この年、日本とアメリカの政権交代があった。アメリカの新政権は期待に反して、前政権の政策をほとんど継承し、初めての非白人大統領であるにも拘らず、伝統的な「アメリカ第一」的精神は継承しているようである。これはノーベル平和賞受賞講演に濃厚に現れていた。日本の民主党新政権は、自民前政権の政策を基本的に見直す姿勢をみせ、予算案、公共事業の見直しなどかなり理にかなった政策を打ち出しているし、アメリカの軍事基地に関して、自民党下でのアメリカ一辺倒でなく、日本の独自性を主張しようとしていることについては、国民がこぞって後押しすべきである。優柔不断に見える態度不決定を指導性の欠如と見なすのは、不適当であろう。ただ単に、選挙公約を断固として履行するのみが、指導力の証左ではない。
アフガン戦争は兵力が増強され、しかも今まで参加していなかったNATO諸国も参加するようになったことは、非常に憂慮すべき事態である。それは欧米列強による中央アジアの石油・天然ガス資源を取り込む動きであり、しかも中国とロシアの間にくさびを打ち込む目論みも含まれているようである。アフガン戦争がますますパキスタン側へ拡大され、パキスタンを後押しする中国との関係が心配される。その上、アメリカはインドの核兵器を容認し、インド首相を国賓待遇するなどインドとの関係を強化しつつあることも、アフガニスタン・パキスタンを含む地域から中央アジアへの勢力拡大の思惑を表明している。しかし、アフガン戦争にアメリカがなんらかの意味での勝利をおさめることは、殆ど不可能と見なされている。この戦争の拡大は、莫大な財政・人的資源の浪費を伴い、上のような意図を想定しない限り、理にかなうところは一つもない。
中華人民共和国は、建国60周年を迎え、盛大な式典を挙行し、経済発展、軍事力強化を誇示した。最近中国自身が、現在の軍事力はアメリカに次いで世界第2位であると発表した。中国は、13億の人口を抱え、欧米並みの経済発展を意図しているようであるが、これを実現するには、地球が幾つあっても足りない。いわゆる先進国が、こうした中国の望みを押さえつけようとすることは、先進国自身がその生活レベルを低下・放棄しないかぎり不当である。こうした先進国のエゴイズムを先進国自身が反省しない限り、いわゆる発展途上国からの、例えば２酸化炭素排出規制への積極的参加は期待できない。事実、国連のCOP15では、発展途上国の反撥で、意味のある合意は得られなかった。
一方中国自身は、その経済発展のための資源獲得にあらゆる手段を用いている。欧米のような軍事力行使による進出ではないが、特にアフリカ諸国への経済進出は執拗をきわめている。欧米と中国の利益背反は、すでにアフリカでいくつかの衝突として現れている。以上述べた点は、国家レベルでのエゴイズムの現れである。すなわち国家レベルでのエゴイズムは、ますます国家間の緊張を高めている。
経済レベルでは、この年は前年のアメリカ発金融危機に由来する経済危機が世界中を駆け巡り、その負の影響から殆どの国は立ち直れないばかりか、悪化の一途を辿っているようにみえる。悪化は、しかし庶民の側のみであり、一部の経済エリートはますます富を増やしている。この問題は、したがって、富のより公平な分配で解決出来るはずであるが、エリートの貪欲（エゴイズム）が政治を巻き込んで、そのような解決策を阻んでいる。これは特にアメリカに於いて顕著である。この解決は革命によってしか実現しないのかもしれない。
金融危機は、住宅ローンその他を商品化し、ぼろ儲けを企んだが、住宅などの価値低下による躓きに端を発している。すなわちエリートとされる人間達の貪欲が引き起こしたものである。この年は、こうした一部のエリートや大企業の貪欲・エゴイズム（しゃにむな利潤追求）による犯罪的イヴェントが世界的規模で人々の健康や生死をも無視して行われた。それは、メキシコで発生したとされるスワインフルーなる現象である。製薬・ワクチン製造業者が（世の中では公平と看做されている）科学者達を巻き込み、彼らが国連の保健機構を動かして、スワインフルーの「パンデミック」を演出したようである（これはEU議会で近々審議されることになっているので、結論するのは早急だが）。「パンデミック」が宣言されたため、多くの国でワクチンの予防接種が義務づけられたり、パニックに陥った人々は争ってワクチン接種を受けた。義務づけるには、政府によるワクチンの買い上げが前提になり、製薬・ワクチン製造業者は大儲けをしたようである。しかし、ヨーロッパでもアメリカでも、ワクチンの安全性などに疑問が提出された結果、接種を拒否する人々も増え、ワクチンはだぶついているようである。これは国民の税の無駄使いであり、国民から大企業やそれを後ろ盾にした一部の科学者などへ富を移行したことになる。いわば、これらの人々による一般市民の富の強奪である。しかも、このワクチンが本当に有効で安全ならまだしも、多くの人が、接種の結果健康を害したようである。勿論、正式な統計データは集められてはいない。その上、このような犯罪行為をあらかじめ知ってか知らずか、ワクチン接種の悪影響については、ワクチン製造業者は法律上免罪されているのである（落合：日刊ベリタ2009.10.19、10.24、12.07、12.13，12.15、12.23；Link d1~d6）。
退廃的資本主義市場経済（新自由主義と称される）が政治をも手中に納め、人々の生命をも犠牲にしてまで利潤追求をほしいままにしている姿がこの年は、戦争という面に留まらず、様々な分野で、さらに顕著にしかも全世界的規模に膨らんできたように思われる。こうした経済エリートが政治経済を、そして一般大衆の命を牛耳っている現状をどう打開するのか、人類文明はどうなるのか、難しい局面に来ている。
先に述べた国家レベル間の資源獲得競争は，もう一つの人類の直面する重大問題を象徴している。それは資源の枯渇と環境破壊とそれに伴う人類文明の破滅の可能性である。破滅ではなく、長く持続できるような文明を人類は創造しなければならない。持続可能な未来を築くための施策は今直ぐにでも始めなければならない。それは、２酸化炭素削減をも含むもっと広範な物質削減も含み、人類の倫理観・価値観の変換をも必要とする。これに関しては、2008年度の暮れから2009年度の始めにかけて一つの案を提出した（落合：日刊ベリタ2008.11.01〜2009.01.17；先の英文回想のLink:a1~a11）。２酸化炭素削減の一事ですら、合意をうることが難しい人類に、このような大変化が期待できるであろうか。大変化とはいえ、技術的、経済的には可能な変化であり、出来るかどうかは人類全体、特にそれを阻害するであろう経済エリート達、の意思の問題であろう。
落合栄一郎（VSA9）
Link d1: http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200910191413441
Link d2: http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200910241006006
Link d3: http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200912070938521
Link d4: http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200912131511030
Link d5: http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200912152151252
Link d6: http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200912231038193
12.30.2009
12.16.2009
Reflection on 2009 - by Eiichiro Ochiai, Chair of VSA9
Major changes in 2009
We have seen changes in the administration of the two countries of our concern: USA and Japan. Mr. B. Obama was elected enthusiastically by the US citizens in Nov., 2008. People in the US (and also of the world) hoped that he would act on his promise during the campaign, i.e., to bring about “changes”. People were expecting that he would put forward legislations to help people and to end wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, he has not delivered any of these changes. He continued the policies of the previous administration to help the Wall street (rather than the main streets), and expanded the Afghan war.
The Japanese people rejected the long-standing LDP (liberal democratic) and elected overwhelmingly DPJ (democratic party of Japan) members in the Aug. 30 lower house election. The new government led by Mr. Y. Hatoyama has instituted a number of new measures to overhaul the administrative structures and public work policies, and is trying to establish the Japanese own policies about the US bases in Japan, particularly in Okinawa. The Japanese media have reported that a strong pressure is exerted by the US defense administration against such a move by the Japanese government, but it turned out not to be true. Hopefully, the current Japanese government would show its determination to change the US bases in favor of the people of Okinawa.
The People’s republic of China celebrated the 60th anniversary of its establishment. It demonstrated its economic power and displayed its military might. Russia’s economy did not seem to have been much affected by the financial downturn in the West.
The Afghan War seems to be attracting more participation by the NATO countries. This is a very worrisome sign that the West is interested in the central Asia, perhaps for its oil and gas resources and also it’s being a strategic position between China and Russia. The powerful West (US, Britain, France, etc) is still dominating the world by force; they are also providing the world with about 80%of all the weapons. On the other hands, economically the newly emerging countries are increasing their influences.
How Japan should behave under this circumstance might be a difficult question.
