Hoping Positive Future

Two men shaking hands with smile were looking at domestic politics, rather than the future of bilateral negotiation. Prime Minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe, met with Russian President, Vladimir Putin, at Kremlin, the Russian Presidential Office in Moscow, on Monday. They agreed with accelerating the negotiation for peace treaty with making economic cooperation a driving force for that. It is still not easy, however, for both nations to settle the dispute over the Northern Territory of Japan, which is a remnant of the Cold War.

The achievement of the official visit of Japanese leader to Russia for the first time in a decade, or the joint statement, was to have agreed with annual visit of both foreign ministers each other, expanding of cooperation over energy resource mainly petroleum and natural gas, and condemning North Korea that rejected dismantling nuclear weapons and missile project. Abe invited Putin to visit Japan next year and Putin appreciated.

Both leaders had good reason to want to rebuild their bilateral relationship with each other. For Abe, the biggest problem he had in Asia-Pacific region was China. To deal with Senkaku issue, he needed to find as much friends as he can in the region. Moreover, allowing Russia to cooperate with China over territorial issue against Japan, adding to South Korea, must be a nightmare for Japanese diplomacy. Having no achievement in international relationship as PM, Abe needed to get positive gain in diplomacy with any possible counterparts.

Threatened by shale gas revolution, Putin needed to find as much market as he can to sell energy resource in Russia. Japan, suffered from energy shortage caused by the accident in the nuclear plant in Fukushima, still a good market they can count on. Both leaders also agreed the launching a platform for encouraging investments. To show positive sign, Abe brought a major delegation of economic sector in Japan.

Is it fair to say that accelerated negotiation and economic cooperation would be a great achievement of the leaders’ talk? No, actually. They could not write words down in the joint statement how to solve the dispute over the Northern Territory. Although two countries formerly agreed with having a peace treaty by solving problem over sovereignty of those four islands, the joint statement has no “sovereignty” or “territory.” Abe and Putin agreed with seeking a conclusion acceptable for both parties. Nobody knows whether there is such a conclusion in the world. In other words, solving the territorial issue harms at least one of them. The biggest achievement for both,therefore, was to have a political tool to sell their effort to the nations.

Heil Emperor!

The Emperor and the Empress was staring straight ahead, saying nothing. That was the ceremony of the Sovereignty Restoration Day on April 28^th, the day San Francisco Treasty took effect and Japan restored its independence from the occupation of the United Nations Forc in 1952. The ceremony was held in a room of the Parliamentary Museum with attendance of the Ministers, lawmakers and local governors, without any ordinary people on which sovereignty is constitutionally vested. At the end of the event, attendees exclaimed “Emperor banzai” three times, which reminded of pre-war fascist regime. If the seat of Emperor had been replaced by a flag of Hakenkreuz, it must have been nothing but a secret meeting of Nazis.

The event was set by the right-wing Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe. “This is the day we think about what our grandfathers and grandmothers felt, when our sovereignty was restored,” told Abe in his speech at the ceremony. He must be saying that his grandfather, a suspect of A-class war criminal and former PM Nobusuke Kishi, had not been a bad guy. In short, Abe invited the Emperor to the event for settling old scores with criticisms against his grandfather. It is against the Constitution of Japan to use the Emperor for a political purpose, Mr. Prime Minister.

Remember the pre-war days when the political leaders of Japan decided to open the war against US and other nations under the name of the Emperor. Although the Emperor Hirohito was very careful about their assessment of situation and war strategy, leaders of military regime forced him to agree with throwing Japan into an unwinnable war. “Banzai’ call for the Emperor was a declaration that they captured him on their side. This was figuratively the kidnapping of the Emperor, drawing him down from the status of the symbol of the unity of the people, as written in the Constitution.

The people in Okinawa were furious against the event, because the treaty, in its negative aspect, sealed Okinawa’s fate under the administration of US Forces, in the deal with restoring Japan’s sovereignty. People in Okinawa call it the Humiliation Day. After the day in 1952, Okinawa became an outpost for US military strategy toward Asia-Pacific region, and heavy burden of US Force bases remained after the islands were returned to Japan early 1970s. The Governor of Okinawa rejected to join the ceremony. There was a great rally in Okinawa at the same time of the ceremony, adopting a resolution saying “the ceremony stomps the sentiment of people in Okinawa and abandons Okinawa again.”

It may be difficult for foreigners to understand the significance of the event. The world, however, needs to ask what Abe administration is doing, if it did not want to see the substantial character of the aggressive nation again

New Core Interest

In the process of growth, a man is going to be interested in various things. In the process of expansion, China is going to include many things as its “core interests.” The government of China, for the first time, officially announced that Senkaku Islands are one of its core interests. It is up to them how to call it. But, unilateral attitude in calling a land to be mine is causing a conflict. There is a reason why the world needs to take action against that provocation.

“The Diaoyu Islands are about sovereignty and territorial integrity. Of course, it’s China’s core interest,” told Hua Chunying, a spokeswoman for Chinese Foreign Ministry. “Core interests” is the expression used for Taiwan, Tibet, and the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, each of which have dispute over sovereignty with China. The announcement meant China’s declaration that it would never give in any argument that denies Chinese sovereignty over Senakus.

