Japan’s Case for Multilateral Trade Agreements

FEBRUARY 27, 2018
By: Justin Chapman, Pacific Council

Multilateral trade agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) are mutually beneficial for countries in the Asia-Pacific, Keio University Professor Yorizumi Watanabe told Pacific Council members in a roundtable discussion. The conversation was presented in partnership with Japan House LA and moderated by Ms. Rachel Swanger, associate dean of the RAND Corporation’s Pardee Graduate School.

Watanabe argued that multilateral trade agreements and an international legal infrastructure are necessary in order to forge strong trade and investment partnerships.

"There is a very dynamic production network across the Asia-Pacific," Watanabe said. "It’s not just bilateral: one country to another. The U.S. government is now interested in bilateral trade agreements, but a bilateral agreement between Japan and the United States cannot capture that dynamism."

"The NAFTA negotiations have been an important focus for Japan, because that will have enormous ramifications on bilateral economic talks between Japan and the United States."

Yorizumi Watanabe

He added that the United States is Japan’s closest ally in every sense of the term, particularly in trade.

"We are co-partners, so we have to work together," he said. "The United States was a sort of guarantor for Japan to become a member of the international trade club called the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Because of a trade imbalance that Japan has with the EU and the United States, it became involved in trade disputes. My research has focused on how Japan can mitigate the negative aspects of international trade. In order to do that, a trade architecture had to be established, a legal infrastructure such as the World Trade Organization [WTO]."

He also pointed out that Japan is closely watching the NAFTA renegotiations between the United States, Canada, and Mexico because they could impact talks on the U.S.-Japan free trade agreement. Japan is particularly interested in the outcome of controversial issues such as rules of origin and dispute settlements.

"The NAFTA negotiations have been an important focus for Japan, because that will have enormous ramifications on bilateral economic talks between Japan and the United States," he said. "Japan’s auto industry has been building up its value chain production network in accordance with NAFTA’s rules of origin."

"Japan has had some domestic difficulties in terms of negotiating international trade deals, particularly related to agricultural protectionism."

Yorizumi Watanabe

Watanabe said that over the past 20 years, Japan’s agricultural sector was resistant to joining multilateral trade agreements, but that eventually it came around.

"Japan has had some domestic difficulties in terms of negotiating international trade deals, particularly related to agricultural protectionism," he said. "One of the important outcomes of the TPP trade deal negotiations is that it affected the mindset of the agricultural farming community. Before that there was a spirit of protectionism, which limited Japan’s international trade participation. They tried to protect themselves from international competition, but now with TPP more than 81 percent of all Japanese products are subject to duty elimination. Because of Japan’s domestic politics, this change took some time to be realized."

Watanabe explained that he was an early supporter of TPP, which he said was difficult because the trade deal was not originally popular in Japan.

"What I’ve learned from my Chinese colleagues is that China’s trade policy and TPP are not necessarily in confrontation."

Yorizumi Watanabe

"Before Japan joined TPP negotiations in 2013, whenever I went to various Japanese cities to talk about TPP, the audience shouted at me that I was a traitor," he said. "But this was an initiation of a national debate on TPP. In Japan, we’ve had a comprehensive national debate about whether it was good for national interests or not, which for the United States was maybe not the case. It was only during the [2016] presidential election that most Americans heard about TPP."

Watanabe said that he remains optimistic that the United States will eventually reenter the agreement, adding that President Trump’s Ambassador to Japan William Hagerty told him negotiations for the bilateral U.S.-Japan free trade agreement have been "frustrating."

"The United States will lose if they continue to stay outside of the TPP trade deal," said Watanabe.

Watanabe also argued that China should join TPP.

"What I’ve learned from my Chinese colleagues is that China’s trade policy and TPP are not necessarily in confrontation," he said. "China joining TPP might be their second instance of WTO accession. They acceded to the WTO in 2001, and since then they’ve had double digit growth of trade. China is looking for more trade opportunities. At the beginning of the TPP negotiations, they saw the agreement as a new containment policy against China. Now they see that TPP and RCEP [the China-led regional trade agreement called Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership] are not in conflict with each other. They could be complementary."

