UPDATE: This is probably the best time to invite those of you more interested in the broader trends of Japanese politics to read this paper by Gerald Curtis (pdf).
ORIGINAL POST:
Asia saw two transitions of power today: a military coup in Thailand and the election of Shinzo Abe as president of the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan. As a parliamentary democracy, leadership of the ruling party means Abe is now on track to succeed Junichiro Koizumi as Prime Minister next week. At the tender age of 51, Abe is the youngest person to hold the office. And perhaps more interesting, he is the first Japanese Prime Minister born after World War II.
A few foreign policy positions:
- On China: “We don’t currently see China as a threat… However, military spending has been in double digits for the last 18 years and the lack of transparency on military strength and spending is a concern. We hope China develops peacefully.”
- On Japan-China relations: “During the Koizumi administration, trade has doubled and Japan’s investment in China rose by 20 percent in 2005 from 2004… If relations were bad, this wouldn’t have happened. China benefits from the current economic relations and doesn’t want to destroy it. It’s the same with Japan.”
- On the Iraq War: “I think the US use of force [in Iraq] was judged correctly… There was a reasonable basis to think that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and Iraq had the burden of proof of showing that it did not have these weapons. Considering the Japan-US alliance, there were no mistakes in the decision of the Japanese government at that time to support the invasion.”
- On the US-Japan Alliance: “If Japan is attacked, there is only one country in the world that will protect Japan at the risk of its young soldier’s lives. That country is the United States. This is based in treaty. But a treaty standing alone guarantees nothing. Only if our bilateral relationship is based on mutual trust will the treaty be more than mere paper. Hence the relationship of trust between the two countries is what we strive to achieve.”
- On national defense: “National defense is a national right… If U.S. F-16 fighters take off to intercept 10 missiles headed to Japan and attacking their base, and ask for help from Japanese F-15s, could we say, `no?’ The moment we said, `we cannot go,’ it would be the end of the U.S.-Japan alliance.”
A few more fun facts: he never drinks alcohol and his wife loves “Korean wave” dramas.

Comments to this entry
Joe
September 20, 2006
7:22 am
(Not knocking Koizumi, of course. He is the man)
Mutantfrog
September 20, 2006
7:23 am
Nothing he says is original or deviates in any way from the party line, and to top it off he's also 100% lacking in Koizumi's personal charisma.
People voted for Abe because he's "safe", not because he's any good. It's a return to the pre-Koizumi LDP, and over the course of the next term, Abe's election may be better for the opposition than anything they've done themselves.
Mutantfrog Travelogue » Blog Archive » And Kan begat Shintaro…
September 20, 2006
7:33 am
yeolchae
September 20, 2006
10:24 am
Also, I would not be surprised if Japan becomes even more isolated diplomatically from the rest of Asia during his term.
Younghusband
September 20, 2006
11:25 am
Curzon
September 20, 2006
11:44 am
This brings us to the fundamental disagreement of what is a "neocon." No, he's not Jewish or a former Trotskyist. But here in Japan, he is young, hawkish, pro-US, and pulls no punches when it comes to China or North Korea. In the local context, that makes him the quintessential neocon.
Joe
September 20, 2006
1:56 pm
sun bin
September 20, 2006
4:02 pm
2) "headed to Japan and attacking their base", whether it is US Base of no, it is Japan's soveriegn territory, isn't it? It is within its current constitution of 'self defense', right? Or is there some delicate legal terms about these Bases?
Younghusband
September 20, 2006
7:32 pm
Curzon
September 21, 2006
12:28 am
YH: If we use Nexon's bookmark, both Koizumi and Abe are neocons -- they want a powerful, even extra-powerful U.S. to be the big bully on the block of world affairs. They think the UN is pretty damn useless, although they would never say so in public, and their desire for US power is based on a rational and realist analysis of their national interest -- the desire to keep the US strong, so strong that it's the distant "offshore balancer" of the Far East that can keep the lid on an aggressive North Korea and an growing China.
