Entry details

Curzon
Author

Curzon

Date

September 20th, 2006

Tags

,

Comments

28 Comments so far.
Add yours.

The Japanese Neocon

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
It's a good thing his foreign policy is so developed, because his domestic policy is about as detailed as wearing a T-shirt that says "I'm with Stupid."

(Not knocking Koizumi, of course. He is the man)
Mutantfrog
September 20, 2006
7:23 am
I think he's going to be a disaster for the LDP. A lot of their support in recent years has been due to people hungry for the reforms that Koizumi hyped for years, and partially accomplished, but Abe is already trying to butter up the rural constituents with promises of continued useless pork-construction projects.

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
[...] Where does Japan’s new neoconservative overlord Shinzo Abe come from? [...]
yeolchae
September 20, 2006
10:24 am
I think he will be a more predictable leader than Koizumi but ultimately an inferior one.

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, why do you call him a "neocon"? From the statements above it looks like he is just a plain old conservative. Nationalist to be sure, but not neoconservative.
Curzon
September 20, 2006
11:44 am
Sorry, I originally had several links to Japanese articles, one of which called him a Japanese neocon, but I ultimately removed them because of the fear of alienating English-language readers. You can read several such articles "here":http://www.janjan.jp/government/0609/0609070834/1.php and "here.":http://japanese.joins.com/article/article.php?aid=69170&servcode=200&sectcode=200  

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
I, too, think of the label as indicative of nationalist/realist/militarist foreign policy positions. The problem, of course, is that it's a loaded term and people like to use it to refer to all sorts of ideologies.
sun bin
September 20, 2006
4:02 pm
1) he has written a book, I heard. (I saw some Chinese translation on the 'relevant' chapters) I suppose it was also reported in English media?

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
Re: Neocon label. Yeah, I had figured you picked it up in the Japanese press. I have seen it there before, but knowing how Japanese mangles loanwords I usually leave it alone. In English I expect it to be the type described by "Dan Nexon":http://duckofminerva.blogspot.com/2005/07/john-ikenberrys-pissed.html. But like Joe says, the term is now loaded.
Curzon
September 21, 2006
12:28 am
SB: I read the book last month. It is predictably bland for what you'd expect from a person ready to assume office (think of "A Charge to Keep"). I'd be interested to see what chapters were select-translated.

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
I would disagree. I think the point that Dan makes is the closeness between Idealists and Neocons. There is a difference between having a strong hegemon that keeps the balance in your favour (a realist outlook) and thinking that you can change the international system (and idealist outlook) and it is your duty to spread your type of governance around the world. Thus, I think that Abe is a nationalist realist, not a neocon.
Joe
September 21, 2006
2:50 am
Q: What do you call a Central Asian militarist?

A: A neo-Khan
sun bin
September 21, 2006
4:05 am
Curzon,

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
Curzon,

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
You guys will love this, the newest rumour is the actress Norika Fujiwara will be representing LDP in Tokyo for "senator", as part of the LDP's "babe strategy"

