Collective Trumping on Okinawa

To the dispute between Ministry of Defense and Government of Okinawa, another ministry jumped in to support the stronger side. Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery, Yoshimasa Hayashi, decided to temporarily stop the effect of the order of Governor of Okinawa, Takeshi Onaga, to halt construction effort of alternative facility to Futenma Marine Airbase related to violation of conditions for breaking rocks in seabed in Henoko coastal area. People in Okinawa elected Onaga with overwhelming support for his conviction to stop Henoko relocation plan. A bunch of ministries in Tokyo is killing those local opinions.

Onaga ordered Okinawa Defense Bureau, a regional branch of Ministry of Defense, to stop boring a week ago. MoD immediately appealed to MAFF to stop the effect of Onaga’s order, because the protection of environment for fishery is primarily regarded as a job of MAFF in legal interpretation. After consideration, Hayashi announced his intention to side with MoD on Monday. Under the leadership of Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, bureaucrats in Kasumigaseki started cooperating each other to trample public opinion in small islands in south-most Japan.

There are some reasons for the national government to deal with this issue in an oppressive manner. The first is that the bureaucrats want to prove their rightness in policy execution. They strongly hate to be said that they are against law, which is their rulebook. The national government insisting on that there was no failure in the process of relocation plan.

Secondly, the bureaucrats firmly believe that they should follow the opinion in Washington more than that in Okinawa. Closing their eyes on various opinions in United States about security of Northeast Asia and function of U.S. military base in Okinawa, bureaucrats in Tokyo have been pushing only one option to relocate the base to Henoko. There actually is hidden intention to build another wharf for big vessel in Henoko area, once the Marine Base will be relocated.

Lastly, the bureaucrats dislike being underdog of autonomy. Being on the top of power hierarchy of governmental power is what they have been convinced in their own lives as national elites. They would oppress regional self-determination not for protecting the nation, but themselves. They require no discussion with the people in promoting their policy. If this coercive policy toward Okinawa stands, there will be more serious problems in energy issue. Even if the people elect a governor with opposition against nuclear power generation, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry will easily kill that opinion. So, killing Okinawa’s public opinion leads to killng of democracy in Japan.

Debt Not Compensable

A Japanese company that caused an accident too great to compensate proved to be incompetent to recover its failure. The accumulation of cost consumed for decontamination of the land, reparation to evacuating people and dismantling broken nuclear reactors rose up to hundreds of billions of yen according to the research by Board of Audit of Japan. How much tax money will be pouring into this actually bankrupted company, called Tokyo Electric Power Company, with inappropriate policy leadership taken by the government of Japan?

The total money TEPCO and the government of Japan had poured into the recovery effort accumulated to ¥590 billions in the calculation of the Board, ¥345 of which were owed by TEPCO. The amount of money for dismantling broken reactors and controlling contaminated water amounted to ¥189 billions. TEPCO has already consumed over a hundred billions of Japanese yen for the system of purifying radioactively contaminated water that has not work well, underground frozen wall for blocking underground water flow that has not been frozen at all, and technological research and development for decontamination and water purification. Those examples above were operated with tens of billions of subsidy from the national government.

TEPCO estimated the total cost for decontamination and dismantling reactors as roughly ¥1 trillion after the accident in First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant in 2011 and consumed ¥400 billions in the first year, only resulted in failures of consecutive leak of contaminated water. After the government decided to support TEPCO, the decontamination devise TEPCO had bought from French company did not work. Having wasted ¥70 billions, it is unclear how much money TEPCO is going to spend until it will be successful in dismantling the reactors.

The Board also found that the interest for compensation to the residents around First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant can be reaching the upper limit of ¥9 trillion. In that case, it will take thirty years to pay that debt back and its interest during that period will amount to ¥126 billions. Since the government will not demand return for the interest, that money will be paid by tax money from the people.

Teruaki Kobayashi, Deputy Conductor for Nuclear Energy and Location of TEPCO, recognized the positive effect of ineffective devices. “Devices were for keeping the power plant stable after the accident and not unnecessary. I think they worked,” told Kobayashi. Embarrassingly enough for Kobayashi, the devices stably worked in terms of irritating evacuated people, undermining credibility of Japanese technology and letting Japanese Prime Minister make lies to the world about situation of contaminated water still flowing out to the Pacific Ocean.

Can’t Decide Alone

Once called economic animal, the Japanese are instinctively interested in business chance possibly brought by new international financial regime in Asia. However, they say neither yes nor no to the invitation, because their boss has said nothing about it. As long as their prosperity is brought by their position always on the side of United States, the Japanese will have no option except following U.S. So, Japan cannot decide whether it will participate in China-led Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank.

