A blog in idleness

The Tank Man in the Tiananmen

2006-04-11T20:19:00.000-07:00

Today, I’ve seen the PBS documentary named “The Tank Man.” The Tank Man was the famous man, who stood in front of tanks in Tiananmen massacre in July, 1989. The program also told me how this brutal event was like. Because I was a child in 1989 and do not remember what exactly happened in the summer 1989 in Beijing, the image in the documentary really astonished me. The camera showed that even an ambulance and doctors and nurses in it were shot by the People Liberation Army when they come to help injured students.

The documentary also covered the today’s social contradiction in China. People living in China A, which has attained high development with enormous investments and trades, are enjoying the higher standard of Western life style. People in China B, mostly in rural developing areas, live under so bad conditions like people in other developing countries. Due to the huge gap and economic problems in the rural area, more than 75,000 demonstrations took place last year in China. The number before the year was 50,000.

The students in Beijing university are mostly from China A. They enjoy urban life and benefit from the China’s economic development. But,16 years ago, the university was center of the demonstration. Now, students do not know about the disastrous incident brought by their relentless government because schools do not teach any thing about it to them and the Chinese internet police (having more than 30,000 people) is restricting inappropriate information for them on the Web. Even American IT companies, such as Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft are cooperating with the Chinese authority to restrict searching the word “Tiananmen” and prohibiting Chinese people from knowing the truth.

This documentary was really good, and I recommend that a lot of people, especially Chinese people, see this program. PBS said the program is to be available on its website. According to this documentary, the tank man’s fate after the incident is unknown.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tankman/

MAO

2006-01-24T11:04:00.000-08:00

Jung Chang's recent book about Mao Tse-tung is getting a lot of attention. Though I haven't read it yet, it reportedly exposed true Mao and exploded myths of him.

The International Herald Tribune reported that President Bush finished reading the book. Though the article doubts that the book will have any influence on Bush, I hope that he understands how the Father of present Chinese Communist Party was cruel and autocratic and infers that the Party might not have change its core culture yet.

Redeployment of American diplomats

2006-01-22T21:19:00.000-08:00

According to The International Herald Tribune, the U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice mentioned that she would shift more American diplomats to developing countries. She also has an interesting plan to use internet as a tool of diplomacy.

The State Department will also set up "virtual posts," where people can visit a Web site and chat online with U.S. diplomats, Rice said. "This digital meeting room enables foreign citizens, young people most of all, to engage online with American diplomats who could be hundreds of miles away," Rice said, adding that Internet diplomacy would be a cost-effective way to expand U.S. presence in a country.

Generally, it is difficult to flexibly deploy human resources in bureaucratic organizations. As Rice mentioned, this redeployment intended to move away from the vestiges of the Cold War and would be equivalent to the transformation of American military. Considering nearly 15 years has already passed since the end of the Cold War, this move might be late; however, this shift is necessary and right. Since 9/11, internatinal politics has been mainly about security. But, at the same time, "development" is becoming more and more important in a sense that development of developing countries would eliminate the seeds of future terrors. Actually, even in internatinal economy, development is the main theme. For example, the official name for the Doha Round of WTO negotiations is Doha Development Agenda (DDA); the main theme of the round is about the development of developing countries throug expanding world trade; and the round actually started because of the sense of crisis in the international community immediately after 9/11.

Secretary Rice accurately understands the current tide of international politics, and she emphasizes developmental aspects of world affairs. Her philosophy is reflected on her term "Strategic Development Alliance" in her address in Japan and Japan-U.S. joint statement . I don't know how much Japanese diplomacy has changed its shape in terms of the deployment of bureaucratic human resources, but if it hasn't changed yet, I hope Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan would begin its transformation in accordance with the change of DOS.

Livedoor/ Iranian nuclear program

2006-01-19T13:52:00.000-08:00

Two events in this week reminded me of the fact that Japan is an economic giant but also a political dwarf in the international community.

The investigation to Livedoor, a Japanese company, had nagative impact on markets all over the world. The news in the U.S. about Livedoor and system problems in Tokyo Stock Exchange seems bigger than any other Japan related news I've heard in the U.S. for one and a half years. It is probably bigger than the news about Koizumi's landsliding victory in last summer.

At the same time, Japan appears out of the inner circle of international politics over the Iranian nuclear program even though Japan is a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council and it has historically unique stakes in Iran.

Now, Japan is struggling to become a political power. To attain it, Japan has to get a permanent membership of the Security Council and become a "normal country" in thte field of international security.But there are lot of things what Japan can do without these conditions. I think Iranian issue would be one of the test cases of Japanese diplomacy. I believe that Japan can do more on the issue of Iran than it did on that of Iraq before Iraq war.

