U.S. Intervention in 1965 Indonesia In the early 1960s, Indonesia was polarized between the left and right—left being the PKI (Indonesian Communist Party) and the Indonesian Army being the right. The murders of six army generals on the morning of September 30th 1965 was a very decisive moment in Indonesia’s history. The September 30th movement marked the downfall of Indonesia’s first president Sukarno, his replacement—with the second president Suharto, and the massacres that took the lives of an estimated half-a-million Indonesian civilians, and many more were detained as political prisoners. The United States was one of the western forces which influenced the events that unfolded the most. Analyzing the covert actions adopted by the U.S. administrations during Sukarno’s presidency allow for a more in-depth understanding of not only the movement in 1965 and the mass-killings that followed it, but also the relationship between the U.S. and Indonesia at the time. The actions taken by the United States administrations prior to and during this decisive moment in Indonesia’s history brings to questions the motives and interests of U.S. policy makers, how those interests were ultimately translated into the Suharto regime and the success of their actions were repeated during the mass-killings in East Timor and West Papua during the New Order. Most of what is written about the relations between Indonesia and the United States after 1965 is to discuss whether or not the U.S. was complicit in the coup. The question of whether or not the United States was directly involved in the September 30th movement is very vexed and heavily debated among scholars. There are many who claim that the U.S. was directly involved in the coup, while others claim they were not involved at all. Jaechun Kim in “U.S. Covert Action in Indonesia in the 1960s: Assessing the Motives and Consequences” (2002) argues that “[t]he U.S. had been far more than just an innocent bystander to the evolving course of events in Indonesia” (75). H.W. Brands, however, in “The Limits of Manipulation: How the United States Didn’t Topple Sukarno” (1989) makes the conclusion that Sukarno’s fall from power was not the responsibility of the United States, and neither are the deaths of the PKI members (808). Experts were only able to make tentative conclusions not only because there was an insufficient number of credible evidence and documentation on the event, but also because the evidence that were available aligned with Suharto’s narrative of the coup and was widely accepted by the West. The narrative of the Suharto regime was reflected in the 300-page CIA report written by Helen Louise Hunter published in 1968, which insisted that the September 30th movement was an inevitable reaction of those not involved in the PKI. Major General Suharto—who would eventually become Indonesia’s second president—insists that “the September 30th movement was a devious conspiracy by the PKI to seize state power an ...

1. U.S. Intervention in 1965 Indonesia
In the early 1960s, Indonesia was polarized between the left and
right—left being the PKI (Indonesian Communist Party) and the
Indonesian Army being the right. The murders of six army
generals on the morning of September 30th 1965 was a very
decisive moment in Indonesia’s history. The September 30th
movement marked the downfall of Indonesia’s first president
Sukarno, his replacement—with the second president Suharto,
and the massacres that took the lives of an estimated half-a-
million Indonesian civilians, and many more were detained as
political prisoners. The United States was one of the western
forces which influenced the events that unfolded the most.
Analyzing the covert actions adopted by the U.S.
administrations during Sukarno’s presidency allow for a more
in-depth understanding of not only the movement in 1965 and
the mass-killings that followed it, but also the relationship
between the U.S. and Indonesia at the time. The actions taken
by the United States administrations prior to and during this
decisive moment in Indonesia’s history brings to questions the
motives and interests of U.S. policy makers, how those interests
were ultimately translated into the Suharto regime and the
success of their actions were repeated during the mass-killings
in East Timor and West Papua during the New Order.
Most of what is written about the relations between Indonesia
and the United States after 1965 is to discuss whether or not the
U.S. was complicit in the coup. The question of whether or not
the United States was directly involved in the September 30th
movement is very vexed and heavily debated among scholars.
There are many who claim that the U.S. was directly involved in
the coup, while others claim they were not involved at all.
Jaechun Kim in “U.S. Covert Action in Indonesia in the 1960s:
Assessing the Motives and Consequences” (2002) argues that
“[t]he U.S. had been far more than just an innocent bystander to