Reaching the time limit of obtaining original membership of AIIB, Prime Minister of Australia, Tony Abbott, announced the willingness of joining the bank, while keeping reservation of assurance of good governance. A few days later, South Korea decided to participate in the bank, as expected. Chinese President, Xi Jinping, on Saturday urged other nations to join the bank by the end of March, asserting the necessity of creating new financial mechanism in the region.

International financial mechanism for development in Asian region has been led by Asian Development Bank, mainly invested by United States and Japan. Its post of the president has been occupied by Japan from the beginning of 1966. It was a reserved seat for retired bureaucrats of Ministry of Finance in Japan. The biggest concern for the government of Japan is whether AIIB will erode status of Japan as the leader of Asian financial community.

United States is worrying about China’s advance in widening its influence to the region through financial assistance. As seen in the development of Africa, China does not invest a developing country without political intention. U.S. looks like concerning China-led regional order, as it did against Japan’s Great East Asian Co-prosperity Sphere in the time of World War II. To deter inappropriate investment by AIIB, U.S. stresses that ADB needs to cooperate with AIIB.

In the press conference in Tokyo, President of ADB, Takehiko Nakao, denied competitive relationship between ADB and AIIB, indicating possibility of cooperative finance by those two organizations. But, he requested strict judgment to AIIB, raising environmental protection and preserving human rights of workers. He also insisted on necessity of board of governors in AIIB for transparency.

Based on an assessment that original membership of AIIB will not make great difference, Japan postponed its decision after the end of March. But the struggle over this financial order will closely be connected to regional hegemony in Asia.

Japanese Version of Don Quixote

A nation with the largest land still lives in the previous century. Russian President Vladimir Putin suggested brinkmanship with nuclear weapon to the world, revealing his hidden intention of putting nuclear weapons on operational mode in the time of unilateral annexation of Crimea last year. One of the former Prime Minister of Japan visited Crimea earlier this month, leaving advices of self-restriction behind, with his firm belief in love and friendship. Sadly enough, or happily maybe, his visit produced nothing.

Putin’s announcement was that he considered use of nuclear weapons in the process of Crimea annexation. “We were ready for it,” told Putin to the question of possibility for putting the nuclear weapons in operational status, in case the situation in Crimea would go negative against Russia, in TV interview. One who understands a little about international politics could have understood that it was not a past story, but the future one. Putin intimidated the world that he would be willing to use nuclear weapon, if Ukraine coping with the Western nations would start to regain Crimea.

Former Prime Minister of Japan, Yukio Hatoyama, could not understand the context. He visited Crimea for three days in the middle of this month. He stood on the side of Russia in the annexation issue and told “The annexation was democratic,” inviting criticisms from the world. Most Western media reported his comment as “not understandable.”

Russia did neither welcome nor ignore him. Although he could meet with the Speaker of the Lower House in Moscow, Putin did not save time for him. Russian media ridiculed him with stories about how he was treated in Japanese media. “Hatoyama may really be settling in Crimea,” reported local media in Crimea, when he indicated a possibility of immigration to a report of possible confiscation of his passport by Japanese official.

Hatoyama has actually been known as interested in the bilateral relationship between Japan and Russia. But he stepped down in nine months as Prime Minister, leaving no legacy in diplomacy with Russia. His failure in relocation of Futenma Marine Airbase impressed Japanese people of his label as a novice. He has been dubbed as “alien” with his unpredictable behavior. Most people in Japan expect him to get back his home planet as soon as possible.

Division between Tokyo and Others

Campaign for quadrennial nationwide local elections started on Thursday, urging every candidate to public speeches and meetings until the day before voting on April 12^th. While Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has been enthusiastic in regional developments as a strategy for his economic growth policy, local communities were getting into jeopardy of elimination with unstoppable decline of population. The local elections this year is all about survivability of community, which the people in Tokyo cannot understand.

An expert group released its report on population in Japan last April, which predicted thirty percent of all cities, towns and villages would disappear with consecutive loss of residents. Each of those local entities will suffer from steep decline of population in productive age and women leaving local community, searching for preferable environment for raising children.

So, maintenance of population is one of the biggest issues for local elections this year. National parties have prepared local campaign policies to tackle with those problems, all of which were insufficient for easing worries of the people. Upholding a slogan of “regional revitalization,” Liberal Democratic Party raised a campaign policy of easing subsidy for local community and jobs for young agers. LDP’s viewpoint of bureaucratic distribution does not change forever. Democratic Party of Japan held abstract goals for growth, not learning from their failure as the leading party.