It is likely that China has closely been watching the political situation in Japan. After the purchase of Senkakus, the DPJ administration led by Yoshihiko Noda was collapsed. Now, Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, does not take effective action against China, focusing on his own conservative agenda such as constitutional amendment of Article 96 or visiting Yasukuni Shirine. His right-wing standpoint invited disputes inside Japan, dividing the people between the right and the left. As a consequence of his weakness in persuading the world that Senkakus are Japan’s territory according to international law and justice, the standpoint of Japan is getting weak in the world. In the United States, A lot of newspaper is skeptical about Abe’s excessive leaning on the right.

However, there still is a reason why the world, especially the United States, needs to support Japan. Watch the tendency of China expanding its core interest. The reason why China included Senkakus in their core interest was because they saw they could win it. If the situation allows, the Chinese are going to step up to take Okinawa. What’s next? May be the sea inside the first island chain, may be Guam, may be Hawaii, or whatever. The Chinese traditionally think that China is the center of the world, and the world should be controlled by China. They have every reason for themselves to take everything in the world.

It would be the time for US to say that it also has its own core interests. They may include the situation of human rights in China, manipulatively devalued Renminbi, or Chinese responsibility for stopping North Korea’s intimidation with development of missiles and nuclear weapons. It is important for the world to let the Chinese know that the world is not a place where one nation can unilaterally seek its own “core interests.”

Optimistic Outlook for Price

Why can the Bank of Japan be so optimistic, when the steep rise of commodity price is hitting people’s life. The bank released a quarterly report called Outlook for Economic Activity and Prices, in which the bank predicted 1.9% rise of commodity price in FY2015. While that simply indicated the credibility of governmental +2% target for commodity price by 2015, there was no guarantee for better life. People are more and more worried about bubble economy coming again.

The report was based on the assessments of policy board members of the bank, and the number of price forecast is the median of those nine members. On commodity price, the bank predicted 1.4% up in FY2014, and 1.9% up in FY2015. The governor of the bank, Haruhiko Kuroda, promised that the target of +2% would be achieved in two years. So, 1.9% up prediction would approximately be following the target.

If the raise of consumption tax rate, from 5% to 8%, on April 2014 is considered in, however, the commodity price in 2014 will be raised by 3.4% in FY2014, and 2.9% in FY2015. On the situation of Japanese economy, Kuroda said that “consumption is firm, employment, wage and production is positive. Economy will go on the path to recovery in the middle of this year, and price hike will follow.”

The question here is why is the rise of commodity price so definitely preferable for the bank? Affected by cheap yen against other currency began to harm people’s life and business. The price of bread, noodle or cooking oil has already gotten high along with price hike of imported wheat and oil. Electric power companies are raising price of electricity with their growing dependency on thermal power generation, caused by unavailability of nuclear generation after the accident in the First Fukushima Nuclear Generation Plant.

Long accustomed to deflation with cheap commodity price, it is skeptical that the consumers keep on buying as much commodity in the circumstance of inflation as in the past. Steep rise of price may let people refrain from consumption. There is still no overwhelmingly positive sign of the rise of wage. With the request of the government, some companies decided to raise the wage of workers. But, it is not catching up the pace of price hike.

It is ok for the Bank of Japan to appeal their target setting was right, or to show how they are working accordingly. But, if their work does not show how they are working for the people, any prediction or analysis will be meaningless. While the achievement of price-raising target, they actually call it “the price stability target” in English, is politically important, wage-raising target really matters for the ordinary people.

Road of Right-wing Freak

The Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, got mad. In a session of the Budget Committee of the House of Councillors, he defended the ministers of his cabinet, who visited Yasukuni Shrine in its spring festival few days ago. Acknowledging it or not, it meanwhile was a offensive action against China, Korea and post-war history. As he regains his self-confidence over the handling of politics, a negative aspect as a right-wing freak appears on his words.

It must be the oppressive feeling that makes him aggressive against neighbor nations. “Our ministers would never give in any threat,” he told when he asked about Yasukuni visit by ministers including his closest colleague, Taro Aso. Accordingly, he revealed that he recognized the argument, skeptical about Japanese leader’s attitude toward history of war criminals, of China and South Korea as a threat. It is true that no one can be restricted in praying for war victims. But, Abe ignores the history of Japanese leaders who refrained from stimulating neighbors’ sentiment against Japanese aggression.

Abe also challenges the notion of “aggression” at the wartime. Answering another question, he showed his intention of reviewing Murayama Statement on August 15^th, 1995, the fiftieth anniversary of ending the war. “During a certain period in the not too distant past, Japan, following a mistaken national policy, advanced along the road to war, only to ensnare the Japanese people in a fateful crisis, and, through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations,” says the statement. “The definition of aggression has not confirmed internationally,” told Abe.

This is a typical revisionism. Prime Ministers following Murayama maintained the effectiveness of the statement. Even a hardliner against China, Jun-ichiro Koizumi, reconfirmed the statement at the sixtieth anniversary in 2005. Driven by strong resentment against provocative actions of China and South Korea, and potential discrimination that the Japanese are superior to other Asian nations, Abe insisted of strangeness of not rebutting foreign criticisms over praying for war victims. He intensively ignores that neighbor nations are criticizing not freedom of belief, but mixed message from Japanese leaders.

