Thursday, December 31, 2009

Hatoyama boxed in on Futenma Relocation

Relocating the Futenma base has turned into a nightmare for Prime Minister Hatoyama, as he attempts to please his own political supporters and also offer reassurances to his American counterpart. Washington is increasingly stressing that the 2006 agreement over the base relocation be adhered to. According to the deal, the current Futenma operations would be transferred to Camp Schwab in Nago, Okinawa. Hatoyama's coalition government announced a while back that it would be reviewing this agreement.

The main issue is that protests in Okinawa over American military presence are swelling. Ozawa, with growing political clout is openly second guessing Hatoyama's weak stance in the face of American pressure. And to top it all off, the Social Democratic Party (SDP), a coalition partner in Hatoyama's government is insisting that the base be located outside of Japan. Hatoyama dismissed the SDP proposal of moving the base operations and personal to Guam earlier this week.

When Obama visited Japan in November it sparked protests of opposition in Okinawa over the US military presence on the South Island. Citizens came out in droves to call on their newly elected DPJ government to stand firm against Washington. The local mayor in Okinawa called on new Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama "to put an end to Okinawa's burden and ordeal".

One protester at the November rally, Yoshiko Yonamine, was quoted in a BBC article as saying "Okinawans voted for the new administration, thinking it would remove the base from the island. I don't want it to betray us."

According to an article in the Mainichi Daily News today, Ozawa is now proposing that the relocation be carried out from Futenma to Shimoji Island. "Ruling Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) Secretary-General Ichiro Ozawa has proposed relocating U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Futenma to Shimoji Island in Okinawa Prefecture, ruling coalition sources said," reports the newspaper's online service. Ozawa apparently made the comment Tuesday, at a party celebrating year end.

"There are no regular flights to and from Shimoji Island Airport on Shimoji Island -- located about midway between Okinawa's main island and Taiwan -- and the airport has been mainly used by airlines for pilot training. Shimoji Island Airport had previously been named as a possible site for the relocation of Futenma," further reports the Mainichi Daily News.

The Japanese Foreign Service is in discussions with counterparts in Washington arranging a trip for Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada to visit the American Capital in the near future. The visit will focus on discussions relating to the base relocation. In the past week Okada has proposed a plan to reach a decision by May on where the base should be transferred. He conveyed this to American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The strong statements and the extensive coverage of Ozawa's proposals on the Futenma base issue are increasingly undermining the Prime Minister's authority. Furthermore, the mounting pressure from coalition members and America's insistence that the 2006 deal be followed, as well as public backlash, specifically in Okinawa, but also spread throughout the country has Hatoyama boxed in on the issue. He has little recourse of finding an amicable solution, but it is growing apparent that the relocation of Futenma will be a long drawn out process that will involve political tradeoffs here at home as well as concessions made to the Americans.

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Pills and Weapons; Indian and Japanese Relations

International relations are often bogged down with tireless debate over issues of free trade, moderately priced trade and expensive trade. As Hatoyama travels to India this week to meet Manmohan Singh, the Prime Minister of India, talks will center on trade: specifically on what India wants to trade and what Japan is unwilling to offer.

India wants to push Indian-made generic medication to a Japanese market. The talks on this issue have focused on reducing tariffs and essentially opening up a relatively closed market. Japanese drug makers are no doubt worried that an open market will collapse their profit margin, here in Japan. However, Japanese drug giant Takeda announced in early December that they are looking to enter a growing Indian market. The company is toying with the idea of making an acquisition to achieve this goal. Takeda has recently come under Government pressure in Japan to offer generic drugs in their portfolio. This news comes on the heals of Japanese firm Daiichi purchasing controlling interest in Ranbaxy last year for $4.6 billion.

"Domestic (Indian) drug makers like Cipla, Dr Reddy's Laboratories and Ranbaxy Laboratories are known for their ability to produce quality generic drugs at affordable prices," according to a recent article in Business Standard Online.
With Japanese pharmaceutical giants controlling the Indian producers of these generic drugs, the market is about to open in Japan. The pressure coming from the government to offer a wider selection of generic drugs means that Indian made medicine will become more prevalent in the coming years in pharmacies throughout the country.