"The United States and Japan should incorporate China into the new international trade framework. At the same time, we shouldn't antagonize China too much."

Yorizumi Watanabe

Watanabe said there are essentially two camps within China: a conservative one that wants to maintain the status quo of state-owned enterprises, and a progressive one that wants China to further develop and expand beyond being a middle-income country, which would require China to be exposed to more international competition.

"Japan and the United States should encourage that second group of people in China," said Watanabe. "Japan needed international pressure to change stubborn domestic trade policies. Similarly, China should be incorporated into this new international trade framework. At the same time, we shouldn’t antagonize China too much. We should use existing trade dispute settlements such as the WTO in order to get China to feel like it is internationally committed, legally. This is the best way to make a soft landing for China’s aggressive expansion."

_______________________

Justin Chapman is the Communications Officer at the Pacific Council on International Policy.

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Pacific Council.

The Intelligence Community is Vital in Age of Cyber Threats

FEBRUARY 21, 2018
By: Justin Chapman, Pacific Council

With the evolving danger of cyber-attacks, the U.S. intelligence community is more important than ever, Ms. Susan Gordon recently told Pacific Council members. Gordon is the principal deputy director of U.S. National Intelligence, making her the second highest ranking person and the highest ranking woman in the intelligence community. The discussion was moderated by Mr. Paul Rosen, former chief of staff at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The Office of the Director of U.S National Intelligence (DNI) was established after the 9/11 attacks to provide oversight, coordination, and intelligence integration for the 16 agencies in the intelligence community. Its goal is to ensure that U.S. leaders have the best available information so they can make informed decisions with regards to national security issues.

"Intelligence is one of the great disciplines of all time," said Gordon. "Intelligence is knowing the truth as best we see it and presenting it in a clear and unequivocal fashion. Whether warfighter or legislator or policymaker, we want our leaders to have the best information so that they can make a good decision."

"When the president questions the veracity of our assessment, here’s the funny thing: we don’t mind that. Questioning the veracity of an assessment is an important part of the intelligence process."

Susan Gordon

Gordon pointed out that the work of the intelligence community is independent of the work of politicians and policy makers.

"Administrations change, world conditions change, but the work of intelligence remains the same: to see a bit beyond the horizon and to present that information to our leaders so that they can act before events force our hand. That work of gathering the information is independent of what the policy makers decide to do about the information," she said.

Responding to questions about the Trump administration’s accusations of politicization of intelligence agencies, Gordon said that intelligence officers know they have to be neutral about policy.

"When we talk about politicization, it is not about whether intelligence is relevant to policy making; my God, I hope intelligence is relevant to policy making," she said. "When the president questions the veracity of our assessment, here’s the funny thing: we don’t mind that. Questioning the veracity of an assessment is an important part of the intelligence process. What an intelligence officer knows is you can never say something or make decisions without the underlying intelligence to support it."

"Intelligence is a jigsaw puzzle where you don’t know what the picture is and you only have a quarter of the pieces and the president needs an answer in five minutes in order to make a decision."

Susan Gordon

In reference to the then-pending release of the "Nunes memo" regarding the Russia investigation, Gordon said she hopes "the people making these decisions understand the ramifications of what they’re doing, but it’s their memo. I think we have to tread lightly, as a nation, on this. I would counter-advise [releasing the Nunes memo], but their memorandum, their prerogative."

She added that the biggest lesson they learned from the intelligence community’s incorrect assessment that Iraq possessed nuclear weapons is that they must be much clearer to policy makers about the level of confidence they have in their assessments and the intelligence that goes into their assessments.

"Intelligence is a jigsaw puzzle where you don’t know what the picture is and you only have a quarter of the pieces and the president needs an answer in five minutes in order to make a decision," she said. "It’s an incredibly rigorous process."

Gordon said that the intelligence community is especially vital at a time when the biggest threat to the United States is cyber warfare.