Abe was embarrassingly criticized when he denied the connection of Japanese Imperial Army to the abduction of women for the comfort woman in his first term as a Prime Minister. His revisionism would never be supported from any foreign nations. He shamelessly embarked on the same road as in his first term, only to be defeated.

Priority of Article 96

The argument over amendment of the Constitution is converged into whether the Article 96 should be changed. The Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, announced his intention that he would raise this issue as a campaign promise of the Liberal Democratic Party at the election of the House of Councillors this summer. The structure of pros and cons among parties is getting clear. The situation is the right side that upholds the change is overwhelmingly strong.

The Article 96 determines how to propose amendment of the Constitution. “Amendments to this Constitution shall be initiated by the Diet, through a concurring vote of two-thirds or more of all the members of each House and shall thereupon be submitted to the people for ratification, which shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of all votes cast thereon, at a special referendum or at such election as the Diet shall specify,” says the article.

Abe reiterates that he wants to loosen the restriction of amendment by changing two-thirds vote requirement for each House of the Diet to a half. “It is strange that legislators just a little more than one-thirds can halt amendment, even if a majority of people in Japan wants to change the constitution,” he insists. Polls actually show that over fifty percent of people support amendment of the Constitution. But, Abe is saying that he wants to change the rule of game in play, simply because audience is supporting him.

The focus at the election is whether LDP and Restoration Party would be able to get two-thirds of seat in the House of Councillors, because that fulfills the condition of the amendment, already having two-thirds of majority in the House of Representatives. The amendment is now on a borderline. If the support for Abe’s economic policy now will be maintained until the election, it may be possible. But, market is always fragile.

New Komeito, within the coalition cabinet of Abe, is reluctant to support the amendment of Article 96. If the party stands firm on the side of LDP, it will be easier for Abe to achieve his goal. New Komeito has, however, been appealed itself as a peace party. It will be hard decision for them to accept the amendment, which may lead to the change of war-renouncing Article 9.

Rest of the parties is against the amendment. Your Party says there is something to be done before that. People’s Life Party, led by Ichiro Ozawa, rejects the discussion, saying no one argues grand vision of Japan. Communist Party and Social Democratic party are against it from the perspective of left side ideology. The Democratic Party of Japan can still not have clear position, divided between pros and cons inside the party.

There still is a fundamental argument about Abe’s attitude. Why does he focus on the Article 96, while he insists on Article 9 as the biggest significance? Abe needs to make clear the priority on which amendment is the most important.

Unilateral Interpretation of History

While economy shrinks to a dependence on a monetary policy, politics is getting narrow-minded to unilateral interpretation of history. Legislators closed their eyes on dark side of history of Japan, seeing only an aspect of their personal freedom of thought. They also denied the impact of their actions on Japan’s diplomacy. What they are seeing is internal boost of conservative movement, regardless international politics.

The mastermind of the trouble over ministers’ visit to Yasukuni Shrine was the Vice-Prime Minister, Taro Aso. According to newspapers reports, he told the President of South Korea, Park Geun-hye, at the meeting last February when she inaugurated in the presidency, that interpretation of history would not be the same even in a country or a nation, citing the difference of notions on the Civil War between the North and South of the United States. Park was furious with the comment in front of Aso, a report tells. The reason why South Korea cancelled the visit of Foreign Minister later this month was protest against Aso who visited Yasukuni Shirine.

Aso’s comment to Park was very careless, because he ignored the history of the Confederate states after the civil war, in which southern people suffered from extreme hardships. To recognize the difference between the North and South is to acknowledge the Lost Cause, to approve winner’s historiography, and to be skeptical about the unification of the United States.

Needless to say, Aso’s application of the Civil War to the bilateral relationship between Japan and South Korea was inappropriate. Did Aso try to resemble South Korea to the Rebels, or Japan to be the loser? If he had wanted to say that Japan has its own lost cause, it meant that no reconciliation would be made between Japan and South Korea at least in one and a half century. If he had been saying that history had made by winners, Japan the looser had nothing to do about that effort.

Aso also denied the impact of ministers’ visit to Yasukuni on Japan’s diplomacy, ignoring the hard evidence of cancellation of South Korean Foreign Minister’s visit to Japan. It is a child who does not see what he/she does not want to see. This escapism is a pandemic in the legislative branch. Most legislators who visited Yasukuni in its spring festival told that it was their right to pray for war victims. Selfish politicians who are only enthusiastic in demonstrating their loyalty to conservative voters, ignoring their erosion of national interest by harming international relations would never be called statesmen.

Introducing Internet in Election

The National Diet of Japan passed a legislature to let use of internet in campaigns of elections open. Has it been prohibited for a candidate to use internet for his/her campaign? Yes, it has, simply because the officials had not been confident in controlling it. The greatest reason for new policy is aimed at encouraging voters’ turnout at elections, especially young voters. Although the discussion over introducing internet in election has been focused on how to avoid negative campaign on web pages, the true issue is how to educate voters not to easily believe in negative messages.

The new legislature makes it possible for candidates to build homepage up, use blog, twitter, or facebook. Voters can know about the candidate with the information on the webpage, and discuss about policies directly with the candidate. If a voter wants to support the candidate, he/she can ask friends, relatives or every voter to vote for the candidate through internet.

