War issue a nightmare for Japanese government

War issue a nightmare for Japanese government

By Harvey Stockwin

TOKYO (JP): The longevity of Japan's current coalition
government is increasingly in doubt, while the coalition's
inability to rule effectively is increasingly apparent.

This proposition initially became self-evident at the time of
the great earthquake in the Kansai region, around Osaka and Kobe,
on Jan. 17. The delayed reaction of the Japanese politicians to
the disaster was almost unbelievable, given that politicians are
always supposed to be closely attuned to the electorate's
suffering.

The fact that so much foreign assistance was turned aside was
lamentable, demonstrating as it did the insular, mercantilist and
xenophobic attitudes which Japan normally tries to keep hidden,
even as it seeks to keep foreigners and foreign goods at arm's
length.

In many other democracies the government would have fallen in
the wake of the calamity, because of its inadequate response. But
the coalition staggered on. Last week it once again demonstrated
its inability to get its act together on an important issue.

As Tokyo, Seoul and Washington try to harness their policies
towards North Korea, one missing link is that Japan does not have
any formal diplomatic relations with North Korea. Even the
Americans and the North Koreans are well on their way to
establishing liaison offices in each other's capitals.

Japan's relationship with the North languishes where a
political delegation, led by the former mastermind of the Liberal
Democratic party (LDP) Shin Kanemaru, left it way back in 1990.

The North Koreans somehow persuaded the naive Kanemaru that
Japan should not only pay compensation to Pyongyang for the
period of Japanese colonialism. The declaration issued at the end
of the visit also committed Japan to compensate the North Koreans
"for losses inflicted upon the Korean people since 1945".

At the beginning of this past week it rather looked as if the
Japanese were about to make another effort to break the ice in
the relationship. It was announced that a delegation,
representing the three parties in the current ruling coalition,
would be leaving for North Korea on March 16.

For some optimistic observers it looked as if Japan was
playing its 'North Korean card' in the convoluted international
politics of East Asia. It was even said that the North Koreans
had agreed that former Japanese Foreign Minister Michio Watanabe,
who had strongly criticized the Kanemaru's effort, would head the
delegation.

But then on March 14 the Socialists announced that they would
not be going to Pyongyang. Their precise reason for this stance
is still not clear. It is said that the Socialists were concerned
because the North Koreans had not yet conceded that they would
not insist upon post-1945 compensation for Japan's cold war
hostility.

But if this was a continued sticking point, why had the
delegation's visit been announced in the first place? Further,
the Socialist stance was strange, given that, until very
recently, the Socialists only recognized North Korea, and
disdained the South.

Whatever the reason for the Socialists refusal to go along,
the Sakigake (New Frontier Party) then announced that since the
Socialists were not going, they would not be going either.
Finally, on March 15, the LDP admitted that it would not proceed
to Pyongyang on its own. All of which left the coalition looking
even more disheveled and incompetent.

The biting irony is that while neither the Kansai earthquake
nor the North Korean diplomatic fiasco are likely to be bring the
government down, World War II might well do so.

Two weeks ago Socialist Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama
touched on an explosive issue which could end up blowing apart
the current coalition government of Japan.

He did this as he urged the annual LDP convention to back a
war-renouncing resolution to commemorate the 50th anniversary of
the ending of World War II.

With only five months to go, a coalition consensus is nowhere
in sight on such a resolution -- which was agreed in principle
when the coalition was formed last summer. The Socialists would
like to produce the first draft for debate by the end of March
but even this is doubtful.

The only aspect of World War II on which most Japanese
politicians do agree is that Japan will do everything possible to
trumpet its role as a victim of the atomic bombings at Hiroshima
and Nagasaki, thereby aiming to obscure Japan's role in events
from 1931 to 1945 leading up to the bombing.

Already a group of at least 161 LDP politicians, more than
half the party's combined strength in both Houses of the Diet,
has been meeting to oppose any such resolution. The group counts
among its leading members former LDP ministers who had to resign
for insisting that Japan never committed aggression, or that the
Nanjing Massacre never happened.

It is already clear that Murayama cannot count on
parliamentary assistance from the recently formed Shinshinto (New
Frontier Party), despite its pledge to acknowledge Japan's past
aggression. Already a small group within Shinshinto has also
been formed to oppose the as-yet undrafted resolution.

Yet, for Murayama, the resolution is vital on two counts.
First and foremost, the resolution will be an acid test of
Socialist unity. The political fallout from the Kansai
Earthquake in January has delayed the breakup of the Socialist
Party. If Murayama gives in to opposition to the resolution, he
will quickly revive the threat of disintegration.

Secondly, the resolution is the one area in which the left-
wing socialist faction, which Murayama leads, counts upon the
Prime Minister to display leadership.

In the leftists' eyes, Murayama has given way to the LDP on
the Socialist pledge to not raise the consumption tax. He has
given way on the longtime leftist opposition to the security
treaty with the United States.

Murayama has also been obliged to forget longtime Socialist
opposition to recognizing the legitimacy of Japan's Self-Defense
Forces.

So a resolution by the coalition government, apologizing for
past Japanese aggression and reiterating Japan's dedication to
peace and renunciation of war, is seen as a last chance for the
Socialists to show that their principles do still count for
something.

By contrast, many of those 161 LDP politicians are also
backing a movement which seeks to delete the war-renunciation
clause nine from the current Japanese constitution.

Clearly indicating the LDP's shift to the right, the party has
deleted a key phrase from its campaign pledges for the
forthcoming local elections. The deleted phrase expressed
approval for Murayama's pledge last year that Japan's past "acts
of aggression and colonial rule brought unbearable pain and
sorrow upon many people".

So, in a nutshell, the promised resolution highlights the
incongruity of the LDP-Socialist alliance. In their dogmatic and
ideological way, the Socialists do at least recognize Japan's
wartime failings, whereas the LDP majority is increasingly
unwilling to do so.

Whether the coalition government can survive the process of
creating a 50th anniversary resolution, and whether that
resolution can bring any credit whatsoever upon Japan as a
nation, are both very much in doubt.