Japanese Politics and Public Policy: an Introduction

[Faculty Seminar at East West Center, May 29, 2013]

Yves Tiberghien, UBC (yves.tiberghien@ubc.ca)

Director of the Institute of Asian Research

Associate Professor of Political Science

[Currently Visiting Associate Professor at Tokyo University’s School of Public Policy]

Opening Questions How many main islands does Japan

have? What is Japan’s size? Bigger or Smaller

than France or California? How many times bigger is Canada? What is the population of Japan (vs

Canada)? When did Japan become a democracy?

MORE QUESTIONS Who is Japan’s Prime Minister? Until When ? Who was Prime Minister before him/her? Who is the next PM?

Prime Minister Abe Shinzo

PM Abe in 2006

A Disgraceful Exit

Can you Spot 2 Prime Ministers here?

Who is that (hint: a dojo loach)?

And who is (was) this happy guy?

Former PM Fukuda

And Fukuda again..

The most durable man in Japanese Politics: Ozawa Ichiro

A few questions for everyone:

What comes to your mind first regarding Japan’s politics / policy?

What puzzles you most about Japanese politics and policy-making?

What are you most interested in / curious about?

The big event of 2011

Abandoned City… forever

OUTLINE- Top Puzzles on Japanese Politics: 1. Where did the Constitution come from? 1b. Why did the US retain the Emperor? 2. What are differences with other

parliamentary systems? 3. Why did one party (LDP) dominate for so

long, crash, and then come back with a vengeance?

4. Why do prime ministers rotate so often in Japan?

5. Who has power in the Japanese system? 6. Is civil society making a major impact

since the late 1990s? 7. What was the Koizumi moment? 8. Why did the DPJ win massively in 2009

and crashed miserably in 2012? 9. What is PM Abe doing?

10. Why are China and Japan engaged in such a bitter conflict over small islands after years of economic integration?

11. Why did Japan deal so efficiently with the great 3.11 earthquake/tsunami and so poorly with the nuclear crisis?

1. POLITICAL HISTORY – Origins of Japan’s Constitution and Political System

Key Milestones to Remember 1. Tokugawa Japan: 1600-1868 2. Commodore Perry: 1854 3. Meiji Restoration / Revolution: 1868 4. Meiji Constitution: 1889 5. Imperialism: 1895-1945 6. Taisho Democracy:1920s 7. Militarization:1930s-1945

EDO Period (1600-1868) Unification of Japan by 3 military leaders:

Nobunaga Oda: 1568-1582 Hideyoshi Toyotomi: 1583-1598 Tokugawa Ieyasu: 1600 (battle Sekigahara)

Japan’s Unification

Highlights of Edo Period Establishment of Shogunate (in Edo-Tokyo) Peace and Stability for 250 years (Sankin Kotai) Feudal System (Nobles, Samurais, Peasants,

Merchants) National Seclusion (1639) Ban on Christianity, Persecution Proto-industrial development But occurrence of peasant protests / famines

Ending Years of Edo Period 1823: Siebold comes to Nagasaki,

arrested in 1829 (with shipment of maps) 1833: Tempo Famine (300,000 dead) 1837: Morrison Incident, US ship fired at 1841: Tempo Reforms (conservative) 1842: Treaty of Nanking (UK-China) 1853: Arrival of Commodore Perry

Treaty of Nanking-1842UK - China

Perry’s Black Ships-1853

Commodore Perry

Meiji Revolution 1866: Satsuma-Choshu Alliance Against

Tokugawa Shogunate 1868: Restoration of Imperial Rule 1871: Domains dissolved 1871: Iwakura Mission in US and Europe 1872: National Army created 1873: First Railroad Tokyo-Yokohama

Satsuma and Choshu

Meiji Emperor

Meiji Revolution-the Bottom Line

Political Transformation: effective centralized authoritarian government

Social Transformation: abolition of classes Education revolution: unified education Economic Transformation: the fastest

industrialization on record Military Transformation: a top army in 30 years

Constitution of 1889

Important Milestone: Creation of a Parliament (Diet), elected by 1% of population

Constitutional Government Drafted by Ito Hirobumi The Emperor and the People “rule together” Power in hands of Emperor, but in reality Meiji

Oligarchs rule No Civilian Control of the Army

Ito Hirobumi and New Diet

The New Constitution

Consolidation and Expansion of Japan 1855: Japan-Russia Treaty of Shimoda - 4 Kuril islands under JP

control, joint control over Sakhalin 1875: New Treaty with Russia- all Kurils for Japan, all Sakhalin for

Russia 1874: Japanese Military Expedition to Ryukyu islands (Okinawa)-

Ryukyu ruler had historically been both vassal to Satsuma and tributary to Qing China

1879: Ryukyu Islands incorporated into Japan as the new prefecture of Okinawa, ex-ruler is pensioned off (like the daimyos of Tokugawa Japan)

Japanese Imperialism & For.Pol.

1876: JP gunboat to Korea (imitation of Commodore Perry)- Treaty of Kangwha opens 3 ports to Japan and grants extra-territoriality

1894: Anglo-Japanese Commercial treaty (end of unequal treaties) 1894-1895: Sino-Japanese War, Treaty of Shimonoseki. But Japan

immediately forced by European powers to relinquish territory in Korea and China (Liaodong). Japan keeps Taiwan (Formosa).

1898: Supreme insult: Russia takes Liaodong peninsula in China (the very area that Japan had won in the war with China)

1902: Anglo-Japanese Alliance 1904-1905: Russo-Japanese War, Japanese Stunning Victory, Treaty of

Portsmouth: Korea, Port-Arthur, Liaodong Peninsula, Manchurian Railway, half of Sakhalin under Japan’s control

1910: Annexation of Korea 1915: 21 Demands to China (during WWI, JP allied with UK and FR)

Bombardment of Port-Arthur, 1904

Treaty of Portsmouth

Taisho Democracy: a Lively Period of Party Cabinets From Oligarchy to Democracy? Centrist/Conservative Parties Manage to Organize Cabinets

(and gain power) by compromising with the bureaucracy and the military

Through the Diet, parties control the budget, appointments of prefectural governors

1918: First party cabinet (Hara Government) 1922-1923: Death of last Meiji Oligarchs 1925: Universal Suffrage 1918-1932: Alternance of Governments between Seiyukai and

Minseito

Taisho Period (1912-1926) and Showa Period 1919: End of WWI- Treaty of Versailles. Japan wins Shandong Peninsula

in China and ex-German South Pacific Islands. Riots erupt in China in protest (May 4 Movement)

1921: Washington Naval Conference 1923: Great Kanto Earthquake 1930-1935: Great Economic Depression 1931-32: Invasion of Manchuria, Bombing of Shanghai 1930s: Military increasingly gains control. 1937: Total war mobilization

coordinated by military & bureaucracy 1937: Invasion of China; Nanjing Massacre 1940: Tripartite Pact with Germany,Italy

1937: Invasion of China, Rape of Nanjing (December 1937)

Dec 7, 1941: Pearl Harbor

WWII (1945)-Bombing of Major Japanese Cities

Japan’s Surrender: August 15, 1945

The New Emperor?

OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF THE OCCUPATION: A period of major reforms from above by the

American Occupation, but intense role for Japanese political leaders (Shidehara, Yoshida) and bureaucrats as well.

Most reforms were partly shaped and full implemented by Japanese government officials. A lot of bargaining went on.

Some unwanted reforms were in fact reversed in the early 1950s after the US departure (education reform police reform).

With respect to the Emperor and war responsibility, practical decisions led to an incomplete outcome.

Outline:

1. Overall Approaches followed during the Occupation

2. The Legacy Constitution 3. Decisions with respect to the Emperor 4. The Tokyo Tribunal 5. Key steps in the 1950s 6. Impact and Legacies 7. The Yasukuni Question

1. OVERVIEW OF KEY OCCUPATION DECISIONS

1. The Pivotal Role of the Emperor (August 15, 1945): War comes to an end following a personal intervention of the Emperor, who

urged the most extreme military commanders to stop the war and went on the radio (for the first time) to ask Japanese people to accept surrender gracefully. This was a key factor in the US decision to retain the Emperor.

2. The Extent of Destruction and Despair in Japan in 1945 (cities destroyed by air raids, atomic bombs, economy in shambles…)

3. US-only Occupation: The Soviets were prevented from “sharing” in the Occupation, despite their

interest in being present in Hokkaido. The British, Canadians, Australians, and other Allies were mostly absent.

IMMEDIATE STEPS TAKEN BY THE US OCCUPATION FORCES (1945-1946):

Demilitarization, Purge of key leaders (military, business, politicians)

Land Reform: a major reform that redistributed land

Reform of the giant industrial groups (Zaibatsu), who later regrouped in looser structures (keiretsu)

Key Political Observation in the early Occupation: The US Occupation purged military leaders and

removed the military from the political scene. They also purged many of the senior political leaders and reformed the police (and Home Ministry). But they kept two political pillars:

a/ the Emperor (albeit only as a symbol) b/ the bureaucrats who were needed to administer

the reforms. In fact, because of the removal of most key competitors (politicians and military), bureaucrats grew in power and occupied the power vacuum. This strengthened the trend of government-guided capitalism.

2. The Genesis of the 1946 Constitution

The Sequence: The key priority of the American occupation was

to democratize Japan (smash authoritarian rule, equalize political and even economic rights, and transform values).