What VSA9 should or could do
Well, the whole world needs to reconsider what would be beneficial to the majority of people, not only the so-called economic elites. Would most people like to live without fear of war (1) or would most people not mind waging war if they gain financially (2)? Option (2) would not work for the majority of people; the majority of people would only be victims, and only a small fraction of people (elites) gains benefits from wars (without losing their own lives). Hence for the majority of people there is only one option, option (1), if they want to live. Suppose option (1) is indeed what people want, how would we be able to attain it? Throughout the whole history of humankind, force has been used to settle most international disputes. However, many wars were fought not to resolve conflicts, but to exploit the resources or expand territories; that is, a major motivation for wars has been “greed” of the people (corporations) who gains from the wars at the expense of ordinary people. Aggression has to be defended. Hence, defense is the excuse by which nations arm themselves and militarism has escalated. It has become likely today that humankind may not escape devastation by nuclear weapons if a major war takes place. Even if it is not a major war, devastation of an entire nation is likely, as nuclear power plants are good targets for initial attack. Destruction of nuclear power plants amounts to a nuclear bomb attack.
There are basically two different levels of solution for abolishing wars; one at the people’s basic ethical mentality and the other at the national and international political level. The first is perhaps a very basic issue for humankind; i.e., to change their ethics from egotistical to more people-caring. This has been one of the basic themes in most religious traditions, but “lure of wealth or power” has strayed people from this ideal. In most cultures, particularly in the West, attaining one’s desire (wealth, power or otherwise) is regarded as a “virtue” and hence people would pursue it. Changes in this regard (basic ethics) would, if any, come very slowly.
Hence, we need to pursue political avenues to attain the goal of abolishing wars. Article 9 of the Japanese constitution is one of the good ways to achieve this goal. It declares to the world as well as the Japanese people themselves that Japan would never resort to wars to resolve international conflicts, and that she will not maintain military in order to accomplish it. Unfortunately, the Japanese government has built up a military in the guise of “Self Defense Force” (SDF) under the pressure from without (USA) and within. Yet, because of Article 9, the SDF has so far not been allowed to engage in a combat. In other words, this article could and indeed has restricted the activities of the military force within the confine of self-defense (against a military attack from another nation). It functions as a self-imposed restraint to the urge to use force.
As more and more nations adopt such a constitutional clause, more nations including Japan would feel less threatened and would reduce military machineries. This suggests our activities. One is to watch the movement of the Japanese government and keep pressure on them not to change Article 9, and to spread the message of incorporating Article 9 or the like into every nation’s constitution by all means.
Many people would argue that yes it is ideal, but too unrealistic to achieve. This method, nonviolent resolution of conflicts, is indeed more realistic in terms of safe-guarding ordinary people than violent confrontation. Violent confrontations inevitably put ordinary people in jeopardy.
Unfortunately, powerful nations are still pursuing their egotistical goals by force, and induce counter terrorism, though most of such activities are indeed resistance against aggression. Resistance can become terrorism easily, as the aggression is difficult to defeat. To reduce this kind of aggression requires a fair international organization to pressure such aggressive nations. A movement to make the UN be a fairer representative of the people of the world is one way; this is pursued by “World Federalists Movement” (NGO).
Beyond achieving a long-lasting peace on earth, the humankind is facing a dire problem: whether we can sustain our civilization. That is another big issue, please refer to the following links (a1~a11, b and c1~c6).
Eiichiro Ochiai, Chair of VSA9
Link (a1) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200811011339426
Link (a2) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200811081516266
http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/22618
Link (a3) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200811192242533
Link (a4) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200811270938084
Link (a5) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200812011430101
Link (a6) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200812062108576
Link (a7) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200812170844123
Link (a8) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200812250926344
Link (a9) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200812301912102
Link (a10) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200901101450496
Link (a11) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200901171230116
Link (b) http://www.japanfocus.org/products/details/2346
Link (c1) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/22571
Link (c2) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewarticle/22618
Link (c3) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/22649
Link (c4) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/22694
Link (c5) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/22784
Link (c6) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/23096
Eiichiro Ochiai is a retired chemistry professor; taught chemistry and conducted research in Japan, Canada, USA, Germany and Sweden. Currently involved in a movement to “Save Article 9"and “World Federalists Movement”, and is a citizen reporter for an Internet medium: www.nikkanberita.com reporting on various issues including politics, economics, health and sustainability.
We have seen changes in the administration of the two countries of our concern: USA and Japan. Mr. B. Obama was elected enthusiastically by the US citizens in Nov., 2008. People in the US (and also of the world) hoped that he would act on his promise during the campaign, i.e., to bring about “changes”. People were expecting that he would put forward legislations to help people and to end wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, he has not delivered any of these changes. He continued the policies of the previous administration to help the Wall street (rather than the main streets), and expanded the Afghan war.
The Japanese people rejected the long-standing LDP (liberal democratic) and elected overwhelmingly DPJ (democratic party of Japan) members in the Aug. 30 lower house election. The new government led by Mr. Y. Hatoyama has instituted a number of new measures to overhaul the administrative structures and public work policies, and is trying to establish the Japanese own policies about the US bases in Japan, particularly in Okinawa. The Japanese media have reported that a strong pressure is exerted by the US defense administration against such a move by the Japanese government, but it turned out not to be true. Hopefully, the current Japanese government would show its determination to change the US bases in favor of the people of Okinawa.
The People’s republic of China celebrated the 60th anniversary of its establishment. It demonstrated its economic power and displayed its military might. Russia’s economy did not seem to have been much affected by the financial downturn in the West.
The Afghan War seems to be attracting more participation by the NATO countries. This is a very worrisome sign that the West is interested in the central Asia, perhaps for its oil and gas resources and also it’s being a strategic position between China and Russia. The powerful West (US, Britain, France, etc) is still dominating the world by force; they are also providing the world with about 80%of all the weapons. On the other hands, economically the newly emerging countries are increasing their influences.
How Japan should behave under this circumstance might be a difficult question.
What VSA9 should or could do
Well, the whole world needs to reconsider what would be beneficial to the majority of people, not only the so-called economic elites. Would most people like to live without fear of war (1) or would most people not mind waging war if they gain financially (2)? Option (2) would not work for the majority of people; the majority of people would only be victims, and only a small fraction of people (elites) gains benefits from wars (without losing their own lives). Hence for the majority of people there is only one option, option (1), if they want to live. Suppose option (1) is indeed what people want, how would we be able to attain it? Throughout the whole history of humankind, force has been used to settle most international disputes. However, many wars were fought not to resolve conflicts, but to exploit the resources or expand territories; that is, a major motivation for wars has been “greed” of the people (corporations) who gains from the wars at the expense of ordinary people. Aggression has to be defended. Hence, defense is the excuse by which nations arm themselves and militarism has escalated. It has become likely today that humankind may not escape devastation by nuclear weapons if a major war takes place. Even if it is not a major war, devastation of an entire nation is likely, as nuclear power plants are good targets for initial attack. Destruction of nuclear power plants amounts to a nuclear bomb attack.
There are basically two different levels of solution for abolishing wars; one at the people’s basic ethical mentality and the other at the national and international political level. The first is perhaps a very basic issue for humankind; i.e., to change their ethics from egotistical to more people-caring. This has been one of the basic themes in most religious traditions, but “lure of wealth or power” has strayed people from this ideal. In most cultures, particularly in the West, attaining one’s desire (wealth, power or otherwise) is regarded as a “virtue” and hence people would pursue it. Changes in this regard (basic ethics) would, if any, come very slowly.
Hence, we need to pursue political avenues to attain the goal of abolishing wars. Article 9 of the Japanese constitution is one of the good ways to achieve this goal. It declares to the world as well as the Japanese people themselves that Japan would never resort to wars to resolve international conflicts, and that she will not maintain military in order to accomplish it. Unfortunately, the Japanese government has built up a military in the guise of “Self Defense Force” (SDF) under the pressure from without (USA) and within. Yet, because of Article 9, the SDF has so far not been allowed to engage in a combat. In other words, this article could and indeed has restricted the activities of the military force within the confine of self-defense (against a military attack from another nation). It functions as a self-imposed restraint to the urge to use force.
As more and more nations adopt such a constitutional clause, more nations including Japan would feel less threatened and would reduce military machineries. This suggests our activities. One is to watch the movement of the Japanese government and keep pressure on them not to change Article 9, and to spread the message of incorporating Article 9 or the like into every nation’s constitution by all means.
Many people would argue that yes it is ideal, but too unrealistic to achieve. This method, nonviolent resolution of conflicts, is indeed more realistic in terms of safe-guarding ordinary people than violent confrontation. Violent confrontations inevitably put ordinary people in jeopardy.
Unfortunately, powerful nations are still pursuing their egotistical goals by force, and induce counter terrorism, though most of such activities are indeed resistance against aggression. Resistance can become terrorism easily, as the aggression is difficult to defeat. To reduce this kind of aggression requires a fair international organization to pressure such aggressive nations. A movement to make the UN be a fairer representative of the people of the world is one way; this is pursued by “World Federalists Movement” (NGO).
Beyond achieving a long-lasting peace on earth, the humankind is facing a dire problem: whether we can sustain our civilization. That is another big issue, please refer to the following links (a1~a11, b and c1~c6).