2. the evolving course of events in Indonesia” (75). H.W. Brands,
however, in “The Limits of Manipulation: How the United
States Didn’t Topple Sukarno” (1989) makes the conclusion that
Sukarno’s fall from power was not the responsibility of the
United States, and neither are the deaths of the PKI members
(808). Experts were only able to make tentative conclusions not
only because there was an insufficient number of credible
evidence and documentation on the event, but also because the
evidence that were available aligned with Suharto’s narrative of
the coup and was widely accepted by the West.
The narrative of the Suharto regime was reflected in the 300-
page CIA report written by Helen Louise Hunter published in
1968, which insisted that the September 30th movement was an
inevitable reaction of those not involved in the PKI. Major
General Suharto—who would eventually become Indonesia’s
second president—insists that “the September 30th movement
was a devious conspiracy by the PKI to seize state power and
murder all of its enemies” (Roosa et al). The Indonesian army’s
anti-communist propaganda included accounts of how the the
PKI had abducted the army officers, tortured, mutilated, and
danced around their dead bodies. Official autopsies of the
victim’s bodies later on showed no signs of torture, army media
such as Angkatan Bersendjata and Berita Yudha still expressed
the propaganda created by the army. David Easter argues in his
work “Keep the Indonesian Pot Boiling: Western Covert
Intervention in Indonesia, October 1965-March 1966” (2005)
that because both the narrative provided by the Indonesian army
and the Western propaganda relayed the same message, it is
difficult to separate between the two (69). U.S. officials had
always denied Washington’s involvement and kept avoiding
questions regarding U.S. covert operations in Indonesia prior to
the coup, while radio programs in the United States spread the
anti-PKI propaganda produced by the Indonesian army. The
information portrayed by western sources served as a
confirmation for the information relayed to the Indonesian
people by local media outlets. David Easter explained in his

3. work that the ultimate goal of the propaganda was to justify
killing the communists.
In order to justify the killings, most of the official evidence
which are in the form of interrogation reports were obtained
through means of torture. John Roosa claims in “The Truths of
Torture: Victims’ Memories and States Histories in Indonesia”
(2008) that much of the evidence attained were generated by
members of the Indonesian military who interrogated the PKI
members (43). From the beginning of October 1965 the army
detained around one million Indonesian civilians who were
suspected to be members of the communist party, or anyone
who were suspected to have a connection with the members. In
hopes of justifying what Suharto’s troops were doing, the
fabrications from the torturing procedures became official
evidence. The anti-PKI propaganda established by the army was
so successful, even army officers who were executing the
tortures gradually had difficulties in differentiating between
accurate intelligence with their propaganda. The statements
made by the victims could not be trusted and the—thus, the
events of October 1965 were poorly understood.
Since then, partially declassified CIA files have shed new light
on the presence of The United States in Indonesia prior to the
coup. The key to learning more about the coup and the genocide
rests within the participation of the United States. Although it is
not yet known whether or not The U.S. had a direct planning in
the coup, the evidence available shows the significant effects of
their intervention in Indonesia. In Bradley Simpson’s “The
United States and the 1965-1966 Mass Murders in Indonesia”
(2015), he claims that “declassification of just a fraction of the
CIA’s records…reveal that the Johnson administration was a
direct and willing accomplice to one of the great bloodbaths of
twentieth-century history” (46). Partial declassification of files
makes it possible to evaluate with greater precision the role of
the United States in what the CIA refer to as “one of the worst
mass murders of the 20th century.” Although this evidence does
not assert the United States a mastermind of the coup, this

4. shows the long-running interest the U.S. had in Indonesia.
Rather than naming the United States as the mastermind of the
coup, declassified CIA files and evidence on covert actions
provide a better understanding of the massacres as well as the
presence of the United States in Indonesia as the result.
Through analyzing the relationship shared by the U.S. and
Indonesia during Sukarno’s time as president, shows how
beneficial the overthrow of Sukarno was for the interests of the
United States.
Indonesia is strategically situated between the Indian Ocean and
the Pacific Ocean, and had been seen as an important country in
South East Asia. As Kai M. Thaler quoted in “U.S. Action and
Inaction in the Massacre of Communists and Alleged
Communists in Indonesia” that the United States was afraid of
losing “100 million people, vast potential resources, and a
strategically important chain of islands” to communist forces.
Indonesia’s location was important to the U.S. due to the fact
that U.S. naval power and oil supply goes through Indonesia’s
seas. Jaechun Kim points out that protecting Indonesia from
communist or Soviet influences was important for U.S. interests
in terms of security (64). If Indonesia were to be influenced by
communist powers, oil could not be delivered through Indonesia
for the interests of the United States and its allies. Furthermore,
U.S. business interests were also at stakes. The abundant
amount of natural resources possessed by Indonesia had
attracted the interests of United States businesses. Kim points
out that by the end of WWII, large U.S. corporations have made
large-scale investments in Indonesia. However, protecting
investments in Indonesia became increasingly difficult due to
disagreements between Sukarno’s policies and the policies of
the West.
The independent and nationalistic policies Sukarno had adopted
in Indonesia—which includes Sukarno’s vision of a foreign-
capital-free Indonesia—proved to be an obstacle for U.S.
business interests. Sukarno’s reputation in the West became
even more deteriorated due to his hostility towards foreign

