Southeast Asian Quarrel

Defense Ministers of Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the eight neighbor countries failed in delivering a joint declaration after the meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on Wednesday. It was a disappointing consequence of sharp opposition between United States and People’s Republic of China. Ten ASEAN nations are being divided in two groups.

The framework is called Asian Defense Ministers Meeting, or ADMM, Plus. In the first meeting in Hanoi, Vietnam, in 2010, the Defense Ministers agreed on five areas: maritime security, counter-terrorism, humanitarian assistance and disaster management, peacekeeping operations and military medicine. The Joint Declaration, agreed on the second meeting in Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei Darussalam, in 2013, reaffirmed the strategic importance of ADMM Plus and required the relations to be guided “by the fundamental principles enshrined in the TAC (Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in ASEAN), especially the renunciation of the threat or use of force and exercise of self-restraint.” The third meeting could not deliver a Joint Declaration for the first time.

Asahi Shimbun reported that the draft of Joint Declaration, prepared by the chair country, Malaysia, included “emphasizing the importance of freedom of navigation and aviation or communication in sea lanes based on international laws.” But, China opposed the draft, claiming that it was inappropriate for multi-lateral conference with outer nations to deal with territorial issue. The expression was dropped from the revised draft.

According a report of Mainichi Shimbun, China was agreeing to Malaysia’s draft with words of “freedom of navigation,” but not referring to “South China Sea.” However, United States demanded to include “South China Sea.” China turned down its support for Joint Declaration as long as any expression of “South China Sea” was described.

Now, ten ASEAN nations are categorized into one of the four groups. Laos and Cambodia are the closest to China with great amount of economic support and without territorial dispute. While Myanmar, Indonesia, Thailand and Singapore are maintaining moderate relation with China without territorial issue, Brunei and Malaysia has dispute over territory with China. Vietnam and Philippine are frustrated with China’s unilateral claim for islands in South China Sea.

In this volatile situation in Southeast Asia, skeptical views are cast on Japan, which has been ambivalent in what kind of role it is going to play in the region. Asahi reported an interview to U.S. Senator John McCain who urged Japan to take the same action as a destroyer of U.S. Navy passed the sea area within twelve maritime miles of Spratly Islands, where China was continuing landfill. Japan is drawn into the conflict in far southern sea.

Unusual Distrust on Nuclear Recycle

Nuclear Regulation Authority decided on Wednesday to recommend Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Hiroshi Hase, to replace the organization for operating a fast-breeder reactor, Monju, in Fukui, Japan. NRA dismissed ability of current operator, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, which kept on failing in establishing safety measures. If Hase cannot pick an appropriate operator, the attempt of nuclear fuel recycle in Japan will be seriously damaged.

Monju, sodium-cooled loop type reactor, was built as one of the major facilities for nuclear fuel recycle system. A year after the reactor reached a critical point in 1994, an accident of sodium leak occurred. The government of Japan ordered halting operation for a year. Before the reactor resumed its operation in 2010, the operator made two restructurings. Nevertheless, Monju stopped again in an accident of dropping a relaying device into the reactor three months after the resumption. Making matters worse, JAEA reported insufficiency of inspection for ten thousands of equipments in 2012. NRA ordered JAEA to stop the preparation for restarting the reactor.

Crucial inferiority of JAEA is that its staffs do not realize the problem they have. After the recovery measures from inappropriate operation three years ago, the organization reported that they had finished all inspection on the equipments. In spite of that, JAEA reiterated violations against security regulation for eight times. “They could not answer my question that what was the problem,” told an officer of NRA after he found mistake in the setting of indicators.

NRA required Hase propose an appropriate alternative operator. If he cannot, Hase will have to make complete plan for preserving safety in the reactor. That has to be done within a half year. Chairman of NRA, Shun-ichi Tanaka, does not exclude an option of suspending approval for Monju.

The project of nuclear recycling in Japan is extremely expensive without any achievement so far. The government has been paying for maintenance and safety measures in Monju ¥50 million everyday. The main actor in the recycling is replaced by pluthermal generation, using MOX fuel made by mixing plutonium and uranium produced in nuclear power generation. Monju is already obsolete in the experimental project.

One thing clear is that the people in nuclear village in Japan are too enthusiastic in justifying themselves to show the way Japanese nation should go. As long as they do not stop deceiving the public, Japan keeps on drifting in want of stable energy.

Struggle against Legal Discrimination on Women

Grand Bench of the Supreme Court concluded the argument on the case in which female plaintiffs required compensation for their damage caused by discriminative articles in Civil Codes on Wednesday. Although the first and second courts dismissed their appeals, it is obvious that the provisions are obsolete. The Supreme Court will make decisions on those cases for the first time in its history as soon as the end of this year.

Article 750 of Civil Code determines that “a husband and wife shall adopt the surname of the husband or wife in accordance with that which is decided at the time of marriage. Against the provision, five women in Tokyo filed a lawsuit demanding Japanese government ¥6 million for their mental pains. They argued the provision, coercing change of surname, was violating the Constitution of Japan, which guaranteed the people respect for individuals or gender equality.

