On the day before yesterday, 28 April, Mr.Abe Shinzo's government convened a meeting to celebrate Japan's regaining her independence 63 years ago. It was the first of its kind. There was a counter-meeting in Tokyo, and a huge gathering of people in Okinawa opposing it.
It is true that Japan became independent again on this day in 1952, in the sense that the Peace Treaty, concluded at San Francisco in previous September, took effect on this day. But there was hardly any atmosphere of celebration. I was a student on this day, and the students may be called the most sensitive section of a society. As I recall, this lack of celebrating mood came from two reasons.
First, many countries in Asia, most familiar to us, including China, had been excluded from the peace process. The Korean Peninsula was in the midst of a bloody and endless war. The Soviet and the East European countries also did not join it, and this gave us the strong feeling that the Peace Treaty itself would intensify the Cold War. It took us a long time afterwards to reestablish relations with these nations. Even now we do not have a Peace Treaty with Russia, and at this time of writing Mr.Abe is in Moscow conferring with their government on how to speed up the process.
Secondly, and related to the above, the foreign troops were continuing to be stationed in the country. The Allied Potsdam Declaration, in terms of which the occupation of Japan had been conducted, said that after the country was democratized the occupation forces would withdraw from Japan. But now in terms of the US-Japan Security Pact, signed on the same day as the Peace Treaty but the contents of which were not fully known to our people, the occupation forces would stay on, under a different name but with little change in substance. Even today there is little change.
Nowhere was this feeling as strong as in Okinawa, which had been cut off from Japan proper by the Peace Treaty and was not returned until 1972. Therefore it was declared at the gathering that this was their Day of Subordination and Humiliation, and they demanded the government should cancel the meeting it had convened.
The mechanism by which Okinawa was separated was the planned transfer of Okinawa to an American-administered Trust Territory. Fortunately it was given up. But how? Japan joined the UN in 1956. The UN Charter says that a member country cannot be a trust territory. Does it apply to a part of such a country? I think it does. Why, on what basis, then, was Okinawa under the occupation from 1956 to 1972?
One more thing about the government meeting. To the surprise of many, the Emperor and the Empress were present. I think it is unconstitutional, as it does not fit in with any of what is stated in the Constitution as the Emperor's functions. There presence, apparently sponsored by the government, is therefore politically motivated. We are reminded that the LDP's draft Constitution wants to give a greater, perhaps much greater, political role to the Emperor. When the meeting was over, those present, about 390 in all, mostly the conservative elements on the political spectrum, said "Hurrah" to the Emperor and the Empress. Is this going to be the shape of things to come? No, it is not, although opinion would be deeply split if a poll is taken. It is the same with almost any thing, Constitution, security issues, relations with the US/Asian neighbours, even "Abenomics".
It is true that Japan became independent again on this day in 1952, in the sense that the Peace Treaty, concluded at San Francisco in previous September, took effect on this day. But there was hardly any atmosphere of celebration. I was a student on this day, and the students may be called the most sensitive section of a society. As I recall, this lack of celebrating mood came from two reasons.
First, many countries in Asia, most familiar to us, including China, had been excluded from the peace process. The Korean Peninsula was in the midst of a bloody and endless war. The Soviet and the East European countries also did not join it, and this gave us the strong feeling that the Peace Treaty itself would intensify the Cold War. It took us a long time afterwards to reestablish relations with these nations. Even now we do not have a Peace Treaty with Russia, and at this time of writing Mr.Abe is in Moscow conferring with their government on how to speed up the process.
Secondly, and related to the above, the foreign troops were continuing to be stationed in the country. The Allied Potsdam Declaration, in terms of which the occupation of Japan had been conducted, said that after the country was democratized the occupation forces would withdraw from Japan. But now in terms of the US-Japan Security Pact, signed on the same day as the Peace Treaty but the contents of which were not fully known to our people, the occupation forces would stay on, under a different name but with little change in substance. Even today there is little change.
Nowhere was this feeling as strong as in Okinawa, which had been cut off from Japan proper by the Peace Treaty and was not returned until 1972. Therefore it was declared at the gathering that this was their Day of Subordination and Humiliation, and they demanded the government should cancel the meeting it had convened.
The mechanism by which Okinawa was separated was the planned transfer of Okinawa to an American-administered Trust Territory. Fortunately it was given up. But how? Japan joined the UN in 1956. The UN Charter says that a member country cannot be a trust territory. Does it apply to a part of such a country? I think it does. Why, on what basis, then, was Okinawa under the occupation from 1956 to 1972?
One more thing about the government meeting. To the surprise of many, the Emperor and the Empress were present. I think it is unconstitutional, as it does not fit in with any of what is stated in the Constitution as the Emperor's functions. There presence, apparently sponsored by the government, is therefore politically motivated. We are reminded that the LDP's draft Constitution wants to give a greater, perhaps much greater, political role to the Emperor. When the meeting was over, those present, about 390 in all, mostly the conservative elements on the political spectrum, said "Hurrah" to the Emperor and the Empress. Is this going to be the shape of things to come? No, it is not, although opinion would be deeply split if a poll is taken. It is the same with almost any thing, Constitution, security issues, relations with the US/Asian neighbours, even "Abenomics".
No comments:
Post a Comment