The highest hurdle for the legislature was how to deal with disturbance against opposite campaign. It has been worried that someone would operate defamation against a candidate. It also is possible for a man to pretend himself to be an actual candidate and provide with wrong information about the candidate. The legislature set penalties for wrong use of internet and demanded for candidates to show information to identify the webpage contains true message.

Some contradicts between cyber space and real world have already appeared. The number of campaign brochures and posters for a candidate is still limited. Although it is prohibited to disseminate brochures to ask votes for him/her, a candidate may e-mail to voters to ask votes for him/her. Sending e-mails to appreciate for successful campaign is approved, while postal mail is still prohibited.

Those contradicts come from traditional skepticisms of voters against politicians. In 1970s and 80s, huge amount of money used for election was broadly criticized as oligopoly of politics. But internet made that concern diminished, since disseminating information through internet is so cheap that money advantage became meaningless.

The more information spread, the harder voters’ quality is challenged. Voters need to distinguish true message from pretended message through internet. Not only whether a webpage is made by true candidate, but also whether the candidate is telling truth will matter. The Japanese who have been indifferent and dependent on politics will become easy targets of dishonest campaign strategy. The key to successful election system is on the hand of voters.

Naïve Idealism over Yasukuni

Considering the balance of the gain and the loss, the ministers’ visit of Yasukuni Shrine on Sunday were obviously mistake at the time when Japanese diplomacy was not working well, and when stimulating the sentiments of neighbors would yield nothing productive. Without any vision of reconstructing diplomacy, the ministers simply visited the shrine because they wanted to do that. Even a small child avoids doing what his/her friend does not want to be done. The ministers who visited the shrine uphold naïve idealism of isolated self-determination.

The ministers who visited Yasukuni Shrine were Taro Aso, the Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance, Yoshitaka Shindo, the Minister for Internal Affairs and Communications, and Keiji Furuya, the Chairman of the National Public Safety Commission. The Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, who has been saying that he deeply regretted not having visited the shrine during his first term of PM, did not visit the shrine, but submitted symbol tree called Masakaki, which would be used in Shinto ceremony.

The visit itself should not be blamed in terms of freedom of religion. It does not make sense for foreign countries to blame what those ministers do for their genuinely religious activities. As a symbol of prayer for war victims, however, Yasukuni enshrines A-class war criminals of World War II. China or South Korea has been critical against ministers’ visits from the perspective of political implication, the argument which has been recognized as intervention of internal affairs by the conservatives in Japan.

This time, China blamed Japan of lack of regret for historical invasion. The visit of legislators to China early May was cancelled, obscuring Abe’s diplomatic policy toward China. South Korea responded to it by cancelling the Foreign Minister’s visit to Japan, reflecting its wariness against this conservative prime minister. Japanese diplomacy, already in impasse, suffered from further damage by politicians.

What they need to understand is realism of international politics. Japan needs to keep diplomatic channel with China and South Korea for sending common message to North Korea, the country intimidating neighbors by preparing for missile launch and nuclear test. It is obviously unwise to let China and South Korea cooperate each other for criticizing Japan, while Japan holds territorial arguments with each of them. Ill relationship with those countries does not please the closest ally, the United States. The biggest problem is naïve recognition of those ministers, who put priority on their own individual beliefs, and potential discrimination against Chinese and Korean people.

Was Japan Approved?

Good reputation can be won because of one’s good behavior, or bad behavior of others. Japan reportedly achieved an approval on its monetary easing policy at the meeting of G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors’ meeting in Washington, DC, on Friday. But it is too early to recognize it as a green light for Japan’s economic policy. The main message of G20 was to urge parties, including Japan, to reduce national debt. The world keeps on watching what Japan is doing.

In Japan, the meeting was mainly regarded as the debut stage for new chairman of Bank of Japan, Haruhiko Kuroda. In terms of deterring criticisms against Japan’s monetary policy, Kuroda was successful to do that through dialogues with so-called monetary mafia including Ben Bernanke or Mario Draghi. The final communiqué recognized Japan’s monetary easing as “intended to stop deflation and support domestic demand.” Parties understood that Japan’s policy has more benefit in terms of providing good news to world economy than deficit of cheap Yen impacting each economy. In other words, Japan was welcomed, because other economies, namely Europe, were too bad.

The gravity of G20, however, was on improving national finance. The communiqué unequivocally demands that “Japan should define a credible medium-term fiscal plan,” which is recognized as a big homework. Three years ago, Japan promised to cut its ratio of deficit in primary balance against gross domestic products by half by 2015 and eliminate by 2020. In spite of that the implementation of it is the most obvious target Japan needs to achieve, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has still not showed any schedule for it. There is no effective policy to reduce impacts of consumption tax hike next year.

It has been said that Bank of Japan needs to be careful about being criticized as financing for national budget. While Kuroda explained other parties that the target was genuinely to get rid of deflation, Abe emphasized the positive effect of inflation target policy saying that national pension budget has improved, or revenue for disaster reconstruction was expanded, by rallying of stock market. It showed that Abe’s economic policy still depends on the gambling over stock market.