"I know of no development that poses a greater threat to this nation than a massively, digitally connected world where every aspect of national interest can be affected through digital domain in a largely unconstrained way by anybody who has a few bucks in a manner that defies logic of geography and reach and investment against a target that is so distributed and still so connected," she said. "I have never seen anything like it. Our major adversaries have made significant advances in their cyber capabilities just in the last five years. We need to do a much better job on cybersecurity."

"I don’t want anyone to have to choose between doing what they love and being treated with respect at work. I need the intelligence community to be the model of perfect inclusion."

Susan Gordon

She added that it isn’t the government that needs protecting necessarily, but rather U.S. national infrastructure, intellectual property, critical military systems, and the ability to assess the truth, which was damaged during the 2016 presidential election.

"Russia’s interference in the election woke us all up," she said. "Elections are the thing that are most sacrosanct to democracy, and believing in our systems is the most important thing to us. The Russian actions were designed not only for a specific outcome, but to make Americans not trust our systems, to not believe what we know. The attempt to influence not only the United States but other nations is an attempt by the Russians to prepare for the actions that are in their interests."

Gordon also addressed the #MeToo movement and the ubiquitous nature of sexual harassment, even in the intelligence community.

"What disappoints me most about the recent revelations of sexual misconduct that inspired the #MeToo movement is that people are shocked that women could be mistreated," she said. "Every woman I know can tell you a story on a spectrum when they have been treated with something other than dignity and respect. I don’t want anyone to have to choose between doing what they love and being treated with respect at work. I need the intelligence community to be the model of perfect inclusion."

_______________________

Justin Chapman is the Communications Officer at the Pacific Council on International Policy.

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Pacific Council

Trudeau: Strengthening NAFTA is Key to U.S.-Canada Relations

FEBRUARY 12, 2018
By: Justin Chapman, Pacific Council

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau defended NAFTA and free trade in a recent speech at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.

Watch the full speech below:

"America has no better friend, ally, or partner than Canada," Trudeau told the audience, which included Pacific Council members. "We have the longest, most peaceful, and mutually beneficial relationship of any two countries in the history of the world. Simply put, if trade between Canada and the United States is a bad idea, then there are no good ideas. The sum of our trade is essentially balanced. This is and will continue to be ‘win-win.’"

While acknowledging that NAFTA can and should be modernized and updated, Trudeau argued that the free trade agreement has been beneficial for Canada, the United States, and Mexico, and that trade is not a zero sum game. The sixth round of NAFTA negotiations recently concluded in Montreal. The seventh round is scheduled for Mexico City at the end of February.

"With effort, hard work, and a willingness to compromise on all sides, updating NAFTA is eminently achievable," he said, adding that progress has indeed been made, despite some challenging issues facing the negotiations such as disagreements over rules of origin for the auto sector, investor-state dispute settlements, and a regular five-year review of the agreement.

"We need to make sure the benefits of trade are shared more broadly with more people. We must provide more help to people whose livelihoods are disrupted by global economic shifts."

Justin Trudeau

"It’s vitally important that we build on that progress," he said. "It is fundamentally in Canada’s and the United States’ interest that we do so. Trade is not a hockey game. The truth is, both Canada and the United States are winning. And so is Mexico. That’s exactly how we should keep it. When trade is working as it should, all partners win."

That said, he acknowledged that global trade has not helped everyone achieve prosperity.

"Income inequality is growing worldwide, and this is an urgent problem," he said. "A lot of people are doing well, but far too many are not. The status quo of NAFTA and also trade more broadly is not good enough. We need to make sure the benefits of trade are shared more broadly with more people. We must provide more help to people whose livelihoods are disrupted by global economic shifts, including automation and technological change, so they can reestablish themselves in new jobs with brighter futures."

This is an area where he and President Trump agree, despite popular opinion that the two administrations could not see eye-to-eye about anything because of their political differences.