Eiichiro Ochiai, Chair of VSA9
Link (a1) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200811011339426
Link (a2) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200811081516266
http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/22618
Link (a3) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200811192242533
Link (a4) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200811270938084
Link (a5) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200812011430101
Link (a6) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200812062108576
Link (a7) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200812170844123
Link (a8) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200812250926344
Link (a9) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200812301912102
Link (a10) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200901101450496
Link (a11) http://www.nikkanberita.com/read.cgi?id=200901171230116
Link (b) http://www.japanfocus.org/products/details/2346
Link (c1) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/22571
Link (c2) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewarticle/22618
Link (c3) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/22649
Link (c4) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/22694
Link (c5) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/22784
Link (c6) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/23096
Eiichiro Ochiai is a retired chemistry professor; taught chemistry and conducted research in Japan, Canada, USA, Germany and Sweden. Currently involved in a movement to “Save Article 9"and “World Federalists Movement”, and is a citizen reporter for an Internet medium: www.nikkanberita.com reporting on various issues including politics, economics, health and sustainability.
11.26.2009
International Human Rights Day Celebration on December 5
VSA9 is endorsing this event. We hope many of the members will come. (Click on the image for a larger view.)
11.03.2009
World Peace Forum Teach-In
World Peace Forum Teach-In 2009
The organization World Peace Forum is holding a Teach-in on Nov.
7, 8, 11. The theme is “1929-39: From Crash to
Catastrophe”. In this decade, the economic crash started in
1929 led to the catastrophic consequence, i.e., the Second World War.
Japan had a similar experience, and hence VSA9 is planning to hold a
small workshop focused on the Japanese experience at 2:30-4:00 on
Sunday, Nov. 8. The planned presentation includes a talk on the
overall view of the period, i.e., rise of fascism by Mr. Tatsuo Kage,
and a short movie titled “The Japanese who opposed the
war”. You are invited to attend this workshop as well as the
entire Teach-in. The details will be found in http://www.peaceforumteachin.org/
.
ワールドピースフォーラム、テイーチイン
ワールドピースフォーラム団体は、11月7、8日に
「1929－1939年、経済恐慌から破滅へ」という主題で
テイーチインを催します。日本も、同じ時期、経済恐慌を経験し、
やがて軍部、ファシズムが台頭し、15年戦争へ突入、そして
全てを失うという敗戦を経験しました。バンクーバ－９条の会はこ
の日本の経験をワークショップ（8日、午後２:30―
4:00）という形で検討します。鹿毛達雄氏の総括的話と、「戦争に
反対した日本人」という映画を上映し、皆さんに討論していただき
たいと思っております。ぜひ参加くださるようご案内します。なお、このテイーチ
イン全体の詳細は http://www.peaceforumteachin.org/をご
覧ください。
Eiichiro Ochiai, 落合栄一郎
chair, VSA9
11.01.2009
VSA9 Event Report - Yves Tiberghien's Talk in Chinese with English summary
Report by Arc Han
2009年10月28日晚，卑诗大学政治学系副教授Yves Tinbergen博士受温哥华九条会之邀，来到日裔中心作了题为鸠山内阁及今后日本的对外政策的演讲。
日本民主党在今年8月底的大选中以绝对优势战胜执政60多年的自民党，这一胜利被认为是在日本政治研究中改朝换代的大事件。尽管鸠山内阁才上台两个月，但已经在日本的对内，对外政策之上表现出了一些有意思的变化。Yves教授以翔实的数据分析了这一变化发生的原因，以及对将来日本的对外政策提出了预测。
October 28th, Dr. Yves Tinbergen, associated professor of UBC political science department, gave a lecture on “The victory of DPJ and foreign policy of Hatoyama cabinet”.
温哥华九条会最关心的自然是民主党对宪法第九条的态度。民主党本身的背景复杂，其成员包含了前自民党派阀，社民党左派等等，涵盖了左中右三派。加之民主党挑战美国权威，试图在日美关系中为日本争得更大的发言权的态度，让选民在大选前对民主党对宪法九条的态度颇为担心。有舆论认为民主党如果想要让日本成为能和美国平等对话的“正常国家”，宪法九条就应该被废除。事实证明这样的担心是多余的。Yves教授的数据显示，超过75%的民主党员反对修改宪法第九条，远远高于自民党40%左右的比例。
The status of Article 9 is the most concern of our VSA9 members. DPJ has a complicated background. Its members include former right wing LDPist, or left wing Socialists. And voters believe DPJ is going to take a tougher position against the U.S. This leads to the thoughts that if Japan wants to become a “Normal nation” and gains more equal position with America, then the Article 9 shall be abolished. Therefore, there was a concern about the DPJ attitudes towards article 9. Dr. Yves’s data shows these concerns are not necessary. Over 75% DPJist against revising Article9.
Yves教授的数据同时指出，2007年上议院选举中，安倍首相为首的自民党团操纵宪法九条议题，结果遭到惨败。自民党应该从这一失败中获得教训。即便自民党在今后重新赢得上议院或下议院多数，他们也应当投鼠忌器，在修改宪法九条的问题上小心行事。
Dr. Yves also pointed out that LDP tried to manipulate Article 9 issue and terribly lost in the 2007 HOC election. LDP should learn a lesson from this defeat and even they win their majority back later, they should not try to bring up the Article 9 issue again.
这样的结果标志着至少在很长的一段时间内宪法九条是安全的。这也可以理解为是民意的胜利。日本民众用选票说明了他们希望保留宪法九条，为日本争取一个更平等的日美关系的政策和保持日本非军事化的政策并不矛盾。
Such a result means Article 9 will be in safe at least for a while. This is the victory of the people’s will, I believe. Japanese voters expressed their support to Article 9 by their votes. This also indicates that Japan thinks a more equal Japan-US relation is not contradict to the non-military policy of Japan.
从政治学理论的角度来讲，认为日本应当废除宪法九条以便成为“正常国家”的说法是建立在传统的现实主义国际关系理论之上的。这一理论认为国家之间的力量平衡只能建立在军事力量的威胁之上。基于此理论，某些日本政治家认为日本在日美关系中欠缺和美国平等谈判的砝码，因此日本需要实现国防自主，重建军事力量以平等对谈，出于此目的，限制军备的宪法九条就应该被废除。这一理论的问题在于现实主义国际关系理论已经被证实是20世纪中多场战争的根源，也是日本军国主义时代的指导思想。日本作为战争的发起者和最终的受害者，实在没有必要再去重复过去的老路。国际关系理论中，同样存在新自由主义，解构主义等更和平和人性的学派，他们正在对现实主义学派形成强大的挑战和冲击。
From Political theory point of view, the thought that Japan should abolish Article 9 and become a “normal state” is based on the traditional realism school of international relation. Realism school believes that IR is based on the military might of a state. Based on this theory, some Japanese politician think Japan lacks the leverage in the negotiation with other states, therefore, Japan should realize a military independence. Therefore, the Article 9 which limits the state sovereignty shall be abolished. The problem with this thinking is that the realism school of thinking has been proved as the sources of many violent conflicts in the 20th century, and it was the guiding thinking in the imperial Japan. Japan, as the aggressor and the final victim of the war, shall not repeat the old mistake. In the studies of IR, there are also Neo-liberalism, Constructivism schools which are more peaceful and humanistic.
我个人倾向于用解构主义来理解国际关系。传统的现实主义学派认为我们都生活在一个弱肉强食的世界中，所以我们需要强大的军事力量以求自保。但解构主义学派认为，国际关系的世界并不是天生就是弱肉强食的达尔文世界。这是因为我们都倾向于往最坏的方向去思考别人，是从一开始我们都用这样的不信任和恶意来理解彼此，结果这个世界就真的成为了弱肉强食的达尔文世界。反过来想，如果我们从一开始都能用善意来理解别人，那我们现在对世界的理解可能会不同。
I prefer to use Constructivism to understand international politics. The traditional realism school believe we are all living in a power-based Darwinian world, therefore, we need strong power to protect ourselves. Constructivism school believes that the International politics is not born as a power-based Darwinian world. It was because, since the beginning, we tended to think others in a negative way. We tended to distrust others and be aggressive to each other, therefore our world really becomes a power-based Darwinian world. In other words, we constructed the power-based world. On the contrary, if we all could think about others in a positive way, trust each other and cooperate, our world today might be different.
