Japan ’ s Struggle With Technology I mostly agree with “Why Apple Isn’t Japanese” (Dec. 10), but want to add a point. Any systemic problem with innovation in Japan is due to a lack of attention to marketing cutting-edge technology. First, regarding marketing, Japan focuses on making connections and alliances rather than on coming up with strategies to sell a product, so businesses can easily lose their chance to generate breakthrough ideas. NEC, Toshiba, Hitachi and many phone companies have had excellent products, but they cannot expand their market share. Second, with regard to innovation, Japan has a group-oriented culture, so many Japanese tend not to undertake radical acts. A group-oriented culture is excellent for kaizen, the concept of change for the better through step-by-step, continuous improvement, but this mentality sometimes has a negative effect. For example, a Japanese man invented an airbag system, but the rest of Japan would not accept this technology because his idea was so unusual and “crazy.” After airbag systems became a booming business in the United States, they finally came to Japan. If the Japanese can overcome the problem of how to market innovation, Japan will generate amazing technology. Maki Seki Chiba, Japan
In your article “Why Apple Isn’t Japanese,” you assert that Japan’s dominance in high-tech fields is waning. You cite several examples, including the iPod’s dominance over Sony’s Walkman. You said a lot about an innovation problem while ignoring the fact that Japan has one of the fastest-aging populations in the world (just behind or ahead of Switzerland) and is facing shortages in the workforce. This to me is just as likely a factor in Japan’s lagging high-tech business as any supposed innovation deficiency. Japan still dominates many fields, including digital cameras, where the high-end market is almost entirely owned by Canon and Nikon. Your assumption seems to be that Japan should be the high-tech leader in all fields, and if anyone challenges this position then it demonstrates failure on the part of the Japanese. Apple’s dismal 2005 entry into the handset market (remember the Motorola ROKR?) shows that it, too, is not immune to failure. History has shown us that nations’ dominance in areas of technology waxes and wanes. Japan does not dominate all fields, but the continued level of its leadership is remarkable. The “serious adjustment” that you say “might be in order” may be, but from my vantage point the Japanese are doing just fine. Scott Vance Staffanstorp, Sweden
NEWSWEEK’s coverage of Japan always focuses on the negative, such as homelessness, a downturn in the economy or the yakuza. This leaves the wrong impression on your readers: that 2 to 3 percent of Japanese are homeless, that the economy is perpetually in a downward spiral, and that the mafia controls Japan. The reality is that we do not have 3–4 million homeless people in Japan, Japan Inc. has enjoyed record-high profits over the past five years, and Japan is still reputed to have the lowest crime rate in the world. I travel a lot on business and privately, after having had a long overseas assignment for years, so I know well that every country has social and economic problems. But if you inflate a minor matter in one country with a bit of exaggeration, it might be comically interesting to a native of that nation but will lead to a misguided conception in other countries. H. Yoshimoto Ichikawa, Japan
Pervez Musharraf on Democracy Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was exactly right when he told visiting diplomats: “There is an unrealistic or even impractical obsession with your form of democracy, human rights and civil liberties, which you have taken centuries to acquire and which you expect us to adopt in a few years, in a few months” (Perspectives, Dec. 10). The West has long failed to understand that any culture has to come around to its own perception of democracy before it can implement it; it does not work to impose it. Lorene M. Birden Dijon, France
Vladimir Putin ’ s Iron Grip on Power I am an American who has lived in Moscow for the past 17 years. While I read “Under a Quiet Surface” (Dec. 10) with great interest, I believe that it would be premature to conclude that democracy in Russia is dead. The West has a big stake in ensuring that democracy thrives across the world. So why is NEWSWEEK being so hasty in declaring it dead in Russia? Let’s not forget that Russia does not have a history of democratic institutions. Democracy must be grown from its seeds, and those seeds need warmth, patience, constancy and arduous upkeep so that they may grow. Let’s try to heed the words of the Russian poet who wrote, “Russia cannot be grasped with the mind, one must believe in her.” Now is the time for belief in Russia and the power of democracy to survive even in a seemingly hostile environment. And finally, let us not forget that democracy lives in the hearts and minds of the people, not in the blood wars of the power brokers. Elena Schacter Moscow, Russia
Your in-depth story “Under A Quiet Surface” makes for refreshing reading. Nevertheless, President Vladimir Putin’s party won a landslide victory, fraudulent or not. Undoubtedly despotic, Putin is an extraordinarily smart, power-hungry person. He must have tasted the great sweetness of power and become engrossed in it, because he has been maneuvering to cling to it for as long as possible. By appointing a relatively unknown apostle to the prime minister’s office, he is covertly nurturing his return to the pinnacle of power after he steps down as president this year. After grooming Viktor Zubkov to take his place, Putin could make himself the new prime minister, reversing roles with the would-be president, who would then be his yes man. Truly a remarkable and talented politician, Putin, boosted by the accelerating economy, not only has Russia under his full control but is also aiming to put all of Eastern Europe and a large part of Asia under his sphere of influence. Putin is tightly squeezing Moscow in his iron grip while continuing to be an annoying thorn to the West. B. T. Spencer Manila, Philippines
