Novice Premier Unfortunately

It was reckless governor of Tokyo who threatened Prime Minister to buy Senkaku Islands. Novice PM gave in and paid ransom for national interest in hostage. That was what happened last year.

Then Prime Minister, Yoshihiko Noda, yesterday revealed the reason why he decided to purchase Senkaku Island last year, the action to which China extremely responded with consecutive violation of Japan’s territory. “After the speech of Governor of Tokyo, Shintaro Ishihara, to buy Senkaku, unnecessary ‘halation’ became likelier. To stably and calmly maintain and administrate the islands, I decided that the government should purchase them,” explained Noda in his speech to a party hosted by Akihisa Nagashima, a former Adviser to PM Noda.

In an interview by Yomiuri Shimbun, Noda revealed a part of the process. After Ishihara’s speech, then PM of China, Wen Jiabao, told Noda about Xinjian Uighur and Senkaku, using words of “core interest” or “serious concern” at the trilateral meeting, including South Korea, in Japan in May 2012. Noda recognized that Wen’s reference to Senkaku was caused by Ishihara’s speech.

Three months later, Noda secretly met with Ishihara in PM’s residence to talk about the issue, and made his mind that the situation had been beyond the point of no return. In the meeting, Noda rejected Ishihara’s request to build a harbor in Senkaku with reasons making no sense. Noda told Ishihara that there would come a lot of fishing boats from China, Hong Kong or Taiwan to avoid storm and also invite many kinds of activists, if a harbor would be built. A crucial point of the conversation was that they were not talking in regard with benefits and erosions of national interest.

Nagashima also describes about the process in his recent book. Right after the meeting of Noda and Ishihara on April 22nd without talking about Senkaku, Noda asked Nagashima how did he think about the issue. “I think it is more reasonable for the government to buy them than for Tokyo government to do that,” Nagashima replied. “Indeed,” told Noda with determination, according to Nagashima.

Those episodes show personality of Noda. He is a person with no review on his decision. He fears more of negative impact of changing his mind than that of insistence on a wrong decision. Once he was persuaded by Ishihara to buy those islands, he dropped an option to persuading Ishihara. A decision of buying Senkaku would not have only been a matter of freedom of economic activity, but an issue directly connected to bilateral relationship with China. Noda had no idea on that point.

Watching Silently

The Japanese are silently and closely watching how things are going on in Beijing, where five people died with car explosion in the symbolic place for protests against government, Tiananmen Square. As the Government of China determines the incident to be an act of terrorism by Uighur rebels, the officials of Japanese government are focusing on how it affects bilateral relations between both nations. However, it depends on how China is going to deal with the issue.

News reports in Japan so far revealed that the car exploded at sidewalk in front of Tiananmen Gate, killing three crews and two pedestrians, and injured thirty-eight people. Public Safety Agency of the City of Beijing found that eight minority people mainly from Uighur were engaged in the incident. A human rights group in Hong Kong indicated that the explosion was a retaliation of Uighur people to the oppression of Chinese government in a riot occurred in Lukqun, Uighur, in June, in which twenty-seven were killed.

History of Uighur is full of oppression of Han people that consists dominant ethnicity in China. It was the eighth century when Uighur people established their kingdom, but conquered by the Hans in Qing Dynasty in eighteenth century. Although they declared East Turkestan Islamic Republic early in the twentieth century, Chinese government kept on governing the region. After the establishment of communist China, the government controlled resources such as petroleum or natural gas, imposed Chinese language and education, and set job opportunities preferable to Han people.

The expectation of Japan is shift of China’s concern from the foreign affairs to the domestic. The Government of China put the highest priority on maintaining their governance in Uighur, as well as Tibet and Taiwan, while they do not clearly include Senkaku in that category. Realizing that people in China are no longer blinded by assertion toward Japan, the government would concentrate its policy to settle internal frustration of the people.

Chief Cabinet Secretary, Yoshihide Suga, carefully selected his words in press conferences. “We are collecting information through diplomatic route to find out what had caused that incident,” told Suga on possibility of it being terrorism. While Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, invited criticisms on his comment of a possibility of shooting down foreign unmanned areal vehicles around Senkaku, the bilateral relationship showed a small progress with the meeting of former Prime Minister, Yasuo Fukuda, and Chinese Foreign Minister, Wang Yi. Situation in Senkaku made no difference, anyway. After all, what Japan can do is waiting for things to calm down.

Interested People Speak

Officially telling “It’s up to you,” the Americans keep on saying “You should, or should not, do this and do that” over collective self-defense or amendment of the Constitution of Japan. As long as it is raised by someone who has interests in Japan’s security policy, the argument would not be an national discussion in the United States. However, policy wonks in this issue in Japan like to say that “America” is saying this and saying that, and that’s why we need to do this and do that. After all, the Japanese cannot decide what they want to do, even how the Americans want them to do it.

