking about. Most of the article is not about the eradication of animals and more about the islands history etc. That is obviously the main point, this should probably be split into too separate articles for teh two separate issues,so people dont shoot it down so fast.

• 

  VoXman at 11:39 PM JST - 2nd July

  I think that the point of the article is that Japanese view their world through rose colored glass of their own making. History and culture is all manufactured for their consumption. It makes no difference to the writer of the NHK show that the reason the Lizards are there in Chichi jima is becuase the US and Britain colonized it 80 years prior to the Japanese having any interest in anything beyond their beaches until the beginning of the Meiji period. In their world view real history matters not, when you can write and talk about whatever reality you care to devise. So they say isn't it ridiculous that these foriegners infected "our" islands with their pests? Now "we" have to clean up someone else's mess. Japan utilizes this sort of "mantra" to cleanse their minds of any memories or realities they find inconvienant or embarassing. If you just keep telling yourself that Chichi jima has always been part of Japan enough times it will become reality or Japanese reality. Now say that Comfort women the rape of Nanking never existed 1000 times and it will go away or better yet. If you fold 1000 paper cranes, your Japanese dream of all these little islands being part of Japan becoming historical fact will happen. You have to blame this lack of a sense of true reality on Emperor Hirohito who after having seen all of Japan burned to the ground, and 2 atomic bombs dropped on his beloved Nippon, said in his first public speach ever. "It would seem that the war is not going well for us" As though they (Japan) were only down by 2 points and could make a comeback........

• 

  RepublicofTexas at 11:51 PM JST - 2nd July

  VoXman

  I doubt if all those invasive species are pre-Japanese. As for revisionism (I do not condone it, in fact I most strongly condemn it) is not uniquely a Japanese phenomenon. Nations do it all the time to suit their purposes whether in small or large ways is irrelevant, revisionism is revisionism.

• 

  GW at 12:45 AM JST - 3rd July

  yawn, this selective natural fauna, gajin fauna crap, ok its not crap, introduced species change things, having said that I wonder when Japan will get rid of that nasty weed known as rice.............a yeah thought not, I mean where wud the bull frogs & american zarigani live without the weed, I mean rice fields..........ah carry on

• 

  Molenir at 01:17 AM JST - 3rd July

  Is the article really all that far-fetched? Considering what happened in Hokkaido? I don't particularly think so. I don't necessarily agree either, but pointing this out certainly doesn't hurt anything, and could potentially help prevent more problems.

• 

  OssanULTRA at 02:20 AM JST - 3rd July

  "I think that the point of the article is that Japanese view their world through rose colored glass of their own making. History and culture is all manufactured for their consumption"

  I agree with this statement. Howeever, it can be applied to every nation on this planet, with quite a few countries being far more guilty of it than Japan. In anycase, this article really is a stretch.

• 

  pathat at 04:44 AM JST - 3rd July

  What is so surprising about the "history" as outlined here by Mr. DaiJob, Terrie Lloyd? Geez, a big slice of the history of Chichijima is detailed in James Bradley`s bestseller from a few years ago, "Flyboys." Millions of Americans have read about it.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyboys:ATrueStoryof_Courage

  Former U.S. President George H.W. Bush was shot down during an attack on the island, so, err..., I guess there is knowledge of the situation at the highest levels of the U.S. government.

  Maybe it would be good for the current Bush occupying the White House to bring up the subject at the G-8 Summit. You know, dredge up old memories of the Japanese forces who were executed after the war for things like eating the livers of the U.S. POWs on the island, and the like.

  Japan cannot get back the Kuriles from Russia. Japan cannot get back Takeshima from Korea. Japan has disputes with China and Taiwan about the Senkakus. Japan makes questionable claims to expanding its EEZ using the so-called tetrapod-enhanced islet(or something to this effect) called Okinotorishima. And now Japan seems to have questionable claims to Chichijima. The U.S. is already Japan`s "Daddy." Perhaps its time to have Chichijima and its sovereignty issue solved once and for all.

• 

  pathat at 04:49 AM JST - 3rd July

  I guess I should have said that George H.W. Bush`s plane was shot down, but you all get the point. Terrie Lloyd does a better job writing when he sticks with subjects he knows, like doing business in Japan. But thanks for bringing the subject up, Terrie.

• 

  UnagiDon at 09:17 AM JST - 3rd July

  “So, who is this piece of propaganda serving?”

  I had the same thought about this article.

• 

  nisegaijin at 09:47 AM JST - 3rd July

  maybe they need to deploy some of them lizards here in tokyo so they'd go after roaches

• 

  gogogo at 11:23 AM JST - 3rd July

  The title suggests something else "foreign influences" has nothing to do with introduced animals to Japan. The writers obviously tried to make it sound like something else.

• 

  RepublicofTexas at 11:31 AM JST - 3rd July

  While I do not disagree with the fact that there is a strong sense of xenophobia in Japan, I think this article is ridiculous and perhaps inflammatory in that it seems to suggest Japan is going to go on some purge of foreigners. There is a big difference between invasive species that destroy local wildlife and those immigrants who contribute to society. Unless of course this article seeks to imply that foreigners in Japan are trying to destroy the country.

  In the case of Japanese territorial disputes, I think Takeshima is a lost cause, Russia will never budge on Karafuto, but perhaps maybe on the Chishima disute. Japan has a strong claim to the Senkakus, and China never asserted her claim until natural gas was found. With Okinotori-shima Japan has a good case if the coral grows and global warming doesn't make a mess of things. The only problem is all Japan's rivals have to do is accuse Japan of being imperialistic and they force Japan to back down.

• 

  OssanULTRA at 10:50 AM JST - 4th July

  " And now Japan seems to have questionable claims to Chichijima."

  Hogwash. Japan has no questionable claims to the Ogasawara islands because neither the US nor UK are interested in questioning it. Are China or SoKo going to question it when the island are to the east of Japan?

• 

  pathat at 04:04 PM JST - 4th July

  Ossan-I am sorry I did not color-code the end of my post for sarcasm.

  I was also criticizing Terrie Lloyd for writing a piece detailing what he obviously thought was an obscure bit of history when the story is available in detail in Bradley`s very popular book-as I mentioned previously. I hope this clears things up for you.

Register or login to add a comment!