However despite these private enterprise initiatives in the pharmaceutical industry the Japanese and Indian governments have been unable to close a free trade deal despite years of negotiations.

The problem rests in the fact that a fast growing Indian middle class is an attractive market for a range of Japanese businesses. If the domestic market opens here in Japan, so to will the Indian consumer market to Japanese goods. There is a great deal at steak for both countries and both economies, and some short term negative impacts on smaller drug producing firms domestically might smooth the way for a host of growth across the Japanese economy.

Hayotoma, has in the recent past met with Singh. The two spoke on the sidelines in October following an Association of Southeast Asian Nations conference in Thailand. Singh then pushed for increased relations on the exchange of Nuclear Technology between the two countries.

Japan’s Foreign Ministry has been hesitating on a Nuclear Energy deal with India, linked to India’s steadfast refusal to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Due to these apprehensions, Japan was reluctant to jump behind an Indian/American deal struck in 2008, which opened up the gates to an increased transfer of Nuclear Technology. The waiver offered to New Delhi in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) last year reopened global atomic trade for India after nearly 35 years. Singh will likely argue increased exchanges in nuclear power technology, citing the NSG agreement in his approach. As Hatoyama’s position vis-à-vis nuclear proliferation remains constant, he is unlikely to give any ground on the issue. His nuclear mantra goes something like the following, “Japan is the only nation to have suffered an atomic attack, but we will study the issue in more depth.”

India, as one of a handful of Nuclear weapons harbouring nations is considered a likely nuclear flashpoint when contentious relations with neighbouring Pakistan are considered. Increased instability in Pakistan due to growing militancy has made for increased pressure to downgrade the nuclear weapons capacity of both nations. The Japanese Prime Minister is likely to delay any transfer of Nuclear Technology out of Japan and into India indefinitely. Rightfully So.

Saturday, December 26, 2009

Spokesman Needed for the J-Bomb Campaign

After Nuclear Weapons Tests from North Korea in the past couple of years, Japanese policy makers and politicians have been discussing the issue of arming the country with defensive nuclear weapons, an impressive and interesting discussion to say the least. Japan has held onto its pacifist constitution for far too long and in a time of growing instability, the only way to curb that instability is for the stable and legitimate first world nations to hold the ultimate deterrent.

Earlier this year a former Finance Minister and senior politician, Shoichi Nakagawa suggested that Japan should explore the defensive nuclear issue in more depth to curtail growing instability over the possession of weapons by Kim Jung Il's regime. Since this time Nakagawa's LDP government has been defeated in a general election in August and Nakagawa (age 56) has since died at his apartment in Tokyo. Apparently he had been dealing with alcoholism his entire life.

"North Korea has taken a step toward a system whereby it can shoot without prior notice. We have to discuss countermeasures," said Mr Nakagawa from his office in April. The disgraced Nakagawa stepped down as Finance Minister after appearing to be intoxicated at a G7 press conference in Rome.

Former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has said that the Japanese constitution does not block the possession of defensive nuclear weapons. Abe went on further to reassure his U.S. and Chinese counterparts, back in 2006 that Japan would not exercise that option. His stance however, opens the debate regarding future Japanese Nuclear Weapons.

Now that the LDP government has been cast aside and Japanese voters have entrusted leadership to the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) and the coalition government the question is; who is leading the fight in Japan on the Nuclear Issue?

The DPJ under Hatoyama have exposed a secret pact with the United States that permitted American Nuclear Weapons to enter Japanese ports, spanning back several decades. This has jeopardized the three Non-Nuclear principles of Japan, and has essentially exposed the Three principals to in fact be reduced to Two principles; namely that Japan will not make or possess Nuclear Weapons. The third compromised principle was that the Japanese government would not permit Weapons in Japan, or its territory.

During the recent election, the DPJ campaigned on a principle of attempting to eradicate Nuclear Weapons in North-East Asia. However while campaigning Hatoyama, "emphasized the importance of the US nuclear umbrella for Japan to protect itself against North Korea," claims Tomoko Kiyota in an article titled Japan's Non-nuclear Principles: Change in the Offing? "However, as soon as he realized that his remark had been taken to mean that he intended to change the non-nuclear principles, he was quick to deny the previous remark and said, “the principles are/will be maintained in the near future,” continued Kiyota in the article.

