A blog in idleness

The first joint statement in a round of six-party talks was agreed this week.
I appreciate the importance of this statement as a first step to maintain peace and stability in Northeast Asia.

What I find important in the statement are as follows:
- The DPRK committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear weapons and returning to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and to IAEA safeguards.
- The U.S. affirmed that it has no nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula and has no intention to attack or invade the DPRK.
-The DPRK stated that it has the right to peaceful uses of nuclear energy. The other parties expressed their respect and agreed to discuss, at an appropriate time, the subject of the provision of light water reactor to the DPRK.
- The DPRK and the U.S. undertook to take steps to normalize their relations.
- The DPRK and Japan undertook steps to normalize their relations in accordance with the Pyongyang Declaration, on the basis of the settlement of unfortunate past and the outstanding issues of concern.
- China, Japan, ROK, Russia and the US stated their willingness to provide energy assistance to the DPRK.
- The ROK reaffirmed its proposal of July 12 the 2005 concerning the provision of 2 million kilowatts of electric power to the DPRK
- The Six Parties agreed to take coordinated steps to implement the afore-mentioned consensus in a phased manner in line with the principle of “commitment for commitment, action for action”.

It is remarkable that North Korea agreed to abandon its nuclear weapons and programs, which had been serious security issue for long time to countries concerned, especially, to Japan. On the other hand, the DPRK obtained in return security assurance from the U.S., economic and energy cooperation, the negotiation with the U.S. and Japan for normalization in the framework of this statement, and the possibility of having light water reactor in the future.

It is still vague how North Korea will take steps to fulfill its commitment. And what “appropriate time” to discuss the subject of provision of the LWR to the DPRK means is also ambiguous though Japan and the US mentioned that it is after the North Korea meets its all commitments in this statement.

Compromise and ambiguity usually accompany with diplomacy. The next round is to be held in early November, and the representatives of six-party are supposed to discuss details there. I welcome the fact that each country of six-party, especially the U.S., patiently negotiated and got a diplomatic accomplishment. This would be a model of diplomatic settlement of nuclear issues following so called the Libya model and the Iraq model. I’m interested in how this Joint Statement will have impact on the framework of the Iran nuclear issue. Also, I guess that Japanese representative had a tough time in the negotiation because it has to pursue the settlement of the abduction issue as well as the nuclear issue.

I personally have concern more than anything else for future formation of the regional security framework based on the six-party talks. As Francis Fukuyama argued in his article "Re-envisioning Asia" in Foreign Affairs, the U.S. appears to intend to use the framework of six-party talk as a base of future regional security organization which will serve to keep its presence in Northeast Asia. In this sense, it is interesting that bilateral negotiations between the DPRK and Japan and the U.S. for normalization are incorporated into the structure of six-party talks. It is necessary that Japan addresses its difficult problems to elaborate and examine its Asian strategy in the system of Japan-U.S. alliance.

Foreign Policy　posts a list of the names of the countries which pledged money for damage of Hurricane Katrina and the amount of their donation.
What attracted my attention are as follows.

Afghanistan $ 100,000
Australia $ 7.6 million
Bangladesh $ 1 million
Britain $ 0 note: it sent supply/personnel
Canada $ 5 million
China $ 5.1 million
France $ 1 million
Germany $ 0 note: it sent supply/personnel
India $ 5 million
Indonesia $ 25,000
Iran $ 0 note: Iran offered 20 million barrels of oil—if the United States lifts its sanctions
Iraq $ 1 million
Japan $ 200,000 and 1.5 million private donations
Kwait $ 100 million
Malaysia $ 1 million
Pakistan $ 1 million
Qatar $ 100 million
Russia $ 0 note: It sent supply/personnel
Saudi Arabia $ 5 million note: It offered to increase oil production
South Korea $ 30 million
Taiwan $ 2 million
United Arab Emirates $ 100 million
Ukraine $ 2 million
Venezuela $ 1 million


This list is very interesting when I consider today’s international politics. It would be more interesting when you compare this with the list of tsunami donations

Tear-provoking efforts by small countries impressed me. And pro- American Middle Eastern countries donated huge money. On the other hand, developed countries including Japan did not pay much money. Indonesia, a Tsunami affected country, did not seem to show its gratitude to the U.S. South Korea, which attitude to the U.S. has been ambiguous since inauguration of president Roh, donated much money. China, which was so stingy to Tsunami affected nations, gave the U.S. relatively much money and allegedly raised its donation from 5million to 5.1 million after India decided to donate 5 million.