5. business ventures in Indonesia, which he vocally expressed
often during his presidency. Sukarno’s declarations such as “go
to hell with your aid” goes to show the tensions that existed
between the two countries during that time. Prior to the coup,
Sukarno intended to nationalize two U.S. oil companies—Caltex
and Stanvac—which were located in the island of Sumatra.
Sukarno’s intentions of eradicating Dutch colonialism from
Indonesia by means of rewriting laws regarding the exploitation
of Indonesia’s natural resources were also seen as an obstacle to
U.S. business investments. Sukarno also did not look fondly
upon the intentions that come with the economic assistance
given by the United States. Sukarno claims that “America
tolerates underdeveloped Asian countries for two reasons. One,
we're a good market. We pay back with interest. And two, she
worries we'll turn communist. She tries to buy our loyalties”
(Factsanddetails.com). His disapproval of the strings-attached
aspect that comes with aid coming the United States is often
shown in his speeches. As a result, Sukarno’s views on western
imperialism strengthened to western forces the notion that he
was eventually leaning more towards the PKI. As Tan Swie
Ling claimed in his interview with Intan Suwandi, that
“obviously the reason [for the United States’ involvement] was
economic, with human beings sacrificed on the altar” (2015).
The risk of Indonesia overtaken by left-wing forces and the
safety of U.S. commercial investments is what had motivated
the Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson administrations to take
covert actions toward Indonesia.
U.S. efforts to overthrow Sukarno began during Eishenhower’s
administration from as early as 1955. Peter Dale Scott in “The
United States and the Overthrow of Sukarno, 1965-1967” (1985)
argues that one of the factors contributing to what happened in
1965 was due to the millions of dollars the CIA had given in
support of the Masjumi party (246). The Eisenhower
administration during the Indonesian general election campaign
in 1955 had decided to support PKI’s opposing party—the
Masjumi party in the hopes of overthrowing Sukarno. When the

6. support of the right-wing party did not go as expected, the
Eisenhower administration reverted to military aid by
supporting anti-PKI forces with military equipment. When this
effort to overthrow Sukarno also failed, it only gave Sukarno
the confirmation of The U.S. involvement in the rebellion—
thus, the relationship between the two countries soured.
For a brief moment during the beginning of the Kennedy
administration, the relationship between the two countries had
seem to brighten. Jaechun Kim explained that unlike his
predecessor, the Kennedy used economic and military aid in an
effort to influence Indonesia through a well-kept relationship.
Once the relationship began to deteriorate once again, covert
operations were taken in Indonesia until the Kennedy
administration was replaced with the Johnson administration.
During the Johnson administration, the covert actions in
Indonesia continued with greater intensity. Unlike the Kennedy
administration who increased aid to Sukarno and the army, the
Johnson administration decreased it. Scott explains that “the
gradual cutoff of all economic aid to Indonesia in the years
1962-65 was accompanied by a shift in a military aid to friendly
elements in the Indonesian Army” (253). The decrease of
economic aid was also accompanied by the increase of military
aid from $39.5 million in four years from $28.3 million in the
thirteen years prior. Moreover, the United States government
invested $5 million in training around 2,100 people from the
Indonesian army in the U.S.
On March 1966, Suharto has officially replaced Sukarno and
became Indonesia’s second president. Unlike Sukarno who
believed in adopting nationalist and anti-imperialist policies as
a means of economic self-sufficiency, Suharto’s administration
believed that their long-term economic growth would be made
possible through the help of foreign aid. The replacement of
Sukarno as the president was also accompanied by stream of
foreign aid coming into Indonesia. Shipments of goods such as
rice and clothes resulted in the lowering of prices was made to
make the Indonesian people believe Suharto’s presidency was

7. an improvement from Sukarno’s. During Suharto’s presidency
$2 billion were invested in Indonesia’s oil industries by U.S.
companies, which accounted for 90 percent of the amount
produced by Indonesia. unlike his predecessor, Suharto did not
look to the Soviet Union or other communist forces to attain
financial support. Suharto turned to Western forces such as the
International Monetary Fund and the World Bank for support.
Alongside the help obtained from Western forces, Indonesia’s
revenues from oil and gas exports when their prices were high
encouraged the country to take out loans to further develop the
country. The momentum of economic growth in Indonesia ended
with the Asian economic crisis and the capital flight that
happened in 1997. Falling oil prices caused Indonesia to
allocate large sums of foreign debt from foreign institutions.
John Roosa and Joseph Nevins in “The Mass Killings in
Indonesia” (2005) claim that “[t]he Suharto regime lived by
foreign capital and died by foreign capital.” Even after selling
Indonesia’s natural resources to the western world, the amounts
needed to be paid on foreign debt amounted to a large sum that
took over much of the government’s budget. Soon after,
Indonesia began to import goods such as sugar, rice, and
soybeans—that could be produced in Indonesia, and the primary
occupation for villagers are working as migrant workers. As a
result, Indonesia became increasingly dependent on foreign aid.
It is difficult to determine who the masterminds were and
whether or not the involvement of the United States was
ultimately helpful for Indonesia. As Peter Dale Scott claims, it
would be foolish to blame on only one group involved—the
U.S., the Indonesian military, or Sukarno and the PKI. Each
group involved in some way contributed to what had happened
in 1965, no one was completely blameless or had all the control
in the events. Although evidence of the U.S. involvement in
Indonesia has only been partially declassified—and it is still not
known to what extent they provided assistance to the Indonesian
Army—the evidence that is available prove that the U.S.
provided an important, if not secondary role. It could also be