Oct 45: freedom of speech, press, assembly, labor unions declared. Order issued to extend political and civil rights to women

Dec 45: land reform ordered Feb 46: constitution written by McArthur’s staff Apr 46: elections, Yoshida becomes PM Oct 46: Diet discusses constitutions, votes it May 1947: new constitution effective

THE POLITICAL STORY BEHIND THE CONSTITUTION

Initially, McArthur wanted to let the Japanese government (under PM Shidehara) write its own constitution. But by early 1946, he grew unhappy with the process and thought that the Japanese drafts resembled too much the 1889 Meiji Constitution.

So, McArthur asked his political staff (20 people) to draft a constitution in 6 days. This GHQ draft was handed to the Japanese government. Eventually, when the Diet passed the constitution 4 months later, it looked very much like the GHQ draft.

Battle over Constitution 1. Japanese Cabinet divided (yet, needs unanimity):

Prince Konoe appoints himself to revise constitution as preemptive strike against US. Yoshida-Shidehara refuse, fearing opening floodgates.

2. Nov 1: McArthur’s dismisses Konoe draft. Konoe commits suicide Dec 15.

3. Oct: McArthur gave five-point memo to Shidehara, ordering major revision. Shidehara stonewalls. Sees constitutional revision under occupation as improper.

4. Fierce debate within US and allies: Soviets +Acheson want Emperor out

High Drama in Feb 1946 Jan 24: long meeting McArthur-Shidehara.

Shidehara accepts need for new constitution with popular sovereignty and Emperor as symbol-only way to save Emperor

McArthur holds tight about US pressures to try Emperor (crucial letter)

Feb 1: Matsumoto draft of new constitution leaked. McArthur infuriated. Too little

Feb 3: Gal Whitney and staff draft new draft in a week (by Feb 12).

Feb 13: Ultimatum to For Minister Yoshida by Gal Whitney (crucial meeting - read story)

More on the Constitution: The Constitution guaranteed sweeping rights: human

rights, collective rights, social rights, rights to education and work, etc…

The Constitution created a parliamentary system quite similar to the British (and Canadian) system.

The Constitution also entitled women to vote for the first time. It guaranteed equality in marriage, divorce, property, inheritances…

The Constitution included the famous Article 9, which forbids Japan to wage war and to maintain armed forces (the pacifism clause).

Details of Article 9: CHAPTER 2: RENUNCIATION OF WAR (1) Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on

justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat of use of force as a means of settling international disputes.

(2) In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.

The Emperor Saves the Day Feb 13: Yoshida and Matsumoto refuse to accept

ultimatum. Feb 21:Shidehara-McArthur meeting. No outcome. Cabinet deadlocked.

Feb 21: consulted by PM Shidehara, Emperor order acceptance of US draft (see Dower 384).

March 4: Cabinet issues translated Japanese version (Matsumoto), in fact watered down. Long night at SCAP translating back.

June 20: Diet begins debates. Intense debate in UH (constitutional scholars)

Yoshida forced to defend draft as “will of Japanese people”, some battle with SCAP.

A Few Major Changes to the Initial McArthur Draft

Exhausting back and forth in Spring 46

Biggest change: McArthur draft had unicameral Diet - under strong pressure from Shidehara-Matsumoto, bicameral feature added (to protect against communist sweep).

Big battle over Cabinet vs Emperor: US holds firm (Cabinet primacy). Emperor legitimacy built up a bit (unbroken line).

A few rights are cut out (espec. Rights for foreigners- Japanese promise to issue those by law).

Many small changes through Diet process (approved by SCAP, but only orally. Some grassroots additions (use of common language, stronger education rights, abolition of peerage).

The Battle over Art 9 The Ashida amendment added in

Diet lower house: “In order to accomplish the aim of

the preceding paragraph”. Aim: open the door to future

armament for self-defense.

The Make-Believe Operation Acknowledging GHQ draft became

taboo for Japanese officials. SCAP orders given secretly and orally.

Constitution officials comes from Emperor’s order to revise old one and free will of people expressed through parliament.

Yet Japanese could see the total difference between Feb 1 draft and March 06 public new draft.

Other Points about the US Occupation period:

There was a social and cultural demonstration effect (American affluence on display)

Labor unions and leftist parties were allowed / encouraged (at first).

Initially, a lot of the Americans involved in the occupation were young so-called “New Dealers” (heirs to FDR’s Social New Deal program). They brought a lot of social idealism to Japan.

2/ The post-1946 Japanese Political System – Comparison to UK

Overall System Democracy: supreme sovereignty (power) resides in

the people, checks on govt Guarantee of individual rights: articles 10-40 out of 100 Parliamentary System: Westminster Model (formally same as Canada). Fused Executive

(Cabinet) and Legislature Centralized System (not Federal): like UK, FR Powerful and Extremely Competent Bureaucracy

(especially in economic realm)(like SK, FR)

Role of the Emperor (in Constitution) Article 1. The Emperor shall be the symbol of the State

and of the unity of the People, deriving his position from the will of the people with whom resides sovereign power.

Article 2. The Imperial Throne shall be dynastic and succeeded to in accordance with the Imperial House Law passed by the Diet.

Article 3. The advice and approval of the Cabinet shall be required for all acts of the Emperor in matters of state,

and the Cabinet shall be responsible therefor.

Public Image of the Emperor

That was UBC – July 09

Diet-Legislative Process Formally, the locus of power and center of legislative

process In reality, much happens outside the Diet (informal party

processes, bureaucratic processes) and some theorists allege that the Diet is merely rubber-stamping.

Up to 90% of bills introduced by government, drafted by bureaucracy (in consultation with interest groups). Long review within parties.

The Diet elects the Prime Minister (who then selects the Cabinet). Possibility of No-confidence Vote (eg 1993-Miyazawa).

The Diet votes all laws, budget, treaties

What is Happening Here?

Election of Prime-Minister

Image of the Diet

What People see of the Diet(“Nagatacho”)

Key Facts About the Diet One Impact of the Parliamentary System: 480 + 242

independent actors answering to constituencies--> more parochial system?

Bicameral: Lower House (LH) has preeminent power (over appointment of PM and Budget). But Upper House (UH) has more power than British Lords.

UH can only be over-ruled by LH with 2/3 majority (except for PM and Budget)

In fact, the power of the UH has driven coalition politics since 1998

Electoral System (LH) Old System (until 1994 reforms, 1996 real): * Multiple-Member Districts * Single Non-Transferable Vote (SNTV) * Outcome: intra-party competition, can be

elected with only 15% of the vote in a district

New System (first elections = 1996): * 300 members chosen from Single-Member Districts * 180 (200) members = proportional representation

within large regions Unequal Value of a vote: 2-1 ratio between value of a vote in rural

and urban constituencies

How to Dissolve the Diet

Cabinet and Prime-Minister Cabinet collectively responsible in front of Diet. Diet elects PM,

PM nominates other cabinet members.

Under LDP norms, cabinet jobs are given proportionately to factional strength, agreed by party leadership (and faction leaders)

Limited to 20 ministers (now 14-17), all civilians. PM has right to dismiss any Cabinet member, but rarely done Cabinet ministers (and PM) tend to rotate quickly. Rarely more

than 1 year. Usually, Cabinet has less direct power than in UK or Canada.

Key decisions not taken in cabinet meetings.

Traditional Cabinet Photo

Former PM Obuchi and Mori

RECENT PRIME MINISTERS Shinzo ABE December 2012- Yoshihiko NODA September 2011-December 2012 Naoto KAN June 2010-Sept 2011 Yukio HATOYAMA Sept 2009-May 2010 Taro ASO Sept 2008-Aug 2009 Yasuo FUKUDA Sept 2007-Sept 2008 Shinzo ABE Sept 2006-Sept 2007 Junichiro KOIZUMI April 2001 - Sept 2006 Yoshiro MORI April 2000 - April 2001 Keizo OBUCHI July 1998 - April 2000 Ryutaro HASHIMOTO January 1996 - July 1998 Tomiichi MURAYAMA June 1994 - January 1996 Tsutomu HATA April 1994 - June 1994 Morihiro HOSOKAWA August 1993 - April 1994 Kiichi MIYAZAWA November 1991 - August 1993 Toshiki KAIFU August 1989 - November 1991 Sosuke UNO June 1989 - August 1989 Noboru TAKESHITA November 1987 - June 1989 Yasuhiro NAKASONE November 1982 -November 1987 Zenko SUZUKI July 1980 - November 1982 Masayoshi OHIRA December 1978 - July 1980

Your turn.. Who are they?

4/ Puzzle-Why are Japanese PM so weak?

Symptoms: rapid rotation, often reacting to events rather than driving them (eg Kobe earthquake). Rarely remembered. Often unable to achieve their goals (eg. Koizumi)

Possible Answers 1.Secondary level Administrative rules (small staff vs

bureaucracies, lack of resources) 2. Party organization (LDP and DPJ): LDP controls the

PM and its leadership wants to maintain a collective sway. Also party rules force PM to fight elections every 2 years.

3. Japanese culture: lack of legitimacy for strong leadership ???

The Bureaucracy Powerful and deeply organized bureaucracy Attracts best and brightest in Japan (Todai Law School).

Strong past record. Controls information and possibly the drafting of laws But probably 2-tiered: Elite (MOF,MITI, MOFA) vs

Others (anti-reform) Fragmented: famous bureaucratic battles

Sources of Bureaucratic PowerMANY LINKAGES:(*** my story) Historically: large number of top bureaucrats turned

politicians. Former top PM (Yoshida, Historically: higher legitimacy than politicians Protected from Political Interference Shukko: loaning to other agencies, PM office Amakudari: descent from heaven into private sector Colonization of other agencies – battles over EPA or BOJ MOF: control of budget (decreasing) Kisha Club: Cooptation of the press

Some Darker SidesMIYAMOTO’s Straitjacket Society Bureaucrat’s view: “Most Diet members lack the ability to

write laws. Their main duty is to procure benefits for their local districts (32). Think about it. Can you really imagine today’s politicians entrusted with the job of lawmaking? It would be the end of Japan (34)”

The annual banquet serves a safety valve to release the stress that builds in the shadow of the supposed harmony. Peace is preserved by letting off steam periodically in this way (60-61)

5/ Interesting Question Who is driving the Japanese Political

System (first cut)?1. Prime Minister and Cabinet2. Bureaucracy3. LDP backbenchers (Ramseyer and R?)4. Oligarchy of key leaders5. Electorate, NGOs, Civil Society

Puzzle 3/ THE SOURCES OF LDP POWER

Electoral Dynamics MMD-SNTV the 7 key letters, system chosen in

1925 as a result of inter-party bargaining, re-implemented in 1947 (party incentives, GHQ)

Key feature: elections are very costly in Japan, hence the need for massive funds and fund-raising organization

Electoral system fosters intra-party competition Institutional Ties shape Electoral Behavior (Flanagan

1991)

ZOOM: Koenkai[Classic Account: Gerald Curtis,1969, Election

Campaigning Japanese Style, 126-151] Campaigns = candidate-centered, not party-centered. No mass

membership parties. Koenkai = Personal Support Organization of individual Diet

members (not for Komeito and JCP, very centralized parties). A kind of personal political machine (with staff, hence the cost).

Mostly involved in social activities, drawing upon all possible personal networks

Difficult to establish, thus encouraging 2d-generation MPs

LDP Structure and Organization

[Classics: Ramseyer and Rosenbluth 1993. Kohno1997. Curtis 1988 ]

Complex LDP organization arose (enabled by its stable rule).

Winning coalition of street politicians and competent ex-bureaucrats (Curtis). Shift in 1980s. Ex-bureaucrats in power from 1957 to 1972.

Pattern of power-sharing among factions arose

ZOOM: the 1955 System[Good Accounts: Kohno, 1998. Richardson, 1997. Curtis, 1988] 1945-1955: high fluidity of party politics, 4 big parties

(Liberals, Progressives, Socialists, National-Cooperativists, as of 1947 Elections)

What happened in 1955: double-merger (2 socialist parties first, 2 conservative parties next)

1955-System”=stable situation of a large conservative-centrist party and large permanent opposition party (JSP)

But 1957-1960 = fierce confrontation!

Opposition Parties: Why marginalized ?

[Classics: Curtis, 1988. JSP. Started out (1955) as large and growing. Support

of young, well-educated urban voters and organized blue-collar workers. Seen as party of the future (lawyers, journalists, some bureaucrats).

But gradual loss of support, concentration on labor unions. JSP’s appeal (protect constitution, oppose SDF and US-JP alliance) lost relevance. Impact of perpetual opposition, removed from policy issues. Weak factions, leaderless

5. The Big Question: explaining LDP dominance since 1955

DISCUSSION:

WHAT EXPLAINS THE UNINTERRUPTED LDP DOMINANCE FROM 1955 to 1993?

POSSIBLE ANSWERS 1[good discussion: Curtis, 1988. Pempel, 1990] Electoral over-representation of rural voters (who

vote as a bloc for LDP) Cold War and Ideological Rift: Socialist party locked

into extreme positions, unelectable Economic Miracle allows LDP to reward interest

groups while keeping low taxes (expanding pie) [stretched to the limit under Tanaka] [good evidence: creation of consumption tax costs the LDP its UH majority in 1989, again in 1998]

POSSIBLE ANSWERS 2 Curtis: “LDP’s ability to closely track changes in its

social and economic environment, and to adjust policies”: rewarding supporters, getting new support

- on one hand: farming subsidies, public works- on other hand: welfare state, environment (70s)

6/ Rising Power of Civil Society in the 1990s and 2000s

Yves Tiberghien108

Most scholars have seen Japan as a top-down political system with a dominating state (including both bureaucratic elites and political leaders / the Imperial institution)

The legal framework has made it hard for NGOs to even exist (until revisions in 1998)

Yet, the reality of the 1990s shows a much more active scene

Under what conditions has this weak but brave actor managed to find power?

The Big Question / Summary

Historical context: individuals vs the state or public interests / the nail that sticks out

Pervasive tools of state domination Post 1949 repression of labor Controlled and grand-fathered civil society,

allowed to prosper on the fringes but kept out of power

Big change: Kobe earthquake, 1995 NPO Law 1998

Context

1. Petitions and Protests appealing to morality and higher good (reminiscent of Ikki tradition): nuclear, gender, environment

2. Using the courts as platforms for protests (itai itai disease, Minamata mercury poisoning)

3. Networking with local governments (cf referenda on dams, Shikoku, Nagano)

4. Networking with Diet MPs to change bills, under propitious conditions; coalitions, divided governments, weak bureaucracy

5. Naming and shaming, using international norms and treaties (gender, minorities)

6. Global networking with global civil society (comfort women, burakumin)

Successful Mechanisms

Minority Rights: the saga of Arudou DebitoDebito Arudo

Anti-Globalization movements : ATTAC Labor Rights protest: the saga of the privatization of

JNR Security: Okinawa protests – NGOs with local

government Common threads: highly motivated economic

interests, full power of the state, no sympathy from media, against discourse of economic prosperity and reforms/modernization

Difficult Cases: high stakes

Contributions: information gathering, smoking alarm, outreach and education, coalition building

Key link = link with politicians and sympathetic media; moving from confrontation with bureaucracy to cooperation / cooptation

Climate Change – growing impact

Civil Society and Political Agenda Capture:

the Battle over Genetically-Engineered Food in Japan

Yves Tiberghien115

Japan: an Unusual Reversal Context: low food sufficiency (wheat 13%, soy 5%, corn

4%, canola 0%) - 40% overall Initial Situation: government promotion of biotech

(hundreds of field tests), public funding, GMO tests since 1989, substantial equivalence.

1999: government shift and move toward mandatory labeling (effective 2001)

2003: tightening with Cartagena ratification and creation of independent FSC

2005: Hokkaido Govt passes a law making GM production impossible and restricting research

Yves Tiberghien116

Rise of Civil Society Actors 1996: Creation of NGO federation:“No GMO! Campaign”

(Consumers) (Yasuda Setsuko, Amagasa Keisuke) Alliance with Seikatsu Club Consumers’ Cooperative Union

(22 Million members) - common focus on labeling demand. Numerous new groups: Soybeans Trust, Rice Trust, Slow

Food Cafes, etc.. After 2001: alliances with other groups: environment, organic

farmers (key in Hokkaido 2005 = alliance consumers and farmers)

Yves Tiberghien117

Yves Tiberghien118

Yves Tiberghien119

Yves Tiberghien120

Yves Tiberghien121

Yves Tiberghien122

Agenda-Capture: Key Political Mechanisms 1. Massive Petitions that capture the public attention (and

MAFF): 1997-1998: petition signed by 2 million citizens requesting labeling.

2. Resolutions by 50% of local governments (1600). 3. Activities in Diet: Benkyokai and relay through Key

Committee [MAFF sandwiched] 4. Impact of EU processes: ideas, models, blueprints 5. Facilitating Factor: general institutional crisis (bureaucracy

under attack)

Yves Tiberghien123

In sum - a tipping point Encounter between 3 forces: Issue Entrepreneurs (civil society) Political opening: party politics in flux,

increase in role of urban politics, weakening bureaucracy

Decentralization and changing balance of power: role of local governments

Yves Tiberghien124

Global Reach - Japanese Civil Society in Canada, US, Australia!

2004 - Battle over GM wheat approval: No! GMO campaign put together a hand-delivered petition signed by 413 NGOs, companies, and local consumer unions in Japan (representing 1.2 Million people), addressed to the heads of regulatory authorities in Canada and the US - threat of boycott

2004-2006: Japanese Delegates join EU conferences and GMO-free region conferences

Oct 2007: No! GMO Campaign, alliance of 80 consumer groups + farmers groups and individuals visit Australia with petition representing 2.9 Million consumers to lobby state premiers to extend moratoria on GMO cultivation

Reverse links: Percy Schmeiser (Sasaktchewan) in Japan in 2002 and 2005

Growing partnership between NGOs and MOFA over post-war reconstruction and aid/relief in places like East Timor, Afghanistan, Iraq.

Mutual need / exchange Global platform developed by MOFA

Another key positive arena

Big Impact of Civil Society on Gender IssuesTraditional Women’s Movements in Japan(source: Jennifer Chan)

Suffrage (1946) Anti-Prostitution (1956) Peace movement (60s, 70s) Women’ lib (70s) Marginalization within Japan - few groups, no state

recognition

Extensive legal, policy, and institutional changes since 1995:

Vision and Plan for Gender Equality 1996 Revised EEOL (sexual harassment) 1997 Basic Law for Gender Equality 1999 Child Prostitution and Pornography Prohibition

Law (1999) Child Abuse Prevention Law (2000) Anti-Stalking Law (2000) Law on the Promotion of HR Education (2000) Anti-Domestic Violence Law (2001)

Example: Nomura Securities 2002, great Gender Discrimination Suit (¥56 Million paid to 12 female employees: “consolation for mental pain”)

An explosion of NGOs and NGO activities A full spectrum of outcomes, from individuals

hitting the traditional wall of the state and vested interests to successful institutional change

Great potential for new coalitions, new patterns, new policy-making patterns

A very fluid arena Gradually, Japan getting more similar to

European democracies

In sum:

7/ What was the Great Koizumi Moment?

Focus Today: Party Politics in 2000-2009 Abnormal politics under Koizumi, 2001-

2006: a very dynamic period that interrupts the slide of the LDP and the 2 party system process

Return to pre-Koizumi period in 2006-2009 – slide downward for LDP

Confirms instability / transition stage in party politics.

The Koizumi Political Game 1. Koizumi steals the opposition’s program of

reforms --> the opposition (DPJ) is in disarray (supports Koizumi until Dec 01, opposes him afterwards but collapses as a whole.

2. LDP old guard blocks reforms in Diet. Tug-of-war with Koizumi (effective opposition).

3. Koizumi gets a few successes by threatening to dissolve the Diet to punish the LDP old guard, and even to defect from LDP

4. Makiko Tanaka big loss Jan 02, NK gain Sep 02

Evaluating Koizumi’s Legacy

A/ Koizumi Economic Reforms 1. Promised to cap debt and bond issuance (Y

30 Trillion per year), broken in Fall 2002 (recession) - Reality: half success

2. Promised tough reforms of special corporations, including highway corp, no success

3. Promised Postal Reforms: succeeded by breaking LDP

4. Financial Reforms, bad loans: success with Takenaka Heizo

B/ Foreign Policy: Stronger US-Japan alliance, support for war in

Afghanistan, troops in Iraq, Missile Defense Opened link with NK but backtracked after

hostage crisis Negative cycle for foreign affairs in wake of

Yasukuni and other nationalist policies In any case, demonstrated increased top down

political leadership (Kantei mark) - opened the way for Abe’s NSC plan

C/ High Mark: the 2005 Election

Dispatch of Assassins

Koizumi saved the LDP in 2001-2006, but could not stem its decline afterwards

With the failures of Abe, Fukuda and Aso, it is increasingly clear that the LDP is losing the capacity to govern. The situation is not sustainable.

Aso has maneuvered for the moment and delayed election, but in vain

Quid the deadlock between 2 houses of parliament?

Recent Political Events 2001-2006: PM Koizumi Junichiro 2006-2007: PM Abe July 2007: Disastrous UH Election for LDP Sept 2007: Abe resigns, Fukuda takes over September 2008: Aso takes over Fall 07-Fall 09: parliamentary deadlock Aug 31 2009: DPJ wins, Hatoyama PM June 2010 – PM Kan Naoto September 2011 – PM Noda

8. What Happened on Aug 31, 2009?

Big Picture (1) A major episode of regime change has taken

place in Tokyo, sweeping aside governing networks in place since 1955.

It represents a shift toward some degree of social democracy and a foreign policy rebalancing toward Asia and EU modes of operation.

The shift was caused by a perfect storm – coming together of several parallel forces, including social anxieties around rising inequality and exacerbated by the global financial crisis.

Big Picture (2) - Realities The Hatoyama Cabinet started rapid action on all

fronts, initiating both policy shift (national and foreign) and a structural change in governance.

Yet, within months, Hatoyama hit the wall: Personal funding scandals Lack of unified leadership, within party and

coalition Tense US-Japan relations, difficult interactions Harsh budget realities – inability to fulfill pledges Difficult economic reality

1. The Election: Great Reversal (60% of LDP incumbents

lost seats)

Flash Back: the 2005 LH election (Koizumi)

Source: Asahi.com (2005)

The August 2009 LH Election Results by SMDs

Source: Asahi.com (2009)

Astonishing Defeats (LDP)

Historical Twist

Ichiro Hatoyama with 2 grandsons, Yukio and Kunio

Perfect Storm and Great Reversal 1. Protracted exhaustion of LDP trying to fend off

corruption and inertia since 1993 –internal divisions + terrible timing of election (vs economic cycle and cabinet support rate)

2. Rejection of LDP traditional politics (ongoing since 1993, with spikes like 1998 or 2007 UH)

3. Koizumi double whammy delivered coup de grace: structural reforms angered traditional (rural) supporters while not convincing middle class voters

4. Creation of credible alternative with new DPJ (Kan-Hatoyama idealism with Ozawa realism)

5. Boosting effect of Electoral system

The Big Picture: Social-Democrat Shift? “Put people before concrete:” from producers and

organized interest groups to consumers and unorganized individuals.

Attempt at transferring government funding away from construction and LDP-interest group particularistic redistribution and toward social welfare (child care allowance, pension, minimum wages, rights of temp workers, etc..).

Major rhetorical change around foreign policy: more normal country; rebalancing US-Japan alliance, economic integration with China and Asia, currency integration.

