Kan maybe not so unrealistic

PM Kan has been reported to suggest that the SDF would go to Korea in case of war. This has been judged to be unrealistic by some in the ROK. It certainly might cause problems for an untested force that has never participated* in exercises with the US/Korea forces (not ground combat anyway), and with no known (at least not widely known) planning for such actions with South Korea or the US. Then one would have to wonder just what the SDF could do that the ROK could not do about 10 zillion times better in a war in Korea. And how would the SDF know where the abducted Japanese are in North Korea? Would it be involved in the war only to protect Japanese? "Oh, a nearby ROK unit is is isolated, outnumbered, and needs immediate assistance. Sorry, we are only here for self-defense and that means Japanese citizens. Gomen ne. Gambatte!"

Of course there just might be some small possibility of a slight objection to Japanese military forces in Korea by the Koreans and Chinese even though they could be reassured by explaining that the SDF is not really a military as Japan is prohibited from having a military by its constitution.

So I thought, but then Martin Fackler wrote this article for the New York Times: Japan to Shift its Military Toward Threats from China

... Japan’s new Democratic Party government has been pulling closer to Washington, spurred by a bruising diplomatic clash three months ago with China over the disputed islands and fears about North Korea’s nuclear program.

.... Washington has proposed forging stronger three-way military ties that would also include its other key regional ally, South Korea...

...During a visit to the region last week, Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, urged Japan to join American military exercises with South Korea. In a meeting with Japan’s defense minister, Toshimi Kitazawa, Admiral Mullen said the two nations needed to support South Korea after North Korea’s deadly shelling last month of a South Korean island...

Fackler also vaguely notes that the ROK vice minister of defense visited Tokyo last week to discuss "increased bilateral cooperation" with his Japanese counterpart.

*Or if it did, it was kept very much under wraps, so much so that most US military never knew it. In other words, nearly impossible.

Wikileaks leaks on Japan

....Singapore's Ambassador Tommy Koh called Japan "the big fat loser" and "stupidity, bad leadership and lack of vision" for Japan's position in Asian region. OneIndia.in (Reporting on Wikileaks)

South Korea has dismissed as ``unrealistic’’ Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan’s comment on sending troops to the Korean Peninsula if a war breaks out.

Speaking to the families of Japanese citizens abducted by North Korea, Friday, Kan said that in the event of war on the peninsula, he’d send Self-Defense Forces to rescue abductees in the North and Japanese residents in the South. Korea Times.

Since I have been unable to access Wikileaks, the only question I have is: Was the "stupidity, bad leadership and lack of vision" statement made during the LDP's time in power or the DPJ's and does it make any difference?

P.S. Will the SDF need the Dutch military to protect them during the rescue operations?

PM Kan's TV

Although it is tough to pull away from the antics of the unpredictable DPRK which for some reason seems to be generally predictable, one can entertain oneself with some good TV. Failing that, one can find PM Kan's TV online. This will help folks try to figure out just what the government is doing since it isn't exactly obvious otherwise. It is available in English and in Japanese. (Unfortunately, it cannot be embedded.)

From the reactions of the people I talked to about the recent shelling of South Korea by the North, a little publicity/spin about Kan's achievements* is both long overdue and too late. Somehow, the shelling of the ROK just emphasized the apparent weakness and incompetence of the Kan government. Although none of these folks knew what any of the other parties could have done better, no one said they would do worse.

Now gotta go back online and read opinions of what to do about Korea from folks--- many or most of---whom you just know have less information about what is going than an observant and minimally informed E-1 who is stationed 100 miles south of the DMZ.

*Don't know if this "TV" would ever work in spite of it being spellbindingly exciting and tremendously informative.

What you say?!!

Published in the NYT and it is not some sort of idiotic fantasy-world pap like some of the recent stuff has been. I'll have to read and reread this to make sure that I am not dreaming as it seems to make some sense. Not that it will make any difference...

...in view of the deepening quagmire in Japan’s domestic politics, U.S. policymakers may need to scale down their ambitions for the role they wish to assign Japan. More than 60 years after World War II, Japan is still generally isolated in the Asian region. It remains heavily dependent on the United States for its defense and the health of the U.S. economy for its growth — not a positive state of affairs for U.S. policymakers trying to cope with rising regional powers and economic difficulties of their own...

...mounting voter frustration in Japan with an unresponsive political system leaves the door ajar for nationalist politicians and policies...A must read at NYT

The authors go on to state that the 60-year old contingency scenario for Korea is no longer adequate and that perhaps the security relationship with Japan should be "multilaterized." Someone shut these guys up before they influence US policy to move past the 1950s. Fortunately though, US foreign policy does not change until change is forced.

Maybe I am just a bit too sensitive to the rants of the nationalists, but methinks the door is a little more than ajar already.

(Speaking of NYT nonsense, I have never been to Norway and know nothing about it, but I'll just bet that this is oversimplified goofiness.)