A long time U.S. diplomat to Japan, Kevin Maher, recommended Japan in an article of Yomiuri Shimbun to change current interpretation of the Constitution on exercise of collective self-defense right of Japan. “Armed Chinese vessels are hanging around Senkaku Islands. While Japan needs to enhance its own defense capability, it is more effective for Japan to reinforce defense capability and deterrence by operating with U.S. Since ships with Aegis system, submarines and F35 fighter jets are operating together sharing information, it would be a great disturbance for Japan to maintain the interpretation that it cannot do anything without an attack on Japan’s Self-defense Force,” told him.

Maher was fired by the State Department after his harsh criticisms on people in Okinawa was revealed by news reports. Running a consultant firm around Washington, D.C., he would have critical interests in Japan’s foreign policy toward U.S. If Japan raised warnings against China and increased purchase of security devices from U.S., it is leading to his benefit. That is one thing.

A Professor of Harvard University, Joseph Nye, on the other hand, recommended Japan not to amend the Constitution to exercise collective self-defense right in a symposium held in Tokyo International University. In his reasoning, Japan already possesses the right of collective self-defense right under the Charter of the United Nations. For him who studies how to make the situation in East Asia stable, it is unfavorable for Japan to stimulate China and deteriorate security situation in the region. So, it is quite natural for Nye to restrain Japan from making unnecessarily bold action.

Having said those things, the officials of the Government of Japan keeps on asking silly questions that “Is it ok for Japan to do nothing at the moment when U.S. ships operating with us is attacked?” And the opposite parties are arguing such trivial things as whether they should amend the Constitution or change the interpretation of its provisions. To tell one reasonable answer, Japan does not need both. It can help U.S. ships without any constitutional amendment or reinterpretation of it.

Anything More Than Existence

As the supreme commander of Japan Self-defense Force, Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, required his personnel to be more than existence. While it is still unclear what he really meant by “existence,” the words showed his frustration with something in the force. For him, supposedly, there is a gap between the security situation in Eastern Asia with growing difficulty and the readiness of the force. However, a man who does not have a cool vision on what he is seeing and keeps on complaining about his staffs is unfit for command.

The speech was the instruction to the force in triennial Military Review held in Asaka Exercise Field of Japan Ground Self-defense Force in Saitama Prefecture on Sunday. “The security situation around us is getting difficult,” Abe told, “so you need to dismiss such traditional idea as that you just have to do daily exercises in ordinary situation, or that defense power makes deterrence simply with its existence.” Although it is unclear who said that “traditional” idea, Abe obviously required the force of higher alert on security situation in East Asia.

He also stressed Chinese assertion. “We will show our firm national will of not allowing the change of status quo resorted to power,” he said. “In the world deepening interdependence, we cannot maintain our peace by ourselves. Japan needs to contribute to peace and stability of the world more than ever. It is ‘positive pacifism’ that becomes our banner in the twenty-first century.” As appeared in the words, he has no idea to respond to the intimidation from China and North Korea other than escalating the sparring.

What is required for an existence to be a deterrence? Abe gave no answer for that question. Did he really have an answer, anyway? It is obvious that the existence of the Self-defense Force is a part of deterrence, but not all. Deterrence of Japan consists of some other elements, such as readiness for homeland defense or alliance with other nations, which everyone in and out of Japan knows. What he actually meant was “ Okay, you guys are in short of being deterrence, but need to think yourself how to be that, you know.” That is not something a responsible commander would say.

Escalating situation without any clear vision is a sort of act of naughty kids. Responding to it or not, Chinese official vessels invaded into Japan’s territorial sea around Senkaku Islands on Monday, breaking twenty-six days silence. Chinese officials are sensitively responding to asserted option of shooting down the unmanned areal vehicles around the isles. Mr. Prime Minister, stop muttering and talk with them.

Arbitrary Tradition of the Government

The Cabinet led by the Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, decided the bill of Specific Secret Protection Act on Friday and submitted it to the Diet. The bill allows the government to register important security information as “specific secret, ” the leak of which may cause ten years in prison at most. Who allured the leakage can also be charged five years in prison. Media organizations are firmly opposing to the bill, because of oppressive tendency of that government in the past.

Media organizations strongly criticize government’s arbitrariness of the act. Although “specific secret” is limited to four categories -- defense, diplomacy, activities harmful for the government and terrorism, it is the government officials who decide what would be within one of those categories or out of them. If one were talking about his company that produces a new engine for aircraft, for instance, a policeman may arrest him with suspect of leaking information about high technology that is related to a governmental project. Such a kind of thing may not happen in democracy. But Japan is rather a nation of bureaucracy than democracy.

