Japan's PM Noda Yoshihiko held a 20-minute Press Conference at 8 pm yesterday, 11 November, and said that Japan will enter into conferring with the interested parties with the aim of joining the negotiations for the TTP(Trans-Pacific Partnership). He did so in the teeth of deep split within the ruling Democratic Party, which advised the PM and the Government to be cautious about joining the negotiations.
Behind this caution is a strong apprehension as to the future of, first and foremost, agriculture and dairy in this country, as was discussed in the previous blog and even before. It is estimated that 90% of domestic rice production will be gone. Reflecting this, almost all the local newspapers are opposed to Japan's joining the TTP. Only a few pro-capital national papers are in support of it.
The PM, not unaware of this apprehension, told the Press that the Government will concentrate its effort on strenghening the competitiveness of large-scale farming. But it is not convincing, in view of the fact that even in Hokkaido, the northernmost major island, where the competitiveness is considered to be greater than elsewhere with its larger-sized farms, the farmers are strongly opposed to the TTP.
The PM said that, Japan being a trade-dependent country, the need of the time is to bring in the energy of the vibrant Asia to revitalize the Japanese economy. But neither China nor India have been or are likely to be a part of it. It will simply end up with importing more products from the US. It will be practically nothing more than the Japan-US FTA. We must watch Korea carefully now, which has just concluded FTA with the US, but there are dissatisfactions with the agreement. It is wrong to characterize Japan as a trade-dependent nation. We have relied to a far greater extent on the growth of the domestic purchasing power. It is this power that has been greatly damaged in the past two decades by the policies and are badly in need of reconstructing.
If so, when the PM told the Press that he is determined to rebuild a stable society supported by wide strata of the middle classes, but he is simply talking untruth, however beautiful his words may be. How to rebuild middle classes exposed to a strong northern wind called TTP, under the burden of heavy taxes, high cost of medical care, education, housing, etc., or with a considerable part of the industrial base transferred abroad, as is shown by the recent floods in Thailand affecting all the car manufacturers in Japan.
Finally TTP is not just agricultural, or industrial. It includes 24 different sectors. What are expected in those sectors are not known yet, or the Government is not kind enough to inform the people.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Japanese Farmers and the TTP
The harvesting season is almost over in the rice fields around the country. But some of the farmers, especially in Fukushima Prefecture where the ill-fated nuclear plants are located, are working hard to protect their crops from radioactivity. Or to prepare the ground for the next year's planting.
Their originality is startling. They are determined to reduce the amount of the radioactivity their crops may absorb from the rice field to infinitely near the zero point. And by so doing to call back the consumers to them, some of them with many years' ties, who have left them because of the fear of the fallout. They say that the Government and the Prefectural Offices are moving too slowly with whatever research and experiments they are doing.
Thus some of the farmers themselves are trying to see how they should cultivate the land, especially how deeply they should do it, what is the proper way of mixing the surface with the deeper soil, and so on. The soil itself, the fertile soil, has been the product of their long years of labour.
Sometimes, the needle in their gauge suddenly goes up, pointing to the presence of the fallout near the small streams coming down from the side of the mountains facing the nuclear plants, and the farmers are up against the threat in collaboration with researchers from the universities etc.
The above has been taken from the NHK broadcasting of yesterday, 8 November. While admiring the efforts by the farmers to contain the fallout and to continue to produce safe and delicious rice as before, however, it is not my main point to summarize the broadcast. My point is that the TPP, into which the US and our own Government are trying to drag us, will simply take no notice of those voluntary, individual and creative efforts by the unassuming farmers. They think nothing of the almost probable damage our agriculture will be destined to suffer.
If Japan is to join the TPP, she will do it under the heavy US pressure. As it is the TPP will nothing much more than the US-Japan Free Trade Agreement. The readers will be surprised to know that, toward the end of October, a former high-ranking US official said in Tokyo in reference to the growing opposition in Japan to joining the TPP that agriculture accounts for only 1.2% of Japan's GDP, implying that the opposition from that quarter can be safely ignored. He also said that the agriculturalists' lobby is similarly being ignored in the US. Moreover he also said that Japan should increase her defense budget, loosen restrictions on the export of arms, and to revise the Article 9 of the Constitution so that the Self-Defense Forces of Japan should operate together with the US forces. Naked interference in our internal affairs, and only in the US interests.
It is true that our rice farming is facing heavy odds. But every rice field is a small dam, since every hectare of it holds 30 tons of water. Without it our land will go the way of desertification. We should defend them as they are.
