Parties Talking To The Party

"Normalization? What normalization? Sino-Japanese relations have always been run throught the Komeito." *

Two weeks ago on Channel News Asia I tried to explain that newly announced Cabinet and Liberal Democratic Party line ups hinted that repair work on the Sino-Japanese political relationship was less likely to be conducted state-to-state as party-to-party. (Link)

Yesterday, at a lecture/press availability, New Komeito vice representative Kitagawa Kazuo revealed that unnamed high-level members of the LDP and New Komeito executive secretariats will be traveling to China in October to meet with counterparts in the Chinese Communist Party in what should be read as a preparatory visit for a possible Xi Jingping-Abe Shinzo direct dialogue on the sidelines of the APEC Summit in November. Unsurprisingly, Kitagawa made mentioned of the two high ranking officials of the LDP I highlighted when I talked on CNA two weeks ago. (Link - J)

Working party-to-party, in what I called in the video a privatization of the relationship, is not necessarily a bad thing, despite the negative connotations "privatization" has. Working LDP/NK-to-CCP certainly allows both sides to get past the cumbersome prerequisites each of the respective governments has declared are the minimal decencies that must be met before the two sides can sit across from each other in those grotesquely overstuffed armchairs the Chinese favor.

However, those of us who still harbor illusions of living in a democracy rather than in what is one of a set of strangely similar Asian plutocratic aristocracies (thank you, Indonesia, for keeping lit the pathetic tiny flame of meritocracy) still must wince at princelings convivially meeting each other in their private capacities rather than facing off against each other in the public arena.

Given how close we might be to stupid shooting breaking out between paramilitary forces of both sides, we possibly should not be so picky about how conversations get restarted.

-------------------
* Not an actual quote, of course. C'mon.


Image: Kitagawa Kazuo speaking on 17 September 2014.
Image courtesy: New Komeito official website.

What To Call The New Order

I was asked a few months back what we should be calling the Japanese political order in the aftermath of the July House of Councillors election, whether it is indeed the return of the "1.5 Party System" of old. The phrase "1.5 Party System" is a demeaning* and easily apprehended international version of what was domestically called "the 1955 System," after the year the two factions of the Socialists on the left and the Liberal Party and the Japan Democratic Party on the right merged to form two large left/right divide parties, with the right dominant due to the left's division into Socialist and Communist camps. I responded that a better term for the current situation would be a 1.0 Party System. Under the 1955 system, the Socialists could tie up Diet business in a serious way and had to be paid off to an extent the term "1.5 Party System" leaves unclear. "1.5 Party System" indeed undersells the political threat that the Socialists posed (which the LDP neutralized in a whole host of shoddy ways, including absurd levels of disproportion in between rural and urban voting districts). However, the "0.5" in the "1.5" does give the Socialists at least some heft -- which they had.

After last year's House of Representatives election and the July election the rump opposition parties in the Diet are little more than confused noise machines without any power to foment change. Hence my suggestion of a "1.0 System" moniker.

The image of an utterly powerless opposition (the 0 in the 1.0 expression) is obviously an exaggeration. The general concept is not, however, entirely without merit. Leadership of Japan's small but dogged anti-nuclear power and anti-secrecy bill forces, the current most prominent movements challenging the government's attempts to sweep problems under the rug and move on, comes almost entirely from outside the Diet.

I have been and will continue using the 1.0 System expression, having possibly coined it. However, one sees in the news media the indigenous expression ikkyo tajaku (一強多弱 - "one strong, many weak"), an expansion of the standard expression ikkyo meaning "dominant." I have seen the four character compound used on NHK and I think TBS network broadcasts. Here is a letter to editor of The Asahi Shimbun that uses the phrase, though the first character is replaced by the Arabic numeral 1.

When written in kanji the expression ikkyo tajaku is both visually arresting and easily understood. However, what is/would be the elegant and succint English translation?

------------------------

* Speaking of demeaning, why did the author insert a denigration of Japanese tech praxis in this article on South Korean reverse engineering of U.S. military technology?

Abe Shinzo in 2020? (Not Hindsight)

Twice this week I have read in prominent publications musings about whether or not Prime Minister Abe Shinzo could possibly still be in office at the time of the opening of the Tokyo 2020 Olympics.

Could Abe be the premier at the torch lighting ceremony?

In theory, yes. The only requirements for a prime minister are being alive and a member of the Diet (yes, I am aware that the latter presumes the former. Bear with me).

Prime Minister Abe is 58 years old, meaning that he will be 65 at the time the 2020 games. Abe's father Shintaro died at the relatively young age of 67 of undetermined causes -- explanations including heart failure (the official cause of death), liver failure and cancer. Shinzo has also had health problems, the nature of which are the subject of speculation (secrecy about health issues seems to run in the family). Shintaro's death came after a two year period of hospitalization -- a collapse and sudden withdrawal from public life seemingly triggered by the shuddering halt in his career brought about by the Recruit Scandal (another parallel - Link).

While the robustness of Abe Shinzo's physical health has a question mark over it, there should be no questions about his political health. Yamaguchi Prefecture is the home of conservative elective politics and a Liberal Democratic Party (all six Diet members) and Kishi clan (Abe's younger brother Kishi Nobuo is the representative for Yamaguchi District #4) bastion. Abe will continue to win in his Yamaguchi #2 district as long as he is running for a seat.

