Sports and politics don’t mix

GEORGE JONAS EXPLAINS why it’s best not to mix sports and politics, using China as an example.

Ram jam city

EVERY ONE of the following statements that appeared in recent news articles is incorrect.

Reuters, 2 May

In a poll carried out after the government rammed a bill through parliament reinstating the gasoline tax from May 1…

Bloomberg, 2 May

Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda’s ruling coalition pushed through revenue bills that will reinstate a gasoline tax…

AFP 2 May

Fukuda, concerned about a budget shortfall, rammed through parliament bills to reimpose a petrol tax that had expired, under pressure from the opposition.

Radio Australia 2 May

The bill which was rammed through parliament reinstates the 24 US cent tax. (sic)

The only way anyone can state that the bills were “rammed through” the Diet is if one is under the impression that minority parties in a parliamentary chamber should be encouraged to sign off on any legislation they oppose before it can be passed.

It’s as if these news outlets think the democratic deal is for all legislators to hold up their identification badges and vote in a display of unity for whatever idea the Great Man happens to be peddling at the time. That’s standard operating procedure in North Korea, and was in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and the Soviet Politburo. But some in the news media seem not to have noticed that’s not how it works in a modern democracy.

American Presidents can veto legislation they don’t care for, but if the Congress insists, it can override that veto with a two-thirds vote, and the bill becomes law. When a veto is overridden there, however, no one talks about how Congress “rammed the bill through”. The New York Times, an unrelenting opponent of the President, dealt with an override of a Bush veto this way.

Here’s the deal: If Japan’s upper house rejects a bill passed by the lower house, or ignores it for 60 days (which is what happened in this instance), the lower house can pass the bill a second time with a two-thirds majority of the members present, and it becomes law.

It’s all right there in the Constitution.

So what the ruling Liberal-Democratic Party did was simply follow Constitutional procedures. They reintroduced the bill into the lower house and passed it on a straight up-or-down vote.

No one in the opposition was locked out of the chamber, stripped of their credentials, had the safety of their family threatened, had their genitals taped to electrodes, or was taken outside and shot.

Of course they got all hot and bothered, but it’s a bit rich to complain about constitutionally correct behavior–particularly if the legislator who would complain is one who supports the policy of “defending the Constitution” to prevent the amendment of Article 9, the so-called Peace Clause.

Perhaps for some folks constitutional law is like a restaurant menu.

Now, this does not mean that anyone has to like the legislation or the fact that the tax was restored in this manner (and most Japanese voters don’t). And you can be sure the opposition will try to win votes in the next election by reminding the voters of LDP behavior (and they are sure to win some.)

But it was a simple legislative procedure. No one was strong-armed and no one is torching Toyotas in the streets.

What is does mean, however, is that the print and broadcast media would rather titillate their consumers rather than stick to reporting the facts and nothing but the facts in a news report, and leaving their Hemingway imitations for the op-ed page.

Here it is again: If your knowledge of Japan is derived from what you see, read, or hear in the Western media, then everything you know is wrong.

A Koizumi coup?

Political realignment has now started. That’s a 100% certainty.
- Iijima Isao, former principal aide to Prime Minister Koizumi Jun’ichiro Koizumi

IT’S NOW OBVIOUS to everyone that Japan’s Prime Minister Fukuda Yasuo has become the lamest of ducks whose remaining days in office are numbered. His pillar of support is the retro wing of his own Liberal Democratic Party, but they must surely be dismayed at his performance over the past six months–not that they managed to formulate a winning strategy on his behalf. And the LDP reformers wrote him off months ago.

Meanwhile, the opposition Democratic Party of Japan has kept intact their reputation for never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity to convince anyone they’re capable of heading a government. The glittering jewel of the landslide upper house election victory that fell into their laps last summer slipped between their legs by late autumn due to internal dissension among the leadership and poor political choices.

Since gaining control of the upper house, they’ve alienated an electorate increasingly irritated with both parties by following the script of a political Punch and Judy show, whacking the LDP with a slapstick and exulting “That’s the way to do it!” Unlike the latter-day Pulcinella, however, they’ve harmed themselves as much, if not more, than the cardboard Devil of the LDP. Their poll numbers are even worse than those for Mr. Fukuda’s Cabinet, and they’re having an increasingly difficult time maintaining party discipline.

It’s the Japanese version of government gridlock, and the situation cries out for a patrolman to direct traffic—preferably one mounted on a white horse.

That’s why the recent public reemergence of former Prime Minister Koizumi Jun’ichiro is leading to increased speculation that he wants to correct the course of Japanese politics now that it’s veered from the direction he set before stepping down in September 2006. Of particular concern to him must be the regression to faction-oriented politics based on hand-in-glove ties with the bureaucracy, which he spearheaded an effort to destroy during his term in office. Those weeds have been growing for a long time, and their roots go very deep.

We’ve seen before that Iijima Isao, formerly his principal political aide, floated what seemed very much like a trial balloon for a comeback in February. Then, earlier this month came the announcement that Mr. Koizumi—still Japan’s most popular politician—had formed a policy study group consisting of people both in his own party and from the opposition.

Finally, Shukan Gendai ran an article in its 26 April edition suggesting that he would join forces with fellow LDP politicos Nakagawa Hidenao (Machimura faction) and Koga Makoto (Faction leader) to stage a political coup d’etat in May and remove Mr. Fukuda from office. They also speculated that he might form a new party.

Shukan Gendai is one of those wild and wooly Japanese weeklies whose word can’t always be trusted, and the article itself seems to be a congeries of the rumors currently circulating in Nagata-cho. Nevertheless, some of it is plausible enough to make it worth presenting in English here. It’s also an excellent illustration of the opacity and Byzantine maneuverings in the palace intrigue that passes for Japanese politics. The following is a translated summary of the article, called The Great Heisei Political Realignment (Heisei being the reign name of the current Tenno, or emperor) and the voice is that of the magazine itself.

