You are currently browsing the monthly archive for September 2007.
I say the sequel because his father was Prime Minister in the 1970’s which is apparently common in Japan as a certain number of political dynasties pretty much have disproportionate control over the body politic at the national level. This guy though is real establishment, real old school, fairly passive. He will seek to create concensus with S.Korea and China and likely stall any attempts to normalize Japan’s military or further economic reforms that Koizumi started. (sigh)
Veteran Lawmaker Chosen as Japan’s Prime Minister
TOKYO, Sept. 23 — Yasuo Fukuda, a mild-mannered moderate known for his ability to build consensus behind the scenes, was chosen Sunday by Japan’s governing Liberal Democratic Party to become the country’s next prime minister.
Facing one of their deepest crises in a half-century of power, Liberal Democrats decided on Mr. Fukuda, 71, to steady a party wobbling from Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s disastrous one-year government, his abrupt resignation 11 days ago and a surging opposition.
Mr. Fukuda, sometimes described as a foreign policy dove who has long emphasized the importance of building strong ties with China and the rest of Asia, represents a break from the nationalist Mr. Abe and his predecessor, Junichiro Koizumi. At home, analysts say, Mr. Fukuda will be pressed to slow down the political and economic reforms undertaken by Mr. Koizumi that had angered the party’s base.
“Today’s Liberal Democratic Party is facing grave difficulties,” Mr. Fukuda said in a short acceptance speech. “First of all, I will work to revitalize the Liberal Democratic Party. Then I would like to regain the people’s trust and remake this into a party that can steadily carry out policies.”
The party’s national lawmakers and prefectural chapters handed Mr. Fukuda 330 of 527 valid votes cast. His only rival, Taro Aso, 67, the party’s secretary general who shared Mr. Abe’s right-wing views, won 197 votes.
In reality, the party’s bosses had already picked Mr. Fukuda a week earlier — after intense negotiations over cellphones and in this city’s exclusive restaurants. Although Japan’s news media had crowned Mr. Fukuda the country’s next leader more than a week ago, the two candidates last week toured the country in joint appearances before general audiences that had no votes in the party election.
The selection process harked back to the days of smoke-filled back rooms, reversing the party’s recent relative openness. Mr. Fukuda was endorsed by eight of the party’s nine factional bosses, who believe that Mr. Koizumi’s economic reforms, especially steep cuts in public work projects, were to blame for the party’s devastating loss in July’s election in the upper house of Parliament.
“The factions have staged a comeback — it’s old-style politics again,” said Ikuo Kabashima, a professor of politics at the University of Tokyo. “Mr. Fukuda, above all, symbolizes that. He is the exact opposite of Mr. Koizumi. We’ll probably see more public works from now on, plenty of pork.”
Political analysts and opposition lawmakers say Mr. Fukuda, as a consensus candidate, is likely to serve as a caretaker leader until the party can regroup. He will formally become prime minister in a vote by the Liberal Democrat-controlled lower house of Parliament on Tuesday.
Mr. Fukuda will not have to call a general election to seek a popular mandate until September 2009, though he has hinted that he may do so next spring after Parliament passes next year’s budget.
The newly empowered opposition Democratic Party, which repeated its call on Sunday for an immediate general election, is expected to try to force an election by blocking the extension of a Japanese naval mission in the Indian Ocean that refuels American and other ships participating in the war in Afghanistan. A special law permitting that mission, passed in 2001 to circumvent Japan’s pacifist Constitution, expires on Nov. 1.
Mr. Fukuda said he would push to extend the mission. In general, however, he is regarded as more cautious in military matters. Priorities set by Mr. Abe, like revising the pacifist Constitution and removing limits on Japan’s ability to engage in self-defense with other countries, are expected to be shelved. Mr. Fukuda has said he has no intention of visiting the Yasukuni Shrine, the memorial to Japan’s war dead and a symbol of Japanese militarism throughout Asia.
A longtime salaryman at a Japanese oil company, Mr. Fukuda eventually quit to serve as a secretary to his father, Takeo, a prime minister in the late 1970s. He was elected to the lower house of Parliament in 1990 and went on to serve as chief cabinet secretary to Mr. Koizumi.
Mr. Fukuda has said he will pursue the economic and political reforms that started under Mr. Koizumi but slowed under Mr. Abe. Further backpedaling would jeopardize the changes that economists say are needed to boost Japan’s productivity and reduce its fiscal deficit. But many inside Mr. Fukuda’s party want to increase spending to recapture their traditional rural voters, who deserted them in July’s election.