Also, what made me surprised are responses from Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea, representative anti-American countries. (Though the name of North Korea is not listed here, it is reported that North Korean Red Cross sent a consoling letter to the U.S.)

The result of the election was, put simply, overwhelming victory of Koizumi’s LDP. Though many people expected the LDP would win, the degree of the victory was more than they expected. Actually, when my wife called her father in the Sunday morning to make sure the result and he answered the LDP got around 300 seats, I thought he doesn’t know Japanese politics well. But the LDP really won 296 in the 480-seat lower diet. and occupied two thirds of the lower Diet with the Komeito, the LDP’s partner.
On the other hand, the democratic party of Japan (DPJ) got only 113 seats, down from 177.


These numbers will have some important implications.
In Japanese politics, votes over two thirds in lower Diet can override a refusal in upper Diet. Therefore, the bill of privatizing post offices will be approved even if it is denied in the upper Diet again. And changing the Japanese post war constitution will be easier at least in the lower Diet. To change the constitution, you need more than two thirds approval in both diets, and need majority vote in the national referendum. With the overwhelming support, Koizumi will decisively challenge important and difficult issues by the end of his term. His term is supposed to end next September, but he might extend the term with this result. Besides, because the LDP has majority by its own, the influence of Komeito would relatively decrease. And the people who were expelled from the LDP by Koizumi will not rejoin the party for a while.


The reason of Koizumi’s victory was simple. He involved many of Japanese into his rule of the game, change the LDP or not. I think the main rule of the game was whether you supported the new LDP, not, whether you supported the bill of privatizing postal service as some people argue. Many of the Japanese don’t understand whether the bill is good for them or not. Actually, people’s interest in the bill was not necessarily high before the election. According to an opinion research in this February, privatization of postal service was the 8th in the order of voters’ priority behind the pension issue, the fiscal problem, security issues, and so on. In the first place, almost nobody had been interested in privatizing post offices before Koizumi became popular. Koizumi, the “eccentric prime minister” had advocated only one issue, privatizing post office, for long years. Even after he became a prime minister, the majority of Japanese do not have concern for it. In this sense, DPJ’s slogan “there are many other important issues than privatizing post offices” itself was absolutely right, though it was ridiculous that they used it as the main tactic to fight against Koizumi, because the rule of the game was not about policy. What the Japanese expected Koizumi has been to destroy old LDP since he became prime minister. At last they could attain it through this election with Koizumi, proved to be a political genius in this election.


I think the Japanese judged correctly though I also think LDP won too much and I don’t like Koizumi so much.
Many countries except for China and Korea would basically welcome this result. As for domestic issue, as I mentioned, economic reform will gain momentum and Japanese economy will keep its recovery from long depression. About foreign issue, Japan will steadily move toward becoming a “normal country” with its strong relationship with the United States. As long as Koizumi is the prime minister, Sino-Japanese relationship would not be drastically improved. Koizumi will certainly visit Yasukuni shrine before long. Though it depends on who will succeed him next year or 2 years later, basic foreign policy would not change for a while.


What I am concerned about is whether opposition parties, especially the DPJ, will function after their disastrous defeats. I no longer have so much expectation of the DPJ. Japan needs strong liberal party which is oriented to theThird Way like the labor party in the UK. Now, both the LDP and the DPJ are oriented to the small government. I hope a new opposition party would emerge which platform will be domestically social democratic and internationally reliable. If this kind of party appears, I will vote for it.