*****

The Fukuda Flop

There is an air of uneasiness surrounding Prime Minister Fukuda. He is reported to have told an associate, “If (the party makes arrangements) to pass the job to Aso (Taro), I’ll dissolve the Diet and take him down with me.”

Mr. Fukuda also exploded in frustration during the question period in the Diet with opposition leader Ozawa Ichiro. He answered few of the questions and angrily went on the attack himself, peppering Mr. Ozawa with many questions of his own.

The Ministry of Finance is now serving as a primary means of support for the prime minister. His proposal for eliminating the contentious temporary gasoline surtax for road construction and placing the funds in the general account was written by Saka Atsuo, an aide to the Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary whose career started in the MOF. Mr. Fukuda’s announcement during a press conference that he intended to eventually reform the tax system concealed the fact that it would mean a boost in the consumption tax rate (currently 5%), which the MOF is desperate to implement.

The MOF plans to increase their control over the prime minister. Now that their efforts to place their own man at the head of the Bank of Japan have failed, they’ve switched to a strategy of infiltrating the Cabinet Secretariat. The ministry is focusing on deputy-level positions, and they initially planned to place Mr. Saka there after the July summit. The name of Muto Toshiro, rejected as the BOJ head, has also emerged for that position. Their free hand in the executive branch will depend on whether Mr. Fukuda can stay in office until the summit.

Are the Prime Minister’s Days Numbered?

Some people are beginning to think he won’t last that long. His itinerary for a foreign trip during the first week of May, which is a holiday period in Japan, has not been finalized, and it is suspected that this is a sign he will be stepping down. Dissolution of the Diet and the subsequent election would likely mean the LDP loses its supermajority in the lower house—making such a step the height of stupidity.

Mr. Koizumi is giving it some credence, however. In a recent speech he broadly hinted that he thinks an election will be called soon, and the LDP will find itself in a tight spot. (See a previous post on that subject here.)

In March, Mr. Koizumi seemed to think that the next election would not be held until the summer of 2009, but he’s suddenly changed his mind. Another change has been his return to active participation in the political fray. He joined former Defense Minister Koike Yuriko (LDP; Machimura faction) and former LDP Secretary-General Nakagawa Hidenao to become honorary advisors for a group of diet members working to achieve Japan’s Kyoto Protocol targets. The Koizumi Children, the political newcomers who were swept into office on the prime minister’s coattails during the LDP’s landslide 2005 victory, have been meeting more frequently behind the scenes.

For public consumption, Mr. Koizumi is now saying, “At a time like this, we should support Prime Minister Fukuda.” In fact, however, he is not sanguine about the future of the Fukuda administration.

On 20 March, Mr. Fukuda met with former Chief Cabinet Secretary Yosano Kaoru (LDP, No faction) and then immediately called Mr. Nakagawa, a Yosano opponent, to the prime minister’s residence. Mr. Koizumi remarked to a friend, “Fukuda has reached his limit. He thinks he’s trying to strike a balance, but neither one of them can stand him.”

One LDP Diet member observed that Mr. Koizumi, who is unsurpassed at reading political tea leaves, thinks Prime Minister Fukuda is finished. He also thinks the LDP will be clobbered in the next election unless the prime minister is replaced beforehand. The voters have abandoned him over his handling of the gasoline surtax and pension issues. Many in the party would have preferred to allow him to go out on a high note after the summit, but he may not last that long.

The magazine quotes an unnamed political reporter for a national newspaper saying the belief is growing that the Fukuda administration will have run its course after Golden Week (an eight-day period from 29 April to 6 May with five national holidays). If the party employs their lower house supermajority to readopt the road construction and gas tax bills, the DPJ could submit and adopt in the upper house a motion to censure him. If the prime minister then chooses to remain in office, the opposition will refuse to conduct deliberations, leaving the Fukuda administration dead in the water.

Kono Taro (LDP; Aso faction), 37 Diet members from the LDP and New Komeito, and 18 proxies convened a meeting to support the Fukuda proposal to put the funds from the gasoline tax into the general account rather than hold them separately for road construction projects. But Mr. Kono says that adopting the measure will require that the revised bill for the gasoline surtax be abandoned because they are contradictory. He told the magazine that he would revolt if both bills are readopted in the lower house. (Note: Chief Cabinet Secretary Machimura Nobutaka, head of the largest LDP faction, disagrees that the bills are contradictory).

Even without a revolt, 16 absences would scuttle the readoption, which in turn would scuttle the Fukuda administration. Some observers believe that Mr. Kono would then form an alliance with Mr. Koizumi.

That would trigger the widely anticipated political realignment, and Mr. Koizumi would be at the center of it.

Yamamoto Ichita (LDP; Machimura faction), upper house member and long-time Koizumi supporter, told the magazine that the former prime minister would play a key role in the political realignment. Mr. Yamamoto said it is not an ironclad certainty that he will actively reemerge, but he is still the most popular politician in Japan and is far and away the most adept at communicating with the public. MPs have a survival instinct, and politicians instinctively place their trust in Koizumi.

Any new political grouping of this type would attract the so-called Koizumi Children, some LPD members, and also some DPJ members. This group would initially consist of LDP members and then become a multi-party group. In the future, it would merge with the reform elements of the LDP.

An LDP official characterized this as a case of the smaller eating the larger. He said that Mr. Koizumi considers the “trump card” for political realignment to be a return to the electoral system with multiple representatives for a single district. He also said that Mr. Koizumi is urging other LDP election officials to bring this about.