The Japanese experienced that kind of arbitrary exercise of laws in pre-war imperial regime. One typical example is Maintenance of the Public Order Act. Legislated in 1925, few years after the establishment of the Soviet Union, the Act strictly prohibited communist activities in Japan. Warrants of arrest were not issued by the court, but the prosecutors office. A suspect could not hire a lawyer. Instead, the Minister of Justice would select one. If the government had seen a possibility of subsequent offense, it could extend detention. Such oppressive tradition of laws in Japan was succeeded by some post-war legislations such as Destructive Activity Prevention Act.

Regardless requirement of anti-communism or national security, the government always seeks stricter control on the public, because it simply makes their job easier. Basic concept for their governance to the people has traditionally been: “The less they are informed, the more they depends on the government.”

In modern society with huge amount of information shared through networks, however, blind-and-rule governance would never work at all. It is the government of Japan which is blinded by their own desire to rule the people. If they genuinely wanted to protect security information from leaking to public, current laws can do it well. The National Public Service Act determines that a national public servant should not leak a secret obtained through his/her profession. There is no need to anti-democratically restrict access of reporters to workers of the government.

Endless Quarrel

“We don’t give in threats.” Saying so, Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, revealed his intention to treat unmanned areal vehicles around Japan with possible interceptive countermeasures. The Chinese, apparently the owner of those aircrafts, responded the statement with intimidation that they would recognize those actions as an act of war. Without appropriate diplomatic channel between Japan and China, the two keep on growling with fear against each other.

It was September 9^th when Ministry of Defense detected an unmanned areal vehicle around Senkaku Islands in East China Sea for the first time. Although the nationality of the aircraft was not identified, the government of Japan realized that it was likely to have come from China. The government embarked on considering how to deal with that new factor. The consideration included shooting the vehicles down, if they would ignore warning message and be likely to endanger people’s life and property in Japan.

A spokesman with the Ministry of National Defense of China stressed that Chinese military would regard those measures as the acts of war and respond with darling countermeasures. He further intimidated Japan, saying “Japan should not miscalculate Chinese determination to protect sovereignty of the nation.” China has shown no reflection on their unilateral challenges on status quo of administration in Senkaku Islands.

The relation between them has been deteriorating not only in terms of official relationship, but also of public. In a symposium in Beijing hosted by non-governmental organizations of both countries, a former state councilor, Tang Jiaxuan, harshly criticized the alliance between Japan and United States. “A country of East Asia or an agency of a great power outside,” told Tang, “Japan is going on narrower road, if it does not care for relationship with China.”

A former Minister for Defense Agency of Japan, Gen Nakatani, fired back against Tang, explaining that Abe’s slogan of “positive pacifism” was a concept of Japan’s diplomacy which rooted on such values as liberty, democracy and rule of law. Nakatani also scolded Tang of leaving the discussion, saying “He is a coward in unilaterally making argument. His leadership in this big country reaches far short from world standard.” The discussion was nothing more than a quarrel of kids.

The world, however, cannot leave this discord as something managed by time factor. Those two countries have been struggling for centuries, far before the establishment of democracy in Europe of America. Developed countries needs to find some appropriate option to cease their quarrel, otherwise they will be doing that for coming centuries.

Post-war Compensation Continues

Osaka District Court on Thursday ordered Osaka Prefectural Government to dismiss the rejection to pay for medical cost of three Koreans in their treatment of diseases stemmed from a nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima sixty-eight years ago. The point of the judgment was that the law for supporting sufferers of atomic bombs, or hibakusha, allowed them to have medical treatment in overseas, if there would be an inevitable reason. With this decision, hibakushas in overseas may charge medical cost to the government of Japan. Japan still needs to settle the problems in wartime.

Governmental support for hibakusha in overseas has a long history. The system started in 1957, when Atomic Bomb Medication Act was activated, with issuance of notebooks to sufferers of the bomb. Although the government of Japan decided in 1974 that foreign hibakusha who went out of Japan would not be eligible for governmental compensation, they resumed the right after Osaka High Court recognized Koreans eligible in 2002. However, they would not be covered for medical cares, because medical fee in overseas was generally too expensive.

Plaintiffs of current case were three hibakushas who had been lived in South Korea. Their mothers were exposed atomic bomb in Hiroshima when they were in the status of fetus. They got back to South Korea after the end of war, but were under medical treatment for hepatic cancer or kidney disease from 2006 to 2010. To the government of Osaka Prefecture, they requested payment for ¥1.5 million, which was rejected. The Osaka District Court denied their request for the compensation, while it acknowledged their status of eligibility.