Younghusband
September 21, 2006
12:36 am
Joe
September 21, 2006
2:50 am
A: A neo-Khan
sun bin
September 21, 2006
4:05 am
since it was a HK based newspaper (Ming Pao) in Chinese. the 'relevant' chapters summarized/quoted are chinese-related. allthough yasukuni/textbook/history/remiliatarization mess we have already heard of.
but he has made one interesting point regarding sino-japanese relationship (not new either, i suppose), that economic and politics should be separated. i know this is what is happening all these times, but it would be nice if the two sides can agree on it openly.
just need to find the right time and right pretext.
sun bin
September 21, 2006
4:06 am
since it was a HK based newspaper (Ming Pao) in Chinese. the "Ëœrelevant' chapters summarized/quoted are chinese-related. nothing new, mostly the yasukuni/textbook/ history/remiliatarization mess we have already heard of.
but he has made one interesting point regarding sino-japanese relationship (not new either, i suppose), that economic and politics should be separated. i know this is what has been happening all these times, but it would be nice if the two sides can agree on it openly.
just need to find the right time and right pretext, i guess.
sun bin
September 21, 2006
4:59 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norika_Fujiwara
!http://news.eastday.com/eastday/news/news/node4948/node36226/images/00157928.jpg!
Joe
September 21, 2006
10:10 am
sun bin
September 21, 2006
10:27 pm
今㔚·ãƒ¼ã”šÂºÃ£Æ’³é™Â?㔚ŠãÂ?§ãƒ—ãƒÂ锡ŽçÂ?ĎÂ?¸æ”°”¹Ã£Â?”¹Ã£”š”°Ã£Â?®å¼”¢Ã©â‚¬â‚¬Ã£”š'発表ãÂ?—ãÂ?Ÿæ”“°åº”žÃ©Â?¸æ”°”¹Ã£â‚¬”šÃ£”šÂ¿Ã£Æ’¬ãƒ³ãƒˆæ€§ã€Â?人æ°—Ã¥”¦Â±Ã£Â?«ãƒÂ?ピžÃ£”šÂ°Ã£Æ’³ã€”šÃ¥”ºÂ½Ã¤Â¼Å¡Ã¨Â°å“¡å€™è£œãÂ?¨ãÂ?—ãÂ?¦æ”?¿å”¦Å¡Ã£Â?Œè§¦æ”°”¹Ã£”š'伸ãÂ?°ãÂ?—ãÂ?ŸãÂ?”žÃ¦Â°—æŒÂ?ãÂ?¡ã”š”šÃ£”šÂ?ãÂ?”¹Ã£”š”¹Ã£â‚¬”šÃ¦Å“Â?日攓°èÂ?žãÂ?¯06å¹´9月16æ—¥ãÂ?®ç´™éÂ?¢ãÂ?§æ”“°åº”žÃ©Â?¸æ”°”¹Ã£Â?«å¯¾ãÂ?—ãÂ?¦ã€Œè”¡ÂªÃ¦Â°”˜Ã¥”¦Å¡Ã£Â?ξÂ?¥å¹´å¤Â?ãÂ?®åÂ?”šÃ©â„¢Â¢Ã©Â?¸æ¯”?ä¾”¹Ã¥Å’ºãÂ?¸ãÂ?®ç«”¹Ã¥â‚¬â„¢Ã¨Â£Å“㔚'æ”°“診ãÂ?—ãÂ?¦ãÂ?”žÃ£”š”¹Ã£Â?“ãÂ?¨ãÂ?Œåˆ” ãÂ?”¹Ã£Â?£ãÂ?Ÿã€Â?ãÂ?¨å ±ãÂ?˜ã€Â?å°Â?æ³”°Ã©Â¦”“町¸ãÂ?®ã€Œå”¡ÂºÃ£”šÅ’ãÂ?°ãÂ?Šã”š”šÃ£Â?—㔚Â?ãÂ?”žÃ£Â?Â〔šÃ¦Â§ËœÃ£â‚¬”¦Ã£Â?ªåˆ” 锡ŽãÂ?”¹Ã£”š”°Ã¥”ºÂ½Ã¤Â¼Å¡Ã¨Â°å“¡ãÂ?«ãÂ?ªã”š”¹Ã£Â?£ãÂ?¦ãÂ?“ãÂ?¨ãÂ?¯è”°Â¯Ã£Â?”žÃ£Â?“ãÂ?¨ãÂ?˜ã”šÆ’ãÂ?ªãÂ?”žÃ£Â?§ãÂ?™ãÂ?”¹Ã£â‚¬Â?ãÂ?¨ãÂ?®ã”šÂ³Ã£Æ’¡ãƒ³ãƒˆã”š'掲è¼”°Ã£Â?—ãÂ?Ÿã€”š
"link":http://entame.funsurf.in/?eid=405351
sun bin
September 21, 2006
10:41 pm
adamu
September 25, 2006
1:27 am
Joe
September 25, 2006
1:28 am
Two Cents
September 25, 2006
1:58 am
>see the return of a full-strength imperial army
If my memory serves me right, I think we ceased to be Imperial Japan in 1945.