Nevertheless, the charter of the LDP pretty much rules out Abe presiding over Olympics in 2020. Article 12 of the charter sets the term of the presidency of the LDP at three years, with a maximum of two consecutive terms in office (Link - J). While there is no stipulation that a prime minister must be the head of a party, the general consensus is that only the heads of parties are eligible for the prime ministerial election. Murayama Tomiichi became prime minister even though he was not the leader of the largest party in the Diet. He nevertheless was at least the leader of the soon-to-be-doomed Socialist Party.

In the already unlikely event Abe Shinzo manages to serve out two full terms, he will lose his party presidency. This will mandate his resignation as prime minister.

Abe could, of course, return to the LDP presidency after the term in office of a successor. However, it is extremely unlikely that the members of the LDP, or more specifically the many prime minister wannabees in the LDP, would let Abe have a third chance at the party's top post. It is even more unlikely that Abe would run for the premiership as an independent or the head of a party other than the LDP.

Where The Opponents Of The LDP Lose Me

In intellectual sparfests these past few days I have faced not a few persons asserting that the citizens of Japan deserve (and, according to Ozawa Ichiro, want) an organized, progressive umbrella party as an electoral alternative to the Liberal Democratic Party.

To which I reply, "And what would this alternative party's policy axis be?"

Let us look at the posters of the current five strongly anti-LDP opposition parties, i.e.

- The Democratic Party of Japan

- The People's Life Party

- The Social Democratic Party

- The Japan Communist Party and

- Green Breeze (Midori no kaze)


DPJ - "We Will be the Power to Protect People's Ways of Life"


People's Life Party - "We Will Protect Livelihoods!"


DSP - "Rather Than A Strong Country, A Kind Society"


JCP - "Stop TPP: Agriculture, Employment, Medical Care and Food Safety
The Party That Loves This Country"

Green Breeze - no official poster (that I know of) but a lot of the same kind of messages

Give the JCP credit for its opportunistic seizure of a national emblem at a time when Mt. Fuji is very much in the news, and for its unabashed expression of a love of country. Way to go, JCP (whose name is, by the way, the NIPPON Kyosanto) -- this is how a progressive party should muscle in on right wing nationalist territory!

Nevertheless, the similarity of the messages, rather than being a source of hope (hey look, all these different parties are saying about the same thing -- we have the ingredients for a united front here!) is instead incredibly depressing*. Each party is asserting that globalization and its effects can be resisted, that competition and market forces can be stopped at the border, and that even as the world changes, Japan can stay as it was.

I am sorry. If a crabbed, timid and backward-looking vision is what you have on offer, then you have lost me.

For all its many faults, the policies of the ruling LDP-New Komeito coalition, which are in every area risky as hell, at least acknowledge the premise that the important work of government is the management of change, not desperate, lunging attempts to keep change out.

-----------------

* That the DPJ, People's Life and Green Breeze should have near identical policy platforms is hardly surprising, as all are led by either Ozawa Ichiro or one of his proteges.

That Mountain In My Eye

Below is the graph of the support levels for the various major parties over the last six months, according to the monthly NHK public opinion survey:


Click on image to enlarge.

The House of Councillors election is less than two months away.

Somebody please tell me what the opposition parties could possibly hope to accomplish...and what the strategy would be to achieve that end...and please do not tell me it is "winning over the undecided voters."

Source: NHK Broadcasting Culture Research Institute

Popularity Of Constitutional Revision, As A Concept

One of the reliable, longtime "Yes...but" caveats has been that while Japan's politicians, particular the Diet members of the Liberal Democratic Party and the Japan Restoration Association, are essentially unanimous in their desire for revisions of the Constitution, the general populace does not share their enthusiasm.

Last week's public opinion polls seem to drive a spike into this chestnut. While the data still finds that the general public is not as enthusiastic about constitutional reform as the denizens of the Diet, a clear majority of respondents would still like to the election of a House of Councillors where more than two-thirds of the seats are held by pro-revision Senators -- 2/3rds majority in that House being the only real road block to constitutional revision.

The Kyodo News poll of March 30-31 had the following question and answers:

Currently, in the House of Representatives, 2 out of 3 members wish to revise the Constitution. In reality, in order to initiate a revision of the Constitution, 2/3rds majorities are necessary in both Houses of the Diet. What do you think would be the best outcome for the House of Councillors election?

That 2 out 3 members of the House of Councillors are in favor of constitutional revision
65.1%

That the number of members of the Councillors in favor of constitutional revision be less than 2 out of 3
27.4%

Don't know/Don't care
7.5%

In the NHK News poll April 4-5(Link – J video) the question is and answers are:

In the results of the House of Councillors election taking place this summer, would you find it desirable or undesirable that political forces in favor of constitutional revision come out holding 2 out of 3 seats?

Desirable 20%

If I had to choose, I would say desirable 37%

If I had to choose, I would say undesirable 20%

Undesirable 12%

The public opinion polls will likely be revisiting this question. A rephrasing of the question may shift a few percentage points in either direction -- but probably not by much in the negative direction.

In the aggregate, a clear majority of the electorate is ready, or at least wants the House of Councillors ready, to revise the Constitution.

As to what about the Constitution the voters want to change most, that question is largely left up in the air. The NHK polls does find that voters have not been convinced by the Abe-led LDP's hard sell of a revision of Article 96, the article that mandates revision by 2/3rds majorities in both Houses and a majority in a national referendum:

As regards constitutional revision, Article 96 requires first of all that over 2/3rds of the members of both the House of Representatives and House of Councillors be in favor of a revision. Are you in favor of a lowering of the threshold for constitutional revision, such as is proposed by Prime Minister Abe?

In favor 28%

Opposed 24%

Cannot say either way 42%

That big undecided chunk of voters means real opportunities for political entrepreneurs to ply their trade over the next few months.