One of the plaintiffs, Kaori Oguni, made an argument in the Grand Bench. “When I called my married name, it seemed to be calling someone else,” told Oguni. When she supported writing her client’s living will as an administrative scrivener, her client required her signing with her legal name. But, the client could not identify her, because her husband had very rare surname. “I want the Judges to understand that it is painful to lose one’s existence with marriage,” told Oguni in the press conference about her belief in identity between surname and personality.

The defendant argues that maintaining surname is not an indispensable right for an individual and the article does not harm gender equality as long as it allows choosing one of the two names of the couple. Behind that reasoning, there is a conservative recognition that choosing one name maintains integration of family.

But, Civil Code has further discriminative provision. Article 733 says “a woman may not remarry unless six months have passed since the day of dissolution or rescission of the previous marriage.” While its purpose is to determine the father of baby, if a pregnancy was recognized after her divorce, the article has been criticized as discrimination to all women.

In an argument to the Supreme Court, a representative lawyer for a woman plaintiff emphasized unconstitutionality of the article. The woman was pregnant just before the divorce with her ex-husband, who had been repeating domestic violence on her. Her children could not have any family register, which meant no existence in Japanese society.

Since it may affect fundamental value of the Japanese, the Supreme Court will have to make a difficult judge. But, it is sure that modern Japanese think surname to be nothing guarantees family integration. Technology can determine a child’s father. Traditional disadvantage of woman has to be eliminated.

Nuclear Elimination in Trouble

It must have been a routine resolution in a committee of United Nations. But, Japan, as the main sponsor of it, was fundamentally disappointed with the conclusion, because the minority opposing or defying the resolution were too major to make the concept against nuclear weapon prevalent. The effort of Japan to eliminate nuclear weapon, which severely devastated the island nation seventy years ago, is facing serious trouble.

Japan has been submitting resolutions to declare complete elimination of nuclear weapon and they passed the First Committee of General assembly, which dealt with disarmament and security, for the each of consecutive twenty-two years. This year, the resolution was supported by 156 countries out of the 176. However, United States and United Kingdom, which had been co-sponsors of the resolution until last year, and France, which had been supporting it, abstained from voting.

In the year of seventieth anniversary from atomic devastation in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japanese delegation to U.N. went one step forward in details of the resolution. Using an expression of “Hibakusha,” sufferers from nuclear bombs, the resolution required world leaders to visit Hiroshima or Nagasaki to realize inhumanity of nuclear weapon. On the other hand, it attempted to include nuclear possessing countries into supporters of the resolution by avoiding describing concrete time limit for total elimination of nuclear weapons.

Japanese government was shocked by defiance of U.S., which had been co-sponsoring the resolution from 2009, when U.S. President Barack Obama proposed “the world without nuclear weapon” in Prague. It is likely that U.S. changed the attitude, because the resolution this year included an expression of inhumanity of nuclear weapon. But, U.S. must be worrying about the trend after bitter breaking off in Reviewing Convention of Non-proliferation Treaty this May, which has been moving toward Nuclear Banning Treaty.

Further insulting, China denounced Japan of its insistence on nuclear elimination. “It was a direct consequence of the aggressive war,” told Chinese delegation in the committee. It is rarely heard that war can be settled by using nuclear weapons, if the opponent were aggressive. Sincere reflection of relying on the immoral weapons could not see in this pragmatic nation.

Japan has been appealing the inhumanity of nuclear weapon, which can instantly kill a huge number of innocent people. Upholding a concept of “human security,” Japan has been trying to lead the discussion toward nuclear disarmament. One can think that current shift of Japanese security policy to unleash its military capability caused skepticism on traditional pacifism of Japan.

What’s Early Settlement?

Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, had a summit meeting with South Korean President, Park Geun-hye, for the first time as national leaders, at the Blue House in Seoul on Monday. In spite of the significance of the fact that those two leaders had a meeting, the outcome was strange. They agreed on seeking “early settlement” of comfort woman issue. Early settlement? What’s that?

The meeting was held including both foreign ministers for an hour and continued with other officials for additional forty-five minutes. “This is the greatest obstacle in improving our bilateral relationship. It should soon be resolved on the level which is acceptable for victims and understandable for our nation,” Park told Abe on comfort woman issue.

Abe revealed some details about the meeting. “We agreed on accelerating the negotiation for early settlement,” told Abe to the reporters. “For constructing future-looking cooperative relation,” he stressed, “it cannot be tolerated for us to leave obstacles to future generation.”

According to a report of Mainichi Shimbun, one official of Japanese government explained the meaning of “early settlement” as issuing order to accelerate current talks on the level of bureau chief of both Foreign Ministries, which made no sense. The fact that Abe referred to “early settlement” meant that comfort woman issue was not settled, contradicting Japan’s longtime argument that all claims had been settled with an agreement simultaneous with Japan-South Korea Basic Treaty in 1965. On this point, Abe told that the standpoint of Japan has not changed. He used different tongues between Park and Japanese citizens.