8. assumed that the motives that drove the United States was due
to its business and commercial interests of the private
investments made in Indonesia. The covert action done by the
U.S. during that critical time aligned with their interests they
had at stake, and those interests are ultimately reflected on the
amount of aid and U.S. business interests present during
Suharto’s presidency. Since the perpetrators of the events which
unfolded in 1965 were never condemned, Suharto and the new
order in the upcoming years engaged in brutal mass-killings in
East Timor and West Papua.
Works Cited
Brands, H. W. "The Limits of Manipulation: How the United
States Didn't Topple Sukarno." The Journal of American
History, vol. 76, no. 3, Dec. 1989, pp. 785-808. JSTOR,
doi:10.2307/2936421. Accessed 16 Oct. 2016.
Easter, David. "‘Keep the Indonesian Pot Boiling’: Western
Covert Intervention in Indonesia, October 1965–March 1966."
Cold War History, vol. 5, no. 1, 16 Aug. 2006,
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1468274042000283144?t
ab=permissions&scroll=top. Accessed 16 Oct. 2016.
Hays, Jeffrey. "Indonesia under Suharto." Facts and Details,
2008,
factsanddetails.com/indonesia/History_and_Religion/sub6_1c/e
ntry-3960.html. Accessed 13 Nov. 2016.
Kadane, Kathy. "Ex-agents Say CIA Compiled Death Lists for
Indonesians." Namebase, 1990, www.namebase.net/kadane.html.
Accessed 13 Nov. 2016.
Kim, Jaechun. "U.S. Covert Action in Indonesia in the 1960s:
Assessing the Motives and Consequences." Journal of
International and Area Studies, vol. 9, no. 2, Dec. 2002, pp. 63-
85. ProQuest,
www.shoreline.edu:2048/login?url=http://www.shoreline.edu:23
60/docview/223820001?accountid=1164. Accessed 16 Oct.
2016.

9. Roosa, John, and Joseph Nevins. "The Mass Killings in
Indonesia." CounterPunch, edited by Jeffrey St. Clair, Nov.
2005, www.counterpunch.org/2005/11/05/the-mass-killings-in-
indonesia/. Accessed 5 Nov. 2016.
Scott, Peter Dale. "The United States and the Overthrow of
Sukarno, 1965-1967." Pacific Affairs, vol. 58, no. 2, Summer
1985, pp. 239-64. JSTOR, doi:10.2307/2758262. Accessed 16
Oct. 2016.
Simpson, Bradley. "The United States and the 1965-1966 Mass
Murders in Indonesia." Monthly Review Press, vol. 67, no. 7,
Dec. 2015, pp. 31-49. ProQuest,
www.shoreline.edu:2048/login?url=http://www.shoreline.edu:23
60/docview/1744761662?accountid=1164. Accessed 13 Oct.
2016.
Suwandi, Intan. "No Reconciliation without Truth: An Interview
with Tan Swie Ling on the 1965 Mass Killings in Indonesia."
Monthly Review, vol. 67, no. 7, Dec. 2015, pp. 14-30.
ProQuest,
www.shoreline.edu:2048/login?url=http://www.shoreline.edu:23
60/docview/1744761675?accountid=1164. Accessed 16 Oct.
2016.
Thaler, Kai M. "U.S. Action and Inaction in the Massacre of
Communists and Alleged Communists in Indonesia." Harvard
University,
scholar.harvard.edu/files/kaithaler/files/us_action_and_inaction
_in_indonesia_massacres_2.pdf?m=1446331795. Accessed 13
Nov. 2016.
Due Dates:
Mini Draft: Due November 8th
· should be more than halfway complete, so at least 4 pages and
a Works Cited page with at least 4 sources
Full Draft: Due November 17th
· should be almost fully complete, so at least 6 pages and a