So, self-determination is the key concept for local communities, as long as central government is not reliable for their sustainability. However, most communities have very few choices.

Only two gubernatorial elections out of ten have a structure of viable competition with candidates both from LDP and DPJ. The rest of them are de facto reconfirmation of incumbent governors with multi-partisan support, including LDP and DPJ, except Japan Communist Party. Even in the election in Hokkaido and Oita, in which LDP and DPJ raised their own candidates, policy for regional revitalization showed no great difference each other.

One exception is energy policy. One candidate for the Governor of Hokkaido challenges national energy policy dependent on nuclear power, while the incumbent makes nothing clear on her policy on nuclear energy. Voters in regional communities has a very few options for their future local politics. Bureaucratic power from Tokyo is too strong for local communities to have original and revitalizing visions for their future, with lack of proper handlings of politicians.

Judicial Hesitation on Equality

High Courts in Japan are consecutively releasing their decisions over the value of a vote in the election of the House of Representatives last December. Strangely enough, the decisions were sharply divided over the constitutionality of the election. While one recognized violation of people’s equality under law, some regarded the election as constitutional within discretion of the legislative branch. The judicial branch of Japan sometimes shows appeasement to politics, eroding its credibility to the people.

As soon as the election was finished, some lawyers group filed seventeen lawsuits demanding confirmation of invalidity of the election to High Courts all over Japan. As of Wednesday, eleven courts announced their decisions. One court made it unconstitutional, not acknowledging the election invalid, while three found it constitutional. The rest of seven realized the election as in a state of unconstitutional, in which the courts recognized progressive efforts to some degree of the Diet to reform the election system.

The cases were discussed in two aspects: whether the value gap of one vote were unconstitutional enough in terms of equality under law and whether the legislators made good effort to fix it. In the last election, the First District of Tokyo had 493,811 voters, while the Fifth District of Miyagi had 231,660. One vote in Miyagi 5^th had 2.13 times greater value than in Tokyo 1^st.

Fukuoka High Court recognized the significance of the value gap beyond two times greater. Criticizing legislative effort to contain it within two times and structural inequality in the election system, Fukuoka urged the legislators to narrow the gap as soon as possible.

High Courts of Tokyo, Hiroshima and Takamatsu thought that the legislators had made enough efforts to fix it. They realized that value of one vote could not be completely equal and there was a room of discretion in legislation for election system.

The Supreme Court of Japan sentenced in 2011 that the value gap of one vote needed to be less than two times. According to the line, the rest of High Courts realized unconstitutionality of the election, encouraging further reform. Other six High Courts will deliver their decision by the end of next month

Although Prime Minister Shinzo Abe keeps on asserting his overwhelming support in the election, the election itself is doubted as unconstitutional. This is a matter of legitimacy of the legislative branch, which elected Abe as the Premier. Before losing credibility of the people, all parties need to promote fundamental reform of the Diet.

Resumption of Party Level Communication

Trying to compensate the loss made by a rigorous leader insisting on his political conviction, the leading parties of Japan started their own diplomacy with China for resuming communication between the nations. In the meeting with Director of the International Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, Wang Jiarui, Secretary Generals of Liberal Democratic Party, Sadakazu Tanigaki, and Komeito, Yoshihisa Inoue, confirmed that their parties would restart constant meetings by the end of this year. Although it might be a progress in political relationship between Japan and China, no one knows when the normalization of top leaders of both nations will be achieved.

In the meeting, Wang emphasized the necessity of frank communication. “We do not need to exchange diplomatic languages,” told Wang, “but we must not quarrel each other. It is better for us to say what is in our minds straightforwardly.” Inoue replied that the both sides must continue the communication even in a negative situation for both nations. They agreed that the meeting between Japanese leading coalition parties and Communist Party of China should be annually held.

The first leading party meeting was held in 2006, some months before First Shinzo Abe administration embarked on. During the administration of LDP and Komeito, the meeting was maintained with their effort and Tanigaki met with Xi Jinping in Politburo Standing Committee as the Director of Policy Council of LDP in 2007. After those two parties lost their handling of administration, the meeting had been interrupted. The meeting this year was the first one in these six years.

Tanigaki and Inoue reconfirmed that Chinese leaders were not fully confident in normalization of the bilateral relationship. In the meeting of the Chairman of People’s Political Consultative Conference, Yu Zhengsheng, they realized that Chinese leaders were deeply worried about Abe’s statement in the seventieth anniversary of the end of World War II. “We want Japan to succeed Murayama Statement in 1995 and Kono Statement in 1993” told Yu. Tanigaki had to confront him with frustration against China’s activity around Senkaku Islands.