Reflecting the potential frustration, other parties stress the temporality of approval on current untraditional monetary easing policies. “We recognize that Japan’s policy should be temporal measure and the policy needs to be accompanied by structural reform,” told German Financial Minister, Wolfgang Schàubre. It is more important for Japan to show a clear roadmap toward stable growth through deregulation than to talk big about “Japan’s back.”

Reluctance to Compensation

Minamata has been one of the symbols of negative impact of rapid industrial growth of Japan in post-war years. Residents who ate fish contaminated with methyl mercury emitted from a chemical factory in Minamata city to the river suffered from sensory disorder or narrowing of visual field. With appeals for expanding the area of governmental compensation, the Supreme Court decided to apply a new standard for registration of “Minamata Disease.” A woman who was approved as a patient by the Court had died forty-six years ago, indicating government’s reluctance to compensation.

The government of Japan has been paying the compensation along with a standard in 1977 that certification of Minamata Disease required not only sensory disorder, but also any other phenomena that stemmed from chemical poison from the factory. The Supreme Court determined that there was no reason for acknowledging only patients sufficient for the standard and it was reasonable to certificate patients with single phenomenon. The plaintiff was a patient only with sensory disorder.

On the background, there is a consistent reluctance of the government for paying compensation to the patients, with firm belief that saving money is absolute good for government even if it harms some sufferers. That attitude always invited criticisms from public who required flexible response to social responsibility of the government.

Compromising with consistent movement to require compensation, the government paid “temporary money” to seek political solution with patients. But, after the Supreme Court approved the responsibility of the government in failing prevention, more patients appeared for the compensation.

It is common for the government of Japan to make matters worse by failing in approval of its responsibility in honest way. In the acknowledgement of victims of nuclear bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the government has been very reluctant to acknowledge the sufferers, rendering mental burden to the sufferers. The officials of the government cannot get out of a firm belief that once the government loosen the standard for compensation, there will be great number of turn-outs to make the government bankrupted.

The same attitude can be seen in Japan’s diplomacy. The government has long been reluctant to paying compensation to the “comfort women” at the time of the World War II, saying that Japan had paid enough and no more compensation could be approved. This negative attitude makes the problems remain unsolved, leaving the governmental responsibility ignored.

The Third Arrow

They are directed to everywhere. The Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, delightedly announced that he was going to develop opportunities for medical business on Friday. Why medical business? Nobody knows. He looked like putting that at the center of his growth strategy, which will make the core of campaign promise this summer. While the Liberal Democratic Party has traditionally been good at pouring money into public infrastructure, it had few experience of success in growth policy. That was because the party had been reluctant to deregulation.

Abe recognizes his monetary easing policy as the first arrow, and positive financial mobilization as the second. Those two have obtained certain positive consequences so far. The third arrow, growth strategy, is now a big concern. Even if the first two had been successful, the third determines the sustainability of his economic policy. He is going to make a comprehensive policy package by June, which will also be a strategy for the election of the House of Councillors this summer.

He revealed some of his idea in a policy speech in Japan Press Club. Referring to the Nobel Prize laureate, Dr. Shinya Yamanaka, he emphasized the significance of the study on induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPS cells, and showed his interest in commercialization of that technology for health policy. Abe was also enthusiastic to establish a Japanese version of National Institutes of Health. He mentioned his intention to submit a bill for deregulation for shortening testing period for medicines.

Women power would be the key for his strategy. Abe reiterated his seriousness for cultivating job opportunities for women. He explained his policy plan of building effective circumstances for women workers. It included preparing for more capacity for nurseries and increasing women business leaders.

What would he do, however, was still unclear. To encourage liquidity of labor, his plan includes job trainings and making rules of dismissal. As long as employers are positive for hiring workers, it is all right. But once they become negative for employing workers, Abe’s plan will enlarge the gap between regular workers and tentative workers. If he fails in maintaining economic momentum, “Abenomics” policy may soon turn to the nightmare of gapped society, which caused a major defeat in general election of the House of Representatives in 2009.

Although it is crucial for him to be successful in deregulation, LDP has traditionally been deeply connected with vested interests. Whether Abe can overcome that political structure may determine the result of his economic policy.

Fresh News from Royal Family

The Crown Prince Naruhito and the Crown Princess Masako is going to visit Netherland for attending the ceremonies related to the succession of the throne from the Queen Beatrix to the Prince Willem-Alexander later this month. The news was not about Naruhito but Masako. If she can visit the Netherland, it will be the first official foreign visit for her in these ten years. People are watching how her mental health is cured, but no guarantee of her readiness has been shown. The decision may reflect people’s growing frustration against Royal Family.

Masako’s last foreign visit was to New Zealand and Australia in 2002. After the visit, she fell in recuperation, mostly out of public eye. In 2003, she reportedly diagnosed as suffering from shingles, and as adjustment disorder in 2004. Reports about her have been limited to some activities related to taking care of her daughter, Princess Aiko. Compared to active attitude of the Empress Michiko in relieving sufferers in the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011, the efforts Masako made for Tohoku area are not fully obvious for the eyes of people in Japan. That is the reason why public is somewhat negative against the Royal Family.

According to reports of newspapers, the decision was made by the Royal Prince and Princess. But, there was an unusual pressure from the Grand Steward of Imperial Household Agency to urge their decision soon, reflecting public frustration. Although the Prince and Princess consulted with medical doctors, there is a possibility of cancellation of the trip based on her health condition. Details of the decision have not been delivered from the always-secretive agency.

