The Abe Administration has seen many such disturbing trends, highly reminiscent of pre-WW2 politics. There has been increasing press censorship since 2012, with corresponding militarism and nationalism promoted through the public school. Under Abe, the Empire has vastly expanded military spending including the development of a new Stealth-fighter. This aircraft was displayed last Autumn at an airshow ominously also displaying restored WW2-era Japanese Zeroes.
The Party Congress also pledged constitutional reform including repealing Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution which renounces aggressive war. Indeed, Abe has deployed Japanese Naval Forces well beyond the country's territorial waters and pursued a highly interventionist foreign policy. The Japanese Empire has never apologized formally for WW2 atrocities, nor have they officially given up territorial claims of land ceded in 1945. They have cracked down further on Okinawa and pressed demands for the strategic Kuril and Daiyou Islands. They still consider Sakhalin as part of Japan; and most of their interventions have been in former Japanese-held territories especially Korea, Taiwan, and Indochina.
There are many in the US who believe that a strong Japan is necessary to maintain a strong balance of power in the Pacific; but history proves otherwise. A militarized Japan is as great a threat to regional stability today as it was during the 1930s. Japan never underwent the type of post-war reforms that Europe did. They even retained their Emperor, who is worshipped as a god by the Japanese ruling elite. While the top political and military leaders were removed and tried for war crimes, they were replaced---not by opposition leaders as in Europe---but by their underlings. The large corporate monopolies were broken up, but quickly reorganized under new names. In other words, Japan never underwent a democratic reformation like Europe did.
A resurgent Fascist Japanese Empire is not in the interest of American policy in the Pacific. While it is true that in the 1930s, Japan blocked Russian and Chinese hegemony in the region, they also fought American interests as well---as the events of December 1941 should make abundantly clear. Their goals in the region are not---and never have been---those of a free country securing the rights of free global trade. Their goal has been to monopolize Asian trade under the aegis of their god-emperor.
A better course of action for the US to pursue is abandon the Pax Americana notions of the last four Administrations and pursue a trilateral power-sharing course in the Pacific with the other two great powers: Russia and China. A NATO-type alliance between these three powers would ensure a degree of security and free trade for the entire region.
But Japan is heavily financially invested in Wall Street, US political PACs and the Corporate Media; so opposition to such a policies would be strong. It will be an interesting foreign policy test for the Trump Administration to see where the US will go in the Pacific---as a partner or an aggressor.
We should not ignore that some of these things are real issues; but I do think left leaning sensationalism has exaggerated Shinzo Abe's issues. He is in many respects much more of a generic hawkish liberal capitalist (like many American "conservative" politicians) than a fascist. Now, does he pal around with high profile fascists to get their support? It appears so, with the Moritomo Gakuen scandal. But that is different from him being one. I do think there is a persistent intellectual and moral impoverishment in Japanese conservative circles, but that is similar to what we face here.
ReplyDeleteI do think issues like the official secrets law are a problem. But the current term limits are, IMO, less of an issue, as that was never legislative to begin with: it was strictly a party level regulation (and 5 years is kind of short for a Prime Minister, anyways). And for the elite today (and in the past), the issue of a goad emperor is less important than mere Statism, militarism, greater driving factors IMHO. Hirohito was a weak willed and spineless enabler; Tojo is who I hold responsible for the debacle.
Thank you---I did allude to the problems with the Japanese opposition on one of the Tillerson articles. The US doesn't really have much choice but to back Abe; but he's a lot like Erdogan---he's going to need reining in on occasion.
DeleteIt could also be the case that Abe is using this Imperialist rhetoric as a bargaining-chip. Trump stated during the campaign that Japan should pay for US troops stationed there; Abe may be putting Trump on notice that if Japan has to pay for its own defense, they may as well re-militarize. Unlike the US, a lot of our allies in the region have bad memories of the Japanese Military and might pressure Trump to back down. China is also opposed to Japanese militarization. It's hard to say whether or not Abe is bluffing to keep American subsidizes, but he knows that he's holding a lot of cards and Trump may have to keep subsidizing Japan in exchange for Abe toning things down.