Koga Makoto, chairman of the LDP Election Strategy Council, is quoted as saying, “Returning to the multiple seat electoral system will be the major axis of political realignment.” The magazine finds it odd that the reformer Koizumi and Mr. Koga, the unofficial head of those Diet members who want to maintain the status quo with road construction projects, would be in accord. It points out, however, that despite their political differences, they’ve known each other for some time and have personal connections.

The magazine then speculates that Mr. Nakagawa, a member of the so-called “Ageshio group” (ageshio means incoming tide) and a critic of the Finance Ministry, and Mr. Koga, a hyper-realist, are working with the former prime minister to pull off a political coup, having written off the Fukuda administration. It quotes a commentator to the effect that Mr. Koizumi has undergone a change. Gone is his taste for orchestrating political crises for his own benefit. The commentator says that the last time he met Mr. Koizumi, he had become a policy maven interested in the global environment, food safety, and fiscal reform. The commentator concludes by suggesting that instead of choosing to become prime minister again, he might back Koike Yuriko and take on the role of backstage advisor (a common practice in Japanese politics.)

SIDEBAR: The Ageshio group are promoting fiscal reform. Their objectives are, in this order:

1. Ending deflation
2. Reducing government assets
3. Cutting government expenditures
4. Systemic reform, and
5. Increasing taxes

The first words that strike the eye on Mr. Nakagawa’s Japanese-language website are “Small Government”

.

Who is the Kingmaker Thinking of?

A source close to the LDP told the magazine that Ms. Koike is really just a stalking horse, however. The source said to forget about both Mr. Yosano and Mr. Aso in this scenario. He suggested instead that people keep an eye on Watanabe Yoshimi (LDP; no faction), a champion of reform and the Minister of State for Financial Services and Regulatory Reform (who has also clashed with Prime Minister Fukuda over moves to water down reform policies).

Shukan Gendai also cautions that the so-called New Bureaucracy Faction will not stand by quietly without putting up a fight. Yosano Kaoru has close ties to the Ministry of Finance and in April published his first book, Dodotaru Seiji, or Heroic Politics. (Note that several other translations are possible, however.) Mr. Yosano uses the book to criticize the growth policies of Mr. Nakagawa and others, calling them a “sneak attack that is the ultimate in political escape.” He also thinks it’s necessary to undo the structural reforms of the Koizumi-Abe era, and he refers to them as a distortion.

One of those close to Mr. Yosano is Sonoda Hiroyuki (LDP; Tanigaki faction), who in turn is close to members of the former New Party Sakigake (sakigake means harbinger), a 10-man splinter party formed in 1993 by former LDP members that disbanded in 2002. In fact, Mr. Sonoda was himself a member of the party (as were Hatoyama Yukio and Kan Naoto until they left to form the DPJ). Another political reporter for a national paper says this group is looking into the possibility of reviving the party with like-minded people. He suggests that the Finance Ministry is backing this effort with the idea of putting Mr. Yosano in office.

The same reporter also thinks there is a chance Mr. Koizumi might ally himself with this group rather than Mr. Nakagawa because of his ties to the Finance Ministry.

But then the magazine quotes a Japanese proverb by saying that in Nagata-cho, “fear populates the night with monsters”.

The article concludes with the report that several politicians met for an old-fashioned backroom restaurant party on the night of 2 April. In the United States, political deals used to be cut in smoke-filled rooms; in Japan, those deals are settled in expensive restaurants.

The list of those attending the gathering is fascinating:

Liberal Democrats
Yamasaki Hiraku (AKA Taku) (Faction leader)
Kato Koichi (No faction)

SIDEBAR: Both Mr. Yamasaki and Mr. Kato were long-time allies of Mr. Koizumi; in January 1991 they formed a trio that operated as a sort of political chakra within the LDP called YKK after the initials of their surnames. They represented a force opposed to old-style LDP politics and favoring reform within the party. All three were considered prime ministerial material; only Mr. Koizumi grasped the brass ring after an aborted attempt by Mr. Kato to unseat Mr. Koizumi’s predecessor. They are no longer working as allies.

Democratic Party of Japan
Kan Naoto
Edano Yukio (Maehara/Edano group)

Mr. Kan is of course one of the founders of the party.

People’s New Party
Kamei Shizuka

The PNP is a splinter party that formed after Mr. Koizumi threw out of the LDP those Diet members who failed to support his postal privatization plan, and who rejected the invitation to return to the party extended by former Prime Minister Abe Shinzo.

There is no word about what they discussed, but Mr. Yamasaki was quoted after the meeting as saying that an election will be held this year, and that political realignment will follow. He concluded with the words, “Anything is possible.”

Shukan Gendai observes that it is significant people in both of the main parties are more forthcoming about internal conditions than usual, and concludes that the LDP and the DPJ will split and realign.

Aftermath

After the article was published:

• Prime Minister Fukuda cancelled his overseas trip.
• Yosano Kaoru published an article in another weekly magazine calling on Mr. Fukuda to conduct dodotaru seiji.
• The Ministry of Finance openly admitted they wanted to boost the consumption tax.
• Aso Taro visited Yamaguchi twice to campaign for the LDP candidate in a recent by-election. Mr. Aso has been campaigning heavily for local candidates, and said he would run again for the LDP presidency (and therefore prime minister).
• The opposition DPJ candidate won the by-election and party leader Ozawa Ichiro said they would not file a censure motion at this time if the gasoline surtax was readopted.
• The gasoline surtax was readopted, however, and NHK reports that the DPJ is considering a censure motion after all.
• NHK also reports that unidentified LDP members are muttering about having Mr. Fukuda step down after the summit. Is the broadcaster behind the curve?
• Kono Taro has not revolted yet.

