Incompetent Defense Leadership

Day after day, it gets obvious that the Specific Secret Protection Act can make all kinds of information hidden from eyes of the people. While the basic concept of the legislation has been to protect security information shared by allied governments, the bill was distorted by bureaucrats in order to occupy every sort of information useful for subordinate the people. Democracy in this country is in such a primitive level.

In the discussion at the Special Committee on National Security of the House of Representative on Monday, an officer for Ministry of Defense reiterated that every kind of information would be recognized as secrets. The Vice-chief of Defense Policy Bureau, Rou Manabe, answered that “It generally is possible to be applied to specific secret,” to questions about what kind of information the Self-defense Force could obtain in their activity in Iraq reconstruction assistance by lawmaker Gaku Hashimoto, a son of former Prime Minister, Ryutaro Hashimoto.

It is highly skeptical that Manabe is an appropriate person to answer on this issue in the committee. As the Chief of Okinawa Defense Bureau, he made a speech to his staffs inducing them to vote a specific candidate in the mayoral election of City of Ginowan, where Futenma Marine Airbase is located. His activity was doubted as a violation of National Civil Service Law, which requires neutrality to national civil servants.

His predecessor was replaced with an ugly talk that resembled secret submission of assessment documents for Futenma relocation to local government of Okinawa as raping women, saying “Do you think a man would say to a woman that he would rape her?” That showed a culture of bureaucrats in Ministry of Defense.

That kind of bureaucrats is deeply involved in writing the draft of Specific Secret Protection Act. They are too careful in protecting information from allied countries to balance security necessity and preservation of human rights to access public information. In other words, they are too incompetent to distinguish information to be classified from that not to be released. Security alliance, as its consequence, would be kept on jeopardized as long as those bureaucrats exist.

As a second guess, they might have been smart enough to block establishing stronger ties with allied countries, especially the United States. As is well known, Ground Self-defense Force is relatively skeptical to U.S. involvement in Japan’s security, while Marine Self-defense Force is not so much. Even if the bill is not going to pass the Diet, it will be ok for them. The Japanese are in such a poor situation as that selfish leadership trains the nation.

Considering Game Changing

In spite of a great amount of surplus in reconstruction budget, the Government of Japan considers lowering the target of decontamination in Fukushima attributing it to money shortage. Nobody guarantees the impact on human health, when the threshold for residents is eased. Young families, namely with kids, don’t want to go back their hometown, worrying about high radiation. It is old people who really consider going back home. The government is just buying time until all those old residents will die.

The government set a long-term goal to reduce the radiation of towns around broken First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant to 1mSv per year, and required Tokyo Electric Power Company to achieve it for residents to go back home. However, incompetent TEPCO is not serious about reaching it, making the government frustrated. While it realized the necessity to inject a huge amount of tax money in decontamination, the government embarked on changing the rule of game.

Keeping the goal as it has been, the government is considering letting the residents return before the long-term goal will be achieved. Experts found that actual radiation monitored on the land was lower than measurement by aircraft that would determine standard radiation level. The delegation of International Atomic Energy Agency led by Von Carlos Lentijo encouraged the government not to insist on the goal of 1mSv, saying that “It should be determined within the range from 1mSv to 20mSv, balancing benefit and burden.”

The residents in Fukushima saw Lentijo as a devil. Even workers for dismantling First Fukushima are protected with threshold of 5mSv. If one got over beyond that line, he needs to report how he worked. The 20mSv regulation means forcing the ordinary residents harder situation than workers in the plant. Overall recognition of the people in Fukushima is 1mSv goal must be maintained.

1mSv has been a symbol of safety for sufferers in Fukushima to go back home. The promise of the government has been that it is forcing TEPCO to reduce radiation level down to 1mSv. While there was a broad skepticism for achievement of the goal, the government rigorously kept on saying that it would do that, with a hint of underestimation of impact of the accident.

Ambitious decontamination policy was introduced by former administration of Democratic Party of Japan. The politics could not decide setting unlivable land, because it would directly connects to TEPCO’s responsibility. As long as the government insists on survival of TEPCO, no answer will be found. To vest those burden stemmed from the accident is a violation of humanity.

0.2% Matters

While the government decided deregulation of all 11.400 kinds of drug except 28 strong ones, an eminent entrepreneur running an internet shopping site was so frustrated with the result that he would step down as a member of a governmental conference for deregulation. For him, the government had chosen the side of old economy with traditional interests by protecting that 0.2% of all kinds of drug.

The announcement of the government was to make most drugs able to be sold in internet market. Among all, however, five medicines, including four kinds of tablets for erectile dysfunction and one for sterilization, were banned to be sold through internet. Other twenty-three were conditioned to sell after clearing safety assessment for three years. New rule would be adopted next spring.