"The truth is we agree about this: too many people have been left behind even as our economies surged," Trudeau said. "I was heartened to hear President Trump talk about the importance of skills training in his State of the Union address. We in Canada are seized with the same problem and have reached a similar conclusion: we cannot allow the technological wave to sweep working families aside. This is something we must address as we modernize and improve NAFTA."

"We can and must work tirelessly to find a pathway to prosperity for us all. This is among the greatest challenges of our time."

Justin Trudeau

Trudeau quoted Ronald Reagan in a speech the former U.S. president gave to Canadian parliament in 1987, highlighting the U.S.-Canadian relationship and promoting the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement: "We look forward to the day when the free flow of trade, from the southern reaches of Tierra del Fuego to the northern reaches of the Arctic Circle, unites the people of the western hemisphere in a bond of mutually beneficial exchange. When all borders become what the U.S.-Canada border so long has been: a meeting place, rather than a dividing line."

He argued that both governments can and must do more to help the people who have been left behind by global trade.

"We can and must build bridges to new opportunities for the middle class, and people working hard to join the middle class," he said. "We can and must work tirelessly to find a pathway to prosperity for us all. This is among the greatest challenges of our time."

"President Reagan most famously declared, ‘It is morning in America.’ A generation later, it can be morning in North America. But that is up to us."

Justin Trudeau

Trudeau expressed confidence in the U.S.-Canada relationship, both historically and looking ahead to the future.

"The United States and Canada have stood shoulder to shoulder through thick and thin," he said. "Let’s not raise fresh barriers between our peoples. The nexus point for this all is NAFTA. Our task, surely, is to take what our parents’ generation built and transform it into a trade agreement fit for the 21st century. We in Canada, for our part, will devote every necessary effort, for as long as it takes, in a spirit of fairness and mutual compromise, to achieve this goal. President Reagan most famously declared, ‘It is morning in America.’ A generation later, it can be morning in North America. But that is up to us."

_______________________

Justin Chapman is the Communications Officer at the Pacific Council on International Policy.

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Pacific Council.

Experts: International Response to Rohingya Crisis Lacking

FEBRUARY 7, 2018
By: Justin Chapman, Pacific Council

During a teleconference about the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Myanmar and Bangladesh that has displaced the Rohingya Muslim minority, experts disagreed about how the international community should respond.

The call featured Mr. Simon Billenness, executive director of the International Campaign for the Rohingya; Ms. Priscilla A. Clapp, senior advisor at the U.S. Institute of Peace; and Dr. Ali Riaz, university professor in the Department of Politics and Government at Illinois State University. The discussion was moderated by Dr. Parveen Parmar, associate professor of clinical emergency medicine in the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California.

In recent months, nearly half a million Rohingya Muslims have fled from Myanmar’s western Rakhine State into Bangladesh to escape abuse and death at the hands of Myanmar’s army. The crisis, which both the UN and the United States are referring to as ethnic cleansing, has now become the worst contemporary humanitarian disaster in Southeast Asia.

"The sanctions on the Myanmar army have been one of the more important contributions the international community has made to support the civilian government."

Simon Billenness

While Billenness argued for the extension of Western sanctions against the Myanmar army, Clapp disagreed and said sanctions will not help any of the parties involved.

"The sanctions on the Myanmar army have been one of the more important contributions the international community has made to support the civilian government," said Billenness. "The United States could be doing a lot more to help resolve the Rohingya crisis situation in Myanmar and Bangladesh. It can sanction individuals in the Myanmar army as well as business interests. Sanctions do effect Asian business in Myanmar."

Clapp argued that sanctions actually do more harm to western nations than they help the Rohingya.

"The West’s sanctions against the Myanmar army won’t turn anything around for the Rohingya, it will just cut us out of the situation," she said. "We need to keep engaged."

Billenness countered by saying it is "fundamentally misguided" to say sanctions didn’t work. "Sanctions essentially brought the army to the negotiating table," he added.

"It is counterproductive to put the blame for the Rohingya crisis on Aung San Suu Kyi. She cannot afford, politically, to be speaking out against the military in favor of the Rohingya."