As long as Abe maintains his unilateral revisionism on history, China cannot have a momentum to improve the relationship with Japan. Before reconfirming what Abe will say in summer, China will not take action in this bilateral communication. Although the leaders of Chinese National People’s Congress will visit Japan next month and multi-partisan delegation of Japanese national Diet will visit China in May, it after all depends on what kind of attitude Abe will show toward China.

Japan v. Okinawa?

Opposition between Shinzo Abe administration and Okinawa looks like going beyond the point of no return. Governor of Okinawa, Takeshi Onaga, on Monday ordered Okinawa Defense Bureau to stop all the activity for relocating U.S. Futenma Marine Base in Henoko coastal area within seven days. The government of Japan has shown no attitude to abide by the order and is considering a lawsuit against the Government of Okinawa. If this issue proceeds to that stage, final solution will not be brought in Okinawa.

In the press conference soon after delivering the order, Onaga revealed his intention to dismiss the permission for destruction of rocks in seabed, issued by former pro-Tokyo governor Hirokazu Nakaima last August, if Tokyo government does not follow his order. In the permission, the national government agreed to follow demands of Okinawa government and acknowledged the possibility of abolishing the allowance, in case the construction violates registered activities.

After Onaga took seat in, the government of Okinawa investigated the situation of seabed and reconfirmed that coral reef in Henoko was broken by concrete blocks sunken in the construction. “This is the second time that I ordered the bureau to stop the construction, and more important than last one. I have made up my mind. I will proceed to this process without hesitation,” told Onaga in the press conference.

Not understanding the strong sentiment of Okinawa against Tokyo, Abe’s staffs responded excitedly. Chief Cabinet Secretary, Yoshihide Suga, reiterated that Japan was a nation with rule of law. “We have consulted with Okinawa side. There will be no change in the construction process operated under the laws,” told Suga in his press conference.

The government of Okinawa is reaching a conclusion that this issue cannot be solved without judicial struggle. It is possible for Tokyo government will raise a lawsuit to dispute Okinawa’s order, as the Okinawa side already predicts, making final solution more difficult than ever.

If the judicial branch decides that Tokyo has power to continue the construction for security needs, Okinawa will still be against Japanese government, because they have already suffer from heavy burden of military base for many years. Even if the judicial branch of Japan decides that Okinawa has a good reason to oppose, Tokyo government will not turn down the relocation plan. There is no viable solution in this issue until Abe administration stops oppressive policy enforcement on Okinawa and resumes normal communication with the governor.

Economic Hegemony in Asia

Japan started swinging between two international economic frameworks, one of which had been operated under the leadership of United States and another would be promoted by the initiative of China. New framework of investing developments in Asian region, Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, surprisingly enjoyed participation of major European economies, Germany, France and Italy, in addition to United Kingdom. This quick movement may not only affect Japan’s behavior in Asian economy, but economic order in Asian region.

With initiative of Chinese President, Xi Jinping, twenty-one nations signed the memorandum of establishment of AIIB last October. China is going to regard the nations stepping forward by the end of this month as founding members of the bank. Negotiation over the establishment will be finished by the end of June and AIIB will begin to work within this year. While the capital of the bank will be $50 billions, it will be doubled eventually. The headquarters will be settled in Beijing.

Receiving the news of participation of Europeans, Japanese government showed negative response, indicating instability in management of AIIB. It was an announcement that Japan would firmly be on the side of United States through Asian Development Bank. But it was changed only three days after. “There is a possibility of having discussion,” told Minister of Finance, Taro Aso, on Friday. Chinese government immediately welcomed Aso’s comment. “Principle of AIIB is openness and tolerance. We welcome any nation preparing for participation,” told Spokesman for Chinese Foreign Ministery, Hong Lei.

While AIIB will basically not distinguish participants from others in investment to Asian nations, Japanese officials believe that AIIJ members will be treated as something different from the states without membership. In terms of exporting products with Japan’s technology, including transportation system, devices for renewable energy or disaster preventing buildings. Japanese companies have crucial interests in competition with China or European countries.

United States and Japan could not predict this quick and broad expansion of AIIJ membership. They have been leading development in Asia through Asian Development Bank. Interest shown on AIIB proved insufficiency of traditional ADB regime. With great amount of reservation of foreign currency, China prospects to grab its hegemony in business in Asia, the growth center of the world. As seen in Africa, it is possible that China is going to sprawl its influence to the region through development.

Superficial Cooperation

After the blank of three years, the trilateral agreement was not to continue the blank. The meeting among foreign ministers of Japan, China and South Korea in Seoul brought poor result. The joint statement of them promised their effort to have trilateral summit meeting without any time schedule. The most disturbing element among those three nations was interpretation of their history.