The basic problem of this issue is discrimination. The government has been taking a position that all sufferers of atomic bomb would be treated equally, regardless the place they were living. There were a number of foreign people, including Koreans, in wartime Japan, supposedly caused by Japan’s expansionism at the time.

There would be an objection that it was not discrimination, but fiscal requirement, that made the government difficult in covering all hibakushas. However, post-war Japan has been trying to reason everything in terms of money, not justice. Side effects of economic growth, including air and water pollution or urban diseases, were left behind, for example. Leaving those problems behind may cause discrimination to socially weaker people.

What the government must do is actively tackling the post-war problems, and to take next steps to end “post-war” status of Japan. It needs to make positive efforts by politics, which are not expectable in current government with extremely positive attitude for growth.

Expression Incomplete

Blocked or completely blocked? That is the question. But is it really so? Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, has frequently been changing his expression on the situation of contaminated water in First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant. Once he said the water had been completely blocked within the harbor annexed to the plant. Then, he omitted “completely” last week and resumed it this week. This ambiguous attitude showed his innocence on what exactly was going on there.

In his speech at International Olympic Committee in September, he told the affection of contaminated water was “completely” blocked within the harbor, inviting skepticisms on his knowledge about the fact that contaminated water had kept on leaking into the outer sea. Losing credibility on the information he received, Abe degraded his words on the issue by simply saying that the water was blocked in his answer in the General Meeting of the Diet last week. But, in the Committee of Budget in the House of Representatives this week, he again insisted on the expression of “completely blocked,” when he asked the true meaning.

The actual situation of contaminated water is far from “completely” blocked. Abe insisted on that the affection of contaminated water to human body is blocked. But, there is no such expression as affection on human body is blocked. “Although we have been trying to block contaminated water within the harbor by setting silt fence at the mouth of the harbor, the water went out of it. We have not seen any affection on human body so far.” That should be an appropriate explanation on current situation.

Abe tends to be failing in detailed expression about policies. To a question on achievement of his economic policy this week, he boasted that a hundred and thirty-two firms raised summer bonus by 5% as a result of his successful policy. Later, asked by another legislator, he corrected that the average, not all, of the rise in those firms, was 4.99%.

Those kind of wrong statements are stems from his dependence on the idea of his staffs. Without deep understanding on the details, he easily takes on staffs’ idea in official situation. When he was in his first term, he explained that there had not been forced abduction of comfort women in a narrow meaning, though there had been in a broad meaning, receiving strong opposition from the Koreans and Chinese. That happened because he simply borrowed idea of his staffs.

On the contaminated water in Fukushima, the information he had gotten did not explain what was happening there. Regardless the affection of human body is “completely” blocked or not, Prime Minister has to stop the leaking of contaminated water immediately.

Antagonism against Reporters

Liberal Democratic Party and New Komeito agreed on a draft of Specific Secret Protection Act on Tuesday. The Cabinet led by Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, is going to decide it as an official bill and submit it to the Diet. However, it is unclear whether the bill will pass it, because opposite parties are firmly criticizing its character of restricting freedom of speech. Although the bill looks like taking care of the freedom, concerns of people keeps on growing.

Agreed draft of the bill includes new concept of “specific secret,” which is needed to be protected from leaking for avoiding disturbance on national security. If a government official leaks specific secret, he/she will be imprisoned for ten years at most. With request from New Komeito, they added a provision that describes acknowledgement on freedom of report and interview to government officials in order to benefit the people’s right of accessing information. It is to preserve opportunities of reporters to access government officials for news reports.

The draft has two problems at least. The first is that the government recognizes information as something possessed by the government. Under democracy, the people basically have the right to access all the information their government has. In other words, information is possessed by the people, not the government. In this country with strong power of bureaucrats, however, the government always tries to occupy all the information. As long as this idea prevails in the government, no true democracy settles.

The second is that the government thinks reporters as enemies of them. The bill is mainly to protect security information from harmful leaking for maintaining alliance with the United States and some others. Bureaucrats supposedly took advantage of this opportunity to restrict reporters not to disturb their jobs. Scandal reports among bureaucracy have caused degradation or resignation of government staffs, for regrets of bureaucrats. While politics have been acknowledging the value of such reports, politics demanding tighter security on information and bureaucrats demanding tighter security on reporters matched this time.

The draft regards interview with no illegal activity as appropriate. However, it is the government, not the people, who decides the illegality of an interview. There is no guarantee of preserving rule of law, which is the basic concept of legal democracy.

The government will submit the bill next Friday. With overall majority in both Houses, the bill is likely to pass the Diet in this session. But, opposite parties are strongly protesting the bill as violation of freedom of speech. Considering the bill as important issue, both Houses are reserving enough time to discuss it. So, it still is unclear for the bill to pass by the end of the session, December 6^th.