Ran (乱) dumb Commentary

The point of the article was a possible alliance between Messrs. Koizumi, Nakagawa, and Koga to unseat Prime Minister Fukuda. The magazine didn’t do a whole lot to connect those particular dots, however. Undoubtedly one factor behind their story was a desire to sell magazines. Yet it isn’t out of the question that discussions of this sort have taken place. Whether it is true or not, this story as a whole is a vivid example of how difficult it is to penetrate the multiple veils of Japanese political circles.

Here’s a case in point: In a speech earlier this year, Iijima Isao said the natural heir to Mr. Koizumi’s policies was Yosano Kaoru.

Now really–That tells you just how difficult it is for people following politics to make heads or tails of anything. Mr. Yosano just published a book saying that the Koizumi-Abe reforms are a distortion and must be rolled back. How then can he be the natural heir to Mr. Koizumi? And what would prompt Mr. Iijima, who was close to Mr. Fukuda for decades, to say such a thing?

Anyone who knows isn’t saying, and anyone who’s saying doesn’t know.

Was Japan’s Lizzie Borden lucky?

POLICE BLOTTER CASES seldom get covered on this site, but yesterday’s verdict in a Tokyo murder trial brings up some aspects of the criminal justice system that the Japanese media don’t seem to be addressing.

Here are the facts, in brief:

Shortly after getting married in March 2003, Mihashi Yusuke, an employee of a securities firm, began beating his wife. The beatings were severe enough that she was admitted to a shelter for domestic violence victims with a broken nose and a bruised face in June 2006. She returned to her husband a month later.

Mihashi Kaori (photo) eventually asked for a divorce, but her husband refused to grant one on her terms. Her lawyers also allege that Mr. Mihashi had taken nude photographs of his wife and threatened to make them public if she insisted on a divorce.

On 12 December 2006, Mrs. Mihashi killed her husband by hitting him in the head with a wine bottle when he was asleep. The evidence showed that she kept whacking him in the head with the bottle just to make sure–an autopsy revealed 10 separate head wounds. She then used a saw to cut his body into five pieces in their Shibuya apartment and hid the pieces in Tokyo.

Mrs. Mihashi was given a psychiatric evaluation by two doctors, one selected by the defense attorneys and the other selected by the prosecutors. In their judgment, the defendant was suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome and therefore not criminally responsible for her acts.

Presiding Judge Kawamoto Masaya did not agree, however. Here’s what he said:

Her husband physically abused her soon after they were married, and she began hallucinating. The content of the psychiatric evaluation is reliable…it can be said that her married life was a (living) hell, she felt despair, and on the spur of the moment, she was seized by a homicidal intent. Her psychiatric problems, however, did not create a problem with her capacity to assume responsibility (for her act).

He continued:

She was fully capable of understanding her responsibility. She committed a brutal act by persistently and repeatedly striking her husband in the head, cutting his body into five pieces, and disposing of it. She also trampled on the emotions of her husband’s parents, who were concerned about the safety of their son, by sending them an e-mail that led them to believe he was alive.

Mrs. Mihashi impersonated her husband and sent a text message to her father-in-law on his cell phone telling him not to worry for the recent lack of communication.

The judge also said:

Her motive for murder is understandable, but she repeatedly took several rational steps to conceal what she had done and prevent the discovery (of the crime). These included buying a saw, cutting up the body, and disposing of it.

Cultural note: Cutting up a body and disposing of it is a crime in Japan, and Mrs. Mihashi was charged with that offense in addition to murder.

Judge Kawasaki sentenced her to 15 years in jail. The prosecutors asked for 20, and they’re not certain yet whether they will appeal for a longer sentence.

Mrs. Mihashi’s defense attorney was not pleased:

This contravenes the Supreme Court ruling that psychiatric evaluations of a defendant’s competency should be respected, and is (therefore) unfair.

When asked whether she would file an appeal, he said:

I think she should, but (Mrs. Mihashi) has said she will not appeal. I’ll discuss it with her again.

Mihashi Yusuke’s parents, however, claim that their son was not a wife-beater. They also complained about media coverage of the case that they thought focused excessively on their son’s behavior. (Sound familiar?)

All the information available to us is second- or third-hand, filtered through the media and its infotainment agenda, so it’s impossible for any of us to have an informed opinion. That’s not the reason I bring up the case here, however.

In May 2009–little more than a year from now–Japan’s legal system will undergo a revolution. Trials are currently adjudicated by a panel consisting of three judges. Starting next year, that panel will be expanded to include six citizen judges serving on a case-by-case basis. The presiding judge will be responsible for determining the sentence.

Decisions will be made by majority vote, so citizens can overrule the judges. The judges will be able to overrule the citizens only when all six citizens vote to convict and all three judges vote not guilty. (Here’s a previous post about this with plenty of links.)

Yesterday’s verdict makes me wonder:

• Would the citizens be more likely to accept the psychiatric evaluation in Mrs. Mihashi’s case than were the judges?
• Would a citizen panel with more women than men tend to sympathize with defendants such as Mrs. Mihashi? How would a citizen panel with more men behave?

The Japanese public supports the death penalty by an overwhelming margin. (Surveys usually find support to be more than 70%; the previous post on the judicial system links to an article citing a survey showing 80% support.)

• Would a citizen panel that voted to convict a defendant of murder push the judges to impose a sentence tougher than 15 years? Will the change in the system lead to more executions?

The Japanese have traditionally been more deferential to authority than people in other countries, and some think the members of a lay citizen panel would tend to defer to the judges. Twenty years ago, I would have agreed. But Japanese society has changed so much since then that I’m not sure it’s safe to make that assumption today.