To put it bluntly, there is no credible figure in Japanese Politics at the moment who can come out punching and make the case for Japanese Nuclear Proliferation. The case needs to be made, and strongly by a senior politician who values the defence of Japan. The Chinese and North Korean capabilities threaten the nation and as a global leader Japan should take a proactive approach in eliminating their long held principles of non-proliferation and acquire a stockpile of Weapons. The move will not destabilize the region, any more than it has already been destabilized by the acquisition of Hiroshima payload weapons currently held by the DPRK. The introduction of a Japanese nuclear weapons program should be done over the course of some time and should be done in parallel with a program to beef-up the Japanese Self Defence Forces.

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

What do Pinocchio, Medvedav and Hatoyama have in common?

Alright, that's easy even if you’re not familiar with politics. Pinocchio is the world's most famous puppet. Dmitry Medvedev now plays a close second to the Disney creation with his master, former President and still undisputed champion of modern Russia Iron Vlad Putin, calling all the shots. It is now clear that current Prime Minister of Japan Yukio Hatoyama is being led along by Party Kingpin Ichiro Ozawa, current DPJ Secretary General.

Hatoyama, with all the panache of a Kia car seat stumbles through awkward press conferences and is, to put it mildly, not terribly exciting. The media has begun to focus on the influence that Ozawa commands in government discussions and decisions. This week the DPJ has shifted their policy on a major election promise. A pledge that helped them claim a decisive victory in the August general election. Hatoyama promised to end surcharges on road-related taxes that amount to 2.5 trillion yen in annual government revenue. Now the policy is essentially a mute-point as Ozawa has called on the government to continue imposing the tax, and Hatoyama has backed this request. The change in policy highlights the growing instability of the ruling coalition. The DPJ campaigned heavily against the "policy flip-flops" of the former LDP party and now it seems they've both flipped and flopped on the one of the single biggest promises they had made to voters.

So what? The government has said one thing and done another. It happens everyday in politics. This may be true to us in the West, but Japanese Governments have to make efforts to honour their campaign promises or they will pay the price in voter trust. The DPJ upset the LDP, snatching up more than 70 per cent of the votes in the last election, but their most recent polling numbers are hovering at the 50 per cent level. Sharp drops like these have recently been seen by many Japanese Prime Ministers, including Taro Aso, Yasuo Fukuda and Shinzo Abe, who lasted roughly a year after such steep drops in popular support. Thus, Japan has lacked a popular and dynamic Prime Minister since the days of Koizumi.

Hatoyama, and his supporters are aware of the government’s image problem and leading Cabinet Ministers have been propping up Hatoyama to the media. Hirofumi Hirano, the Chief Cabinet Secretary has publicly stated that Hatoyama has made the final decision on the gasoline and vehicle related taxes. This political support alone will not help Hatoyama hold the reigns of the top office in Japan. He needs to distance himself from Ozawa's control to establish his own legitimacy or he will continue to be seen as a puppet. Hatoyama is trying to do such with the recent announcement and rejection of Ozawa's proposal to institute an income cap on the child-care allowance. However, this ploy has not passed the test according to political commentators in Japan. Minoru Morita, a political critic has commented that, "Hatoyama is clearly just the head clerk of the administration."

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Japan Needs to Keep Funding Defence; The Price is Right

Japan's defence minister Toshimi Kitazawa is operating with tightened purse strings. The government has recently announced that it will be suspending new funds for a joint missile defence system with the United States.

This move will push back the deployment of the new Patriot Advanced Capability -3 (PAC-3) surface to air interceptors until after April 2011, according to recent news reports. The move was made during the negotiations leading up to the 2010/11 defence spending guidelines. Prime Minister Hatoyama's government has also delayed an extensive scheduled review of defence policy guidelines.

"Hatoyama's Democratic Party of Japan and its left-leaning and pacifist coalition partners have signalled a shift from supporting military missions to humanitarian aid in a break with their more hawkish conservative predecessors," boasts a recent AFP article.