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
Interesting rumor, but it looks like she's a peace activist and an Article 9 fan, so I'm not sure that the LDP would want her casting votes...
sun bin
September 21, 2006
10:27 pm
å®”°Ã¥â‚¬Â?æ™”¹Ã¤Â¸”°Ã¥Â®ËœÃ¦Ë†Â¿Ã©”¢Â·Ã¥Â®ËœÃ£Â?Ώ”¡ÂªÃ¦Â°”˜Ã¥”¦Å¡Ã£Â?®æ”“°ç·Â?è£Â?ãÂ?«éÂ?¸å”¡ÂºÃ£Â?”¢Ã£”šÅ’ã€Â?æ—©ãÂ?Â?㔚”š2007å¹´ãÂ?®åÂ?”šÃ¨Â­Â°Ã©â„¢Â¢Ã©Â?¸æŒ™ãÂ?Œè©±é¡ŒãÂ?«ãÂ?ªãÂ?£ãÂ?¦ãÂ?”žÃ£”š”¹Ã£â‚¬”šÃ£â‚¬Å’å®”°Ã©Æ’¨æ”?¿æ¨©ãÂ?§ã”š”šÃ¨”¹Â¦Ã¦Ë†Â¦Ã£Â?¯å¿”¦Ã¨”¡Â³Ã£Â? ã€Â?ãÂ?¨ãÂ?”¢Ã£”šÅ’㔚”¹Ã£Â?ªãÂ?”¹Ã£â‚¬Â?「頼㔚ŠãÂ?«ãÂ?™ã”š”¹Ã£Â?®ãÂ?¯ã”šÂ¿Ã£Æ’¬ãƒ³ãƒˆã€Â?ãÂ?¨ã€Â?Ã¥”¡ÂºÃ©Â¦Â¬Ã¥â‚¬â„¢Ã¨Â£Å“ãÂ?«æ—¥æœ¬ãƒÂ?ムãÂ?®æ”“°åº”žÃ¥”°”ºÃ¥Â¿—éÂ?¸æ”°”¹Ã£”š”žÃ¨—¤åŽŸç´€é¦™ãÂ?”¢Ã£”š“ã€Â?PR〔˜Ã§”?»åƒÂ?㔚”°Ã£Â?®åÂ?Â?Ã¥”°Â?ãÂ?Å’Ã¥”¡ÂºÃ¥Â§”¹Ã£”šÂ?ãÂ?Ÿã€”šÃ£Â?—ãÂ?”¹Ã£Â?—ã€Â?ãƒÂ?ットãÂ?§ãÂ?¯ã€Œå”¡ÂºÃ©Â¦Â¬Ã£Â?—ãÂ?ªãÂ?”žÃ£Â?§!ã€Â?ãÂ?¨ãÂ?”žÃ£Â?£ãÂ?ŸåÂ?¦å®šçš”žÃ£Â?ªå£°ãÂ?Œå¤šãÂ?Â?㔚'Ã¥Â? ã”šÂ?ãÂ?¦ãÂ?”žÃ£”š”¹Ã£â‚¬”š

今㔚·ãƒ¼ã”šÂºÃ£Æ’³é™Â?㔚ŠãÂ?§ãƒ—ロ锡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¨Â­Â°Ã¥“¡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” Ã£Â?”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?­ã€”šÃ¦Â§ËœÃ£â‚¬”¦Ã£Â?ªåˆ” Ã©”¡Å½Ã£Â?”¹Ã£”š”°Ã¥”ºÂ½Ã¤Â¼Å¡Ã¨Â­Â°Ã¥“¡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
"the livedoor link":http://news.livedoor.com/webapp/journal/cid__2473869/detail
adamu
September 25, 2006
1:27 am
Just a quick note - Fujiwara has aged something like 10 years since that photo was taken. She still looks pretty good and all, but it's a far cry from her days as an Asahi Super Dry girl.
Joe
September 25, 2006
1:28 am
Look out, Abe! Norimitsu is on your case!
Two Cents
September 25, 2006
1:58 am
Onishi always make me laugh. One reason I no longer take the NYT seriously.

>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
2C: Seriously. Kishi was one of the most pro-US Prime Ministers in post-war history.

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
re:2c

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
Curzon,
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
Also, that all things regarding the royal family in Japan are translated into English as "Imperial" doesn't mean anything in practice or reality. Japan's "Emperor" has less political power than any other incumbent royal family in the world.
sun bin
September 25, 2006
6:58 am
along curzon's note, does Onashi's use of "imperial" mean anything in practice or reality? he was only trying to show us the "scope" as in "full strength", which is comparable to that of the imperial period.

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
SB: Onishi used the word with the specific intent of conjuring up spectres of WWII's Imperial Japan, and loaded the word accordingly.
Darin
September 25, 2006
11:02 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.


Are you going to apply for the position to replace him, or should I? ;)