宪法九条对日本和对世界的意义就在于此。过去四百年间的国际政治确实证明了现实主义学派的论点是事实。现实主义学派在过去四百年间的胜利是伴随着欧洲工业文明和资本主义的发展和扩张，并最终被世界范围的国家接受，成为国际关系中占统治地位的指导思想。但是20世纪的历史同样证明了这样的现实主义最终会把国家引向冲突和战争一途。二战后很多国家都认识到了这样的指导思想最终会把我们引向毁灭，因此新自由主义和解构主义作为现实主义的替代得到了很大的发展。很多国家也开始试验一些措施限制国家的军事力量在国际关系中的作用，来作为重建国际间信任关系的努力。日本宪法第九条无疑是这些政治试验中最引人注目的一条。
This is why Article 9 is important to human beings. The history of the past 400 years demonstrated that realism school is the reality of international politics. In the past 400 years, along with the development of European industrial civilization and the expansion of capitalism, the realism school has been accepted by all countries over the world. It becomes the dominant theory of international politics. But the history of the 20th century also proved that realism understanding only can lead countries to conflicts and wars. After WWII, many countries already realized that this understanding can only leads us to a devastation, therefore many of them start some practices which can limit the military power of states and re-establish the trust-relationship between nations. Article 9 of Japan is definitely an eye-catching experiment among these road-finding practices.
因此，保持宪法九条的努力可以理解为新的国际关系理论对旧有的达尔文主义的理论的挑战。保持宪法九条的胜利标志着对过去四百年间人类政治思想哲学的反思，和在世界范围内开创一种完全不同的人际/国际关系的胜利。如果保持宪法九条的斗争失败了，那么我想我会真的悲观绝望，从而像Hans Morgenthau宣称的那样，认为人的本性就是如此无可救药的。
Therefore, the efforts of defending article 9 can be understood as the new generation of international political theory challenging the old Darwinian Realism. The victory of defending Article 9 is a symbol of how we re-think about the political philosophy of the past 400 years. It is also an experiment of making a new inter-personal and international relationship. If we failed to defend Article 9, I think I would be really disappointed and pessimistic--and I would really become a believer of Hans Morgenthau who claimed that human nature is really that hopeless.
这一理论同样适用于中国。一般认为中国将是接替美国的下一个超级强权。现实主义学派中对强权更替有着非常悲观的预测--国际强权更替必然导致世界范围内的战争和冲突。但在解构主义者来看则是未必。中国的未来也正在我们的建设之中。如果中国走过去欧洲殖民主义帝国主义的老路，那么现实主义者的预测倒是很可能的。但是中国完全有可能从历史中获得教训，走上一条与他人信任，和平共存的道路。这也要求中国以外的人们不要从一开始就简单用恶意和不信任去理解中国的崛起--因为这样会简单得导致中国同样以不信任和恶意回应，最终大家都会走上过去四百年间不信任和冲突的老路。
This theory also applies to China. Generally, China is regarded as the next hegemony which will replace America. Realism school has a very pessimistic Hegemony changing theory--the change of hegemony powers will definitely leads to world wars. But according to constructivists, it is not necessarily true. The future Chinese policies are still under our construction. If China repeated the old way of colonialism and imperialism, then the realists prediction might become true. But it is also possible that China can learn a lesson from the history and walk to a peaceful rising (the words Hu Jintao used in the ASEAN +3 summit) and peaceful co-existing way. This also requires that people out of China don’t initially interpret The China’s rising in a negative way--because this would only make China to distrust others and think others negatively in return, then we would repeat the old way of distrust and conflicts as we did in the last 400 years.
鸠山内阁提出的东亚共同体的思路，同样是重建东亚各国之间的信任的努力，应当得到大力支持。作为这一策略的一部分，宪法九条则必需要得到保留。很难想象如果日本删除宪法第九条，日本还能赢得中国或者韩国的信任。宪法九条可以说是东亚共同体的先决条件。
The East Asia Community proposal by PM Hatoyama is another efforts to win trust from other Asian countries. I give my full supports to this idea. As part of the strategy, the Article 9 should definitely be maintained in the Constitution. It is hard to believe that Japan could win the trust of China and Korea if Japan deleted Article 9. Article 9 is the necessary condition of the East Asia Community.
Arc Han is a University of British Columbia student majoring in International Relations, and a member of Vancouver Save Article 9.
2009年10月28日晚，卑诗大学政治学系副教授Yves Tinbergen博士受温哥华九条会之邀，来到日裔中心作了题为鸠山内阁及今后日本的对外政策的演讲。
日本民主党在今年8月底的大选中以绝对优势战胜执政60多年的自民党，这一胜利被认为是在日本政治研究中改朝换代的大事件。尽管鸠山内阁才上台两个月，但已经在日本的对内，对外政策之上表现出了一些有意思的变化。Yves教授以翔实的数据分析了这一变化发生的原因，以及对将来日本的对外政策提出了预测。
October 28th, Dr. Yves Tinbergen, associated professor of UBC political science department, gave a lecture on “The victory of DPJ and foreign policy of Hatoyama cabinet”.
温哥华九条会最关心的自然是民主党对宪法第九条的态度。民主党本身的背景复杂，其成员包含了前自民党派阀，社民党左派等等，涵盖了左中右三派。加之民主党挑战美国权威，试图在日美关系中为日本争得更大的发言权的态度，让选民在大选前对民主党对宪法九条的态度颇为担心。有舆论认为民主党如果想要让日本成为能和美国平等对话的“正常国家”，宪法九条就应该被废除。事实证明这样的担心是多余的。Yves教授的数据显示，超过75%的民主党员反对修改宪法第九条，远远高于自民党40%左右的比例。
The status of Article 9 is the most concern of our VSA9 members. DPJ has a complicated background. Its members include former right wing LDPist, or left wing Socialists. And voters believe DPJ is going to take a tougher position against the U.S. This leads to the thoughts that if Japan wants to become a “Normal nation” and gains more equal position with America, then the Article 9 shall be abolished. Therefore, there was a concern about the DPJ attitudes towards article 9. Dr. Yves’s data shows these concerns are not necessary. Over 75% DPJist against revising Article9.
Yves教授的数据同时指出，2007年上议院选举中，安倍首相为首的自民党团操纵宪法九条议题，结果遭到惨败。自民党应该从这一失败中获得教训。即便自民党在今后重新赢得上议院或下议院多数，他们也应当投鼠忌器，在修改宪法九条的问题上小心行事。
Dr. Yves also pointed out that LDP tried to manipulate Article 9 issue and terribly lost in the 2007 HOC election. LDP should learn a lesson from this defeat and even they win their majority back later, they should not try to bring up the Article 9 issue again.
这样的结果标志着至少在很长的一段时间内宪法九条是安全的。这也可以理解为是民意的胜利。日本民众用选票说明了他们希望保留宪法九条，为日本争取一个更平等的日美关系的政策和保持日本非军事化的政策并不矛盾。
Such a result means Article 9 will be in safe at least for a while. This is the victory of the people’s will, I believe. Japanese voters expressed their support to Article 9 by their votes. This also indicates that Japan thinks a more equal Japan-US relation is not contradict to the non-military policy of Japan.
从政治学理论的角度来讲，认为日本应当废除宪法九条以便成为“正常国家”的说法是建立在传统的现实主义国际关系理论之上的。这一理论认为国家之间的力量平衡只能建立在军事力量的威胁之上。基于此理论，某些日本政治家认为日本在日美关系中欠缺和美国平等谈判的砝码，因此日本需要实现国防自主，重建军事力量以平等对谈，出于此目的，限制军备的宪法九条就应该被废除。这一理论的问题在于现实主义国际关系理论已经被证实是20世纪中多场战争的根源，也是日本军国主义时代的指导思想。日本作为战争的发起者和最终的受害者，实在没有必要再去重复过去的老路。国际关系理论中，同样存在新自由主义，解构主义等更和平和人性的学派，他们正在对现实主义学派形成强大的挑战和冲击。
From Political theory point of view, the thought that Japan should abolish Article 9 and become a “normal state” is based on the traditional realism school of international relation. Realism school believes that IR is based on the military might of a state. Based on this theory, some Japanese politician think Japan lacks the leverage in the negotiation with other states, therefore, Japan should realize a military independence. Therefore, the Article 9 which limits the state sovereignty shall be abolished. The problem with this thinking is that the realism school of thinking has been proved as the sources of many violent conflicts in the 20th century, and it was the guiding thinking in the imperial Japan. Japan, as the aggressor and the final victim of the war, shall not repeat the old mistake. In the studies of IR, there are also Neo-liberalism, Constructivism schools which are more peaceful and humanistic.
我个人倾向于用解构主义来理解国际关系。传统的现实主义学派认为我们都生活在一个弱肉强食的世界中，所以我们需要强大的军事力量以求自保。但解构主义学派认为，国际关系的世界并不是天生就是弱肉强食的达尔文世界。这是因为我们都倾向于往最坏的方向去思考别人，是从一开始我们都用这样的不信任和恶意来理解彼此，结果这个世界就真的成为了弱肉强食的达尔文世界。反过来想，如果我们从一开始都能用善意来理解别人，那我们现在对世界的理解可能会不同。
I prefer to use Constructivism to understand international politics. The traditional realism school believe we are all living in a power-based Darwinian world, therefore, we need strong power to protect ourselves. Constructivism school believes that the International politics is not born as a power-based Darwinian world. It was because, since the beginning, we tended to think others in a negative way. We tended to distrust others and be aggressive to each other, therefore our world really becomes a power-based Darwinian world. In other words, we constructed the power-based world. On the contrary, if we all could think about others in a positive way, trust each other and cooperate, our world today might be different.
