Have the LDP been neo-conned?
Posted by Matt Dioguardi on July 8th, 2007
In this entry I discuss LDP’s utter and complete lack of a real foreign policy …
If you click on the above picture, you’ll be able to see it better. (Or download a PDF here.)
This is a copy of a flyer that will be used by the DPJ (Democratic Party of Japan) in their upcoming election. Basically it says across the top that “If the LDP’s government continues, then Japan will continue to kiss up to America and the world will continue to grow more chaotic.”
In the first picture on the left it shows an unnamed American (Bush?) He’s shouting “War with Afghanistan! Next war with Iraq!” Two guys who look similar to Junichiro Koizumi and Shinzo Abe are digging and saying, “Yes sir, yes sir, we can do it!” Meanwhile an angry crowd looks on shouting, “where are the weapons of mass destruction?” “Where’s the connection between Hussein and terror?” And so on.
The next picture under the one just described shows a man who look like Abe, he’s humbly accepting the American fighters and telling them to use Japan freely, while promising his own people he won’t accept their bases (but giving them some kind of carrot to make them do so).
The last picture shows a person who looks very much like Abe and he’s trying to gain permanent membership status in the the UN security council, but both America and China seem disgusted with him and won’t even talk to him.
This flyer actually sums up Abe and Koizumi’s foreign policy pretty well.
The right half of the picture shows various DPJ leaders dealing effectively with foreign leaders from around the world. And talks about working together with other countries while Japan stands on its own.
Across the bottom it is written:
“The LDP are the people who thinks it’s okay to entrust our foreign policy to America, the DPJ are the people who think we have to stand on our own!”
As an American, I am personally not at all happy with the current situation that exists between America and Japan. In particular, the neocons have been idiotically firing up the far right in Japan. Just like the neocons have continued to stir up a hornet’s nest in the middle east, they are likewise doing so in Asia as well.
This might sound like an overstatement, but I’m glad to hear I’m not alone in this viewpoint. Reading this morning’s Japan Times, I saw a review for Gavan McCormack’s new book Client State: Japan in America’s Embrace [amazon link].
Here’s an excerpt from the review, which is written by Jeff Kingston:
-
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and his predecessor Junichiro Koizumi are usually portrayed as assertive nationalists, but come off here as dutiful and submissive gophers carrying out the Bush administration’s agenda. Looking behind the patriotic rhetoric, Gavan McCormack, professor emeritus at Australia National University, argues that the closer embrace of the United States at the opening of the 21st century has widened the gulf between Japan and its neighbors. Japan’s “neocons” are isolating Japan and making it more dependent on the U.S. while pretending to be assertive and charting their own destiny.
In trying to become the Great Britain of Asia, Japan is casting off its security constraints and trying to meet U.S. demands, but in doing so is alienating China and both Koreas. Moreover, despite accommodating U.S. demands, it’s views are ignored and counsel unsolicited on matters of importance. In this unequal alliance, Japan is treated like a vassal and used as an ATM.
.
.
He writes, “The Koizumi-Abe ‘revolution’ actually meant the liquidation of some important residual levers of Japanese autonomy, and the acceptance of an even higher level of submission and exploitation within the U.S. global empire.”
McCormack explains that, “Identity is the fundamental unresolved question of Japan’s modern history.” In this context one can better understand the culture war being waged by Abe in imposing patriotic education, airbrushing Japan’s wartime history and promoting constitutional revision. By allowing the emperor to remain institutionalized as the symbol of the state in the Constitution, embracing the wartime conservative elite and postponing any reckoning over Japan’s shared history with Asia due to the Cold War, Washington has powerfully shaped Japan’s identity. These policies keep Japan aloof from the region and impair moves toward regional reconciliation. …
True enough!
July 8th, 2007 at 7:25 pm
There are some points I agree and other points I disagree, but I think there is one important perspective missing;What is the best option available for Japan in terms of national security in the face of increasing Chinese military strength ?
In this respect, I think Koizumi and Abe are basically on the right track, though I dislike their policy on several points. The multi-diplomacy with the Asia countries and EU, and working with UN sound good as long as there is a strong alliance with the U.S. I am not sure yet where DPJ’s policy of distancing from the U.S. will lead Japan. Depending on the details of their policy, it will lead the region more chaotic.
July 9th, 2007 at 5:24 am
Ponta,
Thank you for comments. Your ideas are probably more reasonable than mine, as I like to push things towards a speculative direction in order to challenge people. Having said that let me try and challenge you a little …
I don’t want to cause a collective shudder by making a silly suggestion, but how about a nuclear deterrent?
That is what Japan has now, under America. I think Japanese nationalism succeeds far better with America defending Japan, because the nationalists can say whatever they want and not really worry about the consequences. In other words, the domestic audience can be appealed to without any concern whatsoever for the foreign impact this is having.
If America were not striving for global hegemony in the region, Japan would have to far more successfully engage its neighbors. The repercussions for domestic political pandering would become all to evident in overseas relations.
In that case, I think a soft tongue, a humble attitude, a willingness to talk about WWII in an open manner would become a necessity. However, I think Japan would also require a nuclear deterrent, wouldn’t they?
The two trouble spots with China are Taiwan and then certain territorial disputes about who has rights to mine certain underwater areas. Are these differences dangerous and significant? What other threats does China pose for Japan? Just how dangerous is China?
My guess is China is do busy with internal problems to pose much of a threat to anyone, especially another nuclear power.
The UN basically equals America, does it not?
To tell the truth, at this point I’m thinking it’s mostly just rhetoric. But I think it makes a good point.
As someone who is an America national, I think America has far over extended itself, and I worry about the future of the country. America is accumulating massive debts so it can maintain its influence over vast areas of the world. How long can America continue to do this? Moreover, the American government is accountable to the American people, how many of them are fully aware of just how extensive America’s involvement is overseas? Does any of this really represent the interests of the ordinary American?
Let’s be very speculative here … American foreign extravagance overseas will continue to have two effects in America:
1. Increase the debt towards the point where it is unmanageable without significant (unacceptable levels of) inflation.
2. Continue to cause resentment overseas with potential terrorist attacks in America.
As a result America will either have to let go of it’s Empire
-or-
lean farther to the right, restricting freedom even more in order to maintain it’s empire.
Either way, if there’s any truth to this speculative thinking, then Japan had sooner better than later look towards minding it’s own foreign policy, rather than relying on outsiders.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
Thanks Matt.
That is the exactly choice Japan has to take if the U.S. pull out of Japan. But nuclear deterrent does not stop the country to engage in conventional war. So I think Japan still needs strong alliances to counter China.
First I don’t think American will give up striving for hegemnoy.
Second, besides, I think the U.S. hegemony in East Asia is essential to the stability of the region.(this might be debatable, though).
Third, it is also possible Asian countries does not want the U.S. to leave Japan for fear that Japan alone might rise as an expansionist.
The threat, when talking of the balance of power. is measured by the scale of military of that country. China’s increasing military would be a threat even if we had no territorial issue.
I think bascially Japan is minding its own foreign policy. The sending troop for Iraqi was rather exceptional, but if Japan is determined to cooperate with UN, Japan needs to send peace-keeping troop anyway.
With or without American hegemony in the region, I think Japan needs to hold close relations with India, Australia, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, etc to counter China. I love Chinese traditional culture. I think we need to communicate with Chinese people in the grass-root level on history and other matters. But when it comes to balance of power, that is another story.
Thanks for the comment, I always enjoy your intellectual posts.