Hurricane Katrina is the biggest issue in the U.S. today. So, I, as a resident in the U.S., choose this as the theme of my second entry. We can realize how terrible that hurricane was by just seeing TV and hear the expected death tolls. And, I feel sad New Orleans, one of the most famous jazz cities in the world and I was eager to visit, was affected so badly.

I was surprised at the statistics in the column by Nicholas D. Kristof in the New York Times on September 6 (“The larger shame”). One of my friends said to me that he couldn’t distinguish devastated New Orleans with other towns in African countries. After seeing the statistics below, I couldn’t think my friend’s remark was overexaggerated.
Kristof wrote:

The U.S. Census Bureau reported a few days ago that the
poverty rate rose again last year, with 1.1 million more Americans living in poverty in 2004 than a year earlier. After declining sharply under Bill Clinton, the number of poor people has now risen 17 percent under Mr. Bush.
If it's shameful that we have bloated corpses on New Orleans streets, it's even more disgraceful that the infant mortality rate in America's capital is twice as high as in China's capital. That's right - the number of babies who died before their first birthdays amounted to 11.5 per thousand live births in 2002 in Washington, compared with 4.6 in Beijing.
Indeed, according to the United Nations Development Program, an African-American baby in Washington has less chance of surviving its first year than a baby born in urban parts of the state of Kerala in India.
Under Mr. Bush, the national infant mortality rate has risen for the first time since 1958. The U.S. ranks 43rd in the world in infant mortality, according to the C.I.A.'s World Factbook; if we could reach the level of Singapore, ranked No. 1, we would save 18,900 children's lives each year.
So in some ways the poor children evacuated from New Orleans are the lucky ones because they may now get checkups and vaccinations. Nationally, 29 percent of children had no health insurance at some point in the last 12 months, and many get neither checkups nor vaccinations. On immunizations, the U.S. ranks 84th for measles and 89th for polio.

Hurricane Katrina revealed one of the most difficult American problems, the race issue. I don’t know so much about the problem because I live in the U.S. for just one year and I haven’t studied about it. But what I feel in the U.S. is that races are not assimilated yet here. Though the American boasted that the U.S. is melting pot, I do not think so. The United States is rather a salad bowl in which races basically live separately. Actually, while we can hardly see white people in the today’s affected area, there are some places where I hardly saw black people like the Disney world in Florida, the Arlington National Cemetery, and so on. And, also, from my short experience of living in the U.S., I find American people tend to hang around with people of the same skin color.

Kristof also mentioned Japanese behavior in Kobe earthquake. He wrote:

One of the most dispiriting elements of the catastrophe in New Orleans was the looting. I covered the 1995 earthquake that leveled much of Kobe, Japan, killing 5,500, and for days I searched there for any sign of criminal behavior.
Finally I found a resident who had seen three men steal food. I asked him whether he was embarrassed that Japanese would engage in such thuggery.
"No, you misunderstand," he said firmly. "These looters weren't
Japanese. They were foreigners."
The reasons for this are complex and partly cultural, but one reason is that Japan has tried hard to stitch all Japanese together into the
nation's social fabric. In contrast, the U.S. - particularly under the Bush administration - has systematically cut people out of the social fabric by redistributing wealth from the most vulnerable Americans to the most affluent.

As a sufferer of Kobe earthquake, the looting in New Orleans reminded me contrastly of the Japanese well ordered behavior after the damage of Kobe earthquake. After the catastrophic damage, the people in Kobe behaved in quite well ordered manner. It was amazing.

Though their behavior deserve to be admired, I don’t think the response of the Japanese government was fast enough. While the government of the U.S. is criticized for its late response to Katrina, the Japanese government’s response to the Kobe earthquake was also criticized.

The prime minister at the time was Tomio Murayama. He was the first prime minister from Japanese socialist party since 1955 when the “55-year system” (55年体制) was established. The Murayama cabinet was the product of the compromise between the LDP, which wanted to return to a given party at any cost at that time, and the socialist party, which had been criticized the LDP as the biggest opposition party. So, imaginably, Murayama’s leadership was not strong. And, the socialist party had been opposing to the existence of the Self Defense Force (SDF) until Murayama became the prime minister. These factors hampered Murayama from responding decisively to the earthquake.