The public attitude has been getting severe to the Royal couple. According to the reports of weekly magazines, an old man hurled harsh words at the Prince Family in Tokyo station, on their way to ski vacation in late March. “Thieves of our tax money with fake illness and sabotage. Get out of the Royal Family,” screamed the man. When they arrived Nagano station, old woman said to them, “Go the devastated area, too.” Another magazine reported that Masako wore a Bvlgari necklace of ¥2 million and a Chanel handbag of ¥500 thousand, trying to tell how the family is far from ordinary citizens.

But it is unclear how her condition has been crucial. Masako was formerly a diplomat in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, an organization which sometimes collide with Imperial Household Agency over protocols of events. From the beginning of her marriage with the Prince, many people were afraid of uneasy relationship between her and the agency. No body really knows the true reason why Masako fell ill in her life in the Imperial Family.

Chinese Defense White Paper

The gravity is on accusing Japan. The government of China released a white paper on defense policy, in which it criticized no country in the world except Japan, saying “Japan created a problem in Diaoyu (Senkaku) Islands.” Making the dispute against Japan a cause, China seems to justify itself of building its naval power up.

The white paper was released to respond to international demands for Chinese transparency in military information, which is necessary for understanding intention and ability. The paper for the first time reveals the breakdowns of the People’s Liberation Army, which is consisted of 850 thousand mobile operation troops, 235 thousand navy personnel and 398 thousand for air force. It acknowledged Liaoning, a reformed Russian aircraft carrier formally named Varyag, as China’s first carrier for the navy. “It is extraordinary significant to develop aircraft carriers in building strong naval power and securing safety in the sea,” explained the paper to keep on building carriers.

The paper intensively focuses on Japan as a target for justifying naval expansion in the Pacific Ocean. “Japan has brought a mess in the issue of Diaoyu (Senkaku) Islands,” accused the paper. An officer of the Chinese Defense Ministry told that China had determination and ability to protect its sovereignty, while stressing its basic stance of solving in peaceful measures.

The paper also criticized the United States. “Some states is deepening its military alliance in Asia-Pacific region, enhancing, military presence and raising regional tension,” it describes. China is going to be positively involved in protecting interest in the East China sea including Senkaku Islands and the South China sea where it has dispute with Philippine or Vietnam.

The government of Japan immediately took counter action toward China. The deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary, Hiroshige Seko, announced that the government of Japan officially disputed over the descriptions on the paper to the Embassy of China in Tokyo. “There is no issue to solve over Senkaku Islands. We can never accept any movements dependent on Chinese unilateral viewpoints,” told Seko. But the objection was done by low level in Japan-China bilateral diplomatic channel.

It is probably make sense that the Chinese accusations against Japan are mainly emphasizing the determination of protecting Chinese interest in Xi Jinping administration. Focusing on its maritime interest may also have an intention to show low priority on complicated Korean Peninsula, in which China has great responsibility. It is not wise, however, making international matters pushed into the corner of collision being blinded by domestic interests.

Unequal Treaty

It may have reminded the people in Japan of the unequal treaties that the country had with the United States and European powers at the end of Edo era in the ninetieth century. Japan and US agreed on Japanese participation in the negotiation for Trans-Pacific Partnership, a framework of free trade agreement among the countries on the rim of Pacific Ocean. While US get a guarantee for protecting domestic cars, Japan could not secure enough promise for agricultural products. Pessimists in Japan argue that agriculture in Japan will be destroyed by TPP.

The biggest achievement of US was that it is able to maintain tariffs against imported cars, in which Japanese carmakers is still believed to have technological and commercial advantage. It was crucial for President Barack Obama to persuade shaky Congress and angry voters in Midwest states, where car factory workers have great political power. “US tariffs on cars will be postponed to the largest extent,” described the agreement.

What the administration of Shinzo Abe wanted was guarantee for setting sanctuary for domestic agriculture, because farmers have crucial votes for next election of the House of Councillors this summer. The agreement, however, did not include an exceptional language for Japanese agriculture. It simply acknowledged “certain sensitivity” on Japanese agriculture, as well as industrial products in US. Japan could not get a goal to exclusion for rice, wheat, beef/pork, dairy products and resources for sweets. With the agreement, the government of Japan drew a schedule to join TPP negotiation in July.

Farmers in Japan became furious about the outcome of the bilateral talk. Most agricultural leaders argue the agreement as eroding national interest, jeopardizing food safety in Japan and overwhelmingly meaningless. On the other hand, leaders in industries welcomed it with optimistic view for Japanese exporters. Leaning on industrial sectors to implement his economic policies, Abe stressed the significance of joining TPP.

Comparing both gains, the agreement is more favorable for US than Japan. But it might have been predicted by the government of Japan. Former Prime Minister Naoto Kan, who proposed the necessity of TPP, reiterated to call TPP as new opening of Japan. The opening of Meiji era was brought with unequal treaties including Convention of Peace and Amity or Treaty of Amity and Commerce between US and Japan in 1850s. Those treaties included foreigners’ capitulations, most-favored-country treatment for foreign countries and denial of Japanese tariff autonomy. The inequality in TPP should be recognized as a built-in characteristic.