“The faction leaders made their selection on the basis of who’s easy to control,” said Muneo Suzuki, a former Liberal Democratic lawmaker who leads a small opposition party. “As a result, if the question is whether Mr. Fukuda can take the initiative and govern, he can’t.”
But Kosei Ueno, a former Liberal Democratic lawmaker close to Mr. Fukuda, said that Mr. Fukuda was not the “type” to buckle under pressure and that he would follow his “own way of thinking.”
Mr. Fukuda lacks the charisma that empowered Mr. Koizumi to carry out policies often opposed by his own party. He is also a generation older than Mr. Abe, whose initial popularity rested partly on the fact that he was Japan’s first leader born after the end of World War II.
Known for making elusive and sometimes cynical comments, Mr. Fukuda often comes across as stern in public.
“I don’t think I can exercise Mr. Koizumi’s kind of leadership,” he said in a news conference last week. Instead, he said he wanted to lead by gaining people’s understanding, adding, “I think leadership will emerge as a result.”
Although it appears that Fukuda is leading Aso (both sons or grandsons of previous Prime Ministers) he might have some issues as some Japanese feel he is too soft on China and especially on North Korea. It appears that during the investigation Koizumi launched concerning the Japanese citizens that N.Korea kidnapped, Fukuda stood in opposition when he was head of the lower house of the Diet. I’m still trying to figure out why this was. This could hurt him as Japanese took the kidnapping issues very seriously.
Next Japan PM faces parliament fight
By Linda Sieg
TOKYO (Reuters) – Japan’s Yasuo Fukuda looks likely to cruise to victory in a ruling party leadership race on Sunday to become the next prime minister. Then comes the hard part.
The 71-year-old Fukuda, seen as an experienced moderate who can avoid the missteps that forced his predecessor Shinzo Abe to resign, could well get a boost in public opinion polls after his expected confirmation as prime minister next week, analysts say.
But Japan’s next leader faces a divided parliament, where combative opposition parties control the upper house, as well as conflicting pressures to help out those left behind by recent economic reforms while also reining in a huge public debt.
“Politics is the art of the possible and unfortunately, the possibilities are very limited,” said Jesper Koll, president of investment advisory firm Tantallon Research Japan.
“That’s the real political risk — not getting things done.”
Abe, who turned 53 on Friday, abruptly announced his resignation last week after a year in office during which he improved ties with China but was plagued by scandals and gaffes by his ministers that contributed to a humiliating election rout.
The bland and bespectacled Fukuda, the son of a former prime minister and a proponent of warmer ties with Asian neighbors, quickly won the backing of most ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) factions. He is expected to easily defeat former foreign minister Taro Aso in Sunday’s LDP leadership election.
The victor is sure to become prime minister by virtue of the ruling coalition’s huge majority in parliament’s powerful lower house.
The hawkish Aso — a fan of “manga” comic books who casts himself as a strong leader — saw his early lead in the LDP race evaporate suddenly, partly because of his close ties to Abe.
“Aso is part of the old Abe regime. No matter how much he jokes and talks about ‘manga’, he’s still no change,” said Chuo University political science professor Steven Reed.
“With Fukuda, going back to the old ways looks like change.”
Both Fukuda and Aso have pledged to pay more heed to those left behind by economic reforms begun under Abe’s predecessor, the charismatic Junichiro Koizumi, whose cuts in wasteful public works spending won plaudits from many voters but angered traditional LDP backers in rural areas.
BREAD, BUTTER AND NAVAL MISSIONS
Abe’s conservative agenda including a bolder global security role for Japan and more patriotism in the schools will almost certainly take a back seat under the next Japanese leader.
“Voters want people to deal with issues close to their hearts, like pensions and the budget,” Koll said.
Still, one of the first challenges for the new premier will be a battle to extend past a November 1 deadline a naval supply mission in support of U.S.-led operations in Afghanistan that opposition parties are against.
Though an advocate of a less U.S.-centric foreign policy, Fukuda, like Aso, has stressed the need to extend Japan’s refueling mission of coalition ships in the Indian Ocean.
Fukuda has not ruled out using the ruling camp’s two-thirds lower house majority to override the opposition-controlled upper house, but has said that would be a last resort.