Priscilla Clapp

They also had different perspectives on where the responsibility for these human rights abuses in Myanmar ultimately lies. While they both singled out Myanmar’s army, they differed on how much blame should be laid at the feet of Myanmar’s leader, Aung San Suu Kyi.

"The problem in Myanmar is the army, which has considerable political and economic power," said Billenness. "The solution to problems such as the violence against the Rohingya is to dramatically curtail Myanmar’s military power and put the army under civilian oversight. It is the army that is carrying out the vast majority of grave human rights abuses. There needs to be consequences for them."

Clapp agreed with that point, adding that there are essentially two governments in Myanmar: civilian and military.

"The civilian government is not responsible for the Rohingya crisis; the military government is," she said.

Riaz argued that ultimate responsibility for the ongoing humanitarian crisis lies with Kyi.

"The Rohingya crisis is an abject failure from Aung San Suu Kyi," he said. "Perhaps we put too much hope in her in the beginning, because of the structural constraints. But that doesn’t mean she couldn’t do anything."

"Where is the action from the international community regarding this crisis? A coordinated international response is necessary. Without it, this crisis isn’t going anywhere."

Ali Riaz

Clapp pushed back against Riaz’s argument, saying that it’s "counterproductive to put the blame for the Rohingya crisis on Aung San Suu Kyi. She doesn’t have control of the situation. She tried to turn things around for the Rohingya. But she cannot afford, politically, to be speaking out against the military in favor of the Rohingya."

With or without sanctions, Riaz said that the international response to this crisis has been severely lacking.

"The camps that more than 700,000 Rohingya are living in look like concentration camps," he said. "The conditions are terrible, and monsoons are coming. I am worried about public health. Where is the action from the international community regarding this crisis? A coordinated international response is necessary. Without it, this crisis isn’t going anywhere."

Billenness also discussed the potential involuntary repatriation of the Rohingya back to Myanmar, a plan that has since been postponed.

"One crucial voice has been missed in the negotiations over the repatriation of Rohingyas, and that is the Rohingyas themselves," he said. "We need to ask them, where do they want to go? Where do they want to live? The voice of Rohingya is not being heard. It is unfortunate. It is shocking. It has to change."

Listen to the full conversation below:

_______________________

Justin Chapman is the Communications Officer at the Pacific Council on International Policy.

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Pacific Council.


Beating the odds

Cancer survivor Gerald Freeny becomes the first black president of the Tournament of Roses

By Justin Chapman, Pasadena Weekly, 2/1/2018

Gerald Freeny of Altadena made history on Jan. 19 when the Tournament of Roses Association announced that Freeny will serve as the first African-American president of the 123-year-old organization, presiding over the 130th Rose Parade and the 105th Rose Bowl Game on Jan. 1 under the theme “The Melody of Life.”

Until recently, the Tournament had long struggled with the image that it was an exclusive organization run almost entirely by white men. An African American had never served in the organization’s senior staff until 2015, when a senior director of community relations position was created, and there have only been four African-American Rose Queens. It took decades of lobbying and protesting for the Tournament to change its diversity and inclusion policies.

Although Freeny’s presidency was announced last week, the Tournament has a seven-year succession path for its presidents and he was actually elected on Jan. 6, 2011 by the 14-member Executive Committee, the Tournament’s decision-making body consisting of seven future presidents, the current president, the immediate past president, and five rotational “at-large” members. These five seats must be held by racial and gender minorities who get a vote but are not in line to become president like the others and only serve for two years.

The at-large members were added to the Executive Committee as a compromise following protests in 1992-93 led by local developer Jim Morris and newspaper publishers Joe Hopkins and Danny Bakewell, who is also a developer. They blocked traffic with vehicles on South Orange Grove Boulevard in front of Tournament House in fall 1993 to protest the organization’s lack of diversity.

Freeny, 57, was one of the first people chosen to be an at-large member when it was created in 1993. He served from 1993-95, having started as a volunteer with the organization in 1988.

“Being one of the early at-large members gave Gerald the opportunity to be seen on the Executive Committee,” said Ronald Okum, who served as president in 2002 and mentored Freeny.