George Washington's Farewell Address (1796)

2006-01-10T22:23:00.000-08:00

The wisdom of the ancients is sometimes highly suggestive for those living in the 21st century.
George Washington's Farewell Address in 1796 is one of the wisdom.This address is said to be mainly drafted by Alexandar Hamilton, the representative of Federarlists, and it consists of two important themes: the warning about partisan struggle between the Federalists (Hamiltonian) and the Anti Federalists (Jeffersonian) and the recommendation for American people to keep a distance from Europe. The latter theme is regarded as the root of isolationism in American foreign policy.

This bible of isolationism argues like this:

-In the execution of such a plan nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations and passionate attachments for others should be excluded, and that in place of them just and amicable feelings toward all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur.

-likewise, a passionate attachment of one Nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite Nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite Nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the Nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained; and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, (who devote themselves to the favorite nation,) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

-The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connexion as possible.

- There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.

Ofcourse, today's U.S. foreign policy no longer embrace this kind of isolationism ostensibly, but Washington's (or Hamilton's) insights into the essence of interenational politics tells us a lot. We cannot count on favors of other nations.

Though the phrase "there can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation" sounds natural and obvious, the words of Washington sounds ironic and somewhat fresh to me, considering the situation of Japan in the system of the Japan- U.S. security treaty .
What wisdom should we extract from this address for the relationship between Japan and the U.S.?

The Doha Round/Hong Kong ministerial conference

2006-01-05T12:11:00.000-08:00

A certain progress was made in the Hong Kong ministerial conference. It was good news that the conference did not break up unlike the former conferencec where trade diplomats saw a disastrous failure of negotiations.
The Doha Round, however, is still on the verge of a failure. Withouth each nation's strong commitment and political will, the negotiations would soon collapse.

2006 will become a siginificant year of the Doha Round. One of the main reasons is that Trade Promotion Authority(TPA) in the U.S. will expire in 2006. Under this authority, congresses can only accept or reject the results of trade negotiations as a package. So, after TPA's expiration, It will be difficult that President Bush makes pollitically sensitive decisions on trade matters.

I hope every member country will make efforts to conclude this difficult negotiation in this year. The U.S., EU, and Japan especially carry the responsibilty of this agenda. I hope they will compromise each other over their agricultural interests for broader interests of the world.

WTO ministerial conference

2005-12-11T22:34:00.000-08:00

The 6th WTO ministerial conference will be held in Hong kong this week.
It would be very important conference though it seems difficult to have a substantial conclusion.

Recently, the U.S. appears to be taking an initiative in the WTO negotiation. Probably, they are shifting their emphasis on trade policy priorities from regional agreements to the WTO negotiations, confronting with the difficulty in the negotiation of FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas). For example, President Bush remarked about the Doha Round of negotiations in the WTO for several paragraphs in his address in Kyoto last month.

If you have interest in the trade negotiations in WTO, see the latest issue of Foreign Affairs. Its special eddition is about WTO.

interesting news about Japanese politics

2005-12-08T21:31:00.000-08:00

According to the news in Asahi shimbun, Japanese Prime Minister Koizumi approached the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) for the grand coalition after the general election in 9/11. (About this election, see also my entry in 9/12)

If this report is true, it is quite interesting. Since it has the simple majority in the Lower House, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) does not need to cooperate with the DPJ. Given its supremacy in the Diet, Koizumi's intention of this offer may be to reshuffle whole picture of Japanese politics.

Koizumi might have sought to introduce the two- partcy system in a different way from current LDP-DPJ framework. Indeed, both the LDP and the DPJ have wide range of politicians from liberals to conservatives, and it has been argued for long time that Japan needs political realignment. Conceivably, Koizumi wanted to make a pure conservative party by the alignment with conservatives of the DPJ. Catalysts of this political reorganization would be issues of consituitional amendment and raising consumers tax.

The new leader of the DPJ, Seiji Maehara, did not take up the offer. I think he should have accepted it in terms of Japanese whole politics. Maehara's position is not so different from Koizumi's. Actually, the DPJ currently has trouble with having difference from the LDP.

Koizumi's offer indicates that he did not take the circumstance of his party seriously. On the other hand, Maehara could not think beyond his party. This reported episode imply very interesting diffrence such as between Koizmi's character and Maehara's, confident leader and relatively weak leader, experienced leader and young leader, and so on. Koizumi, who seems to evaluate Maehara highly, might have tested young Maehara's political resolution.