Fingerprintin' them thar furriners

Over the last few days, the government and media have been reporting that last year's law requiring all non-Japanese (including permanent residents) to be fingerprinted when entering or re-entering Japan, has been a success as it has kept 800-odd "undesirables" out of Japan.

The law was controversial when passed, as many---permanent residents in particular---were angered and offended. Too bad, said the government (and most others, including many non-Japanese) it's for safety and security and it stays.

So where did all this fingerprinting of non-Japanese begin? We all know that it was done to ethnic Koreans for decades until the law was rescinded mainly due to their protests in the 80s. While reading Mark E. Caprio's article in Japan Focus I found this interesting little tidbit:

...in May 1947, just months prior to SCAP’s January 1948 announcement that Koreans would be treated as “Japanese nationals,” SCAP reversed course by subjecting Japan-based Koreans and Taiwanese to its Alien Registration Ordinance. Mirrored after the U.S. Alien Registration Act of 1940, it required all non-Japanese over the age of 14 to register their alien status and carry with them at all times their alien registration passbook. It further stipulated that violators would face deportation. This legislation served as the forerunner for the more comprehensive Alien Registration Act of 1952 that introduced mandatory fingerprinting of foreign residents. See Japan Focus: The Cold War explodes in Kobe---the 1948 Korean Ethnic School "Riots" and the US Occupation Authorities.

I suppose the Japanese government of the time could have objected to Dugout Doug, SCAP, and Uncle Sam, but they didn't. Just like today, when the US passes tougher laws controlling foreign visitors or residents, Japan rarely declines adopting a similar law because of moral reasons as long as it citizens (or industries) are not affected. .

The news is reporting that the US will relist South Korean ownership of the disputed Takeshima Islands. This will certainly peeve the nearly non-existent, nationalists.* Others may be concerned that this could damage US-Japan relations. (The US said that this represents no change in policy but a reversal of its week-long listing of the islands as belonging to no country.)

It seems that some folks are always concerned that certain US actions will damage the relationship.

Let's imagine that this tempest-in-a-teapot---or something that was actually serious---did damage relations. Severely. Japan then refuses to cooperate with the US in Iraq and Afghanistan. Japan reduces all military/security cooperation with the US. Would that irreparably harm either country?

Would it be bad for the US to no longer be seen by other countries in the region as moving toward a Japan-centered Northeast Asia policy? Would the US once again be viewed as a positive that acts as a stabilizing force between potential military rivals such as Japan and China instead of being on team Japan? Would the US actually have to rethink its 60 year-old policy that US bases (and the mostly one-sided Security Treaty) must be maintained in/with Japan until hell freezes over no matter how the world changes?

Would it be bad for Japan if it no longer supported policies just because Boy George---or whoever follows---insists that if it doesn't Uncle Sam will get mad? Would the right-wingers really be able to realize their fantasy of a re-armed Japan? Would Japan even be able to afford rearming with all of the other problems it is facing now? Would the nationalists (who don't really have much influence, or perhaps don't even exist) be as willing to use that force as some of them irresponsibly claim? If they were, would the Japanese public rise up and vote them out of office as it has throughout history?

Just a few poorly thought-out questions. Of course, I didn't even consider the possibility of damaged relations spilling over into trade. Anyway, I am sure that as the now long dead Senator Mike Mansfield said, (paraphrasing) "The US-Japan relationship is the most important in the world, bar none."

*We can in part judge the presence of nationalism (narrowly defined) in Japan by how much it spends on defense---around 1% of its budget. This is much less than other countries in the region. Japan is in a very unstable part of the world with potential war zones (Korea and Taiwan) nearby, and yet Japan still only spends such a minuscule amount on defense. This, among other things, shows a lack of nationalism. It just isn't an issue!

Oops!!! Wonder if the fact that the US is providing security for Japan influences that lack of defense spending and lack of concern by the public with defense/foreign policy issues? Naaaah...

Edited at 2300. I should have read MTC's Shisaku post on the relisting of the Takeshima Islands before I posted the above. Maybe so, but I really wanted to rant about nationalists who don't really exist to any extent in Japan, a country with little or no (narrowly defined) nationalism.

Kim Dae-Jung kidnapping

Below I wrote that there had been rumors that the Japanese government had been somehow involved in Kim Dae Jung's kidnapping from Tokyo in 1973. That is not correct. The rumors were that Korean members of the yakuza in Japan were involved. This information is from the book: Yakuza, Japan's criminal underworld, by David E. Kaplan and Alec Dubro.

Japan asks South Korea to apologize for kidnapping??!!

Japan has asked South Korea to apologize for the kidnapping of then opposition leader Kim Dae-jung in Tokyo in 1973, and take measures to prevent the recurrence of similar incidents, a report said Wednesday. Full article and hereand also here.

Wonder if South Korea will pull an Abe and again pretend that there is no evidence that the ROK government was involved. (Sorry if by "pull an Abe" anyone was mislead into believing I meant to suddenly resign.) Deniability of any responsibility could be established if, as one of the commentors suggested, Kim Dae-Jung had his status changed to "comfort man." (Were he a comfort man, then the ROK could claim that he was not kidnapped but voluntarily went to South Korea to be imprisoned and nearly executed. Or perhaps they could claim he kidnapped himself. Besides, was his prison cell under Chun Doo Hwan all that bad?)