Messages from Three Capitals

The United States was supposedly wanted to say that “Stop kidding. We are serious.” The diplomatic effort shown by the Secretary of State, John Kerry, proved US seriousness on the intimidation of North Korea. From Seoul, Beijing and Tokyo, Kerry sent different messages to Pyongyang. But, the message from Tokyo was also directed to the Japanese, too.

Diplomacy is always endorsed by military ability. US already deployed nuclear-loadable aircrafts in the process of US-South Korea joint military practice. The message was that US had been ready for any military actions of the North.

The existence of the Secretary of State in Northeast Asia at the time the North is preparing launching missile has its significance, because if the North launches missile when Kerry is there, the action automatically means not only attacking on the visiting country but also on US. US may have enough reason to attack the North, then.

With the background of that US-South Korea military cooperation, Kerry sent the hardest message from Seoul to Pyongyang that US would never tolerate the missile launching of the North. “Kim Jong-un needs to understand what the outcome of the conflict would be,” said Kerry at the press conference after the meeting with President Park Geun-hye and Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se.

In Beijing, Kerry had sent messages both to Pyongyang and Beijing. To the North, he showed the communication between US and China is still working. In the direct talk with US, China has nothing but condemning the North, because US and China somehow shared a view against the North in the discussion over new sanction at the United Nations Security Counsil. To China, Kerry urged Beijing further efforts to persuade the North. He seemed to remind China of the North’s intimidation eroding Chinese standpoint.

So, the last stop was Tokyo. Kerry emphasized the firmness of US-Japan alliance in the meeting with Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida, revealing that the bilateral relationship is unstable to the extent that he needed to have stressed it. But, in the meeting with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Kerry also referred to the necessity of talks with the North, while Abe required strong measures against the North. That reflected a sense of difference between US and Japan, when Japan had already unilateral sanction against the North.

Kerry’s message to Japan might have been to let it calm down. Meanwhile, he did not forget to urge Japan to settle Futenma issue, indicating the importance of US nuclear umbrella over Japan. After all, Kerry warned North Korea by showing friendship with Japan by hiding uncertainty behind. Whether the North recognized the message is still not clear.

Japan-Taiwan Fishery Deal

It can be said as a diplomatic progress. Japan and Taiwan reached an agreement on mutual recognition on fishery around Senkaku Islands, to which Taiwan had been disputing its sovereignty, while Japan denied the existence of territorial dispute. The agreement allows fishing boats of both nations to take fish in the area where both governments appeal their exclusive right for fishing. On the other hand, the territorial issue around Senkakus was put aside. Both governments seem to have taken one step forward to escape from crucial moment over the Senkaku issue.

Japan and Taiwan has been negotiating on this issue since 1996, with no actual conclusion. The main reason of deadlock has been both insistences over the territory around Senkaku Islands. Both have been including that sea area in exclusive economic zone.

The deal was to share that zone by both. The fishing boats in that overlapped area is excluded from law application and enforcement of counterpart governments. Mutual fishery committee by both governments will be established for joint overseeing of fishery there. Territorial sea area around Senkakus was not included in the subject of the agreement, avoiding further confusion over the territorial issue. It is fair to say that the deal was an achievement of former DPJ administration, which showed positive attitude in negotiation after its “nationalization” of Senkakus last fall.

For Japan, it became positive achievement on the Senkaku issue. If the relationship with Taiwan is improved by the agreement, Japan can have a perspective of avoiding cooperated action by Taiwan and China on the issue. Relationship between Japan and China still is in a deteriorated level both politically and economically. “Protecting interests of both side of the sea, meaning China and Taiwan, is a responsibility of both sides,” told a Chinese official with frustration on the agreement.

However, giving Taiwanese fishermen opportunities for fishery in the area where Japan appeals its own EEZ has its risks. In terms of protecting territorial economic interest, the agreement is a great compromise to Taiwan. If Japan insists on its right for the territory, it is reasonable that Japan at least charge a fishing fee against Taiwanese boats, as well as Russia has been doing against Japanese ships around the Northern Territory. As a matter of fact, fishermen in Okinawa area was frustrated with the decision the Japanese government had made.

Still, the significance of the deal for Japan was that it was successful to let Taiwan take different standpoint from China does, because it leads to a contradiction of One-China policy Chinese government has been keeping. But, it is obvious that the agreement can solve all problems on Senkakus.

Problem in Bar Community

The problem can be about whether the nation accepts rule of law. A governmental committee submitted a mid-term proposal, which recommended the government to give up the goal of three thousand applicants to pass annual bar examination. The main reason was because the number of lawyers is too much. But, is it true? There are a number of opportunities in our society to require helping hands of law specialists. It is possible that the bar society in Japan is barring new lawyers.

The government introduced a new system of bar examination in 2006 aiming increasing the number of lawyers. In the system, all the applicants of the examination basically need to graduate law schools. Because lawyer is one of the occupations broadly respected and with high income, universities competitively established law school to recruit freshmen, mainly in terms of school management. With the help of new system, bar community expanded by 50% compared to the number in 2004.