This break is problematic for the defence of Japan and their bi-lateral relations with the United States. After the recent change of government in Japan and Washington, the conditions were ripe to scale back spending. The sheepish economy also provides an adequate excuse for the government here to be weak on funding defence. However, the defence of Japan is not something the government should be scaling back finances for.

The United States continues to be, by far the largest spender of defence dollars in the world. Spending roughly 50 cents for every one dollar spent on defence globally. Allies of the United States are falling short on their share of the tab. Japan, compared to other allies is not doing horribly, spending USD 50 Billion a year, including outpouring a substantial amount of cash taking care of US base needs in the country. However, the protection offered by a exceedingly thin American Military is of huge benefit to the decision makers in Tokyo, and the public at large, and has been for the past six decades. The main benefit being that, the allies share a common goal in land and sea based interceptors against possible attacks stemming from proximity to North Korea. The other benefit being that the agreements allow Japan the international goodwill of not being a nuclear state, while maintaining a very close relationship to the ultimate weapon. These benefits come at a price, so when Japan scales back military spending and support for the American war efforts it strains the relationship. "The new government (of Japan) has scrapped a naval refuelling mission in the Indian Ocean that has supported the US-led campaign in Afghanistan and announced a review of a 2006 pact on relocating US bases in Japan," from the same AFP article quoted earlier.

Therefore, Japan's new government could tighten the purse strings on the defence forces and eventually be forced to carry more of the real costs associated with being a global heavyweight, as power increasingly shifts to Asia. On the other hand, Japan could maintain the status quo, keep up their end of the military agreements with the United States, subtly boost defence funding and thrive as they have in the past with a strong partner in the future.

Sunday, December 20, 2009

"Secret" Nuclear Pact not that Surprising

Often governments undertake politically unpopular, but necessary decisions. Keeping the voters in the dark and suppressing information that if known will cause them to loose favour, and face almost certain defeat at the polls. It is now widely alleged that a secret agreement was signed between the government of Japan and that of the United States to permit nuclear weapons in transit to pass through Japan without express knowledge being conveyed to the government in Tokyo.

Japan, the only victim of a nuclear weapons offensive, remains proud of its three main nonnuclear principles that are in theory, still in place; to not possess nuclear weapons, to not produce said weapons nor to permit the weapons in Japan. The policy is now being called into question with the upcoming political memoir that is to be published by Hajime Morita, a former House of Representatives member and foreign minister to the late Prime Minister Masayoshi Ohira. According to Morita's account he is able to confirm the agreement, stemming from his affirmation of the pact with a Washington counterpart in 1963.

According to the Japan Times, "The secret nuclear deal is believed to have been agreed on bilaterally when the Japanese U.S. security treaty was revised in 1960, even though the treaty officially requires Washington to hold prior consultations with Tokyo before bringing nuclear weapons into Japan." However Morita confirms in his upcoming book that in practice the consultations were done away with and no advance notice was given.

In late November of this year, Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada, "officially acknowledged the existence of a secret Japan-U.S. pact that allowed U.S. vessels carrying nuclear weapons to enter Japanese territory." The government has been constantly denying the agreement since its inception, claiming that no nuclear weapons were brought into Japanese territory.

Hatoyama, and the Democratic Party of Japan are obviously playing politics with this decades old agreement. The knowledge that in certain circumstances U.S nuclear weapons made port calls to American bases in Japan should not come as a surprise, but should be taken as expected behaviour. The long established Liberal Democratic Party made these agreements ages ago and the DPJ will gain political favour by shedding light on the lies offered by their adversaries.

"After the Hatoyama administration took over in September, the foreign ministry's investigative task force looked at 2,694 files related to the security agreement and 571 related to the return of Okinawa that were found in the ministry archives, as well as approximately 400 files that were found at the Japanese embassy in the U.S," according to the Mainichi Daily News.

Japan would have had little room to oppose this treaty as it was signed in 1960, by then U.S. Ambassador to Japan Douglas MacArthur II and then-Foreign Minister Aiichiro Fujiyama. After falling victim to the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki roughly 13 years earlier, with a pro-American government and a heavy American presence in Japan with a constitution that reflected American values, it is of little wonder that such an agreement would be made. The more surprising news is that the American negotiators settled for such a weak agreement on this front. It would not be shocking if the inquiry revealed that nuclear weapons were permanently installed on American bases in Japan, given the proximity to Russia and the strategic location of Japan to many perceived threats of the day.