宪法九条对日本和对世界的意义就在于此。过去四百年间的国际政治确实证明了现实主义学派的论点是事实。现实主义学派在过去四百年间的胜利是伴随着欧洲工业文明和资本主义的发展和扩张，并最终被世界范围的国家接受，成为国际关系中占统治地位的指导思想。但是20世纪的历史同样证明了这样的现实主义最终会把国家引向冲突和战争一途。二战后很多国家都认识到了这样的指导思想最终会把我们引向毁灭，因此新自由主义和解构主义作为现实主义的替代得到了很大的发展。很多国家也开始试验一些措施限制国家的军事力量在国际关系中的作用，来作为重建国际间信任关系的努力。日本宪法第九条无疑是这些政治试验中最引人注目的一条。
This is why Article 9 is important to human beings. The history of the past 400 years demonstrated that realism school is the reality of international politics. In the past 400 years, along with the development of European industrial civilization and the expansion of capitalism, the realism school has been accepted by all countries over the world. It becomes the dominant theory of international politics. But the history of the 20th century also proved that realism understanding only can lead countries to conflicts and wars. After WWII, many countries already realized that this understanding can only leads us to a devastation, therefore many of them start some practices which can limit the military power of states and re-establish the trust-relationship between nations. Article 9 of Japan is definitely an eye-catching experiment among these road-finding practices.
因此，保持宪法九条的努力可以理解为新的国际关系理论对旧有的达尔文主义的理论的挑战。保持宪法九条的胜利标志着对过去四百年间人类政治思想哲学的反思，和在世界范围内开创一种完全不同的人际/国际关系的胜利。如果保持宪法九条的斗争失败了，那么我想我会真的悲观绝望，从而像Hans Morgenthau宣称的那样，认为人的本性就是如此无可救药的。
Therefore, the efforts of defending article 9 can be understood as the new generation of international political theory challenging the old Darwinian Realism. The victory of defending Article 9 is a symbol of how we re-think about the political philosophy of the past 400 years. It is also an experiment of making a new inter-personal and international relationship. If we failed to defend Article 9, I think I would be really disappointed and pessimistic--and I would really become a believer of Hans Morgenthau who claimed that human nature is really that hopeless.
这一理论同样适用于中国。一般认为中国将是接替美国的下一个超级强权。现实主义学派中对强权更替有着非常悲观的预测--国际强权更替必然导致世界范围内的战争和冲突。但在解构主义者来看则是未必。中国的未来也正在我们的建设之中。如果中国走过去欧洲殖民主义帝国主义的老路，那么现实主义者的预测倒是很可能的。但是中国完全有可能从历史中获得教训，走上一条与他人信任，和平共存的道路。这也要求中国以外的人们不要从一开始就简单用恶意和不信任去理解中国的崛起--因为这样会简单得导致中国同样以不信任和恶意回应，最终大家都会走上过去四百年间不信任和冲突的老路。
This theory also applies to China. Generally, China is regarded as the next hegemony which will replace America. Realism school has a very pessimistic Hegemony changing theory--the change of hegemony powers will definitely leads to world wars. But according to constructivists, it is not necessarily true. The future Chinese policies are still under our construction. If China repeated the old way of colonialism and imperialism, then the realists prediction might become true. But it is also possible that China can learn a lesson from the history and walk to a peaceful rising (the words Hu Jintao used in the ASEAN +3 summit) and peaceful co-existing way. This also requires that people out of China don’t initially interpret The China’s rising in a negative way--because this would only make China to distrust others and think others negatively in return, then we would repeat the old way of distrust and conflicts as we did in the last 400 years.
鸠山内阁提出的东亚共同体的思路，同样是重建东亚各国之间的信任的努力，应当得到大力支持。作为这一策略的一部分，宪法九条则必需要得到保留。很难想象如果日本删除宪法第九条，日本还能赢得中国或者韩国的信任。宪法九条可以说是东亚共同体的先决条件。
The East Asia Community proposal by PM Hatoyama is another efforts to win trust from other Asian countries. I give my full supports to this idea. As part of the strategy, the Article 9 should definitely be maintained in the Constitution. It is hard to believe that Japan could win the trust of China and Korea if Japan deleted Article 9. Article 9 is the necessary condition of the East Asia Community.
Arc Han is a University of British Columbia student majoring in International Relations, and a member of Vancouver Save Article 9.10.29.2009
VSA9 Event Report - Yves Tiberghien's Talk on October 28th, 2009
UBC Political Science Professor Yves Tiberghien's talk "New Hatoyama Administration's Implication for Japan's Foreign Policy and the Constitutional Revision Issue" was well-attended by 30+ people, including VSA9 members, students from UBC, and other members of the community. We also had four students from Swaziland, Israel, Indonesia and Mongolia from Lester B. Pearson College in Victoria. Below is Dan Aizawa's report of Yves' talk. Thank you Dan!
Readers, your comments and feedback on Yves' talk and/or Dan's report are
most welcome. Please click "Post a Comment" at the bottom and share your thoughts.
Thank you Yves, for your brilliant and inspiring talk. I felt there was a real sense of a shared purpose in the room for creating an "East Asian Community." We should get together again to develop a concrete plan and a proposal to Hatoyama and other Asian leaders!
Thank you for all the VSA9 members and volunteers who made this event happen.
Thank you for JCCA Human Rights Committee for supporting this event.
Love and peace,
Satoko
(Photos by Walter Matsuda)
Readers, your comments and feedback on Yves' talk and/or Dan's report are
most welcome. Please click "Post a Comment" at the bottom and share your thoughts.Thank you Yves, for your brilliant and inspiring talk. I felt there was a real sense of a shared purpose in the room for creating an "East Asian Community." We should get together again to develop a concrete plan and a proposal to Hatoyama and other Asian leaders!
Thank you for all the VSA9 members and volunteers who made this event happen.
Thank you for JCCA Human Rights Committee for supporting this event.
Love and peace,
Satoko
(Photos by Walter Matsuda)
(LDP: Liberal Democratic Party; DPJ: Democratic Party of Japan; SDP: Social Democratic Party; PNP: People's New Party)
***********************************
Report by Dan Aizawa
October 28th, 2009
The New Hatoyama Administration:
Implications for Japan’s Foreign Policy and Constitution
Speaker: Yves Tiberghien
We were very lucky today to have Professor Yves Tiberghien of UBC speak on the new Hatoyama DPJ administration on Tuesday night. We were very lucky to have a lot of people show up, regardless of the weather, and the time; which goes to show how interested people are on the implications of the new government. We were also very lucky to have the president of the Vancouver Save Article 9 group, Mr. Ochiai, give a small talk on Article 9.
Professor Tiberghien outlined the following in his talk:
1. The Election and Driving Issues
2. The New Government and the Cabinet
3. The Democratic Party of Japan today
4. The Coalition Government and the impact of the October by-elections
5. Domestic dilemmas and priorities
6. Foreign Affairs
7. Constitutional Revision
Professor Tiberghien stated that the shift to the DPJ now means a shift towards a European style Social Democracy, and also a foreign policy rebalancing with Asia and the UN. Professor Tiberghien concluded by stating that there would be major changes to the method of policy making, new foreign and climate change policy, and a shift towards more social welfare. However, he also concluded by stating that the new government is “riddled in dilemmas…spread thin… [and] facing a tough reality” and that “results will be uncertain.”
Professor Tiberghien, in the early minutes of his talk, gave his view on the new government and what would happen to Article 9 under this new DPJ administration. First of all, Professor Tiberghien stated that the new government has “no intention to touch the constitution” and that the “survival of the DPJ depends on social and economic issues.”
I am also inclined to agree with this judgment of the DPJ and the new administration. Having been an election volunteer over the month of August, I have personally seen what was moving voters to vote for the DPJ. The DPJ did not gain power because they did not want to change the constitution, but it was more or less because the DPJ was simply the best alternative to the LDP. Voters in the 2009 general elections did not care about constitutional revision or Article 9; these issues are at the bottom of the list of things the new government should be working on. To touch Article 9 and constitutional revision now would be political suicide and will lead to defeat in the 2010 Upper House elections.
Professor Tiberghien listed four factors that led to the ‘great reversal’ of power.
1. The LDP’s defeat was visible for some time, and that the LDP had been “exhausted, trying to fend off corruption and inertia since 1993.
2. Rejection of LDP traditional politics.
3. The Koizumi Reforms. Professor Tiberghien stated that the reforms that had started under Nakasone in the mid 80’s and onward by the LDP had created a major inequality in wealth, the so-called Kakusa issue, and was eating away at the LDP. The Koizumi reforms were a ‘double whammy,’ because the reforms caused traditional LDP voters, especially the conservative vote in the rural areas, to betray the LDP.
4. The DPJ was able to present itself as a credible alternative to the LDP in 2009. The DPJ has become a more balanced party under the leadership of Kan and Hatoyama’s idealism, and Ozawa’s realism.
Professor Tiberghien went quite deeply into the aspect of a shift towards a more European style social democratic policy being taken up by the DPJ.
“Put People Before Concrete!”
Professor Tiberghien displayed these words on the overhead projector and looked quite pleased with this shift in policy by the DPJ.
The implications for this new shift are that government funding would be diverted from construction and LDP interest groups. There would be more redistribution and social welfare, such as child allowances, minimum wage, fixing the pensions program, and to get results in the fight for temporary workers rights.
These issues will ultimately be the most important issues for the DPJ to face. I feel that as a voter the fixing of these issues should be the raison d'être for the DPJ and the coalition government. I feel that these issues are the primary reason why so many voters, myself included, voted for the DPJ.
Professor Tiberghien also added by stating the changes in Japans rhetoric on foreign policy; primarily the rebalancing of the US-Japan alliance and economic integration with China and the rest of Asia, and if possible currency integration.
Professor Tiberghien also added how the new DPJ is now more coherent on broad issues such as Article 9. There is now a general consensus among DPJ Diet Members to not change Article 9, ban on nuclear weapons, against Yasukuni Shrine visits, and a strong position on climate change. Professor Tiberghien stated that Japan could potentially become a leader on climate change issues along with the EU.
Professor Tiberghien also discussed the implications of the coalition government, and also the implications of the Ozawa faction and its relationship to the other major leaders of the DPJ.
The Ozawa Faction, or the Ozawa Children or Ozawa Girls, as they are often referred to in the media are now the single largest de facto faction in the DPJ. Of course because the DPJ is so new there are no entrenched factionalism’s like the LDP. However, the implications of the Ozawa Faction against former socialists like Kan, or leaders like Okada who are not friendly with Ozawa could have negative impacts on the DPJ and its decision making process.
Professor Tiberghien was able to discuss the situation of power within the DPJ in quite simple terms. Prime Minister Hatoyama controls the cabinet, Ozawa controls the party, and Okada is the best candidate for the next PM. Hatoyama and Ozawa are relatively friendly, while Ozawa and Okada simply do not get along.
The coalition is also of extreme interests to those who are interested in saving Article 9. The SDP and the PNP, both coalition members, but the SDP has a staunch opposition to any changes to the constitution. However, with the addition of new DPJ members in the October by-elections in the upper house, and the addition of four new members from the Renaissance Party in the upper house, the DPJ no longer really need the SDP to have a majority in the upper house.
I see this move by the DPJ as being potentially dangerous to the coalition. Ozawa who organized the Renaissance Parties entry into the coalition may have felt that the SDP could get in the way of the DPJ, the same way the socialists got in his way back in 1994 when he was leader of the Shinseito. Ozawa could see the SDP as an irritant in the coalition.
Professor Tiberghien gave a very long talk on Japan’s new approach to foreign policy and was asked many tough questions on the issue by other participants.
Professor Tiberghien outlined the new direction in the following:
- The Hatoyama government would like to keep the US-Japan Alliance as an anchor of Japanese foreign policy.
- Rebalancing: Rebalance towards Asia and the UN, and give Japan a stronger voice against the US.
- Renegotiation of Okinawa Situation: particularly the Futenma transfers to Nago; however, Japan has no real leverage to bargain a new deal.
- End to the MSDF mission to the Indian Ocean.
Professor Tiberghien also focused on the aspect of the so called East Asian Community.
Professor Tiberghien stated that the success of this proposal depends on the relations with the Republic of Korea and the Peoples Republic of China. Korea would like to see the Takeshima, textbooks, and Yasukuni problems addressed and fixed. China would like to see the oil fields discussed and solved. China would also like to see that Japan respect Chinese sovereignty in Xingjian, Tibet, and Taiwan. Without this problems solved, Professor Tiberghien stated, there would be no hope for an East Asian Community.
The Okinawa issue was also discussed quite deeply by Professor Tiberghien. The current Okinawa issue all comes down to the 2006 agreement between the US and Japan on the relocation of Futenma from Ginowan to Nago by 2014. However, recently Foreign Minister Okada has shown some contempt for the 2006 agreement, and has suggested that Futenma simply be shut down and all functions moved to Kadena, but the US has opposed this deal.
Defense Minister Kitazawa, on the issue of Okinawa had stated that Japan should simply stick to the original plan. However, Okada would like to see this issue fixed in his own way as soon as possible, much to the dismay of the Obama administration. Hatoyama and Ozawa are both not enthusiastic about pressuring the US to a new deal.
There are now, due to the Okinawa issue, visible tensions between the US and Japan. Secretary of Defense Gate’s visit to Japan ended with nothing being discussed because both parties could not agree on what to talk about. Gates had come to Japan wanting to talk about Afghanistan and Iraq, and Hatoyama had wanted to talk about Okinawa.
In my personal opinion, the Okinawa issue should not be the prime focus of the DPJ. The DPJ has more things to worry about than Okinawa with the upper house elections coming up in the summer of 2010. The Okinawa issue could hurt the DPJ in the next elections as being time well wasted by the government, and could represent the DPJ as being out of touch and unable to keep its promises. The Okinawa issue is not something Japan has leverage on, and it could fail disastrously, which could cause a major defeat for the DPJ in the summer at the upper house elections.
In conclusion Professor Tiberghien summarized the change in policy, especially in foreign affairs. However, he also concluded by stating that the new government is facing an extremely tough reality, with a very small time frame between now and the upper house elections. At which point voters could turn against the DPJ if the social and economic issues are not met with real results.
I am once again inclined to agree with this conclusion. For the DPJ to be a pragmatic party that will be able to actually accomplish its goals, subjects such as Article 9 will have to be set aside for now. Article 9 is not an issue at the moment, the economy and social issues are the primary concern. However, the plus side to the fact that there is no interest in Article 9 at the moment is that no one is interested in changing it either.
Professor Tiberghien also stated that, “even if the LDP were in power they would not touch Article 9.” Essentially because it would be political suicide for any party to do so.
However, this does not mean the people are willing to support keeping Article 9 either, if the occasion arose. It simply means that the people don’t care, and to be perfectly frank, the people do not support candidates who do things that they don’t care about, such as issues over Ar
ticle 9. I feel that the best thing to protect Article 9 in Japan, for now, is to keep Article 9 away from the spot light.
Dan Aizawa is a University of British Columbia student majoring in political science and history.
******************************
October 28th, 2009
The New Hatoyama Administration:
Implications for Japan’s Foreign Policy and Constitution
Speaker: Yves Tiberghien
We were very lucky today to have Professor Yves Tiberghien of UBC speak on the new Hatoyama DPJ administration on Tuesday night. We were very lucky to have a lot of people show up, regardless of the weather, and the time; which goes to show how interested people are on the implications of the new government. We were also very lucky to have the president of the Vancouver Save Article 9 group, Mr. Ochiai, give a small talk on Article 9.
Professor Tiberghien outlined the following in his talk:
1. The Election and Driving Issues
2. The New Government and the Cabinet
3. The Democratic Party of Japan today
4. The Coalition Government and the impact of the October by-elections
5. Domestic dilemmas and priorities
6. Foreign Affairs
7. Constitutional Revision
Professor Tiberghien stated that the shift to the DPJ now means a shift towards a European style Social Democracy, and also a foreign policy rebalancing with Asia and the UN. Professor Tiberghien concluded by stating that there would be major changes to the method of policy making, new foreign and climate change policy, and a shift towards more social welfare. However, he also concluded by stating that the new government is “riddled in dilemmas…spread thin… [and] facing a tough reality” and that “results will be uncertain.”
Professor Tiberghien, in the early minutes of his talk, gave his view on the new government and what would happen to Article 9 under this new DPJ administration. First of all, Professor Tiberghien stated that the new government has “no intention to touch the constitution” and that the “survival of the DPJ depends on social and economic issues.”
I am also inclined to agree with this judgment of the DPJ and the new administration. Having been an election volunteer over the month of August, I have personally seen what was moving voters to vote for the DPJ. The DPJ did not gain power because they did not want to change the constitution, but it was more or less because the DPJ was simply the best alternative to the LDP. Voters in the 2009 general elections did not care about constitutional revision or Article 9; these issues are at the bottom of the list of things the new government should be working on. To touch Article 9 and constitutional revision now would be political suicide and will lead to defeat in the 2010 Upper House elections.
Professor Tiberghien listed four factors that led to the ‘great reversal’ of power.
1. The LDP’s defeat was visible for some time, and that the LDP had been “exhausted, trying to fend off corruption and inertia since 1993.
