Trade, Technology and Security: Implications for East Asia and the West: Part II

  • Takashi Inoguchi
Part of the International Institute for Strategic Studies Conference Papers book series (IISSCP)


Perhaps at no other time in history have trade, technology and security been intertwined more closely than they are today. A good illustration of this is provided by a recent Japan-US agreement on semiconductors.1 For some considerable time Japan and the US have been competing very hard in this area, and Japan is clearly catching up. Responding to accusations by US semi-conductor producers that Japanese producers were dumping their products on the US market and to the demands for action under Article 301 of the US Trade Act, the US and Japan have recently agreed that the anti-dumping cases against the Japanese semi-conductor producers of the eprom and 256K dram semi-conductors be suspended, provided that:
  1. 1)

    the Department of Commerce monitor all the quarterly statistics on Japan’s production and sales of eprom and 256K dram, and the Japanese government do the same on six other kinds of semi-conductors, including Japanese exports of semi-conductors to third countries; and

  2. 2)

    Japan set up an organization to expand its imports of semiconductors from the US and other countries.



East Asian Country Japanese Government Japanese Firm Evening Edition Primary Commodity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 3.
    Kym Anderson and Yujiro Hayami, The Political Economy of Agricultural Protection: East Asia in an International Perspective, (Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 1986).Google Scholar
  2. 4.
    Gary Clyde Hufbauer et al, Trade Practice in the United States: 31 Case Studies, (Washington, dc: Institute for International Economics, 1986), p. 21. On US competitiveness, see Robert Z. Lawrence, Can America Compete? (Washington, dc: The Brookings Institution, 1984).Google Scholar
  3. 6.
    For ‘Confucian propriety’, see, for example, Lucian W. Pye, Asian Power and Politics, (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1985). In this connection, one telling event took place recently in Korea: shortly before the US Secretary of State visited Korea to meet the Korean Foreign Minister in early May 1986, the US Special Security Team brought sniffer dogs into the building in an attempt to detect explosives in the Foreign Minister’s office and the vip lift without the sufficient prior understanding of the Korean government. Chungan Ilbo, May 1986, cited in Yomiuri Shimbun, 31 May 1986.Google Scholar
  4. 7.
    A similar view is found in Peter Polomka, The Two Koreas: Catalyst for Conflict in East Asia? Adelphi Paper 208, (London: IISS, 1986), p. 37.Google Scholar
  5. 8.
    William Watts, The United States and Japan: A Troubled Partnership, (Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1984); The United States and Asia: Changing Attitudes and Politics, (Cambridge, MA: Lexington Books 1982).Google Scholar
  6. 9.
    David Sapsford, Real Primary Commodities Prices: An Analysis of Long-Run Movements, imf Internal Memorandum, 17 May 1986, cited in Peter Drucker, ‘The Changed World Economy’, Foreign Affairs, vol. 64, no. 4 (Spring 1986), pp. 768–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 10.
    Ibid.; World Bank, World Development Report 1986, Washington, dc: World Bank, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 11.
    World Bank, World Bank Report 1986, Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 12.
    Research Institute for Peace and Security, Asian Security 1985, (Tokyo: rips, 1985).Google Scholar
  10. 13.
    Peter Drysdale, ‘Japan’s US-Dependence Syndrome as seen from Australia’, Economics Today (in Japanese), No. 1 (Spring 1986), pp. 96–103; and Drucker, (op. cit. in note 9).Google Scholar
  11. 14.
    Anderson and Hayami, (op. cit. in note 3).Google Scholar
  12. 16.
    Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Jeffrey Schott, Trading for Growth: The Next Round of Trade Negotiations, (Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press for Institute for International Economics, 1985), pp. 47–53; Drysdale, (op. cit. in note 13).Google Scholar
  13. 18.
    Hugh Patrick, ‘The Burgeoning American Stake in the Pacific Region’, in James W. Morley, (ed.), The Pacific Basin: New Challenges for the United States (New York: Academy of Political Science, 1986), pp. 59–75.Google Scholar
  14. 20.
    Robert Keohane, After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984). See also Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Jr., ‘Two Cheers for Multilateralism,’ Foreign Policy, No. 60 (Fall 1985), pp. 148–67; Andrew Mack, ‘The Political Economy of Global Decline: America in the 1980s’, Australian Outlook, vol. 40, no. 1 (April 1986), pp. 11–20; and Fred Halliday, The Making of the New Cold War (London: Verso, 1983).Google Scholar
  15. 21.
    Keohane, (op. cit. in note 20).Google Scholar
  16. 22.
    Robert Axelrod, The Evolution of Cooperation (New York: Basic Books, 1981). For a fuller examination of Axelrod’s theory, see Christopher J. Makins, ‘The Super-power’s Dilemma: Negotiating in the Nuclear Age’ in Survival July/August 1985, pp. 169–78.Google Scholar
  17. 24.
    This and other related issues are more fully discussed in my ‘Japan’s Images and Options: Not a Challenger, But a Supporter’, Journal of Japanese Studies, vol. 12, no. 1 (1986), pp. 95–119 and ‘Conclusion: Japan Looking Ahead with Caution’, in Takashi Inoguchi and Daniel Okimoto, (eds), The Changing International Context, vol. 2 of The Political Economy of Japan, Yasusuke Murakami and Hugh T. Patrick, (general eds.), (Stanford: Stanford University Press, forthcoming). On US-Japan economic issues, see C. Fred Bergsten and William R. Cline, The United States Japan Economic Problem, (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press for Institute for International Economics, 1985); Stephen Cohen, Uneasy Partnership: Competition and Conflict in US-Japan Trade Disputes, (Baltimore md: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1985); Kiyohiko Fukushima, ‘Japan’s Real Trade Policy’. Foreign Policy, no. 59 (Summer 1985), pp. 22–39; Bernard Gordon, ‘Truth in Trading’, Foreign Policy, no. 61 (Winter 1985–6), pp. 94–108.Google Scholar
  18. 27.
    Anne G. Keatley, (ed.), Technological Frontiers and Foreign Relations, (Washington, dc: National Academy Press, 1985).Google Scholar
  19. 28.
    See Daniel Okimoto et al, (eds), Competitive Edge: The Semiconductor Industry in the US and Japan, (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1984); and the two special issues in The Economist and Issues in Science and Technology, cited in note 1.Google Scholar
  20. 33.
    On the sdi programme and issues related to it, see Office for Technology Assessment, Strategic Defense Initiatives, (Princeton nj: Princeton University Press, 1986) and works listed therein. As for Japanese thinking, see for instance, Tokyo Shimbun (evening edition), 13 May 1986, Nihon Keizai Shimbun, 18 May 1986, Asahi Shimbun (evening edition), 1 May 1986. See also Daniel Sneider, ‘Why does Japan avoid discussing its participation in the SDI Program in terms of its own security issues?’ Asahi Journal (in Japanese), 25 July 1986, pp. 9–13.Google Scholar
  21. 39.
    Richard Holbrooke, ‘East Asia: The Next Challenge’, Foreign Affairs, vol. 64, no. 4 (Spring 1986), pp. 732–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Institute for Strategic Studies 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Takashi Inoguchi
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Oriental CultureUniversity of TokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations