A Military Man for a Civilian Race

     The Tokyo Gubernatorial race was held on 9 February.  There were four major candidates, or rather there were four candidates who were labelled as major by the media.  Masuzoe, who got elected with 2 million votes, was an LDP candidate.  Utsunomiya, a former President of Japan Bar Association, who as a lawyer pioneered in the field of defending poor debtors, was supported by the Communists and Social Democrats.  Hosokawa, a former Prime Minister, backed by Koizumi, also a former PM with some charisma, fought almost on the single issue of no more nuclear plants.  These two got one million each.  The fourth man was Tamogami, a former Chief of Staff of the Air Force of Japan's Self-Defence Forces.  To everyone's surprise he got 600,000.  They were all men in the mid-60s, except Hosokawa who was in the mid-70s.  The media depicted Masuzoe and Hosokawa as the two main contenders.  So did even the BBC.  But Hosokawa got slightly less than Utsunomiya.

     What kind of man is Tamogami?  Who supported him?  Are there likely to be men like him in the future contests?  He is not a man of charisma.  His style of speech is very ordinary.  But he may be called rightist, even with an adjective of ultra, in that he had been fired when he was the Chief of Staff when he published an article to deny that Japan's wars were wars of aggression, and this time also he repeated the same theme, denying aggression, massacre of Naning, comfort women and so on.  Those voices have been dormant all the time, but the arrival of Prime Minister Abe has made the political atmosphere easier for such voices to be broadcast, and heard.   At the same time the ultra voices have played the role of making Abe and the present mainstream LDP less of the rightist and more of the middle-of-the-road.  There will be a concerted effort to that end, although it is not very likely to succeed.

     The exit-poll shows that a quarter of the voters in their 20s voted for him.  In other wwords the voters in the higher echelons turned away from him, a man who might work to make this a more war-like country.  Having been born in 1948, Tamogami does not know the war, unlike the higher generation.  The greater problem, therefore, is how to win the younger ones to the cause of peace, in other words to the cause of welfare, and higher quality of life. 

Ban Ki-moon's Press Conference

     Three weeks ago, on 10 January, Mr. Ban Ki-moon, the widely respected UN Secretary-General, had the first press conference for the new year.  Here are some excerpts from the opening remarks.

     He said first that this should be the year of 'intensified diplomacy, inroads against poverty and action on climate change'.  In connection with the last-mentioned, he is going to convene 'The Climate Summit' for 23 September.

     On the trouble spots in the world, he mentioned Syria, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic, and said, 'I am especially alarmed by the spread of sectarian animosity'.  On Syria a Conference is going on at Geneva as was announced on this day.

     Then he called attention to 'countries where transitions have gone astray, fragility is growing, institutions are falling and democratic governance has faltered'.

     Not surprisingly he mentioned Thailand where Bangkok was in danger of being 'shut down'. Quite rightly he pointed out that the relation of Israel and Palestine is one of 'a perilous status quo' and the Israeli policy of building 'well over 1,000 settlement units' was both illegal and an obstacle to peace.  The situation in Sierra Leone has got better.

     Towards the end, he said the UN should move forward to 'disaster resilience' and 'a nuclear-weapon free world'.  That means a move to 'a safer, more just and prosperous world'.  He concluded by saying 'I am determined to make this a year of progress for people and the planet'.

     Best wishes, Mr. Ban !

Any Way Out in Thai Politics ?

     This writer knows next to nothing about Thai politics.  His knowledge of the country is also limited.  Apart from Bangkok, he has seen Chiang Mai in the north together with the 'Golden Triangle', and Hajai in the south, and practically nothing more.

     What is taking place in that country at present, however, drives me to produce something on it.  Because it is bound to have some impact upon the other Asian countries.  We are particularly concerned if the people of Thailand are paying, and are going to pay, respect to the principles of democracy.  The country has a long history of military rule.  Between 1973 and 76 there was a short break when citizens and students bought democracy with their blood.  A sociologist from Bangkok who came to Japan in '73 to attend the Asian Sociological Conference requested us to stand up and to mourn the dead students.  He later became the General Secretary of the Socialist Party, but was assassinated in the broad day-light in a few years' time.