2. Rejection of LDP traditional politics.
3. The Koizumi Reforms. Professor Tiberghien stated that the reforms that had started under Nakasone in the mid 80’s and onward by the LDP had created a major inequality in wealth, the so-called Kakusa issue, and was eating away at the LDP. The Koizumi reforms were a ‘double whammy,’ because the reforms caused traditional LDP voters, especially the conservative vote in the rural areas, to betray the LDP.
4. The DPJ was able to present itself as a credible alternative to the LDP in 2009. The DPJ has become a more balanced party under the leadership of Kan and Hatoyama’s idealism, and Ozawa’s realism.
Professor Tiberghien went quite deeply into the aspect of a shift towards a more European style social democratic policy being taken up by the DPJ.
“Put People Before Concrete!”
Professor Tiberghien displayed these words on the overhead projector and looked quite pleased with this shift in policy by the DPJ.
The implications for this new shift are that government funding would be diverted from construction and LDP interest groups. There would be more redistribution and social welfare, such as child allowances, minimum wage, fixing the pensions program, and to get results in the fight for temporary workers rights.
These issues will ultimately be the most important issues for the DPJ to face. I feel that as a voter the fixing of these issues should be the raison d'être for the DPJ and the coalition government. I feel that these issues are the primary reason why so many voters, myself included, voted for the DPJ.
Professor Tiberghien also added by stating the changes in Japans rhetoric on foreign policy; primarily the rebalancing of the US-Japan alliance and economic integration with China and the rest of Asia, and if possible currency integration.
Professor Tiberghien also added how the new DPJ is now more coherent on broad issues such as Article 9. There is now a general consensus among DPJ Diet Members to not change Article 9, ban on nuclear weapons, against Yasukuni Shrine visits, and a strong position on climate change. Professor Tiberghien stated that Japan could potentially become a leader on climate change issues along with the EU.
Professor Tiberghien also discussed the implications of the coalition government, and also the implications of the Ozawa faction and its relationship to the other major leaders of the DPJ.
The Ozawa Faction, or the Ozawa Children or Ozawa Girls, as they are often referred to in the media are now the single largest de facto faction in the DPJ. Of course because the DPJ is so new there are no entrenched factionalism’s like the LDP. However, the implications of the Ozawa Faction against former socialists like Kan, or leaders like Okada who are not friendly with Ozawa could have negative impacts on the DPJ and its decision making process.
Professor Tiberghien was able to discuss the situation of power within the DPJ in quite simple terms. Prime Minister Hatoyama controls the cabinet, Ozawa controls the party, and Okada is the best candidate for the next PM. Hatoyama and Ozawa are relatively friendly, while Ozawa and Okada simply do not get along.
The coalition is also of extreme interests to those who are interested in saving Article 9. The SDP and the PNP, both coalition members, but the SDP has a staunch opposition to any changes to the constitution. However, with the addition of new DPJ members in the October by-elections in the upper house, and the addition of four new members from the Renaissance Party in the upper house, the DPJ no longer really need the SDP to have a majority in the upper house.
I see this move by the DPJ as being potentially dangerous to the coalition. Ozawa who organized the Renaissance Parties entry into the coalition may have felt that the SDP could get in the way of the DPJ, the same way the socialists got in his way back in 1994 when he was leader of the Shinseito. Ozawa could see the SDP as an irritant in the coalition.
Professor Tiberghien gave a very long talk on Japan’s new approach to foreign policy and was asked many tough questions on the issue by other participants.
Professor Tiberghien outlined the new direction in the following:
- The Hatoyama government would like to keep the US-Japan Alliance as an anchor of Japanese foreign policy.
- Rebalancing: Rebalance towards Asia and the UN, and give Japan a stronger voice against the US.
- Renegotiation of Okinawa Situation: particularly the Futenma transfers to Nago; however, Japan has no real leverage to bargain a new deal.
- End to the MSDF mission to the Indian Ocean.
Professor Tiberghien also focused on the aspect of the so called East Asian Community.
Professor Tiberghien stated that the success of this proposal depends on the relations with the Republic of Korea and the Peoples Republic of China. Korea would like to see the Takeshima, textbooks, and Yasukuni problems addressed and fixed. China would like to see the oil fields discussed and solved. China would also like to see that Japan respect Chinese sovereignty in Xingjian, Tibet, and Taiwan. Without this problems solved, Professor Tiberghien stated, there would be no hope for an East Asian Community.
The Okinawa issue was also discussed quite deeply by Professor Tiberghien. The current Okinawa issue all comes down to the 2006 agreement between the US and Japan on the relocation of Futenma from Ginowan to Nago by 2014. However, recently Foreign Minister Okada has shown some contempt for the 2006 agreement, and has suggested that Futenma simply be shut down and all functions moved to Kadena, but the US has opposed this deal.
Defense Minister Kitazawa, on the issue of Okinawa had stated that Japan should simply stick to the original plan. However, Okada would like to see this issue fixed in his own way as soon as possible, much to the dismay of the Obama administration. Hatoyama and Ozawa are both not enthusiastic about pressuring the US to a new deal.
There are now, due to the Okinawa issue, visible tensions between the US and Japan. Secretary of Defense Gate’s visit to Japan ended with nothing being discussed because both parties could not agree on what to talk about. Gates had come to Japan wanting to talk about Afghanistan and Iraq, and Hatoyama had wanted to talk about Okinawa.
In my personal opinion, the Okinawa issue should not be the prime focus of the DPJ. The DPJ has more things to worry about than Okinawa with the upper house elections coming up in the summer of 2010. The Okinawa issue could hurt the DPJ in the next elections as being time well wasted by the government, and could represent the DPJ as being out of touch and unable to keep its promises. The Okinawa issue is not something Japan has leverage on, and it could fail disastrously, which could cause a major defeat for the DPJ in the summer at the upper house elections.
In conclusion Professor Tiberghien summarized the change in policy, especially in foreign affairs. However, he also concluded by stating that the new government is facing an extremely tough reality, with a very small time frame between now and the upper house elections. At which point voters could turn against the DPJ if the social and economic issues are not met with real results.
I am once again inclined to agree with this conclusion. For the DPJ to be a pragmatic party that will be able to actually accomplish its goals, subjects such as Article 9 will have to be set aside for now. Article 9 is not an issue at the moment, the economy and social issues are the primary concern. However, the plus side to the fact that there is no interest in Article 9 at the moment is that no one is interested in changing it either.
Professor Tiberghien also stated that, “even if the LDP were in power they would not touch Article 9.” Essentially because it would be political suicide for any party to do so.
However, this does not mean the people are willing to support keeping Article 9 either, if the occasion arose. It simply means that the people don’t care, and to be perfectly frank, the people do not support candidates who do things that they don’t care about, such as issues over Ar
ticle 9. I feel that the best thing to protect Article 9 in Japan, for now, is to keep Article 9 away from the spot light.Dan Aizawa is a University of British Columbia student majoring in political science and history.
******************************
10.16.2009
Hatoyama Administration's Impact on Foreign Policy and Article 9 バンクーバー九条の会の講演 － 鳩山新政権が外交政策や改憲問題にもたらす影響
(Scroll down for Japanese version of this notice. 日本語版はこの案内の下にあります）
A Talk by Yves Tiberghien, Associate Professor of Political Science at UBC
" New Hatoyama Administration's Implication for Japan's Foreign Policy and the Constitutional Revision Issue"
Date and Time:7 - 9 PM, October 28 (Wed.)
Place: Kaede Room 2nd Floor, National Nikkei Heritage Centre
6688 Southoaks Crescent, Burnaby BC
(Underground parking available. See this link for directions）
The August 30 General Election in Japan ended with a landslide victory for the Democratic Party of Japan and the devastating defeat of the long-ruling Liberal Democratic Party. In light of this, how will the new coalition government tackle the issues surrounding the much debated revisions to The Constitution, specifically Article 9? Some leaders of the DPJ claim that they wish to establish a more equal relationship with the U.S., yet in reality, how does that affect or change policies between the two nations such as the Japan-US Security Treaty, the disputed relocation of Futenma Air Base, the SDF's refuelling mission inthe Indian Ocean, and Japan's cooperation with Obama's initiative for nuclear disarmament? Yves Tiberghien, a UBC Political Science professor specialized in Japanese Politics, will be giving a presentation as to the implication of the New Hatoyama Administration to various aspects of society including the economy, employment, and "kakusa" or economical gap between the rich and poor, among others with special focus on constitutional and foreign policy issues. We will also have with us Sebastien Lechevalier, Associate Professor at EHESS (Centre de Recherches sur le Japon) as a guest commentator.
* Admission by donation (suggested: $5)
* Yves' talk will be in English and Japanese translation will be provided.