One last thing. Way back in 1991, the Philippine Senate refused to ratify the treaty to keep the US bases in that country. The above official went round the opposition Senators to dissuade them from voting 'No'. He and others failed. What would be the ASEAN like today if there were US bases in one of its member countries? And how would we call people like him? Ambassadors of peace?
Their originality is startling. They are determined to reduce the amount of the radioactivity their crops may absorb from the rice field to infinitely near the zero point. And by so doing to call back the consumers to them, some of them with many years' ties, who have left them because of the fear of the fallout. They say that the Government and the Prefectural Offices are moving too slowly with whatever research and experiments they are doing.
Thus some of the farmers themselves are trying to see how they should cultivate the land, especially how deeply they should do it, what is the proper way of mixing the surface with the deeper soil, and so on. The soil itself, the fertile soil, has been the product of their long years of labour.
Sometimes, the needle in their gauge suddenly goes up, pointing to the presence of the fallout near the small streams coming down from the side of the mountains facing the nuclear plants, and the farmers are up against the threat in collaboration with researchers from the universities etc.
The above has been taken from the NHK broadcasting of yesterday, 8 November. While admiring the efforts by the farmers to contain the fallout and to continue to produce safe and delicious rice as before, however, it is not my main point to summarize the broadcast. My point is that the TPP, into which the US and our own Government are trying to drag us, will simply take no notice of those voluntary, individual and creative efforts by the unassuming farmers. They think nothing of the almost probable damage our agriculture will be destined to suffer.
If Japan is to join the TPP, she will do it under the heavy US pressure. As it is the TPP will nothing much more than the US-Japan Free Trade Agreement. The readers will be surprised to know that, toward the end of October, a former high-ranking US official said in Tokyo in reference to the growing opposition in Japan to joining the TPP that agriculture accounts for only 1.2% of Japan's GDP, implying that the opposition from that quarter can be safely ignored. He also said that the agriculturalists' lobby is similarly being ignored in the US. Moreover he also said that Japan should increase her defense budget, loosen restrictions on the export of arms, and to revise the Article 9 of the Constitution so that the Self-Defense Forces of Japan should operate together with the US forces. Naked interference in our internal affairs, and only in the US interests.
It is true that our rice farming is facing heavy odds. But every rice field is a small dam, since every hectare of it holds 30 tons of water. Without it our land will go the way of desertification. We should defend them as they are.
One last thing. Way back in 1991, the Philippine Senate refused to ratify the treaty to keep the US bases in that country. The above official went round the opposition Senators to dissuade them from voting 'No'. He and others failed. What would be the ASEAN like today if there were US bases in one of its member countries? And how would we call people like him? Ambassadors of peace?
Monday, October 31, 2011
The Defense Secretary Came, Saw, but Did Not Conquer
The new US Defense Secretary, Mr.Leon Panetta, visited Japan on 24 October. The next day he saw the Prime Minister Noda for 35 minitues, and some other Ministers, too. Before taking the present office he was the Director of the CIA. As such he was one of the prominent personalities in Bob Woodward's Obama's Wars, discussed before in these columns.
What was his mission this time? Every Japanese knows it by now. It is to make the Japanese, its government, and the prople of Okinawa, swallow a plan, a bitter plan, to construct an entirely new air base in Nago city, Okinawa, about two hours' drive from its capital, Naha city.
It is a plan to move a base existing at Futemma, as it is in the midst of a congested residential district and is called a most dangerous base in the world. The two governments came to an agreement that a new base be built at Nago so that the aircraft and facilities at Futemma should be shifted there. The agreement was reached five years ago. Not a single step has been taken toward that goal since then. Because the people are against the plan. Okinawa is already saturated with the US bases. Why should they have one more? And this one is not a usual one. They, for want of a land space, want to reclaim the sea, a beautiful coral sea, and build a V-shaped two runways. What a violence against the nature!
They have decided on it in the face of the bitter opposition. Why to have another base at a heavy cost, not only in money terms but also at the expense of the natural environment? And why at this time, when the US wars are hopefully coming to an end not only in Iraq but in Afghanistan? Okinawa has long been a stepping-stone for the forward deployment of the US forces, and that is why Japan has been regarded as their ally, not in peace but in war.
This anger has been expressed, for example, by an age-old writer from Okinawa, Mr.Ooshiro Tatsuhiro. It has been discussed here on 10 July.