A cancer survivor, Freeny attended Cal State LA and graduated in 1983 with a degree in business administration and a minor in finance. In addition to his lung cancer, Freeny also had two liver transplants and a kidney transplant. He lives in Altadena with his wife Trina and their daughter Erica. Freeny is a member of the Kappa Alpha Psi and Gamma Zeta Boulé of Sigma Pi Phi fraternities and the First Historic Lutheran Church.

Lessons of Little Rock

In the late 1990s, the Tournament hired consultant Dr. Terrence Roberts — one of the Little Rock Nine who was among the first black students to attend an all-white high school in Arkansas in 1957 through the protection of federal troops — to work with its members and staff in helping them “address complaints from various public and private individuals, organizations, corporations, and municipalities that they were essentially a ‘Whites Only’ organization,” according to Roberts’ consulting  business website.

“I told them, ‘Consider this: You’ve got a bunch of old white guys driving around in white suits, now what message does that send? Literally,’” said Roberts, who has lived in Pasadena since 1985, referring to the 935 volunteers who dress in all-white suits on New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day. “They were a little aghast, as you might expect. I said, ‘What we need to do is help you develop a greater sense of awareness about what’s going on here. You need to have a historical dimension so you understand why people are even considering making noise about you. You’re not just an occasional thorn in the flesh here. You are representative of what this country has stood for, for too long.’”

Volunteers serve on one of 31 operating committees to help organize and pull off the parade and game, such as the Equestrian Committee, the Parade Operations Committee, the Float Construction Committee, and so on. To move up, exemplary volunteers get promoted to vice chair and then chair of a committee. Among the 31 committee chairs, 16 are considered “director-chairs.” Among those 16, about five have seniority, and candidates to become members of the Executive Committee — and thus a future president — are typically chosen from this pool. It usually takes about 20 to 25 years of volunteer service to the organization to reach this level. This is Freeny’s 30th year with the organization.

Once a person is voted onto the Executive Committee, they are considered a vice president. After serving four consecutive years, they ascend to the office of secretary in the fifth year, treasurer in the sixth year, executive vice president in the seventh year, and then president in the eighth year. That person serves one more year on the Executive Committee after their presidency, and then they are rotated off and become known as a “life director.” The organization’s largely ceremonial Board of Directors is made up of all living past presidents/life directors.

A historic moment

Craig Washington, father of 2012 Rose Queen Drew Washington, former chair of the city of Pasadena’s Northwest Commission and director-chair of the Tournament’s Equestrian Committee, served on the Tournament’s Executive Committee as an at-large member from 2009-11, helping to lay the groundwork for Freeny’s election.

“My task was in whatever way possible to influence in a positive way Gerald’s ascension as a candidate to be elected,” said Washington. “I made a strong lobbying push by spending time with Executive Committee members, talking with them, listening to them, and getting straight to the point, asking, ‘Why hasn’t Gerald been selected? What are the concerns?’”

Freeny’s name had been brought up as a possible new presidential candidate a few times in the years prior to his actual election, but he had thus far been passed up.

The 14 members of the Executive Committee vote using an electronic tool. Everyone presses a button and the results pop up on a screen as a bar graph. With Freeny and other candidates nominated, the first round of balloting began in early January 2011. Washington expected a split result, and thus subsequent rounds of voting that he feared could last a long time.

The members cast their secret electronic votes and the results popped up on the screen. It was a clear majority for Freeny.

“I looked up at the screen and damn near cried,” said Washington. “It was his time.”

Shutting down Millionaire’s Row

Long before the Tournament did the right thing and elected an African American as a future president for the first time, racial tensions were heating up in early 1990s Los Angeles. The Tournament still did not have diverse leadership at that time, even though the African-American community had been demanding they diversify as early as the 1960s.

“African Americans were in no way positioned to be in leadership because of the structure of the organization,” said Washington. “In order for you to become a member at the time you had to be recommended by existing Tournament members. Well, geez, there were no African-American Tournament members, so the little circle just kept going. You’d never get recommended to come into this association.”