I lived in a small artificial island in Kobe in 1995. After the big earthquake, which killed thousands of people promptly, happened and regional government warned that chemical plants might have huge explosion, I evacuated away to the southern tip of the island with my family. The people living in the northern area of the island had to evacuate to the south. Because the bridge which linked between mainland and the island located in the northern area, people have only to wait for a rescue in the southern area. Even though there are many helicopters of mass media, there was no helicopter of the SDF for rescue. We waited for a rescue all the day in the small car, but It did not come. As it turned out, Murayama hesitated to the use of the SDF. Until then, I had thought anybody could do prime minister and the quality of the PM didn’t matter. But since then, I changed my thought completely into that the leader should act decisively and I began to think strong leadership is preferable.

This is what I idly felt after the huge damage of Hurricane Katrina.

This may be the most suitable theme for the first entry of this blog which mainly deals with Japan related issues because, today, this election is the hottest issue in Japan, and its result would affect Japan’s future so much. Though a general election is generally important in any case, I regard this election as especially important. I expect that this election would be one of the most important elections in the history of Japanese democracy.

In foreign media, this election is often described “snap.” Indeed,　 in the beginning of this summer, almost nobody certainly expected Japan would have the election this year. When Prime Minister Koizumi managed to pass the bill of privatizing Post Offices in the lower Diet (syugiin 衆議院) by narrow votes, people started talking about the possibility of the dissolution of the lower Diet.

After the approval of the bill in the lower Diet, Koizumi began publicly referring to his exercise of the right of dissolution in the case the privatization bill is denied in the upper Diet. Many people including congressmen of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) regarded Koizumi’s remarks as bluff and thought that Koizumi cannot dismiss the LDP congressmen who opposed to the bill from the party. Their reasoning was not absurd optimistic idea because fighting the election with split LDP was likely to become a political suicide at that moment.

But, I thought Koizumi would exercise his right to dissolve the lower Diet if the bill does not pass the upper Diet. My reasoning was basically based on the notion that Koizumi was the “eccentric Prime Minister.” (henjin souri 変人総理) He is sometimes called “eccentric Prime Minister” because his behavior is out of the LDP’s norm. (I think the first person who called Koizumi “eccentric” was Makiko Tanaka. (a former Foreign Minister in the first Koizumi cabinet)) He has been gaining fairly higher popularity than his precedents because the Japanese support his simple words and his behavior which are unlike any LDP politicians. He also won the election for LDP leader, saying he would smash the LDP. I thought this remark came from the bottom of his heart, and I also thought he is trying to break down the LDP if the bill of privatizing postal offices would be denied. It was reasonable to think that he would try to accomplish his first promise near the end of his term.

After all, Koizumi dissolve the lower diet and expelled opposing people from his party after denial of the bill in the upper diet. Because I have been thinking that the most important job he must do as the leader of the LDP is to reform the LDP, I support his resolution. According to the latest public poll, many of Japanese voters also support him against prior expectation. He would be one of the greatest Prime Ministers in Japanese modern history if he wins the election on this Sunday.

Hello and welcome, people living in the world.

Here, I declare that I’ve started a blog. I’m not sure how long and how often I can post entries.
First of all, let me briefly introduce myself. I was born in Japan in the‘70s. I’m married and now living in the United States. I took the title of this blog from a Japanese classic essay. （"essays in idleness"　徒然草） It's an easy way, though.

This blog will be mainly about Japanese politics, Japanese foreign policy, and Japanese culture. I might also address International politics, history, musics movies and sports because I’m interested in them.

There are three objectives I would like to attain through this blog. First, I would like to organize my thought about things I listed above. Writing helps me think a little bit more logically and deeply. Second, I want to practice English. I’m not good at writing English, and I am eager to improve it through doing this blog. So, I would appreciate it if you would kindly point out my grammatical mistakes. When you find mistakes, please let me know them. Third, I would like foreign people to know about Japan through my blog. I’m glad if my blog can help people outside Japan know Japan or have interest in it..

Finally, your comments are always welcome.