The problem is mixing penalty for the government officials with restriction of reporting. If Abe wants to enhance credibility on management of shared information by the government of Japan, he needs to take stricter attitude on bureaucrats. It is not impossible for the government to enhance information security without eroding democracy.

Something Different from Strategy

The Meeting on Security and Defense Capability, a private consultative organization to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, on Monday drew a draft for National Security Strategy, which would be established for the first time in Japan. It recommended revision of the three principles on weapons export, which has been one of the benchmarks of Japan’s pacifism. To legalize activation of collective self-defense right would not be included in the strategy. Overall objection of Japan’s security would be defined as dealing with China and North Korea factors, regardless possible negative response from those nations.

The three principles were set by the Cabinet led by PM Eisaku Sato, in 1967. It consists of banning export of weapons to the countries with communist regime, with prohibition by a resolution of the United Nations and in an international conflict. Later, PM Takeo Miki, decided to expand the embargo to all kinds of export in 1976. However, with requirement of alliance, PM Yoshihiko Noda paved a way to export for contribution to peace and international cooperation, and for joint international development and production.

While the process of settling the principles had been for determining Japan’s standpoint as peaceful nation, the discussion to review them was mainly aimed to fulfill business requirements. To maintain the level of weapons technology, the meeting stepped into the sphere unleashed from shackles of the three principles. The government of Japan has recently been active in joint development of fighter jets and missiles with United States or United Kingdom.

The draft also included “positive pacifism,” which Abe has recently been mentioning as his new concept for international relations of Japan. With this initiative, Japan would seek further “contribution” to international security. By the way, it implied that Japan was enhancing its capability to deal with threats in the name of international peace and stability. “Actions to change status quo by power are growing recently,” the draft said indicating actual response to the potential threat from China and North Korea.

It is fair to say that most policies included in the strategy are mainly Abe’s personal agenda. In light of political tradition in Japan, it is unlikely that the strategy will survive after Abe’s term ends. In this meaning, the document will be something different from National Security Strategy in United States, which may not be changed so much by administrations. Whether the strategy will be succeeded would depend on security situation around Japan and what kind of administration would appear.

Vulnerable to Rain

The rain was falling on and on broken First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, and it turned into contaminated water and went on and on flowing to the sea. Tokyo Electric Power Company announced on Sunday that polluted rainwater flew over the fence that surrounded tanks with highly contaminated water produced by the process of cooling broken nuclear reactors. The rainwater was suspected to be with high radiation and had possibly flown into the outer sea. Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, still kept on saying that “affection” of the contaminated water was blocked within the harbor annexed to the plant.

It heavily rained around the plant during Sunday. Although the tank site was surrounded by low fence with a foot high, rainwater flooded over them. TEPCO had a plan to raise the fence to two feet high or higher, but it could not catch up with this typhoon season. The flooded water was supposed to have escaped to the sea through the ditch, which was connected to the sea out of the harbor. According to TEPCO, the rain was so heavy that their pump system was unable to avoid the flood.

The announcement of TEPCO was, as usual, too unfair to believe it. On the possibility of the rainwater to have flown into the outer sea, the spokesman told that he could not deny it. Since people in Japan learned from precedents in which TEPCO kept on underestimating the impact of contaminated water, no one believed that the company was telling the truth. Rather, they understood their words to be meaning the opposite. As the perception of ordinary citizens, it was likely that the rainwater flooded into the sea.

Due to this incompetence of TEPCO, Abe is wearing new clothes of an emperor. In that weekend, Abe visited Soma City, thirty miles north of the plant, and appealed the safety of sea products captured off shore of the city. Eating fish and octopuses, Abe reiterated “yummy” in front of TV camera. How many watchers did believe in his performance?

If he really wanted people to consume sea products from Fukushima, his government needs to provide with reliable information to the public. It is unrealistic that TEPCO regain its credibility. On Monday, Yasuhisa Shiozaki, former Chief Cabinet Secretary in the first Abe Cabinet, asked in his question in Budget Committee of the House of Representative to divide TEPCO in two, one was for dismantling the First Fukushima and another was for supplying electricity to its customers. The administration needs to consider such an idea.

As long as the government allows TEPCO cooling down reactors, producing contaminated water, accumulating it in the tanks, leaking it from joints of the tanks, polluting the land, turning it into contaminated rainwater, and releasing it to the sea, this whack-a-mole game will not be over.

Routine Trouble over Visiting Shrine

Two of the Cabinet members visited Yasukuni Shrine during its fall festival. Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, refrained from visiting there with consideration not to bring negative impact on diplomacy. However, China and South Korea responded with frustration to Abe. It is not fulfilling Japan’s national interest for these revisionist leaders to reiterate such messy arguments every spring, summer and fall.