10. Works Cited page with at least 6 sources (the more complete it
is, the better feedback I can give you)
Final Draft: Due December 7th
· should be fully complete, following all requirements, so at
least 8 full pages and a complete Works Cited page with 8+
sources, half of which are scholarly
***NO late final papers will be accepted. Treat this as a virtual
“in-class” final. No make-ups.***
Research Paper Prompt
For the final project of this class, you will conduct research on
a topic of your choosing and write a research paper detailing
your findings.
Researchers Make Claims:
For this project, you will research a topic of your choice, find
sufficient and relevant information on your topic, and develop
and support a claim about that topic. Your final research paper
will advance a significant, specific, and complex claim about
your topic. This research paper must be argumentative,
analytical, or interpretive: you must make a claim for how we,
as readers, should understand, think about, conceptualize, act
upon, view, or question your topic. It may not be merely
informational.
Two Goals:
For this research paper, you will synthesize your research
materials to accomplish two goals:
One goal is to synthesize background information in order to
answer the question: “what information must my readers know
first in order to understand my topic in a meaningful way?”
Your research paper also takes a second step and analyzes the
information in order to make an argumentative, analytical, or
interpretive claim about that topic. Hence, you will also be
synthesizing information in order to get readers to see that
information and the topic in a new and significant way.
Research is Evidence-Based:
You may already have some ideas about your topic, either from
preliminary research or from other classes or from your daily

11. observations of the world around you. However, research
is evidence-driven, which means that your final claim (your
final conclusion about the topic) must come from what you
learned through research. The process should be
This:
Read, interpret, and analyze evidence --> come to a claim about
the topic
Not this:
Already have a claim about the topic --> find evidence that
supports it (this is called “cherry-picking”)
Your paper will be evaluated on the following criteria:
1. Your paper must have an argumentative, analytical, or
interpretive claim.
2. Your paper must be inspired by a human rights or social
justice issue.
3. Your claim, the ideas that support it, and your analysis must
be grounded in your research evidence. You cannot make claims
that are not supported with research evidence.
4. Your topic should be defined specifically enough and narrow
enough so that you can develop and support your claim
significantly in 8-10 pages.
5. Your paper must cite at least 8 sources. These may be
primary or secondary sources. Tertiary sources do not count
(e.g. textbooks and encyclopedias).
6. At least half of your sources must be scholarly. The rest
should be sources that you have rigorously evaluated for
credibility and reliability.
7. Your paper must use academic language and reasoning, and
must be well-organized.
8. Your paper must follow MLA guidelines for citing and
documenting your sources.
9. Any plagiarism on this assignment will result in a grade of 0
on the paper and a failing grade in the course.
10. Final draft shows revision and development based on peer
and instructor feedback.
Formatting Requirements

12. 8-10 double-spaced pages (at least 8 fullpages)
*2700-3300 words
8+ sources (at least half must be scholarly)
MLA in-text citations (footnotes optional)
MLA Works Cited Page (not included in the 8-10 pages)
12-pt Times New Roman font
1-in margins
Heading, upper right-hand corner, single-spaced: Name, Date,
Assignment Name
An interesting title!
Name your document: “YourFirstName_RP”
Please see the syllabus for this class’s late and missing work
policy
*I’ve noticed that international or non-Microsoft versions of
Word measure margins and spacing a bit differently. If you are
using one of these versions, count your words to make sure you
are reaching the required length.
Submission
All paper drafts and the final paper will be submitted online to
our Canvas site. The final draft will be closed to submission
after the due time. Finals that do not meet the page length or
source requirements will lose significant points. No late final
papers will be accepted.
Grading Rubric
See below.
Rubric
Academic Research Writing
Academic Research Writing
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
Argument
view longer description
threshold: 3.0 pts
Exceeding

13. 4.0 pts
Meeting
3.0 pts
Approaching
2.0 pts
Beginning
1.0 pts
Incomplete
0.0 pts
4.0 pts
Evidence
view longer description
threshold: 3.0 pts
Exceeding
4.0 pts
Meeting
3.0 pts
Approaching
2.0 pts
Beginning
1.0 pts
Incomplete
0.0 pts
4.0 pts
Analysis
view longer description
threshold: 3.0 pts
Exceeding
4.0 pts
Meeting
3.0 pts
Approaching
2.0 pts
Beginning

14. 1.0 pts
Incomplete
0.0 pts
4.0 pts
Transitions & Organization
view longer description
threshold: 3.0 pts
Exceeding
4.0 pts
Meeting
3.0 pts
Approaching
2.0 pts
Beginning
1.0 pts
Incomplete
0.0 pts
4.0 pts
Language & Scope
view longer description
threshold: 3.0 pts
Exceeding
4.0 pts
Meeting
3.0 pts
Approaching
2.0 pts
Beginning
1.0 pts
Incomplete
0.0 pts
4.0 pts
Formatting Requirements