This time Mr.Panetta came to push the Japanese authorities on some procedural matters. He certainly came, he saw the PM and others, but he didn't even try to talk to the Okinawan people, let alone conquer their heart and mind.
What was his mission this time? Every Japanese knows it by now. It is to make the Japanese, its government, and the prople of Okinawa, swallow a plan, a bitter plan, to construct an entirely new air base in Nago city, Okinawa, about two hours' drive from its capital, Naha city.
It is a plan to move a base existing at Futemma, as it is in the midst of a congested residential district and is called a most dangerous base in the world. The two governments came to an agreement that a new base be built at Nago so that the aircraft and facilities at Futemma should be shifted there. The agreement was reached five years ago. Not a single step has been taken toward that goal since then. Because the people are against the plan. Okinawa is already saturated with the US bases. Why should they have one more? And this one is not a usual one. They, for want of a land space, want to reclaim the sea, a beautiful coral sea, and build a V-shaped two runways. What a violence against the nature!
They have decided on it in the face of the bitter opposition. Why to have another base at a heavy cost, not only in money terms but also at the expense of the natural environment? And why at this time, when the US wars are hopefully coming to an end not only in Iraq but in Afghanistan? Okinawa has long been a stepping-stone for the forward deployment of the US forces, and that is why Japan has been regarded as their ally, not in peace but in war.
This anger has been expressed, for example, by an age-old writer from Okinawa, Mr.Ooshiro Tatsuhiro. It has been discussed here on 10 July.
This time Mr.Panetta came to push the Japanese authorities on some procedural matters. He certainly came, he saw the PM and others, but he didn't even try to talk to the Okinawan people, let alone conquer their heart and mind.
Friday, October 28, 2011
Narayan Desai on Japan's Nuclear Energy Utilization
Mr.Narayan Desai, 87, is a leading Gandhian thinker and activist in the world today. Through his father, Mr.Mahadev Desai, Gandhi's famous secretary, he was closely acquainted with Gandhi himself during his childhood.
He has recently given a reply in writing to a young lady from Japan, Kurihara Kaori, who is studying Gandhian thought at the Gujarat Vidyapith, Ahmedabad, India, where Narayan is the Chancellor. It is a reply to the question, 'If Gandhi were alive today, what message would he give to the Japanese in view of the recent triple tragedies - earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear, in Japan?'. The reply was given in Gujarati. It has been translated by Kurihara into Japanese, and has just been published in the October issue of "Sarvodaya", a monthly journal of the Tokyo-based Japan-Bharat Sarvodaya Mitrata Sangha(Japan-India Sarvodaya Friendship Association).
Here let me give a summary of that portion of Narayan's reply which has impressed me most, i.e. the portion concerning Japan's nuclear policy.
He begins this portion by saying that it would be discourteous in view of such a disaster to claim that he has been pointing out to the danger of nucler energy in the past. We should instead straight and in all humility admit that this is the second warning. The first one was Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was not only to the people of Japan but to the whole of mankind. But the big powers of the world have not taken heed of the warning. We also have failed to notice the inseparable relationship between the nuclear weapons and the nuclear energy. The people of Japan who have been the victims of the nuclear weapons have unfortunately chosen the path toward the use of the nuclear energy.
Narayan then proceeds to analyze the specific conditions in Japan. The nuclear energy generates radioactivity. It is not economical. Also it has been proved to be not perfectly safe. It may be because of the following reasons that Japan has made use of it in spite of those factors. First, there were scarce energy resources. Second, the government has defined the meaning of development as the pursuit of the material affluence, and tried to achieve economic growth by competition, thereby forgetting that it is a wrong growth that victimizes others. Moreover, they have idealized Western values, Western way of life, Western culture, thereby forgetting their own identity. In so doing they have internalized the belief that science and technology are infallible. They have forgotton that man is fallible.
And he askes if those tragedies are not the opportunity to change such a way of thingking.
I will not go into the more general and philosophical portion of the reply. Let me, however, call your attention to the fact that, at the beginning of his reply, Narayan says that it is a difficult task to say what Gandhi would have said, because he wonders if he qualifies, and, more interestingly to this writer, Gandhi was always evolving, and therefore he could not be sure how Gandhi's ideas might have changed in the 64 years after his death. Very much like him!
He has recently given a reply in writing to a young lady from Japan, Kurihara Kaori, who is studying Gandhian thought at the Gujarat Vidyapith, Ahmedabad, India, where Narayan is the Chancellor. It is a reply to the question, 'If Gandhi were alive today, what message would he give to the Japanese in view of the recent triple tragedies - earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear, in Japan?'. The reply was given in Gujarati. It has been translated by Kurihara into Japanese, and has just been published in the October issue of "Sarvodaya", a monthly journal of the Tokyo-based Japan-Bharat Sarvodaya Mitrata Sangha(Japan-India Sarvodaya Friendship Association).
Here let me give a summary of that portion of Narayan's reply which has impressed me most, i.e. the portion concerning Japan's nuclear policy.
He begins this portion by saying that it would be discourteous in view of such a disaster to claim that he has been pointing out to the danger of nucler energy in the past. We should instead straight and in all humility admit that this is the second warning. The first one was Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was not only to the people of Japan but to the whole of mankind. But the big powers of the world have not taken heed of the warning. We also have failed to notice the inseparable relationship between the nuclear weapons and the nuclear energy. The people of Japan who have been the victims of the nuclear weapons have unfortunately chosen the path toward the use of the nuclear energy.
Narayan then proceeds to analyze the specific conditions in Japan. The nuclear energy generates radioactivity. It is not economical. Also it has been proved to be not perfectly safe. It may be because of the following reasons that Japan has made use of it in spite of those factors. First, there were scarce energy resources. Second, the government has defined the meaning of development as the pursuit of the material affluence, and tried to achieve economic growth by competition, thereby forgetting that it is a wrong growth that victimizes others. Moreover, they have idealized Western values, Western way of life, Western culture, thereby forgetting their own identity. In so doing they have internalized the belief that science and technology are infallible. They have forgotton that man is fallible.
And he askes if those tragedies are not the opportunity to change such a way of thingking.
I will not go into the more general and philosophical portion of the reply. Let me, however, call your attention to the fact that, at the beginning of his reply, Narayan says that it is a difficult task to say what Gandhi would have said, because he wonders if he qualifies, and, more interestingly to this writer, Gandhi was always evolving, and therefore he could not be sure how Gandhi's ideas might have changed in the 64 years after his death. Very much like him!
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
"Occupying Tokyo"
It started in New York on 17 September. The slogan was 'Occupy the Wall Street'.
Thousands did so by going up and down the street. Their placards said 'Arrest the Bankers', 'No More Greed', and many such things. What was unheard-of was that they were unanimous in stressing the disparities between the 99% of the population and the remaining 1%.
From NY it spread to Washington. In the US the population below the poverty line swelled by 2.6 million last year to reach 46.2 million. It is 15-16% of the total, roughly the same as in Japan, though her jobless ratio of 9.1% is somewhat higher.
In less than a month the movement spread to about 1,000 cities all over the globe, including Tokyo. The remarkable thing here is that the ratio of those who are irregularly employed has kept on rising and it now reached 38%. And it is making the position of the rest of the working force that much unstable.
A week ago, in the midst of this phenomenon, a high official of the IMF in charge of the Asia and the Pacific has given an interview to a Japanese newspaper.
He said, among others, that in order to cut the budgetary deficit it would be desirable that Japan would raise the consumption tax from the present 5% to 15% by stages, as the hike of this tax would least affect the economic growth. He also suggested that there should be reforms in the social policy so that, for example, the people would get the pension at a later age.
When there was a change in the government in this country two years ago, the new Democratic Party government was telling the people that there would be no change in the consumption tax ratio for the full term of four years. At the Upper House elections a year ago, however, the former PM talked about a possible hike in this tax, and lost heavily. More recently the new PM and the FM are sending out signs of rasing it to 10%. The above interview may well be a part of a coordinated effort, both on the part of the official and the newspaper.
For, the interview does not take into consideration that there is a very keen feeling of inequality already existing among the people at large. Not only the income tax is unfair. Medical and educational expenditure are so heavy that there are many unable to pay the prescribed insurance fee, or unable to keep the children studying beyond the nine years' obligatory education. If the consumption tax trebles or even doubles over and above all this, it would mean a devastating blow to the purching power of the common people.
Nothing is further from the truth to say that it is the least harmless to the growth. It is the most retrogressive tax. A 10% rise will take away 5% of the annual GDP of the country. It will surely widen the gap between 1% and the rest.
The official also says that Japan should go ahead with trade liberalization through participating in the proposed TPP(Trans-Pacific Partnership). He seems to think that free trade will mean higher growth for Japan. That is not the way Japan's economy grew. It has not been an export-led economy. It has been based on domestic demand and full employment. The pattern has been eroded by making more and more of the working force unstable since 1980s.
Participating in the TTP would surely be another blow, may be a body blow, to the Janapese economy, especially agriculture, for how can our small-scale intensive agriculture compete with the US and Australia? Even the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries estimates that our food self-sufficiency ratio will come down from the present 39%, itself low enough, to a mere 13%. It is also probable that it will open up a number of social sectors to the foreign private capital, so that the already emerging tendency for the government to pull out from those sectors will get further momentum. Thus the dichotomy of one against 99 will reemerge on an international level, as it will help reduce the jobless in the US but increase it in Japan. As such it is part of Obama's election strategy. Most of Japan's 47 Prefectural Assemblies have expressed either opposition to or causion on the PPT participation.
The official said in the same interview that there are limits on the curtailment of the government expenditure. The same newspaper reported on the same day that the Self-Defense Forces of Japan is now selecting one out of the three candidates for their next fighters, and it will mean a purchase of $12 billion or so. Is such a purchase necessary?
Thousands did so by going up and down the street. Their placards said 'Arrest the Bankers', 'No More Greed', and many such things. What was unheard-of was that they were unanimous in stressing the disparities between the 99% of the population and the remaining 1%.
From NY it spread to Washington. In the US the population below the poverty line swelled by 2.6 million last year to reach 46.2 million. It is 15-16% of the total, roughly the same as in Japan, though her jobless ratio of 9.1% is somewhat higher.
In less than a month the movement spread to about 1,000 cities all over the globe, including Tokyo. The remarkable thing here is that the ratio of those who are irregularly employed has kept on rising and it now reached 38%. And it is making the position of the rest of the working force that much unstable.
A week ago, in the midst of this phenomenon, a high official of the IMF in charge of the Asia and the Pacific has given an interview to a Japanese newspaper.
He said, among others, that in order to cut the budgetary deficit it would be desirable that Japan would raise the consumption tax from the present 5% to 15% by stages, as the hike of this tax would least affect the economic growth. He also suggested that there should be reforms in the social policy so that, for example, the people would get the pension at a later age.
When there was a change in the government in this country two years ago, the new Democratic Party government was telling the people that there would be no change in the consumption tax ratio for the full term of four years. At the Upper House elections a year ago, however, the former PM talked about a possible hike in this tax, and lost heavily. More recently the new PM and the FM are sending out signs of rasing it to 10%. The above interview may well be a part of a coordinated effort, both on the part of the official and the newspaper.
For, the interview does not take into consideration that there is a very keen feeling of inequality already existing among the people at large. Not only the income tax is unfair. Medical and educational expenditure are so heavy that there are many unable to pay the prescribed insurance fee, or unable to keep the children studying beyond the nine years' obligatory education. If the consumption tax trebles or even doubles over and above all this, it would mean a devastating blow to the purching power of the common people.
Nothing is further from the truth to say that it is the least harmless to the growth. It is the most retrogressive tax. A 10% rise will take away 5% of the annual GDP of the country. It will surely widen the gap between 1% and the rest.
The official also says that Japan should go ahead with trade liberalization through participating in the proposed TPP(Trans-Pacific Partnership). He seems to think that free trade will mean higher growth for Japan. That is not the way Japan's economy grew. It has not been an export-led economy. It has been based on domestic demand and full employment. The pattern has been eroded by making more and more of the working force unstable since 1980s.
Participating in the TTP would surely be another blow, may be a body blow, to the Janapese economy, especially agriculture, for how can our small-scale intensive agriculture compete with the US and Australia? Even the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries estimates that our food self-sufficiency ratio will come down from the present 39%, itself low enough, to a mere 13%. It is also probable that it will open up a number of social sectors to the foreign private capital, so that the already emerging tendency for the government to pull out from those sectors will get further momentum. Thus the dichotomy of one against 99 will reemerge on an international level, as it will help reduce the jobless in the US but increase it in Japan. As such it is part of Obama's election strategy. Most of Japan's 47 Prefectural Assemblies have expressed either opposition to or causion on the PPT participation.
The official said in the same interview that there are limits on the curtailment of the government expenditure. The same newspaper reported on the same day that the Self-Defense Forces of Japan is now selecting one out of the three candidates for their next fighters, and it will mean a purchase of $12 billion or so. Is such a purchase necessary?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)