Divider in Chief

“The biggest crisis we face is that the Japanese lost their confidence,” told PM Abe in the address to the National Diet. It is not correct. The problem we now have is split between ourselves. The more he takes on his original issues, the broader the social rift becomes. Actually, Abe plays his role as the Divider in Chief.

Abe harshly criticized the plan for energy and environmental policy, in which the former DPJ government proposed diminishing nuclear energy in Japan to zero in 2030s. “It is irresponsible for the government to have such policy,” told Abe and made clear his intention to review DPJ policy from “zero base.” The resumption of nuclear reactors in power plants is required by major pressure groups of big industries. On the other side, people are unprecedentedly aware of the huge cost of nuclear generation after the accident in the First Fukushima Nuclear Plant. It is simply the effusion of egoism for PM to ignore broad anxiety against nuclear power, while safety requirements are not sufficient in any reactor in Japan.

It is a rhetoric to emphasize a non-military nation, while claiming amendment of constitutional provision which guarantees renunciation of war. Even though there are a number of people who doubt the legitimacy of the constitution, only a few require the change of Article 9. It is Abe and a few legislators to be eager to make the Japanese a war-fighting nation. “The Self-defense Force of Japan is actually recognized as a force in foreign countries. But the name of ‘Jieitai’ does not mean force. By changing its name to ‘Kokubogun,’ which means actual force, the Japanese force will be helped by friend force, if it is attacked by an enemy,” said Abe. This reasoning is embarrassingly groundless. Enemy for us is enemy for our friends. The friend force would help Japanese force, regardless its name, to protect not only for us but for themselves. His intention of changing Article 9 creates doubts in the hearts of the Japanese and neighbor nations.

Moreover, Abe is a typical revisionist of post-war history. He intends to replace Kono statement which approved Japan’s responsibility in “comfort woman” issue, ignoring the criticisms in foreign countries. While most people in Japan want to maintain good relationships with neighbor countries, the Prime Minister doesn’t seem to want it. For him, his own pride comes first, national interest second. He also closed a channel to solve Senkaku issue diplomatically. Not so many people in Japan don’t want diplomatic solution, when it is possible. It is false strategy to unequivocally announce dropping one option in diplomacy.

Those attitude stems from his leaning on a typical group on the right side of Japan. Making politics privatize, he divides Japan in two.