That opinion also fails to take into consideration what might happen once citizens on the panel begin to realize they can exercise real power.

The new legal system is just one of several changes that will transform Japanese society in the coming years. As is usually the case, that transformation will be largely sotto voce. How those changes will reconfigure the life of the nation is anyone’s guess.

Note: Here’s an English language account by the Japan Times, noteworthy if only for all the information it leaves out.

Cars losing cachet in Japan?

A NEW SOCIAL TREND in Japan? The Japanese Automobile Manufacturers’ Association revealed the results of its FY 2007 market trend survey showing that younger Japanese are less interested in car ownership than ever before.

The key figure in the survey is the percentage of primary drivers younger than age 30 in all households that own cars. (The primary driver is defined as that person with the greatest frequency of automobile operation in the household.) This percentage slid four points from the survey conducted five years ago to 7%. That’s the first time this percentage has ever been in single digits.

An association source says this percentage stood at 19% in 1995. Those in the 20-29 age group also accounted for 19% of the population that year. They now account for 14%. Therefore, the decline in primary drivers in that age group has been steeper than the drop in the ratio of that group to the overall population during the same period.

A similar survey conducted by the Hakuhodo Institute of Life and Living of men in their 20s uncovered a parallel trend. When asked what they would spend their money on, 31% of the guys in 1996 answered cars. That figure fell to 16% in 2006.

These surveys do not show a corresponding decline for people in their late 30s and older.

An analyst from Demeken (an abbreviation of the Japanese for Digital Media Research Institute) says this represents a shift in the attitude of the generation who grew up in the Internet era amidst the detritus of the collapse of the bubble economy in the 1990s. The people in this age group, he suggests, place more importance on use rather than ownership.

He notes that many in the youngest adult generation view cars merely as a means for transportation and not as a status symbol, as they were for previous generations of postwar Japanese.

Buttressing this analysis is the 35% increase in the number of rental cars in Japan during the 10-year period ended in 2006. Meanwhile, automobile sales fell during that period. (The largest decline occurred from 1995 to 2001).

The Nishinippon Shimbun, the newspaper in which this article appeared, views this as a matter of concern. They’re based in Fukuoka, and local governments and business organizations in northern Kyushu have been lobbying hard—with great success—to attract companies in the auto industry.

The article failed to provide a breakdown by region for these figures, however. It’s a lot easier to get around without a car in Tokyo or Osaka than it is in an area with a lower population density. With the exception of those who live in Fukuoka City, most people in Kyushu would find a car-less life quite inconvenient.

Nevertheless, there has been a noticeable shift in the attitude toward automobiles compared to the early 80s, when I first came to Japan. In those days, it was still the rule for people to work on Saturdays (at least half a day). I was surprised then at the number of people in their 20s whose idea of a good time on Sunday was to go on an all-day automobile jaunt. They went just for the drive and had no specific objective for the trip, such as to attend a concert or sporting event. After driving a few hours in one direction, they’d have something to eat, fool around a little bit, and then turn around and drive back home.

That doesn’t seem to be the case now.

Are Japan’s political tectonic plates shifting?

JAPAN’S POLITICAL CLASS didn’t need to gulp down any coffee to get a kickstart this morning—all they had to do was scan the brief newspaper article reporting that former Prime Minister Koizumi Jun’ichiro had summoned a meeting of business and political leaders last week to confirm plans for periodic confabs to discuss political issues in a Japan plagued by government gridlock.

In addition to Mr. Koizumi’s supporters and associates in the ruling Liberal Democratic Party–most notably Koike Yuriko–others with seats at the table included Maehara Seiji, current vice-president and former president of the largest opposition group, the Democratic Party of Japan, and several of his allies.

The meeting was held on the evening of the ninth—the same day the DPJ had rejected the LDP’s fourth nominee for a post at the Bank of Japan. That the rejection generated considerable frustration within the LDP is no surprise, but there are indications the DPJ’s obstructionism is causing more than a little unpleasantness within the opposition party as well.

The newspapers are calling this a “study group”, which is sometimes the form new political groupings take in Japan when the participants are scouting the prospects for creating a new faction or party. They plan to begin regularly scheduled meetings after the weeklong holidays in the beginning of May.

During the meeting, Mr. Koizumi is reported to have said:

Two (potential) candidates for prime minister are here. This could be interesting.

According to a person present, the guest list included the following:

Okuda Hiroshi, former chairman of the Keidanren, a past president and chairman of Toyota and a special Cabinet advisor. Toyota has generally kept some distance between itself and the LDP in the past because of its union’s ties with the DPJ. Mr. Okuda, however, openly mobilized Toyota support for Mr. Koizumi after the prime minister shocked (and electrified) Japan in 2005 by dissolving the lower house of the Diet and calling a new election to push through his plan for privatizing the postal ministry.

The LDP Contingent

Koike Yuriko, former Environmental Minister in the Koizumi Cabinet, and a national security advisor and briefly Defense Minister in Abe Shinzo’s Cabinet. Some observers think she has a chance to become Japan’s first female prime minister, and everyone assumes she wants the job. Her background also includes membership in the now-defunct Liberal Party, then headed by the current opposition head Ozawa Ichiro, when it was the junior partner in a coalition government with the LDP. Politics makes for some strange bedfellows in Japan.

Motegi Toshimitsu, a graduate of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, former Senior Vice Foreign Minister in the first Koizumi Cabinet and the Minister of State for Okinawa in Second Koizumi Cabinet

Hayashi Yoshimasa, also a graduate of the Kennedy School of Government, and an upper house member (unlike the previous two, who are lower house members). He has Finance Ministry connections, as does Mr. Koizumi.