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Ozawa tells Korea what they want to hear

Politicians have a way of playing to crowds. To this end, Ichiro Ozawa is no different, and his latest comments to a Kookmin University audience in Seoul have marked a change in policy and diplomacy in the bilateral relationship between South Korea and Japan. Ozawa, political heavy weight and the current Secretary General of the Democratic Party of Japan told those gathered in Seoul that Japan must apologize for the “unfortunate period in modern history;” Thus referring to the Japanese rule of Korea from 1910 to 1945.

The tensions between Koreans and Japanese continue to this day and tensions often surface in relation to state visits to Yasukuni Shrine, in Tokyo by sitting Japanese Prime Ministers and Politicians. Koreans are particularly outraged because Japanese war criminals are enshrined at Yasukuni. Another tender spot in bi-lateral relations is the “comfort women” issue, surrounding treatment of Korean women by Japanese soldiers during the Second World War. The Japanese government continues to deny that it participated in orchestrated sexual slavery. Shinzo Abe, former Prime Minister stated in 2007, that, “there was no evidence to prove coercion.” Abe’s statements provoked negative reactions from Korea, and other Asian nations as well as Canada, the US and the Netherlands.

Current Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has in the past said that Japan should offer a formal apology to the comfort women and offer compensation to the victims of the scheme. This suggestion echoed by Ozawa in Korea this past weekend.
It is my contention that Japan should not offer such an apology and should show strength and pride when dealing with these international relations issues.

Successive Japanese governments have not been as strong a player globally as their economic might should suggest. The timid personalities that run Tokyo’s Diet have made the country a global backbencher. Of course, the Liberal Democratic Party, recently ousted by Hatoyama’s DPJ has been much of the problem in this apprehensive medley. The relative inexperience of the DPJ, or any party other than the LDP in governing Japan creates problems for Hatoyama and Ozawa as international spokesmen for Tokyo. The apologies should be less forthcoming, as they are offered by a new government, so close to the transfer of power from the entrenched LDP. Ozawa is riding the “International Friendship,” wave of Obama’s newness in international affairs and making good, by paying lip service to the Korea issue at a University in Seoul. Keep your apologies to yourself; even though they are likely to buy you political good-will, they are not your apologies to make.

North Korea Curbing Growing Tourist Demand

According to reports coming out of Beijing foreigners who have been recently applying for visas to the DPRK are being told, “See you next year.” North Korea has for the time being, blocked foreigners from entering the people’s paradise. The move leaves this commentator thinking how many would be tourists will have to delay their plans to fall at the feet of statues of the great leaders Kim Il Sung or Kim Jung Il and weep their deep respective praises?

The true threat to global politics continues to be the lunacy of North Korea and their tried and tested method of agreeing to international discussions, milking foreign aid and then reneging on the agreements to pursue aggressive weapons programs. In a recent Foreign Affairs article Andrei Lankov argues that quick fixes and international agreements will not bring an end to the oppressive regime in Pyongyang, but rather it will be the strategy that won the original Cold War that will beat back Kimmies strangle hold on the fruit filled garden of North Korea. Not the glorious work of International Negotiators, Foreign Aid, or Military Strength but a good old fashioned Information Campaign.

The disparity of income levels between North and South Korea if known and accepted as truth in North Korea by the bulk of the cut off population would force the cracks to widen in an old and damp foundation and over time would force the building to come crashing down, as it did to a certain wall somewhere in Germany. Communisms chief weakness was that it could not compete with the material well being of capitalist societies. The free trade zone that boarders both Korea’s provides a seemingly mutual benefit, South Korean enterprise benefits from a cheap and disposable work force, while North Korea gets an infusion of cold hard cash. However, the obvious danger for the DPRK is that that work force gets to interact with their neighbors from the South, who in their possessions and actions demonstrate on a very real level how broken their paradise at home actually is.