In the fall festival of Yasukuni Shirine, where Class A war criminals of the World War II are enshrined, Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications, Yoshitaka Shindo, and Chairman of the National Public Safety Commission, Keiji Furuya, visited to pray for war victims. As he did in the spring festival, Abe offered ritual gift of holy wood to the shrine, instead of visiting there. Other ministers who visited in the spring festival, Minister of Finance, Taro Aso, and Minister in Charge of Administrative Reform, Tomomi Inada, did not appear in the fall festival.

From the beginning of his second term as the prime minister, Abe kept on saying that it had been his ultimate regret not to have visited the shrine as the premier. He seemed to be speaking for his conservative political basis represented by the families of war victims.

Having said that, the reason why he avoided visiting the shrine in the spring, on war-end memorial day of August 15^th and in the fall would be pressure from the United States. While U.S. supported Japan’s administration in Senkaku Islands, it required Japan to solve that problem in a peaceful and diplomatic manner without resorting in unilateral exercise of power or intimidation. The spokeswoman for U.S. Department of State, Jen Psaki, stressed that it was important for Japan to continue to work with their neighbors and to address concerns about history in an amicable way in her press conference.

The response from China and South Korea was something within expectation. “We demand Japan to deal related issues in an appropriate way,” told vice-spokesman for Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China about Abe’s submission of ritual goods. South Korean Foreign Ministry’s spokesman delivered a comment that expressed deep concern and regret. However, those reactions were on the same level of resistance at the time of this spring and summer.

But, as long as Abe is keeping his stance that he seeks regaining honor of war victims and revising post-war history, neighbor countries would be frustrated with it and keep on resisting against Japanese leadership. Whatever the personal belief would be, it is one of the most important responsibilities for a leader not to escalate existing instability with the neighbor countries.

Landslide Brought Them Down

Severe weather caused a great landslide in a small island in central Japan, which took twenty-five lives and left twenty-one still missed. Typhoon No. 26, swept away southern coast of Japan between Tuesday night and Wednesday morning. In Izu-Oshima, an island located offshore of Izu Peninsula, extremely heavy rain drew great landslide of hills, swallowing up a number of houses below. Although police office warned the local government to get the residents evacuated, no suggestion was made, for their regrets.

Main reason of the disaster was that land surface of the hill was covered by volcano ashes accumulated for years. Unprecedentedly heavy rain washed those ashes and they made a great amount of muddy stream to the town area. Because of its liquidity, the stream flooded so rapidly that people in the houses did not have enough time to evacuate early in the morning.

Disastrous impact of the typhoon could be said to be predictable. Japan Meteorological Agency had been reporting the magnitude and likely course of it a few days before. The municipal office of Oshima Town actually held a meeting by policemen, fire department officers and other staffs of public offices to consider the measures for the typhoon Tuesday morning, in which they agreed on assembling on two o’clock next morning, if needed. But, they could not save the residents from the landslide.

Absence of the Mayor and vice-Mayor on the island led to hesitance of the local government to take immediate action. Although the JMA faxed warning information about landslide disaster Tuesday evening, no one noticed it in the municipal office. Additionally, based on the information of river flood, Oshima police office recommended the municipal office to evacuate the residents for two times in the morning, but the staffs took no action. Critical time for decision was in the middle of the night. The mayor told that evacuation in the darkness might have been dangerous.

They saw astonishing scene next morning. The town turned into mire with broken trees in it. Hearing groans underground, rescue team salvaged some people from the mud, leaving others helplessly resulted to their deaths. The amount of the mud was so huge that the efforts for searching survivors were making slow progress.

Although news reports accused local government not to take appropriate action in the emergency, it was not easy for the staffs to correctly assess the magnitude of disaster. Families of victims came back in town is just looking for the reflections of their beloved, which was brought down by the landslide.

Hard to Understand American Politics

It was hard to understand for most Japanese that even the oldest congressional democracy would be precipitated into such a big mess. Experienced “twisted parliament,” difference of majority between the two Houses, they could realize that bicameral system sometimes reaches an unreasonable deadlock. However, the process U.S. Congress had fallen into the trouble over Obamacare, and found the way to get rid of it, was too unclear to retain credibility on the country. Even though Japan and U.S. have similar congressional system, there is a difference of political culture.

It is well known in Japan that the biggest factor of the trouble was Tea Party movement. In Japan, conservative movement raised by Japan Restoration Party swept the Lower House election last December. People realized that an emerging conservative power could bring a great damage on liberal administration. They watched Tea Party as unleashed power among other groups on the Capitol Hill.