As I recall, there was/is some suspicion that the Japanese government was involved in the kidnapping too. That, of course, would be impossible. The Japanese government would never do such a thing.

Correction: The rumors were that the yakuza, specifically the Korean descendants in the Japanese yakuza, were involved---not the Japanese government.

It's All Over the Place

Naturally, discrimination due to race, sex, ethnic group, nearly anything exists all over the world. As I have often written about, it certainly exists in Japan. The Japanese government goes out of its way to avoid the issue, claim otherwise, justify it, or flat out lie about it.

But Japan is really not that bad. For most, especially those of European (Caucasian) background, it is for the most part subtle and benevolent. There are other countries in which it is much worse. In a lot of Asia apparently, it is just fine to advocate the idea of a "pure race" or "pure blood." This idea has significance in Japan, but it is not something that hits one in the face here.

I remember when I was in the Air Force years ago and spent 2 years in South Korea. I loved Korea and the Koreans, but it nobody ever assumed that the Korean did not practice open discrimination. For some reason, nobody complained much, like we tend to do about Japan. I wonder why this is? Lower expectations for the Koreans? Fewer foreigners living there?

Anyway, the Koreans, unlike the Japanese, have no qualms about getting in your face about something. If they don't like you, you'll probably be more likely to know it.

Here is an interesting article about discrimination against Koreans born of Korean mothers and American fathers and the "pure blood" idea pushed in the education system there.

The article is at http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/22/news/mixed.php

If that link vanishes, see it at: http://archive.wn.com/2006/02/23/1400/seouldaily/ From an ostracized class, a hero for Koreans

Should both disappear go to: http://archive.wn.com/2006/02/23/1400/p/fe/5220bccd58e2f0.html

Should all those links be missing for this post, searh the internet for an article titled, From an ostracized class, a hero for Koreans from the International Herald Tribune, originally published on 22 February 2006.

It has been some time

since I posted, and a lot has happened. China had a period of protests over Japan's misleading school texts in which the Japanese once again tried to minimize their WW2 war crimes and atrocities in China. Many Westerners used the occasion to hone their Japanapologist skills to rationalize Japan's war conduct. (More info on some reasons that Japan's words of regret aren't believable to many in Asia at http://japanfocus.org/ and specifically http://japanfocus.org/article.asp?id=279 and from a German journalist's perspective at http://japanfocus.org/article.asp?id=278 . For info on how Japanese treated its POWs and how little most Japanese know of the subject, see http://japanfocus.org/article.asp?id=276. For an simple, but uncomfortable comparison of the actions of the U.S. in its treatment of prisoners taken in the "War on Terrorism" and what was called a war crime during the Tokyo trials see http://japanfocus.org/article.asp?id=277. Naturally, the latter in no way excuses the Japanese, but certainly raises serious questions about our recent and current practices.)

The Chinese government obviously inflamed public opinion about Japan, but if Japan had ever shown any real contrition for its past conduct, it would be harder for the public to be manipulated (assuming the Chinese gov't allowed such information to reach the public).

The Chinese are pretty much right in assuming that Japan isn't truly sorry for what they did in WW2. If you watch Japanese TV, you can often see programs---weekly in fact---about the war. However, although they may occasionally show atrocities committed by Japan's Nazi allies, you won't see much if anything about Japan's. What is shown are attacks on Japanese cities, interviews with people who survived them, and sometimes interviews with ex-soldiers about the suffering they endured. Watching them, it becomes obvious that the Japanese consider themselves victims of the war more than victimizers. In fact, this is the impression you are left with when talking to most about WW2. They will mutter something about Japan doing some vague bad things somewhere, but then switch it to the bandwagon fallacy of "everybody does it," or that they were "caused" to go to war (the US cut off oil and other materials because of Japanese actions in China).

The IHT--International Herald Tribune carried an article the other day about Japanese and Indian relations. One way that India was trying to woo Japan was to emphasize that it was the only nation to vote to acquit the Japanese in the Tokyo War Crime trials. Now if Japan were truly contrite about its past, why would this be attractive to them? Can you imagine a country trying to woo Germany by claiming that they supported the Nazis during the Nuremburg trials?

Shintaro Ishihara, a well-known racist, bigot, and governor of Tokyo used to deny that there was any Nanjing Massacre at all, claiming it to be "Chinese lies." He has modified that somewhat to quibble over that exact number of deaths in Nanjing. He and other Japanese politicians pay no penalty for statements in support of Japanese WW2 actions, or for racist statements pertaining to Koreans or Chinese. In fact, like Ol' Blinky Ishihara, they are reelected. Reelected by the Japanese public. One has to wonder where the regret for WW2 is among the Japanese. (Read about Ol' Blinky Ishihara here http://japanfocus.org/article.asp?id=067.)