In December 1992, racial tensions were so high that Tournament officials agreed to create a new Ethnic Diversity Committee to recruit minority volunteers, expand cultural diversity and reach out to community and political leaders. The president that year, Gary Hayward, issued a statement saying the committee’s task would be in keeping with “our longstanding tradition of conducting our all-volunteer efforts on the highest order of fairness and equality.”

However, that same week, Hayward said in an interview with the Pasadena Star-News that promoting minorities who did not have seniority would “destroy morale” among the membership. Adding insult to injury, then-Tournament Executive Director John H. B. “Jack” French added, “It will never happen.”

Critics called the comments racist, a characterization that Hayward takes issue with.

“I don’t like getting called a bigot,” he said. “I’m not a bigot. It’s amazing that somebody would call somebody they don’t even know a bigot, and call an organization racial and bigoted. They didn’t even know the organization; they were just making a lot of noise to get their name in the paper. The Tournament wasn’t a good old boys club. That’s what was so funny. The only restrictions Tournament had at the time were to live or work within a 15-mile radius of Tournament House. That was it. There was no restriction on race, color, creed, female, or whatever. Tradition is what it was.”

Members of Pasadena’s African-American community, however, argued that progress was moving too slowly and that they were not receiving the same opportunities that white men were within the organization.

As the Tournament began ramping up activities for the upcoming parade on Jan. 1, 1994, Morris and Bakewell decided it was time to shake things up at the Tournament in a big and visible way.

Shortly before 11 a.m. on Oct. 21, 1993, Morris drove a rented Ryder truck and Bakewell drove a Lincoln Town Car to Wrigley Mansion, home of the Tournament of Roses Association on South Orange Grove Boulevard. They positioned their vehicles across the four lanes so that traffic coming from both directions was blocked, just as Tournament members were attempting to arrive for the coronation ceremonies of Rose Queen Erica Beth Brynes of Arcadia. Chaos ensued.

“It was absolutely fabulous, because at that time we knew that we could really move this forward for change,” said Morris. “If you look at the demonstrations that took place in the South, the only reason why they were able to make progress is because of demonstrations. We felt that if we backed down there would never be a Gerald Freeny.”

Dozens of demonstrators gathered on the sidewalk in front of Tournament House holding signs and demanding the organization diversify its leadership and membership. Tournament members verbally clashed with protesters, with one elderly woman reportedly shouting at protesters, “I could kill you,” according to a Los Angeles Times report at the time. Another member told a pregnant protester, “Shut up, you tramp.”

“We want to transform the Tournament of Roses into something truly representative of the community,” Bakewell told a Times reporter at the scene.

Police eventually called in the S. N. Ward & Son towing company, which was owned by then-Tournament President Michael Ward and contracted with the city, to tow the vehicles away.

Eventually, Tournament officials agreed to add five “at-large” seats to the Executive Committee consisting of minority members of the local community. Critics called it tokenism, because although those five people would have the same voting rights and privileges as the original nine members of the committee, they were not in line to be president of the organization like the others.

“You were there to voice your opinions with regards to the community, with regards to speaking for the common member,” Freeny said. “At-large members had every right as an individual who was in line to be president, so that means we had a vote on all issues, and we were invited to all events, but we weren’t in line to be president.”

Still, Washington pointed out, “That was a significant change in the organizational structure, in growing this Executive Committee, which created all the policies.”

Progress made

Freeny and Okum recently agreed that the Tournament has progressed in the years since Bakewell, Morris and others shut down Millionaire’s Row. Women and nonblack minorities have served as president in recent years.

“It is a very diversified organization, and I think when that happens you don’t have the sameness we had from years ago where everybody was white, everybody had the same socioeconomic background,” said Okum, adding that several African Americans are moving up through the ranks and that another African American is expected to be voted onto the Executive Committee in the next few years.

“The diversity is not even an issue anymore,” Okum said. “It’s a different organization from the diversity standpoint than it was 20 years ago.”