[The following is an excerpt from the August 1995 edition of Social Science Japan, the newsletter of the Institute of Social Science, University of Tokyo.
The paper edition will be sent out to subscribers at the end of this month. Air mail subscription to SSJ is free, and can be arranged by e-mailing your surface-mail address to ssjinfo[atx]iss.u-tokyo.ac.jp -- Please write "Sub SSJ" in the subject header of your message.]
----------------------

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Social Science Japan No.4, August 1995
Copyright Institute of Social Science, University of Tokyo
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Possibilities Created by Immigration to Japan: How far Kokusaika?

Katherine TEGTMEYER PAK

Japan's foreign population now stands at 1,320,000, plus at least 300,000 who are undocumented, 60% more than in the early 1980s. The rapid increase has prompted heated public debate, although the issue has recently subsided somewhat due to the recession, which makes the looming labor shortage and supposed structural need for foreign labor seem less inevitable. But the potential for social change inherent in the "internationalization" (kokusaika) of the heretofore "homogeneous" Japanese nation-state keeps the discourse of immigration politics very much alive.

In 1988 and 1989 immigration received daily coverage in the mass media.
Attention focused on the rapid increases of migrants from throughout Asia and the Middle East - at one point it was estimated that people from these areas were entering Japan at a rate of 10,000 per month. The migrants were working without proper documentation in sectors of the economy suffering labor shortages, often recruited by underground brokers with ties to the yakuza; thus the entire situation was ripe for sensationalist media coverage. The growing perception of a loss of control prompted bureaucratic involvement, and by 1988 the Ministries of Justice and Labor were at the center of a heated debate and jurisdictional struggle on the appropriate response to the problem. The Ministry of Justice's position - that the problem was essentially a question of controlling entry - won out, and the principle response took the form of the 1990 revision to the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act rather than a response premised on lbor market demands. The prohibition on unskilled labor was firmly retained and indeed, strengthened, with the addition of sanctions against employers and brokers. At the same time the government created a new entry path for Nikkeijin (descendants of Japanese emigrants), justified as easing the reunification of Japanese families. This latter move ignored the obvious fact that the vast majority of Nikkeijin who quickly came to Japan did so out of the same economic motives as the unacceptable unskilled workers from Asia. With these moves, the national government renewed its basic stance of having a policy of entry control and regulation and not a policy of immigration.
Nonetheless, as a demonstration of Japan's willingness to "internationalize", the 1990 revision of the Act included a loosening of restrictions towards skilled professionals, a category which is popularly equated with whites from North America, Europe and Australia, although it does include increasing numbers from Asia.

Many of the participants in the immigration politics discourse are not satisfied with this "resolution". The most extreme views portray the entry statutes as a thinly disguised system of racial differentiation. In any case, their application is seen as creating numerous legal barriers between non-Japanese working in Japan, with particularly detrimental consequences for the human and labor rights of those who have come from Asia. This perspective is generally framed within a local context, with the loudest voices concentrated in those areas with the largest concentrations of migrants. The true significance of this perspective is that it is not limited to polemics against government policy.

Combinations of locally based NGOs and local governments are slowly but steadily constructing a policy of accommodation in response to the realities of Japan's de facto emergence as a destination for international migration flows. Cities such as Kawasaki and Hamamatsu are engaging in what Hamamatsu City refers to as "handmade internationalization", which is intended to be more substantive and more broadly based than the official internationalization. The point is to develop access to the social services offered at the community level. Towards this end, both cities have commissioned major surveys of the foreign residents to determine what their living conditions and needs are. Additional movement includes increased capabilities to offer consultation to the foreign community in a wider range of languages; translations of practical information into multiple languages; tentative efforts to address the needs of the growing numbers of foreign children in local schools; access to local housing for foreign residents and in Kawasaki's case, a plan to implement a representation program for foreign residents modeled after those in France and Germany.

Such initiatives do not address many of the serious problems faced by people working under exploitive conditions without the safety net provided by the welfare state, especially people without proper documentation. Local governments are clearly constrained by the determination of legality made at the national level, and in general, they do not disagree that "illegals" should not be given access to social services (with the possible exception of health care). But where officials are unable or unwilling to take direct action, many NGOs are.
Local officials keenly follow the activities of the NGOs, and in some cases contribute quietly to their causes by publicizing their services and even giving direct financial support.

The justification for these local initiatives is inevitably in terms of an internationalization much broader than that offered by the national government's vague acknowledgment that perhaps certain kinds of foreigners should be allowed into Japan. Local internationalization, in contrast, starts from the premise that the foreigners are already here; thus the question is how to define their position within Japanese society. Internationalization towards Asia has a particular resonance at the local level. This should be recognized as a challenge to the long term fascination with the west, and the implicit assumption that "internationalization" is a question of dealing with only the other advanced industrial democracies and their citizens.

FURTHER READING
CORNELIUS, Wayne (1994): "Japan: The Illusion of Immigration Control." In Wayne
A. CORNELIUS, Philip L. MARTIN and James F. HOLLIFIELD (Eds.) Controlling Immigration: A Global Perspective. Stanford University Press: Stanford. 375-410
EBASHI Takashi (1993): Gaikokujin wa Juumin desu: Jichitai no Gaikokujin Juumin Shisaku Gaido. Gakuyo (?) Shobo: Tokyo KAJITA Takamichi (1994): Gaikokujin Rodosha to Nihon. Nihon Hoso Shupan Kyoukai: Tokyo
KOMAI Hiroshi (1994): Imin Shakai Nihon no Kouzou. Kokusai Shoin: Tokyo. SHIMADA Haruo (1994): Japan's "Guest Workers": Issues and Public Policy. University of Tokyo Press: Tokyo

Katherine TEGTMEYER PAK is a Ph.D. Candidate at the University of Chicago. She is currently a Japan Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Fellow and Research Student at Hitotsubashi University. Electronic mail to:
pg00093[atx]srv.cc.hit-u.ac.jp