Analysts said main opposition Democratic Party leader Ichiro Ozawa would be taking a risk if he forced a showdown over the naval mission — which most Japanese voters now support — to trigger an early election for the lower house.
“The Democrats couldn’t win an election on this issue,” said Yasunori Sone, a Keio University political science professor.
EARLY POLL?
No lower house election need be held until late 2009, but pundits say a parliamentary deadlock could spark one sooner.
The LDP-led coalition can use its lower house majority to enact laws, but may well be wary of a public backlash if it does.
However the alternative — seeking deals with the opposition — would make bold policy virtually impossible even as Japan faces a rapidly ageing population and a related spike in welfare spending.
“Now we need politics more than before because there are reforms that need to be done,” said Martin Schulz, an economist at Fujitsu Research Institute. “I am not optimistic that we will get major steps in any direction.”
Some analysts said the new Japanese leader could risk a snap election in coming months if public support jumps. But the LDP is likely to balk at a move that would almost certainly see it lose seats, if not its majority.
Many pundits now foresee a showdown after the passage of the state budget for 2008/09 in late March.
The budget takes effect one month after approval by the lower house even if rejected by the upper chamber, but laws to implement it need approval by both houses.
“That will be the biggest trial for Fukuda,” Sone said.
This is an excellent editorial on the latest brouhaha between America-China-Taiwan.
Published on Taipei Times
US should consider Taiwan’s need
By ChenHurng-yu 陳鴻瑜
Tuesday, Sep 18, 2007, Page 8Having stated through various channels that it opposes Taiwan’s plan to hold a referendum on applying for UN membership under the name Taiwan, the US has now declared its official position through the publication of a speech made by US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian Affairs Thomas Christensen.
When we read this document carefully, we can start to understand what the US is thinking. The US is against the referendum for six reasons.
First, such a referendum could cause Beijing to use military force against Taiwan, and the US wants to avoid provoking Beijing.
Second, the referendum might involve a name change for Taiwan, and President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has promised not to pursue a change in Taiwan’s official name.
Third, the US “[does] not support Taiwan’s membership in international organizations that require statehood and therefore would not support such a referendum.”
Fourth, this referendum would harm the interests of both Taiwan and the US, because Taiwan’s safety is in the US’ best interest.
Fifth, the referendum has no benefits for Taiwan’s international status. It might harm Taiwan’s foreign relations, and “will limit, not expand, Taiwan’s international space.” Beijing would likely react by limiting Taiwan’s space even further, and this might scare away countries that are friendly to Taiwan.
Sixth, “… most countries in the world accept Beijing’s characterization of Taiwan, and … the PRC can call in overwhelming support to marginalize Taiwan.”
Christensen’s points are a review of what has been US policy for years in the triangular relationship between the US, China and Taiwan.
The US thinks that in this situation, Taiwan should not act rashly, to avoid breaking the triangular framework that has gradually taken shape over time. But this framework is based on the US’ strategic ideas about East Asia, and does not take Taiwan’s situation and needs into account.
The shrinking of Taiwan’s international space has taken shape under this framework, and under it, in the long term Taiwan will have no international space left.
Why did this situation arise? At the beginning of the 1970s, the US sought to normalize its relations with Beijing, in order to be able to extricate itself from the Vietnam war. Before the UN adopted the crucial Resolution 2758 on the matter of who had the right to represent China in the UN, Henry Kissinger went to Beijing to meet Chinese leader Mao Zedong (毛澤東) and premier Zhou Enlai (周恩來), resulting in an electoral setback.
With the normalization of relations, the US wanted to cater to China by using Taiwan as a negotiation chip, and this involved turning it into a special area that is not considered to be a country.
Simply put, in finding a solution for the Taiwan issue, the US has never seriously thought about it from Taiwan’s point of view, and only considers the issue as part of its strategy in East Asia.
In the negotiation process with China, US leaders never brought up the issue of dual recognition of China and Taiwan, but accepted Beijing’s conditions from the start.
In this respect, the US doesn’t take account of former French president Charles de Gaulle in 1964 and Lao premier Souvanna Phouma in 1962, who publicly stated they wanted to recognize both China and Taiwan.
When the San Fransisco Peace Conference was held in 1951, many countries advocated respecting the will of the Taiwanese people. But the US turned a deaf ear to them, and left Taiwan’s status undetermined, so it would have even more leverage over it.