What they could not understand was why those conservatives in U.S. were so persistent on breaking Obamacare down, which might be paralyzing world economy. One possible reason is the difference over the concept of conservatism. In Japan, conservatism is always something related to militarism. Argument between the right and the left has been over how much Japan can take advantage of military force for its security. In U.S., conservatism has not necessarily been about military, but often about concept of fiscal spending. There is no such thing in Japan as fiscal conservatives.

Ordinary Japanese think that taxation in U.S. would be lighter than in their country. The fact is three-layered system -- federal, state and county – poses heavier tax on citizens in middle class with average income or higher. So, they cannot realize the frustration of businessmen with higher education, entrepreneur of small business or others in the well-to-do.

Additionally, they were amazed by the result of votes in both Houses, in which overwhelming majority voted yea. In Japan, votes of legislators so strictly follow party line that it is unusual to vote against party policy to attract public opinion. This time, a number of U.S. Congressmen voted in a way not to be seen as guilty for the government shutdown, even against party requirement.

It is too early to regard the Japanese as happier than U.S. citizens. Although they now have stable parliament with a great majority of Liberal Democratic Party, the people have less power to rein in the excessive decision of the government. To maintain workable democracy always requires effort of overseeing what is going on in politics.

Grilled on the Diet

On the first day of substantial discussion over policies in current session of the Diet, Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, had to explain his words during the recess. While he tried to defend himself about his boastings, leaders of opposition parties persistently accused his irrelevance on his remarks. Words of the leader of Japan are losing its credibility.

The highlight of the discussion was questions from the president of the biggest opposite party, Banri Kaieda. He asked why Abe had mentioned “militarism” in his speech in New York last month. With the notion of criticisms in China, Abe said that “If you want to call me right wing militarist, do it.” In his answer to Kaieda, Abe explained that his words had been for ironically emphasizing our determination not to go back to militarism.

His words were definitely not an emphasis of anti-militarism, but a simple intimidation toward China and South Korea. His reasoning of his negative attitude against militarism cannot be proved by the word, “do it.” If you do not deny someone’s criticisms on you, you will be recognized as have approved that. He did not. If he had wanted to make a counteraction against China or South Korea, he needed to crystal-clearly deny that argument.

Kaieda also asked how the leaked contaminated water from broken First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant had been controlled. “Affection of contaminated water is blocked within the harbor of the plant. The situation is overwhelmingly under control,” answered Abe. In his speech in general meeting of International Olympic Committee, he said that the contaminated water was completely blocked and situation was under control. Yesterday, there were no “completely” in his words, but added “affection of” and “overwhelmingly.” Revisionism on one’s own words with assertion of “nothing changed” makes one’s credibility deteriorated.

Shintaro Ishihara, a right wing extremist, demanded Abe dismissal of the Constitution of Japan, arguing that was forced by the United States. “The Constitution finally passed imperial parliament and it survived for sixty years. So, it is validate,” Abe answered, to Ishihara’s disappointment.

Majority in both Houses of the Diet makes Abe bold on his discussion in the session. However, people are watching whether Abe tells a truth. By the questions of opposite leaders, it became obvious that Abe wants to deal neighbor threats with military power and take the world’s eyes off of Fukushima. Basic line of the ordinary people is to solve the argument with China through diplomacy and to immediately stop the leakage in Fukushima and show them a way to dismantle the plant. He has still not satisfied those requirements.

Reluctant to Be Reined in

The Government of Japan obstinately insists on restricting freedom of speech. In drafting process of the Specific Secret Protection Act, it has been highly reluctant to add provisions for preserving freedom of report, right of knowledge and freedom of interview. Although main purpose of the act is to prevent public servants to reveal important security information, the argument is focused on how to limit reporters’ access to government people. The more rigorous bureaucrats are, the harder establishment of closer security cooperation between Japan and the United States becomes.

The crucial point of the Act is to establish new category in national security information, described as “specific secret”, which should be dealt with special care. Ministers categorizes which information would be protected as specific secret, and only a few public servants who passed examination can access it. The secret will be protected for five years and it will be extended basically up to thirty years, and it needs approval of the Cabinet to extend the expiration beyond thirty years. Penalty of intended leak of the information would be ten years in prison.

The original draft did not mention “freedom of report.” The concern of bureaucrats was the case in which media reporters brings a great scoop on national security and bureaucrats in ministries are suspected for the leak and punished. Considering themselves as being on the top of social hierarchy in Japan, bureaucrats cannot stand leaving their fortune dependent on ordinary people like reporters.

However, the original momentum for this legislation was that a Coast Guard official uploaded a video footage on social network, in which an aggressive collision of a Chinese fish boat on a vessel of Japan Coast Guard in 2010 was recorded. If they are genuinely protect information from that kind of leakage, the argument over the freedom would not be occurred. Since they wanted to take advantage of this opportunity for their resentment against media reports, the process over the legislation became complicated.