RSVP and Inquiry: Email satoko.norimatsu@ubc.ca with your name and the number of people attending. Phone: 604-619-5627
Organized by: Vancouver Save Article 9
Supported by: JCCA Human Rights Committee
Yves Tiberghien - Profile
Dr. Yves Tiberghien is Associate Professor of Political Science and a Faculty Associate of the Center for Japanese Research at UBC. He specialize sin Japanese, Chinese and European politics and political economy. Yves obtained his Ph.D. From Stanford University in Political Science in 2002. IN2004-2006, he was an Academy Scholar at Harvard University. In 1999-2000,Yves was a visiting scholar at the Japanese Ministry of Finance and at Keio University with a Japan Foundation fellowship. Yves' book, "Entrepreneurial States: Reforming Corporate Governance in Japan, Korea, and France" was published by Cornell University in 2007. Yves has also published several articles and book chapters on the Japan's bubble economy, crisis period, and reform process; as well, he has written articles and chapters on Japan's climate change policy and genetically-modified food regulation. Yves is currently completing a book on the global battle over the governance of GMO swith a large focus on Japan, as well as pursuing research on two new projects: one on the political consequences of Japan's rising inequality(the kakusa issue) and one on the analysis of Japan's and China's role in global governance.
バンクーバー九条の会から講演会のお知らせです。（日本語通訳付き）
テーマ：「鳩山新政権が日本の外交政策や改憲問題にもたらす影響」
講師：UBC政治学部 イブ・ティベルギアン准教授
去る８月３０日の総選挙は民主党の圧勝と自民党の大敗に終わりました。民主党・社民党・国民新党の連立政権は改憲、特に九条の問題にどう取り組むのでしょうか。民主党の指導者たちは、アメリカ合衆国とのより対等な関係を築くと表明していますが、このことが日米安全保障条約、普天間基地の移転、インド洋での給油活動、オバマ大統領先導の核廃絶への動きにどのような影響をもたらすのでしょうか。今回は日本の政治や経済に詳しいブリティッシュコロンビア大学政治学部准教授イブ・ティベルギアンさんを招き、格差や雇用といった日本社会が抱える問題をはじめ日本社会や経済への新政権の影響を話していただいた上で、外交や改憲問題に特に重点を置いて参加者とともにディスカッションをしていきたいと思います。またゲスト・コメンテイターとして、フランスの社会科学高等研究院.（EHESS）日本研究所准教授のセバスチャン・レシュバリエさんも参加されます。
日時：１０月２８日（水）午後７時から９時まで
場所：日系ヘリテージセンター２階 楓の間Kaede Room, 2nd Floor National Nikkei Heritage Centre6688 Southoaks Crescent, Burnaby BC （地下駐車場あり。行き方の詳細はこちらをどうぞ）
参加費：無料ですが、ご寄付をお願いします。（目安：５ドル程度）
＊英語による講演で日本語通訳がつきます。ティベルギアンさんは日本語を話しますので講演も一部はご本人が日本語で解説できますし、質疑応答等は日本語でも対応できます。
参加申し込み、問い合わせ先：バンクーバー九条の会 Eメール satoko.norimatsu@ubc.ca に、お名前と人数をお知らせください。電話でも対応できます。６０４－６１９－５６２７
主催 バンクーバー九条の会
後援 JCCA人権委員会
イブ・ティベルギアン 略歴
ブリティッシュコロンビア大学政治学部准教授。政治学博士。日本、中国、ヨーロッパの政治学と政治経済学が専門。２００２年にスタンフォード大学政治学部で博士号を取得。国際交流基金のフェローシップにより日本の財務省および慶応義塾大学で客員研究員・教授を務めた。著書に『企業家的国家：日本、韓国、フランスにおける企業統治の改革』（２００７年 コーネル大学）がある。その他、日本のバブル経済、経済危機の時代、構造改革、日本の気候変動に関する政策や遺伝子組み換え食品の規制について等幅広い分野で執筆活動をしている。
A Talk by Yves Tiberghien, Associate Professor of Political Science at UBC
" New Hatoyama Administration's Implication for Japan's Foreign Policy and the Constitutional Revision Issue"
Date and Time:7 - 9 PM, October 28 (Wed.)
Place: Kaede Room 2nd Floor, National Nikkei Heritage Centre
6688 Southoaks Crescent, Burnaby BC
(Underground parking available. See this link for directions）
The August 30 General Election in Japan ended with a landslide victory for the Democratic Party of Japan and the devastating defeat of the long-ruling Liberal Democratic Party. In light of this, how will the new coalition government tackle the issues surrounding the much debated revisions to The Constitution, specifically Article 9? Some leaders of the DPJ claim that they wish to establish a more equal relationship with the U.S., yet in reality, how does that affect or change policies between the two nations such as the Japan-US Security Treaty, the disputed relocation of Futenma Air Base, the SDF's refuelling mission inthe Indian Ocean, and Japan's cooperation with Obama's initiative for nuclear disarmament? Yves Tiberghien, a UBC Political Science professor specialized in Japanese Politics, will be giving a presentation as to the implication of the New Hatoyama Administration to various aspects of society including the economy, employment, and "kakusa" or economical gap between the rich and poor, among others with special focus on constitutional and foreign policy issues. We will also have with us Sebastien Lechevalier, Associate Professor at EHESS (Centre de Recherches sur le Japon) as a guest commentator.
* Admission by donation (suggested: $5)
* Yves' talk will be in English and Japanese translation will be provided.
RSVP and Inquiry: Email satoko.norimatsu@ubc.ca with your name and the number of people attending. Phone: 604-619-5627
Organized by: Vancouver Save Article 9
Supported by: JCCA Human Rights Committee
Yves Tiberghien - Profile
Dr. Yves Tiberghien is Associate Professor of Political Science and a Faculty Associate of the Center for Japanese Research at UBC. He specialize sin Japanese, Chinese and European politics and political economy. Yves obtained his Ph.D. From Stanford University in Political Science in 2002. IN2004-2006, he was an Academy Scholar at Harvard University. In 1999-2000,Yves was a visiting scholar at the Japanese Ministry of Finance and at Keio University with a Japan Foundation fellowship. Yves' book, "Entrepreneurial States: Reforming Corporate Governance in Japan, Korea, and France" was published by Cornell University in 2007. Yves has also published several articles and book chapters on the Japan's bubble economy, crisis period, and reform process; as well, he has written articles and chapters on Japan's climate change policy and genetically-modified food regulation. Yves is currently completing a book on the global battle over the governance of GMO swith a large focus on Japan, as well as pursuing research on two new projects: one on the political consequences of Japan's rising inequality(the kakusa issue) and one on the analysis of Japan's and China's role in global governance.
バンクーバー九条の会から講演会のお知らせです。（日本語通訳付き）
テーマ：「鳩山新政権が日本の外交政策や改憲問題にもたらす影響」
講師：UBC政治学部 イブ・ティベルギアン准教授
去る８月３０日の総選挙は民主党の圧勝と自民党の大敗に終わりました。民主党・社民党・国民新党の連立政権は改憲、特に九条の問題にどう取り組むのでしょうか。民主党の指導者たちは、アメリカ合衆国とのより対等な関係を築くと表明していますが、このことが日米安全保障条約、普天間基地の移転、インド洋での給油活動、オバマ大統領先導の核廃絶への動きにどのような影響をもたらすのでしょうか。今回は日本の政治や経済に詳しいブリティッシュコロンビア大学政治学部准教授イブ・ティベルギアンさんを招き、格差や雇用といった日本社会が抱える問題をはじめ日本社会や経済への新政権の影響を話していただいた上で、外交や改憲問題に特に重点を置いて参加者とともにディスカッションをしていきたいと思います。またゲスト・コメンテイターとして、フランスの社会科学高等研究院.（EHESS）日本研究所准教授のセバスチャン・レシュバリエさんも参加されます。
日時：１０月２８日（水）午後７時から９時まで
場所：日系ヘリテージセンター２階 楓の間Kaede Room, 2nd Floor National Nikkei Heritage Centre6688 Southoaks Crescent, Burnaby BC （地下駐車場あり。行き方の詳細はこちらをどうぞ）
参加費：無料ですが、ご寄付をお願いします。（目安：５ドル程度）
＊英語による講演で日本語通訳がつきます。ティベルギアンさんは日本語を話しますので講演も一部はご本人が日本語で解説できますし、質疑応答等は日本語でも対応できます。
参加申し込み、問い合わせ先：バンクーバー九条の会 Eメール satoko.norimatsu@ubc.ca に、お名前と人数をお知らせください。電話でも対応できます。６０４－６１９－５６２７
主催 バンクーバー九条の会
後援 JCCA人権委員会
イブ・ティベルギアン 略歴
ブリティッシュコロンビア大学政治学部准教授。政治学博士。日本、中国、ヨーロッパの政治学と政治経済学が専門。２００２年にスタンフォード大学政治学部で博士号を取得。国際交流基金のフェローシップにより日本の財務省および慶応義塾大学で客員研究員・教授を務めた。著書に『企業家的国家：日本、韓国、フランスにおける企業統治の改革』（２００７年 コーネル大学）がある。その他、日本のバブル経済、経済危機の時代、構造改革、日本の気候変動に関する政策や遺伝子組み換え食品の規制について等幅広い分野で執筆活動をしている。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)