Hiroshi Mikitani, the chief executive officer of Rakuten, strongly opposed to the decision of the government. “The government is going to a direction totally opposite to reform,” he told in a press conference right after the announcement from the government. He showed his intention to resign his membership of the Industry Competition Convention, one of the key consultative bodies for promoting economic policy of the administration led by Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe. Mikitani also indicated to sue the government through relative company of Rakuten.

In final consideration of this deregulation policy, related ministers agreed with the necessity of pharmacists in selling specific medicines to avoid trouble caused by lack of consultation. Interest groups of pharmacists, cooperating with groups of medical doctors, had been firmly against internet shopping for medicines. Mikitani criticized the connection between medical businesses and the government as a symbol of old business models, calling new policy “irrational.”

The impact of Mikitani’s turning his back to Abe administration should not be underestimated. Deregulation is the core issue of “growth strategy,” which consists of the third arrow of Abenomics economic policy. Mikitani has been a symbolic figure to show Abe’s seriousness in reforming Japan economy into competitive and enterprising structure. With negative image in pharmaceutical reform, it is inevitable that a number of people realize the strategy to be a fiction and recognize the administration as living on the old regulation system. Paralleled with accumulation of national debt and concern on uncontrollable inflation brought by aggressive stimulating policy, the credibility on Abe’s economic policy is getting eroded.

Consequence of Revisionism

There are growing opposition in Japan against consecutive sentences in South Korea, in which the courts acknowledged the right of former Korean requisition workers in wartime Japan to demand compensation from Japanese employers at the time of colonial occupation. Although the Basic Relations Treaty between those two countries determines that South Korea renounces all rights of compensatory demands to Japan, the sentences of courts ignore the agreement. It should be regarded as one of the reflections of revisionism in Japan.

Turning down the decision of High Court, the Supreme Court of South Korea, for the first time, gave a sentence in May last year that private right of former requisition workers to demand compensation had not expired and ordered Mitsubishi Heavy Industry and Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal to pay compensation. Earlier this month, the Gwangju District Court ordered Mitsubishi to pay 150 million won per person, accepting demands of former Girls Volunteer Corps in Imperial Japan.

Defendants of the case have not accepted the order of compensation. But, it is possible for the courts in South Korea to seize their assets, if the companies keep on rejecting compensation.

Those decisions of the courts were based on a notion that colonial occupation was against international law and the rights of former workers who had been forced to unwilling labor would not be denied, regardless bilateral agreement between the governments. On the other hand, the Government of Japan has been taking the position that all the compensations were settled by the treaty with South Korea.

Being afraid of additional cost in business in South Korea, Japanese companies are worried about current judicial assertion in South Korea. Business groups including Japan Business Federation, or Keidanren, delivered a statement that expressed deep concern against the trend of demanding wartime compensation. “It might be obstacles against business or investment on South Korea,” the statement described. Finding a nuance of threat, Korean people criticized it.

The Japanese should take those actions in the neighbor country as a reflection of revisionism in its domestic politics. It was the highest political leader, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who referred to revising Kono Statement, in which the Government of Japan acknowledged former aggression and colonization. A co-leader of Japan Restoration Party, Toru Hashimoto, questioned the way of thinking that an activity regarded as right in old time may turn to guilty in light of modern concept, in the discussion over the Comfort Women. South Korea is opposing those movements in Japan.

Recession on Climate Policy

A former front runner is now on a position chasing the top group. The government of Japan decided to revise its goal on carbon reduction. New target for 2020 was to reduce 3.8% of greenhouse gasses emission from the level in 2005. It must be said that the target was significant setback it once announced to the world in 2009. Although Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, set an ambitious goal in his first term, the priority of climate change has gotten low in the second term.

Prime Minister, Yukio Hatoyama, declared at the United Nations in 2009 that Japan was aiming to reduce 25% of greenhouse gasses emission from the level of 1990 by 2020. The target was the most ambitious one among developed countries at the time, even higher than that of European Union. However, after the accident of First Fukushima Nuclear Plant that caused halting most nuclear reactors for power generation in Japan and relying heavily on thermal power generation, it became unrealistic for Japan to achieve Hatoyama target.

New 3.8% target expects no nuclear generation. The government regards it as “realistic” goal with assumption of 2% annual economic growth and improvement in developing renewable energies including solar and wind powers. If it is based on 1990 level, the target means 3% of increase. Reminding of the Kyoto Protocol mandate for Japan, 6% down from 1990 level, new goal is not ambitious at all. When the government presents it in COP 19 of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the parties may be disappointed by Japan’s recession in this global effort.

European Union has a goal of 20 or 30% reduction of greenhouse gas emission from the level of 1990 by 2020. Russia’s target is 15 to 25% reduction. Even the United States, which has been reluctant to set an ambitious goal, already possesses 3% reduction target. Compared those positive efforts, Japan’s goal is obviously negative.

