Blog

Japan v Cameroon: Colonialism’s laboratory

In 1959 my grandfather was sent to Japan as a British diplomat. The country he found was undergoing what is now a famous post-war economic recovery.

At the time, the Japanese government was pursuing a strategy of tight economic protectionism, and substantial investment in education. The American army had left only seven years earlier, and Japan’s equivalent of the Marshall Plan had helped kick start the re-building of infrastructure. Japan closed its borders to most international competition, and concentrated on building up its companies, and investing in its people and its infrastructure. Major corporations provided lifetime job guarantees, and factories were heavily unionised, international trade was carefully regulated.

Throughout this period, the country saw growth rates of more than 9%, and rapidly rose to become the second biggest economy on earth. Once companies had built up, throughout the sixties, they were slowly released onto global markets, but with strict controls ensuring they maintained access to their domestic markets.

But by this point, my grandfather had moved on. In 1963, he was sent to the newly independent Cameroon. Unlike Japan, who centuries before had managed to keep European colonialists at bay, Cameroon had suffered from French imperialism. However, significant oil reserves and a willingness to subsidise agriculture led to initial growth in Cameroon, allowing it to become one of the wealthiest sub-Saharan countries.

Unfortunately, though, international economic collapse of the 1980s stifled this. While Japan had built up sufficient wealth by this point, Cameroon had to go cap in hand to the IMF and World Bank. The following decades have been characterised by privatisation and the enforced free trade. 4 re-structuring programs later, the country has not met any of the targets imposed on it by these organisations. In a country replete with natural resources, 23% of the population are chronically hungry, and life expectancy sits just below 60. Such has been the success of two decades IMF/World Bank management.

Like most wealthy countries, Japan has been more than willing to plunder the Cameroonian markets levered open by the IMF and World Bank. Most notable, perhaps, is Japanese industrial fishing off the coast of West Africa. Famous for their love of fish, the people of Japan have managed to trawl their own seas to oblivion. As a result, they have moved on to those areas with any remaining fish – with the West African coast towards the top of their priority list. As one Japanese company boasts: “More than any other parts of the world, the coastal waters of West Africa bring a wealth of business in commercial fishing.” And Cameroon has suffered along with it’s neighbours, as traditional fisherpeople face dwindling stocks of their main source of food.

So, as these two countries face each other in South Africa, what we see are examples of two different models of economic development. In blue, a country which managed to avoid imperial colonisation of both European gun-boats and IMF conditions. In green we will see a team representing a country that has suffered from both. In blue we shall see a country which has exploited it’s own natural resources, and moved in on markets prized open by the World Bank and IMF. In green, we shall see those suffering from these policies. In blue, we shall see a country who’s wealth has multiplied since my grandfather lived there. In green, a country which still suffers the colonial oppression it hoped it had left behind it by the time he arrived.

Posted in: Cameroon, Japan, Japan-Cameroon

Adam Ramsay works for student campaigning network People & Planet, is co-editor of www.brightgreenscotland.org, recently ran the Facebook campaign No Shock Doctrine for Haiti, and is now campaigning against UK government cuts.

Views expressed here are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of the World Development Movement.

Team-by-team: Groups E & F

Group E

Netherlands

Tipped in the WDM office as possible dark-horse winners, despite injury putting Arjen Robben’s participation in doubt, the Oranje are an attractive bet at 10/1. They can also lay claim to being the ethical punters’ choice, being the most generous aid donor at the tournament and one of only two competitors that have met the long-standing target of giving 0.7% of their gross national income as overseas aid. The Dutch give 0.82% of GNI in 2007, edging out, by a mere 0.1%,…

Denmark

…the other country to receive an overseas aid gold star from the OECD. The Danes have the distinction of winning a major championship – Euro 92 – after receiving a place only as a direct result of a UN Security Council Resolution (number 757, which ended Yugoslavia’s tournament before it had begun). They’ve never come close to repeating the trick and, with a strong Cameroonian challenge for second place, may well fall at the first hurdle for the first time in their history.

Japan

The first World Cup to be held in Africa features both hosts of the first in Asia, the joint Japan-South Korea tournament of eight years ago. The Japanese caused England problems last week, but their one goal was the only one in a four-match warm-up schedule, and their qualifying campaign was none too convincing either. Japan enjoys mid-table security/obscurity in the WSICF? rankings, but it’s hard not to like a country where the Prime Minister resigns because he broke an election promise – especially when that promise was to close foreign military bases. Expect another resignation – from Head Coach Takeshi Okada – before June is out.

Cameroon

With Didier Drogba (Ivory Coast) doubtful and his Chelsea teammate Michael Essien (Ghana) out of the tournament, Cameroon’s Sameal Eto’o could be set to be the continent’s hero in South Africa. Pity he doesn’t have the team around him to make a repeat of their 1990 quarter-final run all that likely. 1990 hero Roger Milla’s criticism of Eto’o – that he has performed well for European bosses but done nothing for Cameroon – would be a rather fairer description of the country’s famous rainforests and shrimp fisheries, both of which have been exploited enthusiastically by Western entrepreneurs while the Camerounais suffer the second-worst rate of chronic hunger in the tournament, with 23% not getting enough to eat.

Group F

Italy

The home of this author’s forefathers, it’s fair to say that La Patria is dodgy at best on both a footballing and social justice estimation. The ageing champions will be doing well to progress beyond the quarter-finals, with the Netherlands their likely opponents.

If Italy’s midfield feel a little past their sell-by date, Silvio Berlusconi’s leadership is positively rancid. With total control of the media, Silvio has shifted the Italian mainstream to the right and encouraged the rise of ultra-nationalist groups such as the Lega Nord. The effect is visible in our rankings: Italy’s overseas aid commitment is less than a third of the OECD target, and its economic inequality is worse than any other European competitors’ – except England.

Paraguay

Known to football fans mainly for the heroics of former keeper Jose Luis Chilavert, who – lest we forget – has scored more international goals than Emile Heskey, Paraguay qualified strongly, finishing ahead of Argentina in the 10-team CONMEBOL mega-group.

That campaign featured only 3 draws – a feast-or-famine record that seems appropriate for the most unequal country at the World Cup. The richest 10% of Paraguayans collect over £65 for every £1 earned by the poorest 10%. I wonder what a similar comparison between the richest and poorest players here would look like?

New Zealand

The All Whites qualified for this World Cup – their second – from a group which comprised Fiji, Vanuatu and New Caledonia. As a native of the Old Caledonia, whose group included the Netherlands and Norway and whose players are therefore not in South Africa but relaxing at home with a pizza supper, this fills me with rage.

How frustrating, then, New Zealand is top of the Global Peace Index and boasts the kind of legislation banning nuclear weapons in her territorial waters that has been proposed, but not progressed, by Scotland’s government.

I’d love to hate New Zealand. But it would be like kicking a kitten.

Slovakia

This may be the Slovaks’ first World Cup but they look good bets to qualify from a weak group. Plus, be fair, they’ve only been a country since 1994.

The country is has experienced rapid economic growth since the break-up of Czechoslovakia, yet enjoys the most equal distribution of wealth in the tournament and enviably low carbon emissions – less per capita than those of the hosts.

Posted in: Cameroon, Denmark, Group previews, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Paraguay, Slovakia

Gary Dunion is Campaigns Officer for WDM, where he is developing a new campaign to stop financial speculation driving up food prices for the poorest. A Scot of Italian extraction, he'll be cheering for La Patria despite them being hated both by football fans (with which he takes exception) and social justice fans (well, fair enough).

Views expressed here are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of the World Development Movement.

Switch to our mobile site