The problem now is that even an applicant is successful in the exam, he is not guaranteed to have lawyer’s job. Before introducing new exam system, to register as a lawyer requires two-year training including internship in some law offices. The number of registered lawyers after the training has been decreasing because of shortage of jobs for lawyers. In other words, supplies are overtaking demands in lawyer market.

If supplies are too much, demands needs to be enhanced. Not only in court, lawyers may have jobs in many areas, such as corporation, local government, or anything else. Not only in big cities like Tokyo or Osaka, there are large demands in local cities.

On the other hand, there is an argument that too much lawyers cause deterioration of quality of the lawyers. There exists a gap between universities in the numbers of successful applicants in the exam. Education system for the policy has not been matured enough. It is one reason why three-thousand target has not been achieved.

Another problem is that bar communities can control how many lawyers would be produced every year. In short, the examiners are members of bar association. The more lawyers are produced, the less their income becomes. There is no evidence that old lawyers are reluctant to increase young lawyers. But, although the new system assumes more lawyers in Japanese society, it is said that the exam is still too hard to pass.

The new system is introduced to make Japanese society operate according to the principle of rule of law. The enforcement of law is highly dependent on police or prosecutors section. To let the society effective in world standard, it is important to have more skilled and dedicated lawyers in Japan.

Test against Test

Against the intimidation of the country with a dictator, this nation tries to respond with technology. The government of Japan is preparing for North Korea’s missile test by deploying anti-ballistic missile systems. The question here is whether those systems are reliable. The fact is those systems have only used in experiments, not operated against actual threat. So, it would be nothing more than a test against a test.

The government of South Korea predicts that the missile test would be done around April 15, the birthday of Kim Il-sung, the North’s founding father and grandfather of the First Secretary. According to the information from the United States satellites, the test will include new middle-range ballistic missile called Musudan. It is observed that North Korea has been repeating showing and hiding the missiles around the shelter in saber-rattling way.

The government of Japan deployed PAC-3 systems in Tokyo and Okinawa to protect its capital and the land over which the missile will supposedly pass. It is the fourth time for Japan to do that. All were against the North’s missile tests one time in 2009, and twice in 2012 twice. There was, however, no chance to launch those anti-ballistic missiles, because the North failed to launch ballistic missiles or the missiles did not come over the land of Japan. The message that “Ok, we can make your missiles useless” has not actually be proven to be true.

It has been said that anti-ballistic missile technology is something like shooting down a shot bullet. While it is easier to shoot down a boosting missile, shooting a missile in its terminal phase is extremely difficult because of its high speed. We cannot be feeling safe, even if the missile defense system was deployed on the land. If the anti-missile system failed in actual emergency, it will show the vulnerability of Japan’s defense. It is close to dangerous gamble making people hostages.

It is necessary for the international community to make a deal in diplomatic solution. The foreign ministers meeting of G8 accused the North’s intimidation with a pressure of further sanction and significant additional measures. But, their target is wrong. The target for deterrence against North Korea is not North Korea, but China. “Different from past experience, North Korea is getting uncontrollable even for China,” told Deputy Prime Minister, Taro Aso. No, Aso-san. The North is uncontrollable, because China is not serious about holding the North down. It is obvious when one sees the attitude of China on sanctions against the North. As long as China does not take an action, it is meaningless to agree with any further measures including military attacks.

Top Scientists Failed

It was too hard for the top class geological scientists in Japan to distinguish concrete blocks from old rocks. Scientists of Earthquake Research Institute in University of Tokyo announced that their assessment on a fault in the suburb of Tokyo city was wrong, because of their misunderstanding on the rocks found underground in regarding as an evidence that the fault was active. With growing concern in Japan about nuclear power plants built on an actual fault, the assessment of what kind of geological events had happened underground is getting crucial. The mistake, however, introduced skepticisms on scientists among the Japanese.

The fault is located in Tachikawa area, ten to twenty miles away from the central business districts of Tokyo. A possibility that great earthquake might be happening by the fault has long been concerned by scientists. The government of Japan has data of possible earthquake with magnitude 7.4, and of likeliness within next thirty years as 2%. The Metropolitan government of Tokyo supposes the impact of the earthquake as 2,600 deaths and 85,700 collapses of buildings at most.

In the research of the institute last February, scientists found a trace looked like indicating an old landslide, and white blocks at the edge of the fault. They assessed those blocks as old rocks typically seen in horizontal faults, and declared it as an actual fault. After reviewing the investigation, they realized the rocks were concrete blocks, supposedly concrete piles driven into the land for some constructions. “Something should be there, if that was an actual fault, was there,” told a scientist, admitting their misunderstanding was based on their preoccupation.

This failure of assessment showed the difficulty of analyzing what had happened underground in a long time period. Even if it looks to be a fault on the surface, it may be proved as nothing important after digging in the ground. The method of research and assessment may vary between scientists. The possibility of Tachikawa being an active fault has not been denied with that misunderstanding.

If the assessment were difficult, the policy decision whether or not to operate nuclear plants on faults would be difficult as well. The Authority of Atomic Regulation is still careful about resuming halted nuclear reactors, and there will be no change in their policy of strict restriction of resuming the reactors on an active fault. On the other hand, electric companies will be more active to put pressure for the resumption.

Without any change in regulation policy so far, the misunderstanding shocked both people of pro- and anti-nuclear generation. It must be said again that science cannot control nuclear power.