This policy helped Taiwan overcome the threat of Chinese invasion, and develop its current democracy and prosperity. However, the US’ policy did not solve the Taiwan issue. To this day Taiwan lives with the threat of military action from China. In light of the US’ current security strategy in East Asia, this threat will remain, and it is hard to see it receding in the foreseeable future.
The US is using three methods to avert China’s military threat against Taiwan. The first is persuading China to restrain itself. The second is selling arms to Taiwan. The third is opposing Taiwan’s “provocative behavior.”This is a passive approach, playing a game of balance.
Why doesn’t the US take the Taiwan issue to the UN to debate it? It could allow the UN to safeguard Taiwan’s safety by thoroughly clearing away China’s threats to Taiwan.
Christensen said in his speech that the US government was “trying to help preserve and expand the Taiwan people’s international space.”
How can we put this statement to the test?
The US State Department could consider, or not be opposed to, taking the Taiwan issue to the UN for discussion. It could support Taiwan in setting up a Taiwan liaison office in the UN. It could reconcile its conflicts with Taiwan. Then we would know we can believe Christensen’s words.
Chen Hurng-yu is a professor at Tamkang University. Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
Shinzo Abe’s Year in Power
September 12, 2007 5:11 a.m.
Less than a year after he was elected prime minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe resigned Wednesday. Here’s a look back at the events that marked his tenure:
Sept. 12, 2007: Abe announces he will resign as Japanese prime minister.
Sept. 9, 2007: Abe says he is ready to resign if Parliament fails to extend a mission to refuel U.S.-led coalition warships in the Indian Ocean.
Sept. 5, 2007: Environment Minister Ichiro Kamoshita and his political-fund-management group come under fire over an ¥8 million ($69,000) discrepancy in records of loans from the lawmaker to the group declared in fund reports in the 1990s. Kamoshita denies any ill intent, and Abe and other government officials rally to his defense.
Sept. 3, 2007: Agriculture minister Takehiko Endo resigns only a week after his appointment because of a scandal involving misuse of farm subsidies.
Aug. 27, 2007: Abe starts his campaign to bounce back from an election defeat by selecting older, more experienced cabinet ministers, many of whom served in the administration of Junichiro Koizumi, Abe’s predecessor.
Aug. 1, 2007: Agriculture minister Norihiko Akagi steps down to take responsibility for a major electoral defeat for the ruling party. Akagi is suspected of reporting $730,000 in office expenses over the past decade for a political office that was registered at his parents’ address and was defunct. Akagi has denied any wrongdoing.
July 29, 2007: Just 10 months after Abe takes office, the ruling Liberal Democratic Party loses its majority in the Upper House. Despite the electoral defeat, Abe says he would remain in office.
July 3, 2007: Japan’s defense minister, Fumio Kyuma, resigns after he offended many Japanese with remarks about the 1945 U.S. atom-bomb attacks. Kyuma had said in a speech that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which together killed more than 200,000 people, were inevitable.
May 28, 2007: Agriculture Minister Toshikatsu Matsuoka hangs himself just hours before he is to face questioning over alleged bookkeeping fraud.
March 26, 2007: Abe, under fire for denying that Japan forced women to work as sex slaves during World War II, offers an apology but refuses to clearly acknowledge Japan’s responsibility for running the frontline brothels.
Jan. 9, 2007: Japan’s conservative government upgrades the Defense Agency to a full ministry for the first time since World War II as part of Abe’s push to raise the military’s profile.
Dec. 27, 2006: Minister for administrative reforms Genichiro Sata resigns after admitting that a political support group had engaged in fraudulent accounting. Abe chooses Yoshimi Watanabe, a cabinet vice-minister, to replace Sata.
Dec. 21, 2006: The head the government’s tax panel, Masaaki Homma, resigns amid an outcry over his use of a plush government apartment to house his mistress.
Sept 26, 2006: Shinzo Abe, the leader of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, is elected prime minister of Japan. He announces a cabinet lineup that indicates he will follow many of the policies of his predecessor, Junichiro Koizumi.
My wife and I went to the The Portland Taiko Ensemble tonight at the Kennedy Center in D.C. Cool concert. My wife said it was pretty authentic but they added some improvisation, largely because the group was made up of Japanese-Americans, one hafu woman, and a white guy. I have seen Taiko before in Japan and in America, but to me, they were the most entertaining. I am always impressed with the coordination and actually physical endurance involved. If you ever have a chance to see Taiko performed, especially the Portland Taiko Ensemble, I would highly recommend it.