Last meeting of those three foreign ministers was in April, 2012. It was unusual for those three nations to have such a long blank. Joint statement said that they would work hard for holding the meeting by the Prime Minister or Presidents in any earliest and convenient time for them.

Japanese Foreign Minister, Fumio Kishida, insisted on the importance of foreseeing viewpoint. “It is important to reinforce our trilateral relationship through exchange and cooperation with future-oriented minds,” told Kishida at the beginning of the meeting.

But, “future-oriented” has been a convenient wording for Japan to ignore unilateral interpretation of history by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. China knows it well. Chinese Foreign Minister, Wang Yi, straightforwardly criticized Japan. “Relationship between China and Japan was deteriorated by history issue. History is not in paste tense, but present progressive,” told Wang in his post-meeting press conference. Host of the meeting and Foreign Minister of South Korea, Yun Byung-se also expressed his concern on the trilateral cooperation disturbed by history issue.

The concern was the basis of their bilateral meetings. Wang told Kishida that it was the seventieth anniversary from the World War II and important and sensitive year. “How Japan will face history is closely watched,” said Wang with an acknowledgement on Abe’s statement this summer. While they exchanged their recognition that the bilateral relationship has been improving after the summit meeting last November, there was no progress on the hottest issue between them, territorial dispute on Senkaku Islands.

Yun and Kishida agreed on reinforcing communication in foreign minister level. Kishida requested Yun’s visit to Japan and confirmed to arrange it in preferable timing. But, Yun did not avoid the most sensitive issue, comfort woman, and requested early solution on that issue. Kishida only replied that Abe would be succeeding the standpoint of his predecessors as a whole.

The promise of future meeting by their leaders did not guarantee stable relationship of those three leading nations in East Asia. Not only history, but territory, competition in economic hegemony, cooperation or credibility building in security would be included complicated problems. Instability of those three has not been removed.

New Jab in Island Dispute

Japanese government presented new evidence for ownership of disputed islands in East China Sea. Ministry of Foreign Affairs uploaded on its homepage an old map made by Chinese government, in which Senkaku Islands were described in Japanese name. While Japanese government raised its voice for justifying its administration, Chinese government showed ignoring the undeniable fact. The new action of Japan resulted in a simple continuation of a blaming game with China.

The map Japanese government found was made by General Bureau for Mapping of Chinese government in 1969. On the map, there was Japanese name of Senkaku Islands with Japanese letters, including islands of Uotsuri and Kitakojima. It indicated that Chinese government had officially been recognizing those islands as affiliated to Japan before it started its assertion of sovereignty on them in 1970s.

It was obvious that the government tried to present negative evidence against dispute by China. “We uploaded the map to make it clear that the China’s unique assertion had no basis,” told Minister of Foreign Affairs, Fumio Kishida. “It indicated that they made it on the recognition of Senkakus as within the territory of Japan,” added Kishida, “ and the fact that China used the names they had not used proved the contradiction of China’s appeal.”

To the new jab from Tokyo government, Chinese government showed no uneasiness. “Historical facts cannot be overturned by a couple of maps someone discovered with the efforts in vain,” said a spokesman of Chinese government, Hong Lei. “If it is necessary, we can submit a hundred or a thousand of maps that apparently show affiliation of Diaoyu Islands to China,” rebutted Lei.

It was nineteen century when Japan annexed Senkaku Islands. After 1970s when petroleum reserve was found in the area, China started its dispute on the ownership of them. China’s purpose was obviously to get the rich energy resource there. Before the discovery, those islands had no interest or Chinese government. This attitude has been causing severe criticisms of Japanese right wing activists against China.

There is no persuasive evidence that China had been maintained its sovereignty from the time of Ming, between the centuries of fourteenth and seventeenth. The Chinese are better at fabricating of history than the Japanese does. They would create old maps of Diaoyu Islands made in millions of years ago, if necessary. It is said that gambling of china is not about analyzing about what result is coming, like the Japanese do, but about bribing the dealer. Blaming game may turn out to be a mater of deception.

Can Do Nothing

Three Japanese tourists were killed in the assault by terrorists on a museum in Tunis, Tunisia. The Japanese realized again that terrorism could happen any time anywhere. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe revealed again his incompetence on protecting Japanese nations from terrorist attack, just reiterating “Terrorism cannot be tolerated.” If the government of Japan wants to gain credibility of the people, it needs to work harder than ever to obtain information about terrorists’ activities. Readiness of the Self-defense Force for dispatching to region occupied by terrorists does not work for saving Japanese lives.