15. view longer description
threshold: 3.0 pts
Exceeding
4.0 pts
Meeting
3.0 pts
Approaching
2.0 pts
Beginning
1.0 pts
Incomplete
0.0 pts
4.0 pts
Total Points: 24.0
Zhenmu Gong
English 102
Draft 2
Nov 15th 2016
The world, and not least its 256 million Americans, has an
unwavering belief in America as the land of freedom and the
country of equality. The American Civil War unequivocally
declares the equal rights to all the civilians and residents.
However, in practice, such ambition rarely leads a success in all
aspects of the society. With the national consciousness awaken,
the discrimination towards the black people seems currently
under control. Which indicates a passive trend in the cultural
integration in the era of globalization. The 20th century had
undoubtedly witnessed a great improvement of the culture
quality and the form of the domestic cultures. But as cultures
collapse and multiply with each other, the unequal treatment
towards people are not limited within the range of the black
man, but also involves every kind of people due to their
different religions, skin colors, and the places they came from.

16. Among then the unfair treatment towards Asian American has
arisen and it still remains out of the frame of the crowd view.
Under the general circumstance of cultural integration and
improving of civilian’s educational quality, how are those kinds
of discrimination hang over their way on the society? How the
situation is going to develop? According to Rastogi, Sonya, et
al, in a 2011 US census bureau estimation, it is said that “the
Asian Americans take up 5.6% of the US population, of which
the number is around 18,205,898.” (Rastogi, Sonya, et al). The
authors claim that “Among all of the Asian who have sailed a
long way onto the land of the United States, about a quarter of
the current number is aimed in further education.” (Iwamura and
Jane Naomi). However, questions come as a half of the learning
group choose to go back to their own home country for working
rather than accommodate in the current country they are
actually dreaming for. Logically speaking, this does not make
sense as America is not only one of the countries that provide
best education, but also one of the countries with a complete
merchandise to maintain the living quality of its people. Not to
mention it is described as the most powerful country in the
world and it encourages everyone to realize his dream. What
drives people to leave? What’s more, people who receive
education can be described as in a large number. But when
people graduate, the number of people who goes to work is cut
in half. Also, there are many Asian Americans who have settled
in the USA for generals. The reasons behind such phenomenon
are concluded as they received unfair treatment in many
aspects. But to reveal the very basic reason for them to leave
USA, the emphasis is laid onto the unfair treatment in job
application for Asian American. So that, there are indeed unfair
treatments towards Asian American in this country, and the
situation should be looked through and hanged.
In order to have a detailed look through the lives of Asian
Americans, the current situation of them are illustrated in this
several aspects: the education level, working rate and working
types, wage and working environment. From my point of view,

17. those elements are an inevitably part to talk about.
Education level is not only referable to tell the living condition
of one, but it is also an important element in finding a job. Not
to mention one along country of the USA, but everywhere on
this world. The education level decides what kind of job one
can access to. And working rate and the types of the work are
tightly associated with it. According to a recent search
conducted in 2015 by Pew Research Center analysis of Bureau
of Labor Statistics data, the result, however, shows that
the wage gaps are obviously divided in race and gender. In
2015, average hourly wages for black men were $15, compared
with $21 for white men. Only the hourly earnings of Asian men
of $24 outpaced those of white men. And when it comes to the
hourly earrings of woman, the Asian and white women earn
respectively $18 and $17, which are higher than those of black
women of $13, and also higher than those of black men. And
this research also compared the education degree of races and
the relationship between the two elements. The results show
that among adults ages 25 and older, 23% of blacks have a
bachelor’s degree or more education, compared with 36% of
whites and 53% of Asians. Which gives a strong support to the
point that people with higher education get higher wages.
(Patten)
Especially in countries like the USA where technology is the
first working force. However, from the wage of the Asian
Americans, one can hardly say there is any discrimination as it
is much higher than any other races in USA. But the educational
level of Asian Americans is surprisingly high, which logically
allows the Asian Americans to earn a higher wage. That is to
say, the wage and the education level of Asian Americans are
quite proper. According to the work type and the environment,
one then is able to tell whether he is satisfied with his work or
is his identity or cultivation applying for his job.
On finding whether the Asian Americans working well and their
experience of finding a job and received unfairness, it is not