>Nobusuke Kishi, a wartime cabinet member imprisoned as a Class A war crimes suspect but never tried
Onishi really likes to highlight this point. He has pointed this out in a previous article. Yet, he fails to recognize that, in Japan, people largely remember Kishi as the prime minister who formed the New Security Treaty with the US, against fierce and violent opposition from students threatening to kill him, and created the foundation of today's Japan-US alliance. Until Asahi started pursuing their anti-Abe strategy, the majority of the Japanese had mostly forgotten about the Class-A criminal part.
Curzon
September 25, 2006
2:12 am
Onishi's tenure as all-around clown here in Tokyo is supposed to finish up in the next 6 months, and we can only hope the NYT finds someone a little less-buffoonish to replace him.
sun bin
September 25, 2006
3:11 am
1) not an empire? you mean there is no emperor any more?
anyway, Nishi was comparing the scope of Japan's military, not the imperial structure. but who knows? japan also ceased to own offensice force since 1945 but it is probably fair to say that this would be abandoned soon?
2) the Kishi note is quoted from Shusei Tanaka 'a professor at Fukuyama University and a former Liberal Democratic lawmaker'.
i guess Abe could easily clear his link from the Class-A part by a simple statement, if he choose to. i.e. speak about the legitimacy of FE Tribunal, unprevented by such link.
(Kishi should thank the Tribunal because it acquitted him -- doesn't that demonstrate 'fairness' to his perspective?)
Two Cents
September 25, 2006
4:43 am
I won't have my hopes up too high. He will be sorely missed at 2-channel, though.
Sun bin,
All usage of "imperial" has been dropped after the war. Just as there are no more Imperial Tokyo University or the Imperial Diet, the new military will not have the name "imperial" in it. Come on, you know it's Onishi to tactic to make it look as though Japan is returning to its militaristic past. Abe, I hope, can push ahead with the reform of the constitution so that Japan can legitimately have a military and be a fully mutual ally for the US.
It's not a matter of who is quoted. You can bet that if Onishi had 10 quotes from people who praises Kishi for his role in strengthening the Japan-US alliance, he would still choose Tanaka's quote. Like Curzon said, Kishi was probably the most pro-US prime ministers. Do you even get a hint of that in Onishi's article. No. Thus, I conclude it to biased.
As for Abe's stance on history, he simply states that history should be left up to historians in a democracy where people have the freedom of speech and thought, and should not be used as tools for politics.
Curzon
September 25, 2006
5:37 am
sun bin
September 25, 2006
6:58 am
i do not see what is wrong with such comparison. well, i can compare the Germany military ability as 'as strong as' in the third reich. but that does not necessarily mean that it is reverted to the third reich.
Curzon
September 25, 2006
7:33 am
Darin
September 25, 2006
11:02 am
Are you going to apply for the position to replace him, or should I? ;)