New Komeito, the coalition partner of Liberal Democratic Party, is firmly against restricting freedom of speech. With its effort, the government started consideration to add “freedom of report” “right of knowledge (or accessibility to information)” and “freedom of Interview to public servants” on the draft. It might be some efforts to preserve freedom of activities of the party’s biggest religious supporter, Soka Gakkai.

News organizations are active to report the discussion over the bill, with the notion that the legislature will have crucial impact on their job. They are extremely sensitive on actual effect of it. After all, the discussion is about how to preserve the rights taken for granted to each party.

Unfinished Homework

“Have you finished your summer project?”

“Yeah…I think so. How about you?”

“Not yet. It was too hard to do it in my home. My dad and mom kept on disputing over money. Mom was furious about dad’s way of spending. I’ve been busy for let them stop it, so I had no time to do my homework.

“Too bad…”

It is not a conversation of boys in classroom on the back to school day in September, but a possible dialogue between United States and one of other countries in Group of 20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting in Washington, D.C. last week. The Joint Statement demanded U.S. further efforts to fix its fiscal problem. Just by a resolution to do the best, Japan avoided being targeted and joined in a concerted accusation against U.S.

The Communiqué of Group 20 unusually criticized “class leader.” “U.S. needs to take urgent action to address short term fiscal uncertainties,” says the document. It was apparently a reflection of concern of parties on the political standoff between Republican and Democrats over lifting federal debt limit. Delegates of G20 might have acknowledged how serious the problem was, watching the capital city of U.S. in the time of governmental shutdown.

Minister of Finance, Taro Aso, backed off his usual gaffes, and boasted of his contemplation about the meeting. “There was no argument over the expression of the Communiqué, because it would have great impacts on the world economy,” told Aso after the meeting. He also showed his recognition that the document might be useful for U.S. President, Barack Obama, to persuade Congress to reach a deal. There was no description about Japan on the Communiqué.

In the meeting in April, Japan was required to make credible mid-term fiscal program by the summit meeting in September. In September meeting, Japan again became one of the concerns of world economy. International Monetary Fund submitted to the meeting a report that demanded Japan to accelerate its effort for fiscal improvement. With a decision of Prime Minister on raising consumption tax rate, Japan escaped from further request on its debt management this time.

That did not mean that the Japan problem was taken away. In his economic policy called Abenomics, Shinzo Abe keep on taking stimulus policies with additional debt. There is no “credible program” to reduce it so far. It is possible enough that Japan will again be a target of G20 after U.S. fiscal crisis goes away.

Only Looking to Future

In his policy speech to the Diet of Japan on Tuesday, Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, tried to make the nations see future, not look back past. Stressing that he would seek both growth and fiscal rebuilding at the same time, Abe showed his determination to go forward to a hope, in which Japan would be active in the center of the world. Not clear where the center of the world is, though, it is questionable whether Japan is on the right course.

He boasted of good reputation about Japan in the world. “Now, the world is closely watching the revival of Japan.” “I have introduced Japan’s agricultural projects in my foreign visits. They were amazingly popular everywhere.” “We should be proud of our history as a peaceful nation.” Those were what he emphasized in the address. How many truths are there in his words?

What we have been seeing is not a revival, but a change of mood in Japan economy. The world is still skeptical about Japan’s fiscal situation with huge accumulation of debt. Although some agricultural products of Japan might be popular, there are many other popular ones in the world. Whether they were amazingly so was up to individual feelings. Yes, we are proud of peaceful history, but it is the prime minister who is changing that tradition.

Undoubtedly, Abe did not care about those arguments against him. He insisted that Japan would become the most preferable country for companies to be active. For that goal, he said he would establish the special strategic districts, in which regulations would thoroughly be eliminated. However, this new initiative is already unpopular for some, because it may make workers dismissal easy for employers. Unstable employment was one of the most unpopular policies of former administrations of Liberal Democratic Party.

Abe, in the speech, also upheld “positive pacifism” as Japan’s banner to the world in the twenty-first century. While telling his willingness to contribute to the world peace and stability, it was obvious that he intended to change restrictive policy over collective self-defense right in the name of contribution to the world. But, if he wanted to contribute to the world peace, the first thing he needed to do was finding a break thorough in the dispute with China over Senkaku Islands, which he did not mention in the address.

He finished the speech with an amazingly optimistic point of view, saying “If we only have power of determination, we can achieve reconstruction from the great disaster, getting rid of deflation, economic recovery, fiscal rebuilding, social security reform, education rebuilding, building disaster-proof society, regional revitalizing and restoration of diplomacy and security policy.” One may say he’s a dreamer, and he is the only one.