Nishimura Yasutoshi, a lower house member in the Machimura faction (to which Mr. Koizumi once belonged in a former incarnation), and known to be politically close to Abe Shinzo

The Gang from the DPJ

Maehara Shinji, the second potential prime minister, is known for specializing in security and defense issues, and favors revising the Constitution to allow Japan more leeway to conduct military operations (by eliminating the second paragraph of Article 9, the so-called Peace Clause). He is also on excellent terms with Abe Shinzo, and was not averse to the suggestion for a grand coalition between the two parties that caused Mr. Ozawa so much trouble last fall.

Sengoku Yoshito, a member of the Maehara group (the DPJ doesn’t like to call them factions), he has held several shadow cabinet positions. Interestingly enough, he also directly criticized Mr. Koizumi for the deterioration of relations with South Korea during his term.

Genba Koichiro, a lower house member who is also in the Maehara group.

Fukuyama Tetsuro, ditto.

Also stopping by to say hi was Mikitani Hiroshi, the president and chairman of Rakuten, a giant in Internet shopping in Japan, and one of the 10 largest Internet companies in the world. Their website has the second highest total of unique hits in the country, behind only Yahoo!

In retrospect, neither the meeting itself nor the participants should have been entirely unexpected. Mr. Koizumi has downplayed any interest in a major post-retirement political role by referring to himself as “a man of the past”, but he has become more active since February. Was it a coincidence that his former political right-hand man, Iijima Isao, sat for an interview with a friendly magazine at the same time and floated what looked like a trial balloon for a Koizumi comeback?

In the interview, Mr. Iijima offered a white knight scenario by suggesting that Mr. Koizumi is the only person with the experience and credibility to break through the current impasse and take political reform to the next level. He further noted that it wouldn’t be necessary to form a new political party; it would be enough for Mr. Koizumi to “take the ship out of the harbor and into the sea”, and that a crew of 50 members each from the LDP and the DPJ would be enough to man the ship.

In addition to political gridlock, the Koizumi allies within the party are dismayed at LDP recidivism by failing to maintain the momentum of his political and governmental reforms. The former prime minister’s Man Friday in the Cabinet for implementing those reforms, Takenaka Heizo, has criticized Prime Minister Fukuda Yasuo for allowing the LDP of the bad old days to come back “like a zombie” since he took office in September.

For his part, Mr. Maehara and his group members share some common ground with the LDP reform wing; indeed, they perhaps have more in common with them than they do the left-leaning and leftist elements of their own party. They are also likely to be among those in the DJP unhappy with Mr. Ozawa’s leadership (an unhappiness that predates the party’s strong showing in last summer’s upper house election), and his tactics in the Diet since then.

To be fair, Mr. Maehara has reportedly been telling associates since last week’s meeting that it is not a formal study group. Discretion is the better part of valor, and it’s still too soon to be burning bridges.

Whether this leads to the political realignment that everyone is talking about, to the comeback of Koizumi Jun’ichiro, or merely to informal political discussions across party lines held in expensive restaurants, Mr. Koizumi’s description of the latest development was dead on:

This could be interesting.

How (not) to deal with China

JOHN POMPHRET, editor of the Washington Post’s Outlook section, runs a blog on the Post website called Pomphret’s China. For his posts, Mr. Pomphret uses the experience gained from serving as that newspaper’s Beijing bureau chief for six years.

In his latest entry, he gushes over a linguistic device that Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd (who is fluent in Chinese) used during a recent speech at Beijing University. He suggests that Western countries could employ it as a model for dealing with China in the future. Mr. Pomphret seems to contradict himself in the post, but we’ll get to that in a minute.

The piece is headlined, “Australia to China: Let’s Not Be Friends”. It contains an explanation of the connotations of the word “friendship” as it is applied to foreigners in China today:

Rudd’s brilliance in the speech involves turning the Chinese term “friend” on its head. Friend (pengyou in Chinese) and frienship (youyi) are two of the most distorted concepts in modern China culture. In modern China, a friend is someone who will do you favors and who expects favors in return. A “foreign friend” is someone the Chinese party-state expects will carry water for them and NEVER criticize them.

Whenever a Chinese official called me “foreign friend” (waiguo pengyou), I knew some type of horrible deal would soon be asked or expected of me.

Here’s what Mr. Pomphret thought was brilliant:

So what did Rudd do? He went back — way back — into Chinese history, to the 7th century AD, and used another word for friendship (zhengyou).

“A true friend,” Rudd said, “is one who can be a zhengyou, that is a partner who sees beyond immediate benefit to the broader and firm basis for continuing, profound and sincere friendship….A strong relationship, and a true friendship,” he told the students, “are built on the ability to engage in a direct, frank and ongoing dialogue about our fundamental interests and future vision.”

Clever perhaps, but brilliant overstates it by more than a bit. The contradiction is the declaration in the headline—let’s not be friends—with Mr. Rudd’s actual use of the phrases “true friend” and “true friendship”.

Mr. Rudd’s assertion that “a true friend…is a partner who sees beyond immediate benefit to the broader and firm basis for continuing, profound and sincere friendship” comes across as empty political boilerplate. Read it over a couple of times and watch how quickly it evaporates. Then try to imagine how convincing the Chinese found it.

Mr. Pomphret’s enthusiasm for the Australian PM can perhaps be ascribed to a practice common among the mass media, in which a newspaper or broadcaster tends to lionize those people with whom it shares political viewpoints.

The blogger seems to have forgotten, however, that one G8 nation has considerably more diplomatic experience with China than the others. And he probably wasn’t aware that a prominent politician from that country also used the Chinese language to tell them to knock off the friendship talk and get down to brass tacks. Former Japanese Foreign Minister Aso Taro—who might well become Japan’s next prime minister—described his 2006 meeting with then-Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing during an interview published in the February issue of Shokun! magazine.