Abe expressed his condolence for three victims and sympathy for injured tourists. “Terrorism can never be tolerated in any cause. I strongly blame it. We are going to make every effort cooperating with international society,” told him to the reporters. Chief Cabinet Secretary, Yoshihide Suga, announced to the nation to avoid traveling dangerous places and promised providing with necessary information. “It is the situation what may happen anywhere in the world,” told Suga. In short, the entire world is too dangerous to visit in Suga’s mind.

However, the warning level of Tunisia was the lowest among four categories before the incident happened. That is the critical evidence of laziness of Japanese government. Since Tunisia became the starting point of Arab Springs, terrorists had been targeting the country. Tunisian militants were coming back from the training of terrorist groups. The government of Japan did not know about, or ignored at lease, those trends. Without those kinds of warning information, victims participated in a tour conducted by Japanese travel agent.

The main reason why Abe condemned terrorism was not for promising detailed information about terrorist activities to the people, but for justifying his agenda to expand the role of Self-defense Force. In the discussion of new legislation for security, readiness of self-defense force for rescuing Japanese citizens is one of the controversial points. But, what could the Self-defense Force do for saving lives facing immediate threat of terrorism in such cases as in Tunisia? Nothing. The most important measure the government should do is to provide information as accurate as possible in advance.

Under this administration, it is uncountable how many Japanese people will further be killed by terrorists abroad. The government will even not be able to block terrorists coming in Japan. The Japanese people need to remind of new version of JFK’s saying, “Ask not what your country can do for you, -- ask what you can do for yourself.”

Made in Government

Japanese manufacturers on Wednesday announced boosting of wages backed by positive results in their sales. It is fair to say that Japanese economy looks like showing a positive signs for recovery from long-term slump. However, mid-size and small businesses do not have optimistic vision for the future, with laziness for salary increase. Government-led wage policy has not reached the goal it set.

It was Toyota Motor Co. that led the annual negotiations between employers and employees, or spring struggle. Toyota Workers Union requested averaged ¥6,000 of accumulation on basic monthly wage. Managing side answered ¥4,000, which was recognized by the union as a positive response of the company. Cheap yen against U.S. dollar brought great profit through exports to the carmaker. Nissan Motors answered ¥5,000 to the request of ¥6,000. Other manufactures in electrical appliances, including Hitachi, Toshiba and Panasonic, also placed positive answers.

The active wage hike was not brought by merciful mind of employers, but by pressure from the government. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and his staffs have been reiterating the necessity for trickling down the profits, earned with incentives of unusual monetary and fiscal policies, to the workers. With that request from the government, major corporations reluctantly raised the wage as a matter of fact. It was the reason why spring struggle this year was called government-made.

So, big names like Toyota or Panasonic are ok. How about small businesses supporting those big companies through providing with small parts for high-quality cars or appliances? Seven out of ten are working for mid-size or small businesses. Their consumption has a great significance on Japanese economy as a whole. If they do not feel easiness for their ordinary life, sustainable economic growth cannot be achieved.

Nikkei Shimbun raised a headline, reading “Companies Need to Get Rid of Government-made,” urging independent decision for higher salary. An investigation firm revealed that 37% of mid or small businesses were considering base-up, increased 2% from last year. There is a fact that most middle or small businesses cannot have optimistic vision for raising salary.

Social gap between big and small companies, permanent and temporary employment, urban and local workers and the rich and poor are going to get wider. Even how the government requires employers to distribute their profits, it is the decision of employers to raise the payment as long as Japan is capitalist economy. It is still not sure whether Abe’s economic policy has been appropriate.

Dismantlement of Reactor

Kansai Electric Power Company on Tuesday decided dismantlement of two nuclear reactors in Mihama Nuclear Power Plant in Fukui prefecture and notified the Governor of Fukui, Kazumasa Nishikawa. Japan Atomic Power Company followed KEPCO on one reactor in Tsuruga Nuclear Power Plant. Those three were the first applicant of new forty-year rule of nuclear reactor, legislated after the severe accident in First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant. Their decisions were not based on difficulty of controlling nuclear power, but on running cost of the reactors out of date.

Those three reactors stated operation between 1970 and 1972. Each of their outlet power is less than five hundred thousands kilowatts, smaller than newer ones with eight hundred thousands kilowatts or more.

After the accident in Fukushima, the government required every nuclear reactor of strict measures for safety. Old reactors like in Mihama or Tsuruga were having anxiety on deterioration of metal that consisted of reactor body or cable for electricity transmission. It was too costly for those power companies to maintain those small reactors in consideration of fixing problems those reactors would have, even if the exception of twenty-year extension rule would be applied to them. The decision was made based on deliberated calculation of gains and losses.