     It is beyond our comprehension why both the Government and the opposition seem to be leaning on the shoulders of the military, even now.  And why the opposition refuses to take part in the General Elections already announced?  If they have demanded democratization of some sort, and the Government has announced Elections in their discretion, they should co-operate with them.  All this is none of my business?  But yes.  Whether there is going to be a military take-over in Thailand in the near future, as there was in Egypt last July, or whether the basic rules of democracy are to be followed, is a matter of vital importance to us and all of Thailand's neighbours.  The present situation is as if the opposition is requesting the military to come to their help.  Of course the parliamentary democracy may not be omnipotent.  But what is the democratic and non-violent alternative they can possibly choose?  If the opposition does not want to take part in the Elections because they are not likely to win, what is there to demarcate them from the mere mobs?   I hope I am terribly wrong and ignorant.    

Susumu Wins Over the Pro-Military Base Candidate

     Belatedly let me wish you all a Happy New Year 2014 !  Did I say the same thing for 2013 !?

     It was the voting day yesterday 19 January for the Mayoralty of Nago City, Okinawa Prefecture. Though there were less than 50,000 voters, it was an important election.    The Government, in collaboration with the US under the Security Treaty, wants to build there a US airbase with 2,500 metre V-shape airstrips by reclaiming beautiful coral sea.  The decision was taken in November 1997.  In the next month a residents' vote was taken and the majority voted against the plan. Since then there has been a continuing opposition for 17 years.  Mr. Inamine Susumu, 68, is the sitting mayor, and has stood again for a four-year term from the anti-base camp, with the only opponent backed by the LDP and the Governor of Okinawa.  The result was 20 to 16 thousand, with a distance of a little more than four thousand, a convincing victory.  Japan is not a federal polity, but Governors and Mayors have got certain administrative power.  It is not certain what the new Mayor will do, but with his firmness of mind and the backing of the majority of the voters he can do at least something to stop the building of the base.

     The voters were against noise, crimes, accidents, and environmental destruction.  Several factors have worked in favour of Susumu.  At the end of the last year the Governor, who had been expected to say No to the Government on this matter, expressed Yes, after he was offered the transfer of money by the Government more than he had expected.  Susumu said that he had never suspected this would happen.  It was called the Governor's betrayal.  People expected him not to sell the pride of Okinawa. The Prefectural Assembly has passed resolutions expressing opposition to the base, and demanding the resignation of the Governor.  The anger is still to be seen among the voters.  To make it worse, the LDP hinted at pouring a huge sum of money in return for the victory of their candidate, which kept many away.

     One thing more.  How will the result influence the relations with our neighbours which are not at their best?  Absolutely no harm.  On the contrary, it will hopefully be seen as a sign of Japan going less military-minded.  We hope that the US will also see it that way and accommodate herself with it.  After all they have a Peace-Prize laureate at the top！    

Whither Japan-III-Secrecy Act

     On the night of 6 December 2013, almost the midnight, the coalition majority in the Upper House of Japan's Parliament passed the Secrecy Act, winding up the debate forcefully.  It had already been passed by the Lower House, and thus became an Act, amid the widening opposition among the people.   They were gradually becoming aware that this was a repressive law.  The government, with absolute majorities in both houses, did not want to wait for that awakening.

     The law proposes to set aside a large area of information in the hands of the government, defence and diplomacy to begin with, in the realm of secrecy and to punish those who are responsible for giving this secrecy out up to ten years of imprisonment.  The people are not supposed to know even what is in that realm of secrecy.  So it is a Black Act.  Moreover, those who are in a position to handle the secret information, and not only they but even their family and close friends, are going to be minutely researched upon by the police and the various information agencies.

     Some say that without such a law ready at hand, your allies will hesitate to share their secrecy with you.  True, there has been pressure by the US upon us to have such a legislation(this kind of information may be classified as secret from now on!).  But do we have to have that kind of high-level secret information at the expense of the popular rights?  Is the existing criminal law not enough?  The US is of course a democratic country.  But she has been pressing us to delete the Article 9 from our constitution, to accept the collective right for self-defence as something exercisable, maintain their military bases at Okinawa, and so on. It is dangerous to follow everything that they say.  And look at how our own government dislikes to, and is not used to, share information with the people who are supposed to be sovereign according to our constitution. They, for example, has not admitted that there exist some secret treaties with the US which the US admitted a long time ago.  It is this government that wants more power, and an undefined one. Ooe Kenzaburo, a winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature, said that this Secrecy Law changes the nature of the Japanese state without changing the constitution.  Any opinion poll would show that more than half the voters will support Mr.Ooe.