Keeping the ’ Gates Keeper ’ Reading your splendid piece about U.S. defense Secretary Robert Gates (“The Gates Keeper,” Dec. 10) caused a moderate Republican like me to be thankful for the pressure of the wafer-thin (and admittedly divided) congressional majority that probably made possible his appointment, and to lament that we in America don’t follow the British parliamentary model that allows voters to know before elections who will likely serve in senior positions in candidates’ cabinets and on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Your mentions of “containment” and Gen. George C. Marshall remind me how lucky the internationally inexperienced Harry Truman was to be advised by men of the high caliber of Dean Acheson, Chip Bohlen, Dwight D. Eisenhower, George Kennan and Marshall. (Kennan thought the Marshall Plan did more than anything else to keep Russia out of Western Europe after World War II.) It’s sad that President George W. Bush waited six years to begin to appoint people as excellent as Gates and Gen. David Petraeus. Henry P. Briggs Cincinnati, Ohio
Secretary Robert Gates, The “Anti-Rumsfeld,” is a desperately needed waft of fresh air in the polluted atmosphere of the Bush administration. As a Democrat who can’t wait for the “anti-Bush” on Jan. 20, 2009, I would be delighted if Gates could stay on as Defense secretary in the next (Democratic) administration. Dorian De Wind Austin, Texas
Photography Is a Fractured Medium Peter Plagens’s “Is Photography Dead?” (Dec. 10) claims that photography has lost its soul amid a sea of technology, and that the essence of a pre-digital photograph was that at one point in the process, a record of something real occurred in front of the camera. Nothing could be further from the truth. Since the beginning of photography as a medium of art or truth, the image preserved on film or the computer chip can hardly be classified as unaltered. Simply the act of capturing the image changes the situation in all but the most distant kinds of setups. And in those cases and countless more, the photographer has typically moved the camera, changed the angle and often rearranged the subject matter to portray the image he or she was attempting to convey. Juxtaposing Cindy Sherman’s work with Dorothea Lange’s and using this to illustrate the difference between a “real” photograph (raw-boned, clean and honest) and a “postmodern piece of fiction” fails to realize just how much effort Lange did to establish her shots to convey a message. At its base, all photography shares a sense of interrupting the process of life even for just the fraction of a second it takes to capture the image on film or computer chip; all photographers are more artists than recorders of truth. Plagens is correct in asserting that as gallery material, photographs are now essentially no different from paintings concocted entirely from an artist’s imagination, but he fails to realize that this has been the case since light images were first recorded. Reclaiming a special link to reality in order to produce the next great photographer presupposes that one can truly know reality when it is captured on film, computer chip or canvas, or painted with brushes dipped in color or manipulated as pixels by a high-powered computer. Geoffrey Huys Wausau, Wisconsin
The fact that photography today is different from when it first began doesn’t mean it is a dying art. It’s encouraging that we can still appreciate the old black-and-whites while finding room for new manipulated digitals and welcoming whatever else creative minds can envision. Paula A. White Madison, Wisconsin
Photography is alive and flourishing in America’s national parks and wilderness areas, from alpine mountains to desert canyons to ocean shorelines. No amount of digital manipulation or fabrication can improve on the extraordinary beauty in the natural world. As photographers, all we can do is try to capture it. Olof Carmel Truckee, California
Polish Politicians Head to Britain Your article “Warsaw On the Thames” (Oct. 8), about Polish migration to Britain, said, “Politicians are close behind.” At first I assumed this referred to the many polling stations that were set up here for participation in the Polish elections. This story was covered on TV here in England because it was unprecedented. However, you confined your article to the pursuit of the Polish vote by British politicians—and overlooked an interesting sidebar. Paul Klempner London, England
Rooting Out Corruption in Africa As a Mauritian, I was surprised to read in your Oct. 8 issue that Mauritius is the cleanest regime in Africa (PERISCOPE). It may seem so to analysts at a foundation in Sudan, but from here in Mauritius, the view is completely different. I hope that those who conducted the study did not base their findings on the fact that no Mauritian politician so far has been convicted—or even prosecuted—for fraud or corruption. This is like some police stations that do not record complaints from the public so they can claim that the area is free of crime. I think those countries that have seen their politicians convicted for fraud and corruption are the ones to be praised. Anyway, that “finding” kept me wondering about how “dirty” the other countries on the list really are compared with Mauritius, which seems to me to be No. 1. Bismajaye Jasodanand Curepipe, Mauritius