It will take twenty to thirty years to finish the dismantlement, which will include completely cooling nuclear fuels down, extracting the fuels, sending them to final processing facility and break down the facility for the reactors. The greatest problem so far is there is no such thing of final processing facility in Japan. Spending four years, the government started pilot operation of stocking radioactively contaminated soil in “intermediate stocking facility” in Fukushima without having approval of landowners. While it promised to build final processing facility out of Fukushima, Ministry of Environment had been making no effort for determination of the place so far.

In the context of cost performance as well, KEPCO and some other power companies are considering life extension of seven reactors with high power outlet beyond the limit of forty years. Moreover, they are making attempt of building new reactors or replacement of old reactors. “For the sake of Japan as a whole, replacement is necessary,” told Vice President of KEPCO, Hidemi Toyomatsu. Nuclear power companies believe themselves as indispensable for Japan’s national interest.

It is obvious that nuclear power generation can severely harm national interest of Japan. An accident in nuclear power plant causes evacuation of hundreds of thousands people around, long-term effort for decontamination and compensation, and discredit against the government that has maintained insufficient nuclear policy. Maintaining nuclear power generation is irrelevant.

Fantasy for Permanent Membership

Not realizing or ignoring its difficulty, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe again appealed his determination to make Japan one of the permanent members of Security Council in United Nations. He might have confused that Japan’s status in the world community had been raised by his personal political agenda on security policy. No nation recognizes that Japan has gotten a ticket for the membership with its internally controversial legislation for security, including allowing collective self-defense right. The permanent membership of Japan is a ridiculous illusion inside the mind of Japanese nationalists.

There was a sense of hasting in Abe’s speech in United Nations University in Tokyo on Monday. “It is no longer the time to waste time for discussion. We need to yield concrete outcome,” told Abe. “Based on deep reflection for previous war, Japan made efforts to build a country that would pay respect to world peace, prosperity and rule of law,” added Abe to highlight Japan’s eligibility for the membership.

In the middle of the first decade of twenty-first century, Japan launched a campaign for its permanent membership under Jun-ichiro Koizumi administration. As Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary, Abe conducted the effort in the government of Japan. The greatest sponsor for Japan, with a wrong estimate of bureaucrats, was United States. U.S. at the time supported only Japan for new permanent member of Security Council, knowing all other nations, including other candidates like Germany or India, would firmly oppose. In short, U.S. equivocally opposed Japan’s ticket.

Bureaucrats in Japan often talk Japan’s candidacy in a context of U.N. reform. But, it is not sure what kind of reform Japan is foreseeing. To make Security Council functional in any conflicts, adding new membership will cause further incompetence. If Japan wants to contribute to peaceful solution in international security, it is better for it to say something to U.S. in a friendly manner as a key ally. But it has said nothing even about Okinawa. Nationalistic assertion of Japan’s importance in the world is too blind on its status and nothing but an embarrassment.

Ironic enough, Abe’s speech in U.N. University noted as an expression of his willingness for “deep reflection” on Japan’s past. Over seventieth anniversary statement from the end of World War II, Abe has been considering its expression for the message to Asian nations. Pressures from international community are coming as his idea was revealed from his colleagues. If he wants to contribute international peace and security, he needs to announce appropriate recognition about post-war history of Japan.

Basis of Credibility

While Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was considering how he would express his own interpretation on post-war history of Japan, a former Premier who had deeply considered his statement at the fiftieth anniversary from the end of World War II spoke out his conviction on history. Former Prime Minister Tomi-ichi Murayama emphasized that his Murayama Statement received overwhelming approval from the world. It was not easy for a defeated nation to regain its credibility in international community. Abe is breaking down that credibility Japan earned with a great perseverance.

In the interviews to Asahi and Tokyo Shimbun, Murayama maintained his skepticism on the handling of history issues in Abe administration. “While he established a consultative committee of experts, Prime Minister Abe seemed to have a sentiment that he would not like to touch on colonial rule or apology described in Murayama Statement,” told Murayama.

At the time Murayama delivered his statement in August, 1995, Liberal Democratic Party was in the leading coalition with Social Democratic Party, sending Ministers to the Cabinet. Murayama revealed that there was no negative response on his statement from LDP. Even Ryutaro Hashimoto, then Minister of Trade and Industry and the President of Japan War-Bereaved Families Association, agreed on it. “It was the first recognition and official apology for past faults as Japanese Cabinet,” said Murayama, “Cabinets succeeded it later and the world was satisfied with it. People in China or South Korea told that they could make better environment with Japan based on mutual credibility.”