Lankov also argues that accepting students into the international education network is a clever ploy to also further cut into the legitimacy of Kim Jung Il and his system of governance. Simply giving students or citizens of North Korea internet access and a television remote or a library card will allow them to learn about the world and how different it is from what they are taught.

There are murmurs that the border closing is due to an upcoming Kim Jung Il trip to China. Others insist that the closing is an attempt to block unrest over the economy. The North recently revalued its currency in an attempt to cut into illegal profit making by shady businesses inside North Korea. (Shady businesses in North Korea are simply profit making endeavors.)

Xi Jinping, the Chinese Vice President, and widely rumored to be the front runner to succeed current President Hu Jintao has recently commented on his trip to Japan, that “several agreements on important issues have been reached between the United States and North Korea.” It is widely hoped that six party talks will continue and that they will lead to the de-nuclearization of the DPRK. It seems like the International Community is getting back on the marry-go-round and that North Korea will hop off again at some point in the near future and hold the world hostage for more goodies.

Mossad taking the lead in containing Iranian ambitions

Iranian ambitions are widening and causing alarm. With American troops committed to lengthy and un-winnable wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Madman in Tehran can continue to push the envelope without fear of being seriously challenged, or can he?
With the test launch of the revised Sejil 2 medium-range missile in Iran earlier this week, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad continues to send the wrong the signals to a global community growing impatient with the illegitimate government in Tehran. The new upgrades to the missile could carry it as far as Israel, and as the Jewish State has in the past, it might again be forced to take action to halt a growing nuclear ambition in Iran. In June of 1981, American made, Israeli fighter planes bombed and destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear facility in a wonderful bit of stealth flying and tight maneuvers by Israeli pilots. According to Donald Neff in a Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, “Thus the deeper meaning of the attack was that it amounted to a declaration of war against the Arab world's efforts to enter the atomic age.”
Hopefully Israel is still willing to wage such a war, as the other powers who could have a real impact are committed to ineffective sanctions and political diplomacy. Israel is the only player that can effectively move against the aspirations of Tehran. Former Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon put the problem of defeating Iran's nuclear ambitions on the desk of Mossad chief Meir Dagan. The problem is thus in good hands, as the Israeli Agency is unrivaled in its clandestine activities. American, Israeli and other Western agencies are still actively pursuing the purchasing networks of Iran on nuclear activities. Recent purchasing schemes, through agents and straw companies have been uncovered in Taiwan, according to Yossi Melmen in an article titled; Israel, U.S. leading bid to thwart Iran nuke efforts in Far East, posted on Haaretz.com yesterday. So, while official policy continues to be sanctions, negotiations and abstract threats, the Intelligence Agencies are fighting the ground war on preventing a Nuclear Iran. Such Intelligence work was the main player in a more in-depth inspection of a plane that made an emergency stop for fuel this week in Bangkok. The weapons stashed on the flight were logged as oil drilling equipment, but Thai officials suspect the weapons cache to be bound for Iran, compliments of North Korea. An unnamed Thai official claims that, "Some of the components found are believed to be parts of unassembled Taepodong- 2 missiles." The North Korean missiles are widely believed to be a joint product between the DPRK and Iran.
"The Zionist regime (Israel) and its (western) backers cannot do a damn thing to stop Iran's nuclear work," Ahmadinejad said in a televised speech in the central city of Isfahan earlier in December. The continued gauntlets being thrown down by Tehran's rhetoric and its continued testing of offensive weapons as well as its relationships with global nuclear rogues threatens Israel and the global community at large and if pushed to a breaking point Ahmadinejad will be rather forcefully removed from power. Growing tensions over Iran's internal political scene has taken some of the international focus off the nuclear aspirations of the government and the spotlight needs to be refocused on the issue.
The United States government is down playing the testing of the Sejil 2 medium-range missile, calling it essentially old news, and that the capabilities of this weapon are similar to past missiles. However, White House spokesmen Mike Hammer has said, the test would "increase the seriousness and resolve of the international community to hold Iran accountable for its continued defiance of its international obligations on its nuclear program." It seems that for the time being the only considerable efforts being made to block the nuclear ambitions are being conducted in the shadows.