Abe has been one of the most conscious legislators on climate change. He proposed ambitious target to the world called Cool Earth 50, which demanded halving global greenhouse emission by 2050. With political strategy to denounce unrealistic goal set by former administration led by Democratic Party of Japan, Abe willingly reset Japan’s position on climate change. In the struggle between Ministry of Economy, Trade, Industry, that demanded realistic policy, and climate-conscious Ministry of Environment, Abe stood on the side of METI, turning his position from his first term. Whether the government can reshape the target into more ambitious one will be next focusing point of Japan’s climate policy.

Reviewing Rice Policy

It must be the one of the consequences of current movement for international free trade frameworks. The Government of Japan is reviewing its agricultural policy that existed for a half century, the reform which reduces subsidy for rice farmers beginning next year and abolishes it within five years. The strongest political voice for farmers, Liberal Democratic Party, gave in consistent initiative for open market upheld by the executive branch led by Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe. However, absence of strategy for maintaining staple food of Japan makes farmers worried.

In 1970, the government introduced the policy of reducing acreage to maintain rice price that had been suffering from decline caused by overproduction. To a farmer who accepted quota of reducing rice pads, the government introduced a system to provide with cash. The subsidy currently amounting to ¥15,000 per acre will eventually be reduced starting next year and eliminated by 2018. To others who changes products from rice to something else, the government has been paying ¥80,000 per ten acres, which amount will be increased from next year.

Instead, the government will create new subsidy for maintenance of agricultural fields. Eligible activity includes maintaining ridge, cleaning ditches up and mowing farm roads. In small valleys where farm maintenance is not easy, the subsidy will be added. Concept of policy for farmers is shifting from care for income to supporting agricultural sustainability.

Legislators representing interest of agriculture had been firmly opposed new policy. However, Abe administration insisted on agricultural reform as a symbol of deregulation, which consisted “third arrow” of Abe’s economic policy, following monetary ease and aggressive spending. With retirement of powerful congressmen closely connected with farmers, LDP had become too powerless to reject it.

Rice for the Japanese can be paralleled with beef for the Americans. How is this crucial crop going to be? The benefit for farmers to produce rice will be reduced by new policy and rice farming should inevitably be competitive. A lot of farmers abandoning it are highly expected. Although quality of taste has been improved these years, Japanese rice is going to be exposed to international contest, with possibility of erosion of tariff in the framework of Trans-Pacific Partnership.

If the government fails in this agricultural reform, food security in Japan will significantly be damaged. Economic gap between urban cities and rural area will be wider than ever. It is fair to say that negotiation over open market will determine the future of Japan.

Country of Fake Foods

It’s like Harrods to sell English tea blended with cheap Chinese green tea or Hilton to inject old Aussie beef in 100% American fresh beef hamburger. Fake ingredients in the food sold in common department stores or served in “high class” hotels have been shaking the credibility on their bland value. It is not simply a matter of retail sectors, but about skepticisms of fundamental recognition on food safety in this country.

A hotel chain in Osaka area announced later last month that its franchised restaurants had been serving frozen-preserved fish as “fresh fish,” as if they were recently caught in the sea, or imported cheap prawn as “Japanese Shiba prawn.” It is usual that when someone reveals fake commercial activity, guilty others are consecutively coming up after that. Following the hotel chain, famous hotels and department stores revealed their wrong information about food ingredients, apologizing to the public through press conference pretending to be innocent in those activities. The facts included injecting fat in “beef steak” for liaison, calling imported lobster “Japanese spiny lobster” or serving retailed orange juice as “fresh juice.”

One top manager of department store chain, apologizing with deep bow to TV cameras, explained that they knew the ingredients had been changed in order to balance prime cost with retail price, but forgot renewal of information to their customers. Stop kidding consumers. Knowing there was no customer who can distinguish Japanese prawn from black tiger shrimp in a piece of terrine, they must have cheating buyers. That is everyone’s idea.

Government is also fooling the people. The Secretary General of Consumer Affairs Agency, Hisa Anan, told that the hotels and department stores were the first class retailers and she wondered why they had done that kind of things. Food safety has been the greatest cause of food policy in Japan. In the name of “food safety,” Japanese government had been blocking American beef, resulting in protecting wagyu ranchers and retailers in Japan. While protecting specific interests, the government kept its people innocent on what they had really been eating.

Consumers need to be smart on this kind of system of the society. As long as bureaucrats are firmly connected with specific interests, there will be no true information coming out. Do not be pretended by the name of “first class.” The bigger a retailer grows and sells great amount of foods, the further it will be from “first class” quality. Be sensitive about identifying who produced a food you are eating. If you cannot know where it came from, avoid having it. Though it sounds hard to do that, it is about health of you and your loved ones.