Chapter 20

There are a wide range of reasons why one
organization would (need to) separate from an other organization. In Aikido
there are however multiple reasons why one should not separate. Then again,
from one perspective a separation may seem bad, from another it may not. This
chapter will try to present some of the cases that took place in the
Netherlands*.

As I have stated, I have been involved in the
organization of Aikido in the Netherlands since 1988. In the years before I
started Aikido (1985) a separation took place. Aikido-instructors left the organization they were in (the
Judo Federation) because they wanted to form an independent Aikido federation.

When I found out this had happened, I challenged
the need for this separation. The people that had organized the separation
presented a number of arguments:

Aikido had started as a new martial art with no foundation whatsoever, but had
developed to such an extent that deserved its own organization.

This was not a very strong argument. At the time
some 1000 people practiced Aikido, and about 500 were in one organization, the
same number in the other.

The government has accepted an advice from a committee of wise men which have
indicated Aikido should become member of FOG, not JBN

This was a stretch of reality. While it was true
the committee of wise men was appointed by the government and their advice was
accepted, the advice was that Karate, Taekwondo and Judo should become separate
organizations and other martial arts should become member of the FOG. However,
no specific mention of Aikido was made, so to call on their advice as a ruling
was – to my mind – stretching what was stated.

The JBN doesn’t represent Aikido properly

This argument was usually explained by pointing
to the fact that the JBN had no separate board member for Aikido, that Aikido
was a small section in a large Judo organization, etc. However, the Aikidoka
that have remained in the JBN never felt misrepresented, so this seemed like an
opportunistic argument.

The JBN does not allow for independent Aikido instructors

This turned out to be the most valid argument
available. Judo instructors had to have a black belt to join the instructors
course. Aikido was an application for Judo instructors. So the
Aikido-instructors had to get a black belt in Judo to be able to enter into the
instructors course and get recognition. This did seem like a problem that the
JBN should have solved.

In any case, these arguments were used to
justify the first separation (about which I had first-hand information).

The first split that followed was based on no
need whatsoever. An instructor figured out that if he could get a Japanese
instructor to conduct his gradings he did not need to be member of the national
organization (NCAF). In fact he used the relationship of that instructor with
the NCAF to establish his private relationship and then separated, leaving the
remaining dojos at a loss**.

A next separation happened when the technical
director and technical supervisor of the NCAF resigned. This happened at the
advice of the technical supervisor and in the interest of the NCAF. However,
his advice was not accepted by members. Some instructors followed the technical
director, others followed the technical supervisor. At the time that loyalty
seemed admirable, but it soon became apparent that opportunistic motives had
played a strong role. Any appeal we made as NCAF to maintain cooperation was
dismissed. One organization however tried to overthrow the directing committee
of the NCAF (and their actions were eventually dismissed in court). The other
organization separated again within months after being founded.

In retrospect I can only distinguish the
following motives**:

– I want to stay with my instructor regardless
of his actions and their consequences for the organization
– I will go with this instructor because it will
place me in a higher hierarchical position than remaining in the organization
– I will go with this instructor because he is
my access to his assistants
– I will go with this instructor even when I
admit his actions are wrong, because that is the hierarchy in Aikido that has
been taught to me

In the period that followed completely new
things happened. For instance, European instructors came to the Netherlands and
started their own dojos. In virtually all cases we offered these new
organizations a place in the NCAF, but time and again this was declined. In
retrospect I will assume two factors played a role:

– all the separations described above created a
very negative atmosphere, one we could not compensate for by explaining Hombu
regulations or IAF policy, government policy and international interests
– new organizations were involved with other
issues than where will I become member
– new organizations could see four or five new organizations
that could exist outside the official IAF member, so they rather copied that
strategy

What was intersting to observe, is that after a
number of years the need to cooperate became more apparent after all. When the
NCAF joined a new umbrella organization and strived for recognitionof an
instructors course, virtually all the existing organizations joined as well. By
then the need to have your own organization and be separate had become less
pertinent, whereas the need to get more formal recognition had grown. This was
a clear sign that as a sport Aikido was becoming more mature.

The strategy of separating to become more
important in your own realm did not stop however. Neither did the strategy to
do this under the cover of a foreign instructor. And as travel became cheaper,
more foreign instructors presented themselves. This went on to such an extent
that at least one new organization per year could be expected. At a certain
point I even gave up interest in getting to know all the organizations or
trying to get them to cooperate, because the dynamic was always the same:
– an appeal on Hombu regulations, international
regulations, IAF regulations, etc. was ignored
– a false pretence of all the negative politics
was presented
– gradings were organized through foreign dojos
and foreign instructors
– once sufficient time had passed the
organization would present itself for recognition of its teachers

But as stated earlier, as the number of
organizations grew, so did the general understanding that some form of
cooperation was necessary. And during the period that most organizations were
in the NCS and the cooperation with the JBN was starting to flourish a climate
of democratic cooperation could take shape.

Unfortunately that proved insufficient to stop
the strategy of empire-building. Even at the time the argument no longer could
be the bad political climate, instructors would use the proven strategy:
separate under false pretence, abuse the relationship with a foreign
instructor, and claim a position as soon as you felt strong enough.

Fortunately for me, this was the time I stepped
down as chairman of the NCAF. It was no longer my responsibility to at least
try and uphold the Hombu regulations, IAF statutes or international interests
of governments.

And therefore I rest my presentation on
separations at this point in time.

* and may be considered painful by those which
were involved
** on the other hand, this relationship has
continued until today and has not disturbed the landscape since then.
** unfortunately I can not present any positive
motives surrounding that period of separation