It is likely that both governments put the highest priority on maintaining momentum for continuous summit meeting in their bilateral relationship. But, that compromised agreement will produce no meaningful outcome. The people in South Korea expect that a certain solution is coming from Japan by the end of this year, because Abe referred to “regarding fiftieth anniversary” from normalizing bilateral relationship. There is no willingness in the government of Japan to settle comfort woman issue within this year.

In Japanese, the settlement, or daketsu in Japanese language, generally means concluding negotiation, such as overwhelming settlement in Trans-Pacific Partnership last month. The agreement of Japan-South Korea summit meeting obviously contradicted what Japanese government had been telling to its citizens. Abe administration needs to drop one of the two options; no problem exists on comfort woman issue or it needs to deal with the problem.

Keeping Momentum

Two men showed smile as they had been forced and between them was the host lady with her teeth exposed. Trilateral summit meeting of Japan, China and Republic of Korea was held for the first time these three and a half years in Seoul on Sunday. They failed in settling a number of problems among them. So, what was the reason of their smiles? It was because they thought it was successful in terms of maintaining momentum of the trilateral diplomatic channel.

The meeting was held in the Presidential Residence, Blue House, in Seoul for one and a half hour. In the beginning of the meeting, three leaders made oral jabs each other in front of TV camera. “In spite of closeness of the nations, deep understanding is not established between some of them,” told Chinese Prime Minister Li Keqiang. The host of the meeting also frustrated with the situation of the trilateral relationship. “We have not been able to settle the problems that brought conflict and opposition in politics and security,” said South Korean President Park Geun-hye. As long as reading the reports in Japan, it was not clear what Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said.

According to the reports based on announcement of Japanese government officials, Abe explained that his statement on the seventieth anniversary from World War II was a promise of further contribution to international peace and prosperity based on seventy-year history of a peaceful nation. “It is not productive to focus on specific past events,” Abe said to have told, “and I want to weave a forward-looking history of cooperation by Japan, China and South Korea.”

Having exhibited strong position in the trilateral relationship for taming each of their internal frustrations, three leaders shared the necessity for improving economic relationship that they deadly wanted. They reconfirmed their willingness to accelerate negotiation for the trilateral free trade agreement and to make effort for economic integration in East Asia. Economy is currently the most crucial issue for each of them.

Three leaders intensively avoided crucial issues that had caused deterioration of their relationship: comfort woman and South China Sea. Leaving them behind, the joint declaration included “spirit of facing history and stepping forward to the future,” which interpretation might be different by the three. The greatest achievement was that they agreed to have annual trilateral summit meeting, expecting Japan to chair next meeting in 2016. Li and Park supposedly wanted to say that Abe would be responsible, if next meeting was cancelled.

The declaration also opposed any action drawing tension by North Korea on nuclear issue. On climate change, they reconfirmed their cooperation for making a deal in the Paris conference next month. All those agreements will be meaningless, if the trilateral framework is collapsed.

Sino-Korean Interdependence

President of Republic of Korea, Park Geun-hye, warmly welcomed Chinese Prime Minister, Li Keqiang, in her official house called Blue House on Saturday. They agreed on promoting bilateral economic cooperation with a possibility of establishing new trade zone in East Asia. In the eve of trilateral summit meeting including Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, Park and Li exhibited their close relationship on the continent.

At the beginning of the meeting, both leaders emphasized their willingness of deepening economic ties between the two nations. “I want to develop the strategic and cooperative partnership in terms of middle and long time,” told Park to the reporters. “I want to raise the cooperation in every aspect of both nations up to a new relationship,” replied Li. The meeting continued for one hour and forty minutes, extended by forty minutes from planned schedule.

Both leaders agreed on accelerating the process for Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, in which sixteen Asian nations are involved. They also promised their effort to activate China-South Korea Free Trade Agreement within this year. Regarding Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, Chinese-led economic cooperation framework in Asia in which ROK is participated, two leaders reconfirmed that they would be reinforcing partnership for investment in the third parties.

They exchanged seventeen bilateral documents for vitalization of trade and investment, and memorandums on science and technology or environment. With agreement for protecting panda, China offered presenting one panda for a zoo in South Korea as early as early next year. Panda still is a major diplomatic tool of China.

Those bilateral agreements had one common concept: against American-led order in Asia. RCEP is a free trade framework countering Trans-Pacific Partnership, which has been conceived as a containment policy against China. AIIB is a newly launched monetary system against International Monetary Fund, which includes Asian Development Bank. China has been energetic in inviting ROK to Chinese side to counter those international pressures.

To the close tie between China and South Korea, Abe seems to be powerless in the trilateral meeting. Bogged down with his personal political agenda of reinterpreting history, it is likely that isolation of Japan in Asian nations will be apparent. The people in South Korea have been protesting Abe’s visit to their hometown, denouncing his attitude on comfort woman issue. As one of the worst scenario, he can be labeled as one of the most disgusting guys during his stay in Seoul.