Bush's new strategy on Iraq

2005-12-03T23:38:00.000-08:00

President Bush released the new strategy on Iraq this Wednesday. Though I haven't read it yet, some media coverage reported that Bush denied both withdrawal from Iraq and setting a time table for it. (cf. http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/iraq_national_strategy_20051130.pdf )

The matter of withdrawal from Iraq has been a big issue since Senator John Martha, a hawkish Democrat, called for immediate withdrawal. Bush's new strategy was issued in this timing to show the administration's position on this argument.

I completely agree with the Bush administration's notion reported in media. The U.S. should neither withdraw from Iraq nor set timetable for it at this moment. It is quite sure that, if the U.S. troops retrun to home now, the situation in Iraq will be worse than it used to be under Hussein. It means that Iraq war will end up to produce no positive result in return for massive cost such as tens of thousand deaths of the Iraqi, more than 2000 deaths of American, deaths of other countries' people including some Japanese, and tremendous amount of money.

Some people say that the war was an agressive war and the U.S., troops should leave Iraq as soon as possible. Though, in fact, the war seems to be unnecessary and unjustifiable today, it is irresponsible for the U.S., to withdraw from Iraq now. They should separate the pros ans cons about Iraq war from that of withdrawal.

Others say the Iraqi people can protect themselves without support of the U.S. now. I don't think so. As I wrote above, it is likely that Iraq will be plunged into disastrous civil war.

People who call for early withdrawal from Iraq should argue like this: it is now obvious that we cannot win the Iraq war; as far as we cannot win the war, we should withdraw now in order to make our cost at minimum. I think this pessimistic argument is the most plausible for early withdrawal. If I were an American, and I were a person who think only about my country or I really hated Bush administration, I would support this logic.
The situation in Iraq is not optimistic. It would be the second Vietnam War for America. In the morass of the Vietnam War, the U.S. government kept sending its troops to have better peace agreement. Having lost the timing of withdrawing, it costed more than 50.000 lives of American military and eventually lost Vietnam.

Having said so, I still support keeping troops in Iraq because I'm not a selfish American.I believe there is still hope that situation in Iraq will be better, or even if it does not become better, at least U.S. troops would deter the bloody civil war. Keeping troops in Iraq at any cost is the responsibility of the U.S., which began this war with distorted intelligence and mishudgement. American who are calling for early withdrawal are more unilateral than George W. Bush. They should think about Iraq.
I don't know if this comparison is relevant here, but even in Japan after the W.W.II, the U.S. had held right to fight against Japanese insurgents until the Japan-U.S.security treaty was changed in 1960.
It would take more than 5 years to stabilize Iraq, and American should be ready for keeping its troops for more time. They should have prepared for this situation when they enthusiastically supported the war on Iraq.

Anyway, no matter how people argue this issue, Bush will not withdraw from Iraq in his term because his reputation as a president really depends on the result of Iraq. He cannot give up his dream, building democracy in Iraq, as long as there is a little hope in Iraq.

An artricle of Foreign Affairs about Japan's nationalism

2005-11-06T14:10:00.000-08:00

This spring, I read an article of Foreign Affairs, Nov/Dec2003 about Japan’s emerging nationalism, titled “Japan’s New Nationalism.”
Frankly speaking, it sucks.
I could not believe that I run into such a low-level article in one of themost authoritative American magazines in the field of internationalaffairs.

The author’s recognition of today’s Japan is right. Indeed, Japanese society is drifting to the right. Also, his analysis of this shift isbasically plausible though average Japanese university students could writethe same-level or better explanation than he did.

The problem is he writes some factual errors.

1. Kazuya Fukuda (福田和也) is not a Kyoto University professor. He is a Keio University professor.
The author writes: Meanwhile, two University of Kyoto professors, TerumasaNakanishi and Kazuya Fukuda, recently wrote that "the best way for Japan toavoid being the target of North Korean nuclear missiles is for the primeminister to declare without delay that Japan will arm itself with nuclearweapons."

2. Related to the passage above, the formal nomenclature of 京都大学 inEnglish is Kyoto University, not the University of Kyoto.

3. Shinichi Kitaoka is not a law professor though he is in the faculty of Law in the University of Tokyo. Professor of Political Science is more accurate for his title.

4. His Rome-ji is also strange. Shoku should be corrected as shokku in thepassage below:
One way that the United States can help ward off extremism in Japan is byhelping it avoid any further shoku (shocks), such as a major economiccrisis or the collapse of Japan's social safety net.