Here’s what Mr. Aso said. The translation is mine:

“The chief characteristic of the Chinese government’s diplomatic stance is to give priority to their own benefit. They’ll join hands with anyone if they think it will be beneficial to them. They are a formidable country in that regard. I’ll give you an example.

“This happened during my meeting with the Chinese foreign minister in Doha, Qatar, in May 2006. Talks (between our countries) at the foreign minister level had been suspended for some time. Li Zhaoxing kept going on and on about Japan-China friendship, but I just brushed it off and told him, “I’m not interested in that at all.” An approach and response based on emotions will at times be very damaging to the national interest.

“He seemed suspicious of what I was saying, so here’s what I told him. I said that what we needed was “Japan-China Mutual Benefit”, and we should both recognize that Japan-China friendship was a means to that end. I took out a piece of paper, wrote 日中共益 (Japan-China mutual benefit) in kanji on it and handed it over to him.

“When the meeting was over, he immediately came over to me and quickly extended his hand for a handshake.”

As Mr. Aso noted elsewhere in the interview, there hasn’t been any Japan-China friendship during 1,500 years of diplomatic relations. (He wasn’t taking a hard line; he was just stating the facts as he saw them.) But he also pointed out that an examination of the long bilateral relationship shows the Japanese can disregard a few years of chilly ties without having to worry about it.

Rather than follow Mr. Pomphret’s suggestion that the West use Mr. Rudd’s approach, the better course might be to take a tip from Mr. Aso and the Japanese experience. Bilateral friendship implies shared values. The Chinese nation is a totalitarian hegemon without a shred of respect for human rights. What advanced democracy shares such values as the forced sterilization of women and the absence of free elections?

The Australian prime minister knows enough Chinese to refuse the dubious distinction of “foreign friend”, and has enough wit to make a point by employing a linguistic gambit. Unfortunately, that is as likely to influence the Chinese as a Free Tibet bumper sticker.

Mr. Rudd suggests that friends look beyond benefit to engage in an honest dialogue. The Japanese foreign minister understands that the Chinese accept no nation as a friend unless they benefit from it, and they’re not at all interested in honest dialogue on someone else’s terms. He knows that for China, “the broader and firm basis for…sincere friendship” is their own self interest.

Mr. Rudd’s fluency in Chinese is an advantage when talking to university students in Beijing, but Mr. Aso’s more practical approach is an advantage when actually dealing with that country in a bilateral relationship.

That’s because he speaks their language.

Oracles, pundits, pretenders, and political hacks

ONE OF THE PERKS of being an ex-president or prime minister is that people tend to take your political punditry seriously. Thus it was no surprise to see the ripples spread throughout the media after Koizumi Jun’ichiro, one of the most successful and popular prime ministers in Japanese political history, commented on the timing of the next lower house election at a Liberal Democratic Party reception in his native Kanagawa Prefecture.

Well, that’s what everyone thinks he was talking about. There was a touch of the Oracle of Delphi about Mr. Koizumi’s statements. Here’s a direct translation of the first sentence:

“It seems as if the wind of the important ’something-or-other’ has now started blowing.”

There is a well-known Japanese preference for using indirect and intentionally vague speech; in this country, a sentence that directly translates to “This is that” will be perfectly clear in context. Therefore, Mr. Koizumi’s listeners applied their considerable experience at inference to understand that he was referring to the preparations for the election.

But there was no doubt about his meaning when he continued:

“It won’t be like the overwhelming victory of the previous lower house election. We’re really going to have to brace ourselves.”

He then added, “The “distorted Diet” (i.e., with the opposition in control of the upper house) signals the advent of a major transformation. When I was prime minister, I often used the words ‘boldly and flexibly’, and those traits are critical now. This isn’t a case of just the strong surviving. Those politicians and political parties capable of responding to change will also survive.”

Koga Makoto, the Chairman of the LDP’S Election Strategy Council, was another guest at the party and almost as elliptical when discussing the looming election:

“I have continually maintained that the lower house of the Diet won’t be dissolved this year. Now, I can’t say there won’t be an election within the year, and I must be allowed to say that (the situation) is dangerous. We’ll have to use all our strength to stand up to this headwind.”

The broadcast media turned to commentator Miyake Hisayuki, known for his close ties to the LDP, for his translation, and he spelled it out in more detail. Mr. Miyake repeated the claim that Prime Minister Fukuda Yasuo will not be permitted to decide the timing for the dissolution of the Diet and the subsequent election. (That will be the decision of the backroom bigwigs, and was supposedly made clear to Mr. Fukuda when he took office.) What he will be permitted to do is retire with honor (yutai in Japanese) following the July G8 summit, rather than have to face the electorate with slumping poll numbers after presiding over the probable reinstatement of the gasoline surtax. Mr. Miyake thinks the Diet will then be called into an extraordinary session just to dissolve it.

Who’s Next?

The term yutai contains the nuance that the person retiring is voluntarily removing himself to allow younger people of talent to advance. So for whom would Mr. Fukuda be getting out of the way? Nobody’s pitching a tent in public yet, but everybody knows that former Foreign Minister Aso Taro wants the job—and besides, he’s all of four years younger than the prime minister. As this Yomiuri article points out, Mr. Aso has been driving up his stock with the party’s rank and file by stumping for local candidates around the country. He’s also working to widen the base of his support and floating policy proposals to create a de facto platform.

Mr. Aso surprised many observers in last year’s intra-party election to replace Abe Shinzo by winning a substantial share of the votes after the party’s heavy-hitters lined up to put the fix in for Mr. Fukuda. Even within the LDP, there is a sizeable group that wants no part of any behavior that smacks of…well, traditional LDP behavior.