18. difficult to achieve a pattern inside the segment when Asian
Americans looking for jobs. Bigwowo claims that “the Asian
Americans face discrimination in State Department work.”
(Bigwowo). It is said that there are signs that Asian Americans
have been experienced the worst workplace discrimination of
other racial group and ethnic group. In the article “Workplace
Discrimination Based on Names.” the author gives some
information that “in some press released in 2014, Advancing
Justice—an organization that represents Asian Americans in
employment discrimination cases in both individual cases and
class actions where Asian Americans and other minority groups
have been denied equal employment opportunities because of
their races or national origin.” (Mong). A number of incidents
in which Asian Americans adversely affected by
workplace discrimination are also given in the researches. In
those cases, Asian Americans are refused mainly for their
incapability to speak English well, their unfamiliar about the
company and so many other reasons that seem nothing to do
with racial discrimination. But there are patterns to follow when
Asian Americans appear in job application.
The Asian Americans indeed are ruled under the very pattern
when looking for jobs. Thus reasons are about to be found out.
Is it because of their own behavior and identification of
themselves that they are suffering from unfairness? Or the
deeply rooted discrimination remained from historic reasons?
Not only in the aspect of job applying, the questions come also
when Asian Americans try to apply for education. In 2015, the
Harvard university was even accused of racial discrimination.
Rising by more than 60 groups in the school, Princeton
Professor Thomas J. Espenshade and RTI International
researcher Alexandria Walton Radford argue in the book that
“An Asian-American student has to score 140 points higher than
a white student, 270 points higher than a Hispanic student and
450 points higher than a black student on the SAT to be on
equal footing”. (Camille Cava, C.) And they even received
unfair treatment by police and the courts. Alisia G. T. T. Tran

19. demonstrate the current situation and truth of Asian Americans
in workplace that “No one can deny the hard work the Asian
Americans had pay for a brighter future. But it is also true that
Asian Americans are at risk for marginalization and lower rates
of American identification. Unlike other part of the world, the
Asian Americans are more traditional.” (Tran). And Dugger also
indicate about how Asian Americans balance their cultural
tradition and “They have regional traditional festivals from
January to December, and most of these festivals are complicate
in initial motivation. Preliminary evidence suggests that
subjective social status may explain some of the disparities
between naturalized citizen and noncitizen Asian Americans.”
(Dugger) What’s more, they are somehow shy, which makes
them vulnerable to injuries at large scaled occasion. And if I
have to describe a common behavior of the Asian Americans
that may leads themselves into unfair treatment is that
sometimes they do not stand out and say the unfair treatment
they have received aloud. This is really harmful as such
behavior helps cover the criminal the discrimination has done.
In another word, this helps other people keep on giving unfair
treatments to Asian Americans. Asian Americans are famous for
their low-profile way of doing things, they believe in endurance
and they may keep themselves under sufferance of the high
pressure. But this is not good not only for themselves, but also
for other races that is also under discrimination. They should
tell the difference of endurance and tolerance, the unfair
treatment is intolerable, but not something that should be
endured.
So that once the reason is find out, it is quite feasible to
change the situation. From my point of view, as long as the
reasons are multiplied and reach different field of the society,
the solutions are also accordingly complex. And from the level
of the solutions, they can be divided into from the country
level, from the society level, and from the group level, also
from the individual level. What’s more, the aspects of the
solutions are respectively in the role of interpreters, civilians,

20. and community groups. Among which roles everybody may find
himself one of them in real life.
Considering the problems are mainly occurred in the
working spaces, the main solutions may be given in the aspect
for interpreters. From the view of the superiors in some levels
of the management for interpreters, suggestions are provided as
followed. Firstly, ensure that manager assessments of their
Asian American employees are “fair, objective, and free from
the cultural biases, ensure that the EEOC agency itself does its
job properly in terms of being accessible to Asian American
employees who have a complaint and in properly investigating
such complaints.” (Gee, Gilbert C. et al.) From my point of
view, the individuals are different from each other, and it’s a
common daily behavior to have complaints as there are
undoubtedly regulations that don’t fit everyone. Listen carefully
to those complaints and treat them equally and fairly. This is
actually not a strategy towards racial discrimination, but instead
a management issue that fits well with any cooperations.
Collaborate with Asian American community organizations and
leaders should encourage Asian Americans to “work for the
federal government and to increase their levels of representation
within federal agencies.” (Gee, Gilbert C. et al.et al.) In my
words, this promote the Asian Americans to recognize
themselves as one part of the United States. As long as the
identification is built up, there will be Asian Americans calling
of their now rights.
In addition, the discussion and helps people had put on the
discriminations on Asian Americans should not be only taken by
Non-Asian Americans from the outside, but should also be
promoted from the inner side of the Asian Americans group. So
that, the recognition and awareness of the Asian Americans
themselves is essential in such progress. Without it, it never
reaches the true meaning of eliminating the discrimination. The
authors state the truth that “Actively support Asian American
employee groups. Rather than promoting “balkanization” as
some critics have charged, these ethnically focused support