5. Akita Governor Sukeshiro Terata, and Tochigi Governor Aldo Fukuda... Whoare they? I think no one has such a strange name, Aldo, in Japan. Whatkanji do you use? And, I did not know their names. I sincerely recommend that the Bush administration should not speak with them. It will be waste of time. There are some more famous reform-oriented governors in Japan, such as Asano in Miyagi, Katayama in Tottori, Tanaka in Nagano (I don’t likehim, though), Kitagawa in Mie (former governor of Mie), etc..
The author writes: In this vein, the Bush administration also should begin speaking at high levels with independent leaders such as Ishihara, Akita Governor Sukeshiro Terata, and Tochigi Governor Aldo Fukuda.

6. The organization which sunk a North Korean spy ship in December, 2001 was not Japan’s navy, but Japan Coast Guard.
The author writes: But the significance of Japan's uncharacteristicallyassertive response--a marked contrast to past incursions, and the firsttime Japan's navy had sunk a foreign vessel since the end of World War II.

I don’t think that’s all. But I’m tired, so I’ll stop here.The author is Eugene A. Matthews, and his title is President of Nintai…I’m very curious what Nintai is.

Finally,

2005-11-04T13:05:00.000-08:00

I've escaped from hectic days.
I hope peaceful days will last at least until the end of next week..

Just for my reminder #2

Think Again: Nuclear Proliferation
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3304

His World is Flat
http://www.policyreview.org/aug05/hazony.html

The Ethical Economist
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20051101fareviewessay84612/joseph-e-stiglitz/the-ethical-economist.html

Who’s Behind That Curtain? Unveiling Potential Leverage over Pyongyang
http://twq.com/05winter/docs/05winter_horowitz.pdf

2005-10-19T16:40:00.000-07:00

Just for my reminder.
I will use this site as my bookmark for a while because my PC broke down.
When I have time, I would like to read them.

Soviet Union didn't fail because of the U.S.
http://www.desertdispatch.com/2005/112963986367145.html

U.S.-Japan Relations: Progress Toward a Mature Partnership
http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Occassional_Papers/Przystup_OP_072005/Przystup_OP_072005.pdf

Inside Multilateralism: The Six-Party Talks
http://www.twq.com/05autumn/docs/05autumn_park.pdf

China’s Color-Coded Crackdown
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3251

Paradigm Lost
http://www.nationalinterest.org/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=1ABA92EFCD8348688A4EBEB3D69D33EF&tier=4&id=AE44001EFB39450B9BCE6905BCBC9359

Reassessing the Implications of a Nuclear-Armed Iran
http://www.ndu.edu/inss/mcnair/mcnair69/McNairPDF.pdf

Can Democracy Stop Terrorism?
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050901faessay84506/f-gregory-gause-iii/can-democracy-stop-terrorism.html

Useful link
http://www.cfr.org/media/need_to_know.html#1

A list of intellectualls

2005-10-11T20:44:00.000-07:00

Foreign policy is presenting the list “The Prospect/FP Top 100 Public Intellectuals." The list is still tentative, and we can vote on it.

There are two Japanese listed here, Shinaro Ishihara and Kennichiro Omae. The former is probably one of the FP’s favorite figures. You can see Ishihara’s article in the last issue of FP, in which he said Japan’s passivity will disappear in the future and Japan will be more active and independent. Japan is the sleeping lion, not China, wrote Ishihara.
And, I also know Omae is famous outside Japan. I have seen his name in Thomas Friedman’s new book “The world is flat.” But I don' think he has so much reputation in Japan.
There is some doubt that they are really representatives of Japanese intellectuals, but, sadly, I don’t come up with any other intellectuals to recommend.

By the way, I know 28 names in this list: Gary Becker, Pope Benedict XVI, Jagdish Bhagwati, Noam Chomsky, Richard Dawkins, Thomas Friedman, Francis Fukuyama, Anthony Giddens, J・gen Habermas, Eric Hobsbawm, Samuel Huntington, Robert Kagan, Paul Kennedy, Paul Krugman, Bernard Lewis, Antonio Negri, Steven Pinker, Robert Putnam, Richard Rorty, Jeffrey Sachs, Amartya Sen, Ali al-Sistani, Wang Jisi, Paul Wolfowitz, Fareed Zakaria, Slavoj Zizek and two Japanese guys. Most of the people I’m familiar with are British or American. It is partly because I speak only Japanese and English. But, I have to extend my antenna to other countries.

How many people’s name are you familiar with?

The six-party talk

2005-09-24T14:05:00.000-07:00

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.

A list of donations

2005-09-16T11:29:00.000-07:00

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.)

Koizumi's landsliding victory

2005-09-12T14:48:00.001-07:00

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.

Harricane Katrina/ Kobe Earthqueake

2005-09-09T13:59:00.000-07:00

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.

The coming general election

2005-09-07T12:39:00.000-07:00

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.

start!!

2005-09-06T16:45:00.000-07:00

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.

2005-09-06T13:35:00.000-07:00