Эфиопский интеллектуал Кebede Майкл в 1954 году первым предложил Африке учиться на опыте модернизации Японии

As Africa searches for development models, it often looks to the West or to China. Yet more than seventy years ago, the Ethiopian writer and intellectual Kebede Michael looked elsewhere—to Japan. It was long before “looking East” became fashionable. In 1954, at a time when much of Africa was still under colonial rule, Kebede published an Amharic book with a striking title: How Did Japan Modernize? Rather than asking why Ethiopia was poor, Kebede asked why Japan had become rich. He sought practical lessons from a non-Western society that had transformed itself into a modern power while preserving its sovereignty and cultural identity, and had done so in the proverbial blink of an eye. Kebede’s question remains relevant today. As African countries continue searching for pathways to industrialization, Japan’s experience offers lessons that are often overlooked. More importantly, Kebede’s interpretation of the Meiji transformation anticipated debates that would later emerge in the discourse on development. At the heart of Kebede’s inquiry was a simple puzzle. Ethiopia and Japan shared several historical similarities. Both possessed long state traditions, experienced periods of relative isolation, and encountered expanding Western power in the modern era. Yet by the twentieth century, Japan had become an industrial power while Ethiopia remained economically underdeveloped. Why? From The Reporter Magazine Drought Emergency or Seasonal Deficit? Published on 2026-09-02 By The Reporter Magazine The Economy GDP Cannot Explain Published on 2026-08-01 By Samson Berhane 25-Year Sentences & Retroactive Laws: Controversial Draft Law Sparks Fears of Growing Authoritarianism in Tigray Published on 2026-06-21 By Yared Nigussie Red Sea Rivalries: What a Shifting Geopolitical Landscape Means for Ethiopia and The Horn Published on 2026-08-31 By Yared Nigussie Kebede rejected explanations based on race, geography, or culture. Instead, he focused on how societies responded to external stimuli. In his judgment, nineteenth-century Japan began from the premise that national survival required comprehensive modernization. It recognized that Western strength rested on practical knowledge. Subsequently, it mobilized its society accordingly. What impressed Kebede most was not that Japan learned from the West; many societies attempted that. But instead it was Japan’s ability to learn selectively and rapidly. Japan did not imitate a single foreign model. It studied multiple countries, borrowing what worked and adapting those lessons to local circumstances. Its achievement lay in synthesizing diverse external influences into a coherent national project. Kebede was particularly fascinated by Japan’s approach to knowledge. Long before human capital became a fashionable concept among economists and development practitioners, he argued, that the Japanese recognized that national power depended less on natural resources than on practical knowledge. Technical education such as engineering, medicine, and other applied sciences occupied a central place in the minds of Meiji Japan’s reformers. From The Reporter Magazine From Unwilling Investors to Bidding Wars: Ethiopia’s T-Bill Market Turns on Its Head Published on 2026-09-03 By Mahlet Mehdi Competition, Trapped Funds, and Connectivity: Aviation Guru on Realities in a Fast-Evolving Industry Published on 2026-09-05 By Yared Nigussie Behind Ethiopia’s Stalled Iron Ore Mining Published on 2026-08-29 By Bewket Abebe The Myth of International Currency Reserves in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) Published on 2026-08-16 By Mussie Delelegn Arega (PhD) Incidentally, Kebede’s thinking on the role of technical education closely resembled that of Yukichi Fukuzawa, the renowned Meiji intellectual. Both Kebede and Fukuzawa regarded practical learning as the foundation of national advancement. Kebede also identified another ingredient in Japan’s success that is often neglected in contemporary development debates: leadership. While modern scholars tend to emphasize institutions and incentives, he attached great importance to what he called great men. Kebede observed that most countries are fortunate to produce one transformative leader in a generation — Turkey had Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, India had Mahatma Gandhi, and China had Sun Yat-sen. Meiji Japan, by contrast, seemed blessed with an entire generation of great nation-builders. His list of such great men included Yukichi Fukuzawa, Kido Takayoshi, Okubo Toshimichi, Ito Hirobumi, Okuma Shigenobu, Saigo Takamori, Yamagata Aritomo and others. Whether contemporary historians would fully endorse Kebede’s selection is less important than what it reveals about his unique understanding of modernization. For Kebede, Japan’s spectacular and rapid rise—the “Japanese miracle”— was the product of an extraordinary concentration of talent and public-minded leadership in the Meiji period. Among these figures, according to Kebede, Fukuzawa occupied a special place. He admired him as an intellectual who helped redefine Japan’s relationship with the wider world. He also noted that Fukuzawa and other Meiji leaders were avid readers of world history, drawing lessons from figures such as Alexander the Great and Napoleon. Their success, Kebede argued, stemmed partly from the breadth of their intellectual horizons.  This naturally led Kebede to ask a more uncomfortable question: if Japan could do it, why not Ethiopia? The answer is multifaceted. First, Japan perceived modernization as a matter of national survival. The arrival of Western powers in the middle of the nineteenth century convinced Japanese leaders that failure to modernize could result in subjugation. By contrast, Ethiopia’s rulers, at least from Emperor Tewodros in the 19th century to Emperor Haile Selassie in the twentieth century, often viewed Europe less as a threat than as a potential ally, reducing the sense of urgency in Ethiopia that drove reform in Japan. Second, Ethiopia’s victory over Italy at Adwa in 1896 — one of Africa’s greatest anti-colonial achievements — may have paradoxically weakened the incentive for comprehensive modernization. Unlike Japan, Ethiopia demonstrated that it could defeat a European power without undertaking a far-reaching industrial transformation. Success diminished the pressure for deeper reform. Third, Ethiopian modernization efforts often prioritized political centralization over broad social transformation. Reform was frequently imposed from above rather than built through inclusive national coalitions. Meiji Japan, by contrast, combined state-building with the mobilization of diverse social groups behind a common developmental project. The broader lesson of Kebede’s discourse on Meiji Japan is this. Kebede understood something that remains important today: successful development requires more than resources, aid or favorable policies. It requires practical knowledge, strategic learning and visionary leadership. It is probably fair to conclude that Kebede Michael was not just an Ethiopian admirer of Japan. He was also one of Africa’s earliest interpreters of the East Asian development experience. And beneath his account of the Meiji transformation lay a larger challenge directed at his compatriots: if Japan could successfully modernize, why not Ethiopia? That question remains relevant not only for Ethiopia but for much of the Global South. Seifudein Adem (PhD) is a Visiting Professor, Institute for Advanced Research and Education, Doshisha University, Kyoto, Japan Contributed by Seifudein Adem (PhD)