But he was criticized in some quarters, most notably by former Prime Minister Mori Yoshiro, for a lean and hungry look that looked a little too lean and hungry. Circumspection is still a highly regarded virtue here. Therefore, as the Yomiuri article notes, Mr. Aso is trying to keep his head down this time around.

By Their Fruits You Shall Know Them

The opposition, of course, doesn’t have to be circumspect. They can say anything they like, and in the case of the Democratic Party of Japan, often do. For example, DPJ chief Ozawa Ichiro said on NHK radio and television last Sunday that his primary target date for dissolving the Diet and holding the election was before the July summit.

And there’s the disadvantage of direct speech—one receives a direct view of the exposed speakers. Unfortunately for Mr. Ozawa, the continued exposure of his thoughts makes him seem more like a provincial pol interested only in immediate tactical advantage than a statesman with a strategy to benefit the greater good.

One doesn’t have to look far for examples. After his party won control of the upper house last July, they chose to confront the ruling LDP over the issue of refueling Allied ships in the Indian Ocean to support the NATO anti-terrorism effort in Afghanistan. The problem was not that the DPJ challenged the LDP’s political supremacy—that’s what political parties are supposed to do, and it was inevitable after the thrashing they administered to the ruling party in the polls.

His blunder was that by trying to withdraw Japanese support (and succeeding only in temporarily halting it), he weakened the trust of the world’s democracies in Japan as a dependable ally. The more responsible course would have been to choose an issue for confrontation that did not impair Japan’s standing in the developed world. Instead, he wound up wasting everyone’s time.

Mr. Ozawa’s next idea was to challenge the government over the renewal of the 25-yen-per-liter gasoline surtax, which expired at the end of March. Overhaul of this part of the taxation system is a much-needed reform and a winner with the public. A real opportunity was lost, however, due to the party’s short-sighted approach and failure to present a feasible alternative for revenue sources before throwing a wrench into the works. Instead of focusing on the accomplishment of real reform, they merely tried to gain leverage with the electorate by causing problems for the LDP.

Their effort temporarily succeeded—the tax expired and they will force the LDP into the unpopular position of using their supermajority to reinstate it. But again, the opposition party took no one but themselves into account. The central government distributes most of that tax money to prefectural governments. The expiration of the tax means that the local governments will receive nothing at all (for now) instead of the 3.8 trillion yen that had been planned. As a result, 33 of Japan’s 47 prefectures had to partially freeze expenditures. Prefectural governments throughout the country are financially strapped (some are worried about bankruptcy) and need the funds generated by the gasoline surtax for more than just road construction and repair. They account for 8% of the entire budget of Iwate, to cite one example. Additionally, the failure to receive the expected outlays forced Ishikawa and Tochigi to suspend operations unrelated to roads.

The DPJ head’s response to their difficulties has been cavalier, at best. He suggested in the Diet today that all the money should be returned to “the people” because Japan doesn’t need any more new highways or major road repair.

See what happens when you spend too much time in chauffeured vehicles?

Mr. Ozawa’s next bright idea is to hold the lower house election sometime before the G8 Summit three months from now, earlier than the timing suggested by Mr. Miyake. He of course realizes this will be an unusually important election with as-yet-unforeseen ramifications. It will therefore require the concerted attention of the entire Japanese political class. He also realizes that a pre-summit election means a new prime minister will have to immediately shift gears after an intense campaign to capably represent Japan at the meeting of the world’s leading industrialized nations.

Why is a proposal for a pre-summit election selfish and myopic? Because the eight summit nations have a system with a rotating presidency, and each year the nation holding the presidency hosts the proceedings, sets their agenda, and determines which ministerial meetings will occur.

This year is Japan’s turn to be president. The new prime minister will have to do more than show up after attending a few briefings: He’ll have to run the show.

Japan’s Delphic oracle declared that it is important to be bold and flexible, and that the political survivors will be those capable of responding to change. But Ozawa Ichiro is brazen instead of bold, stubborn and unyielding instead of flexible, and hinders rather than facilitates the responsible implementation of the dynamic changes that people on both sides of the aisle know need to occur.

It’s a shame he doesn’t listen. If he were to accept counsel from someone besides himself, the entire country might benefit.

Mac’s question about Japan and Tibet

FREQUENT POSTER MAC asked an off-topic question while replying to another thread. The question is so good, however, it deserves to be asked where everyone can see and hear it:

What face are the Japanese people going to show amidst all this Olympic Torch/Tibet/Human Rights kerfuffle? It’s a high stakes card to play, but I would say with China’s credibility on the way down, Japan have an opportunity to raise theirs. Whose example are they going to follow on this one?

Whose example indeed?

How to deal with Sea Shepherd

ACCORDING TO THIS POST from Tim Blair, the French dealt with the eco-twerps Sea Shepherd and their leader Paul Watson much more assertively than Japan did.

As described in a link from the post, about 100 French fishermen were upset when Watson said the death of baby seals was a greater tragedy than the recent death of some sealers.

If you haven’t seen it already, please click on the first link (on the word “attacking”) to see a Japanese video of a Sea Shepherd ship deliberately ramming a Japanese whaling vessel. A similiar video was shown last year on the website of Japan’s Institute of Cetacean Research (whose site is linked on the right sidebar).

Yet during the whaling season earlier this year, no one in the English-language mass media could bring themselves to call a spade a spade. They usually described it a “collision” rather than a ramming.

Would you care to speculate on their approach had the Japanese taken steps similar to those of the French fishermen?

It should be obvious by now to everyone that the daily media, whether print or broadcast, is little more than an infotainment vehicle for advertising, with little interest in the concept of journalistic integrity. It is time to draw conclusions from that fact.