21. groups actually lead to greater worker loyalty, productivity, and
satisfaction.” (Kiang. L et al.) As we all know that some of the
Asian Americans that divided by regions they came from are
famous for their hardworking and diligence. Like the the people
from Japan are thoughtful and intelligent, people from China
are moderate and polite, and there are so many examples.
People with so many virtues should never be ignored in the
workplace, there are always applications that calls on such good
qualities. Finally, “give Asian Americans federal employees
who do have documented skill deficiencies the opportunities
and resources to address them and to improve their skills and
qualifications so that they can perform better and be promoted
more easily.” (Gee, Gilbert C. et al). This is like the education
and trainings. No one truly escapes the truth that practice makes
perfect, and training also improves people. It is another form of
investigation. People put time and money in, and they gain
skills, and back in turns they use the skills to earn more money.
However, differently here, the people should be trained in order
to get a promotion. This is a symbol of the social status, the
status of a nation. As I mentioned above, the Asian Americans
are a group of people with brilliant brains and will to work
hard, they should go further and find their ego both in
workplace and society. A promotion to higher space is no
wonder a short cut to gain such status. And hopefully should
such methods also help with the portion the Asian Americans
held in the federal government workplace.
From the level of country who held a large quantity of ethnic
group, the solutions are no more than perfect the law system.
The fourth amendment of the United States’ constitution of the
11th is about the equal status of every civilian in the United
States, which has working against black people discrimination
and native Americans discrimination, and it will work further
against the discrimination against Asian Americans. However, it
still remains a question that even under such law merchandise
discrimination still occur in everyday life and it is common to
see such things happen and people gave already took it for

22. granted. This phenomenon itself is indeed uncommon. Measures
should not be taken on the level of morality, but should be also
strengthened by laws. There should be always a line. Hopefully
the law will arouse people’s attention and awareness, and may it
help to eliminate all kinds of discrimination.
As a conclusion, the unfair treatment that happened in the job
application for Asian Americans indeed exists. It is an
intolerable criminal of racial discrimination which should be
eliminated using the power from every level of the society. For
future research, the unfair treatment that related to other races
and ethnic groups such as Hispanic, Latino and blacks is also
worth to learn about. These people are suffering more during
the history of the USA. Racial problem in workplace in our
society is always hot topic in our life.

23. Work Cited
Rastogi, Sonya, et al. Overview of the 2010 Census Alternative
Questionnaire Experiment: Race and Hispanic Origin Research.
Opportunities and Challenges for Applied Demography in the
21st Century. Springer Netherlands, 2012:11-26. Accessed 2
Nov. 2016.
Iwamura, Jane Naomi, et al. "Reflections on the Pew Forum on
Religion and Public Life's Asian Americans: A Mosaic
of Faiths Data and Report."Amerasia Journal 40.1(2014):1-16.
Accessed 2 Nov. 2016.
Bigwowo.com. (2013). Asian Americans face discrimination in
State Department work | bigWOWO. [online] Available at:
http://www.bigwowo.com/2013/09/asian-americans-face-
discrimination-in-state-department-work/.Accessed 5 Nov.
2016.
Camille Cava, C. (2016). Asian-American groups say Harvard
discriminates. online CNN. Available at:
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/17/us/harvard-asian-americans-
discrimination-complaint/.Accessed 5 Nov. 2016.
Patten, E. (2016). Racial, gender wage gaps persist in U.S.
despite some progress. [online] Pew Research Center. Available
at: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/01/racial-
gender-wage-gaps-persist-in-u-s-despite-some-
progress/.Accessed 5 Nov. 2016.
Dugger, C.W.(1992)U.S. study says Asian-Americans face
widespread discrimination. New York Times Journal 141
2/29/92, p1 Accessed 5 Nov. 2016.
Tran, Alisia G. T. T. (2016) Who Is American? Demographic
and Social-Contextual Correlates of Identification as a
“Typical” American Among Diverse Asian Americans. Identity
Journal 16 10/16, p207-224. 18p. Accessed 5 Nov. 2016.
Kiang. L and Witcow. M and Thompson. T (2016) Model
Minority Stereotyping, Perceived Discrimination, and
Adjustment Among Adolescents from Asian American

24. Backgrounds. Journal of Youth & Adolescence Journal 2016,
Vol. 45 Issue 7, p1366-1379. 14p. 3 Charts, 2 Graphs Accessed
5 Nov. 2016.
Gee, Gilbert C. et al Citizenship as Privilege and Social Identity
American Behavioral Scientist. Journal May2016, Vol. 60 Issue
5/6, p680-704. 25p. Accessed 5 Nov. 2016.
Mong, Derek. "Workplace Discrimination Based on Names."
Asian Fortune, 10 June
2014, www.asianfortunenews.com/2014/06/ workplace-
discrimination-based-on-names/. Accessed 15 Nov. 2016.