Murayama raised some evidences, which caused improvement of bilateral relationship with China or South Korea after Murayama Statement had been delivered. They included a speech of Chinese President Hu Jintao at Waseda University in 2008, in which Hu told Japan’s effort for friendly relationship with China was eternally engraved in his heart. Murayama also revealed his idea that his statement had been succeeded in the Joint Declaration of Japan and South Korea in 1998.

Nevertheless, Abe has shown no intention to succeed the keywords of Murayama Statement. One of his close aids, Shin-ichi Kitaoka, told that he wanted let Abe include the recognition of aggression in Abe Statement this summer. Although Kitaoka’s idea was mostly regarded as a positive attempt for better relationship with the neighbors, it was too common for historians that the war was aggression by Japan. No one denies that. The point is whether Abe will sincerely recognize the mistaken policy and apologize about it.

Escaping Is the Best Way

Commemorating the fourth anniversary of Great East Japan Earthquake, a decennial international conference for disaster prevention, United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, began in Sendai City, the capital of Tohoku area, on Saturday. Japan pledged ¥480 billion for next four years. It is an ordinary way for Japan to emphasize its role in international community through money. But, what Japanese people learned from the disaster was not the importance of how to prevent disaster, but how to escape it. With its inability in communication, the government of Japan is always not good at handing software over.

In the opening speeches, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe announced further contribution of Japan in disaster preventing, which was named “Sendai Cooperation Initiative for Disaster Risk Reduction.” “Japan will contribute to international society through knowledge and technology,” told Abe. The initiative proposed “mainstreaming” of disaster risk reduction, which included legislation to prepare for disaster or building infrastructure.

To make sure preventing tragedy stemming from disaster, the initiative urged countries investment with long-term vision, better reconstruction to prevent the same devastation and cooperation among private firms, local government and non-government organization. It also stressed the importance of participation of women, children, aged and disabled people in disaster preventive efforts.

Through bilateral meeting with state representatives, most of them were from developing countries in Asia-Pacific or Africa, Abe tried to show his leadership in disaster management in the world community. He recommended foreign leaders to invest for well-prepared disaster policy, to which Japan would financially contribute.

However, Abe did not referred to risk of nuclear power generation. The lessons of accident in First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant were that hundreds of thousands people would need to evacuate losing their homes, there would be no way to contain radioactive materials once the reactors were broken, and the best way to prevent nuclear disaster would be not having nuclear reactors. Abe did not want to look at those truths.

The duty of Japan in Sendai conference is to let the world acknowledge what a nation would suffer from great nature. Even how tall the wall along coastline would be, tsunami will swallow the people not aware of power of the nature. The best way to deal with natural disaster is to secure enough space, to where people can escape, no matter what the disaster will be. Do not fight the mother nature.

Condensed Pressure

Ministry of Environment on Friday started carrying contaminated soil in Fukushima Prefecture to the intermediate stockyard in two towns, where residents had evacuated. After people scraped the land contaminated by radioactive materials emitted from broken First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, huge amount of poisonous soil has been accumulated everywhere. It was crucial to find somewhere the soil should be concentrated. However, there is no relevant reason for the soil to be dumped in two towns. The government of Japan has been incompetent in building a consensus.

The greatest problem of Japanese government is that the bureaucrats firmly believe their advantage over local governments. To promote a policy, bureaucrats in Tokyo have always been aggressive. In the case of finding a place for the intermediate stockyard, Ministry of Environment put pressure on Fukushima prefectural government.

The national government has power to control budget for reconstruction of Fukushima. The region has a great concern on health of children supposedly exposed to radiation after the accident. To keep moderate relationship with Tokyo, former Governor of Fukushima accepted an offer to build intermediate facility in Fukushima area. He stepped down soon after the decision.

Then, focus went to the towns, Okuma and Futaba, where the broken plant located. Most people evacuated from those towns had been suffered from pressure coming from neighbors, which require the towns to accept the facility. Leaders of the town could not stand bad reputation on their people living in other cities and towns. The decision was aimed to protect them.

Now, pressure is on the landowners of the area for the facility. There are twenty-three hundred landowners on the land with four thousand acres. Injustice of Ministry of Environment is that they started sending contaminated soil without obtaining consent from anyone of the landowners except one. They secured small area for testing, which had a capacity to lay down 0.1% of all contaminated soil in Fukushima area.

The landowners are facing ugly scenario that their land property will be surrounded by great plastic bags containing poisonous soil. Even though the government promised that final processing facility would be build outside of Fukushima, it has shown no effort to implement it so far. People in Fukushima doubt that the government is gong to make the intermediate facility the final one. The strangest thing is that there is too few arguments to ask responsibility of TEPCO.