Foreign Policy: Big Ideas Clash with Reality

Foreign Policy: a New Direction The Hatoyama Cabinet keeps the US-Japan

Alliance as anchor of Japanese Foreign Policy. Yet, it also seeks a rebalancing toward Asia and

the UN and a stronger Japanese voice vs the US Renegotiation of Okinawa Situation (Futenma

transfer to Nago reviewed) End to MSDF Mission in Indian Ocean Focus on East Asian Community – although early

meetings with China and Korea have not yet yielded concrete results

Growing Tensions with the US (Oct 21 Gates Visit)

B/ Major Improvement in Japan-China Relations

Ozawa’s Visit in Dec 2009 (with 140 DPJ MPs)

Hatoyama China Policy Hatoyama/Ozawa approach: engaging China

positively, while keeping hedge of US alliance No breakthrough on Taiwan or East China Sea or

History, but major symbolic gestures Talk of Hatoyama visit to Nanjing in Spring,

followed by Hu visit to Hiroshima – but did not happen

Major warming up and improvement in Japanese opinion toward China

In the end, however, China was slow to seize the hand, and Hatoyama quickly collapsed

9/ Meet Shinzo Abe – new PM

Economic Vote Besides a reaction to the fragmentation and

broken promises of the DPJ and a booster effect from the electoral system, there was an important economic vote in this election.

Economic concerns trumped nuclear concerns and security / national concerns

Voters reacted to the difficult economic situations, seeking a new approach: neither pure neoliberalism, nor fiscal retrenchment.

Abe got a boost in the campaign from his new Abenomics approach (fiscal stimulus, BOJ QE push)

Economic Policy Components 1. Fiscal Stimulus (led by Finance Minister Aso

Taro) – Y10.3 Trillion 2. BOJ- opening QE gates – anti-deflation 3. Some structural reforms 4. Reformation of the Council on Economic and

Fiscal Policy (CEFP) 5 Question Mark: need push on innovation,

entrepreneurialism, and incentives in the system. Is it forthcoming?

Red Alert in China-Japan relations and nationalism

Larger Significance A new push on monetary and fiscal stimulus with

aggressive QE boost for a public eager to find an escape from neo-liberal reforms and fiscal retrenchment. Can it work?

Seeking short-term results before UH election in July. Part of a trend in 2013 toward economic nationalism

with strong entropic forces. If not matched by proactive role in global economic

policy (G20, TPP, East Asian integration, APEC), it could lead to tensions with key partners and neighbors.

10/ Why Sino-Japanese Tensions?

Tensions are Real: Ships shadowing each other

Chinese aircraft

Water gun battles

Roots of Current Crisis Misperceptions, misunderstandings,

miscalculations Intersecting cycles of domestic politics and

political posturing Rising of nationalists in Japan Similar political nationalism in China

11/ The Fukushima Crisis: Weak State Paradox Relatively effective response to the

earthquake and tsunami (mobilization of support and SDF, authorization of foreign help), central unit around PM and Chief Cabinet Secretary.

But relatively weak response to the nuclear crisis – delays, lack of state capacity relative to TEPCO and METI, internal squabbles, multi-level confusion by June-July.

The Japanese Paradoxes Private strength vs. weak governance Past high economic/social performance vs. weak ability to

adjust to intensified globalization since 1980s Great reactivity to earthquake vs. weak reactivity to nuclear

crisis Gradual economic integration with China vs. lack of

institutional response

In SUM: High innovative capacity of private sector and individuals vs. weak innovative capacity of government in the past 2 decades (and political leadership) in most cases (with some exceptions).

Japanese Institutional Factors

Sources of rigidities and low reactivity: lack of strong and secure leadership

1. Systemic inertia: decentralized system with multiple veto powers

2. Institutional factors against strong legitimate leadership: constitution, Diet law, party norms, unstable party system

3. Strong bicameralism without mitigation and with immature party system

4. High frequency of elections – creates broken leadership 5. Party system in transition – unstable and without clear

party spectrum 6. Confused public preferences – or is it due to parties? 7. Reduced bureaucratic capacity: more fragmented than in

past, weakened by administrative reforms (past rigidities broken, but also some broken systemic links).

Effective deployment in tsunami areas (including 100,000 SDF members)

Orderly Reaction by Citizens

The Nuclear Triangular Conundrum

TEPCO, a private company, is the operator, in charge – with control of information and private incentives (save assets)

Regulated by the Nuclear Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) within METI – cozy relationships (as METI supports nuclear energy). “Atomic Village.”

Tight TEPCO-LDP links The PM (Kantei) from the new DPJ clashes with

TEPCO and METI, yet cannot effectively control them- ineffective interventions (later leaked).

Difficult coordination in crisis; difficult top-down actions.

Delay in Mobilizing Large Urban Fire Trucks

The Terrible Cost (FP picture)

CONCLUSION Japan is a fascinating country that has often

acted as a pioneer of modernity Pioneer of fast economic development Pioneer of economic crisis and nuclear crisis Environmental pioneer Amazing private and technological strengths

often hampered by messy (yet colourful) politics.