Stygius

Koizumi's postal privatization crashes

The upper house of Japan's parliament has defeated PM Koizumi's postal privatization plan, triggering a huge political battle. As I recall, the plan was part of Koizumi's original platform when he ascended into office on a huge wave of popularity, despite inevitable resistance within his own Liberal Democratic Party. The postal system is a state behemoth, and was central to the Prime Minister's attempt to reform Japan's statist economic tendencies. (It is essentially the financial sector's center of gravity with $2.9 trillion in assets;  it is a huge, government-sustained savings and loan system.) There has been little movement on it since, but now that it has been killed in parliament after Koizumi staked his government on it, he is forced to call for elections. This creates a very fluid political situation, especially if the LDP's entrenchment continues to erode.  It's possible that a non-LDP prime minister may take over if Koizumi doesn't survive, so this is huge news.

Koizumi is turning the election into a referendum on this privatization, but since he's spent years setting the groundwork for a soft right resurgence and constitutional reform, it's possible that a lot of voters attracted to nationalism and a resurgent Japanese military may -- even if they don't approve of the privatization plan -- be the Koizumi's saving grace. Associated Press

NK nukes, China & Japan

I just put the North Korea zone blog into my roll.

Also, check out this China Hand post. He sees North Korea's nuclear diplomacy as having more to do with Beijing's fears of a nuclear Japan than anything else:

There is, I believe, a more subtle dynamic than raving madness at work behind the otherwise mystifying behavior of North Korea.

Kim Jung Il is deliberately fomenting the nuclear crisis in order to extort Chinese aid and support.

According to this scenario, when he gets what he’s looking for, he’ll back down and remove the easiest pretext at hand for Japan to go nuclear.

And China can breathe a little easier.

It's long, but well written. A plausible thesis, especially since we Americans explain foreign policy problems self-centeredly.

Japan critiques China's textbooks

What's good for the goose and all that . . . .

"There is a tendency toward this in any country, but the Chinese textbooks are extreme in the way they uniformly convey the 'our country is correct' perspective," [Japan's Foreign Minister, Nobutaka Machimura]  said, echoing Sunday's editorial in Japan's largest newspaper accusing China of nationalistic education.

Machimura said Tokyo would officially inform Beijing of its opinion of Chinese textbooks after fully reviewing them. [Associated Press]

Japan commission backs constitutional reform

In the context of Sino-Japanese tension, the timing could be better. However, a parliamentary committee in Japan is advocating opening up the constitution for major changes. This will include, of course, changes to the pacifist provision (Article IX, I believe). This has long been a goal of PM Koizumi, as well as a United States that wants the Japanese to shoulder a greater share of security spending in the East Asia. Japan has been preparing the ground in the public mind for some time, deploying its quasi-military further and further from Japan's terroritory, including a current non-combat mission in Iraq. See the IHT.

While the reformed constitution would no doubt keep a non-belligerency provision, it will codify the currently ambiguous legality of the Self Defense Forces. Also, the commission is recommending a change permitting females to ascend the Chrysanthemum Throne. Japan has had emperesses in the past, but the constitution currently only permits males to ascend. This would relieve a lot of pressure on the royal family, and is very popular with the public as well.

I hope that any constitutional changes will also include some explicit provisions on women's rights. (They were scotched in 1947; the story being that the US was uncomfortable with a Japanese constitution that was more progressive than the Americans'.)

In Asian squabble, US wins

I must admit I'm enjoying watching China and Japan coming up with more and more reasons not to like each other. A permanent political wedge between these two countries only helps the United States. As Japan is tied further in the US corner, its growing regional influence in Southeast Asia will have an ally doing the heavy lifting for us when it comes to countering China's influence. Eventually, the UN Security Council will have to accept Japan, Brazil and India, if only for certain current members who want to retain its legitimacy to restrain the United States.

It's a healthy thing that US policy wonks are starting to focus on China again, although it's as anxiety-ridden as always. Being cognizant of Asia and terrorism indicates a more healthy, less monomaniacal and self-defeating focus. China's successful reapproachment with India, its conventional and non-conventional weapons agreements with Pakistan, its growing influence in Africa's oil-producing countries (highlighting its dependence on foreign oil), external basing, its expanding regional economic influence and voracious appetite for raw materials, and its emphasis on military modernization are things that shouldn't be flying under the radar in Washington.

However, many Americans seem to be intimidating themselves when it comes to Chinese ambitions.

Thus, China's nationalist ratcheting over Japan is a healthy sign, and an effective way for the US to reintroduce itself to Asia. We're still the grownups next to these yahoos, should be the message. Robert Kagan has a great piece countering the myth of a Chinese strategic genius that has more to do with exoticism and misunderstanding internal Chinese politics than the ghost of Sun Tzu. China's habitual insecurity-cum-bellicosity seems to be its problem. The inept Anti-Secession law has alienated Europe when it was on the verge of lifting its arms embargo. That is now dead. The racket over Japanese textbooks, given its organization and endurance, increasingly looks centrally orchestrated. Not only that, Foreign Ministry official He Yafei has made ominous comments towards Australia's alliance with the US as well. Kagan:

In fact, of course, there is nothing at all subtle about Chinese "diplomacy." The Chinese are indeed flexing their muscles, wielding their increasing economic and military clout to demand greater obedience from their neighbors. There is nothing surprising in this. The only surprise is the way the world, including the United States, has in recent years tried to ignore China's growing belligerence, mesmerized by its economic performance and dreaming of a reformed, postmodern China that can be "integrated" into the global liberal economic order. Some American analysts have even been calling for the erection of new collective security structures in East Asia that would include China.

But this is no reason to not be prudent and aware of the changing security structure in Asia, especially as China's emerging cruise missile capability threatens the US Navy. Kagan's answer is that to secure peace in East Asia is to reinforce its commitment to defend its allies. And "Let's not be too subtle." There are many kinds of multilateralism after all, even if it isn't universally inclusive.

India is a winner in this geopolitical environment, as both China and the United States--historical antagonists--placate the steadily modernizing country. I tend to think the US will win over India in the end. (See this, this, and this.) 

At the same time, this is all a helpful reminder of why the US military is such a multi-faceted thing. In the face of the immediacy and urgency of terrorism and al-Qaeda in Iraq, it might be easy to downplay the needs of the US Navy, the ultimate security guarantator in Asia. While huge nuclear attack submarines are obsolete in the post-Soviet world, carriers alone won't suffice in a cross-Strait war; not by any means. With the Tango-Bravo project, the Navy's recent focus on developing much smaller, and more sophisticated attack subs and reconfiguring ICBM subs into cruise-missile platforms is an interesting step in the right direction.

Navy sending Congress 30-yr plan

From EagleSpeak:

Navy to send Congress 30-year shipbuilding plan

The Navy is sending Congress a long overdue, 30-year shipbuilding plan that projects a fleet that could range from 260 to 325 ships, the service's top acquisition official said Wednesday.

See this and this.

It's past time for a serious expansion of the US Navy's capabilities, in terms of both quantity and quality. The USN is the power of the United States in Asia. It is the guarantator of regional stability in East Asia. Our gains in the Persian Gulf will be mitigated if the US doesn't remain the dominant naval power in the Pacific and Indian Oceans. Moderating China's behavior, bringing it into the "family of nations" and all of that slogany stuff, countering its attempt to undermine US relations in the region, and securing a non-nuclear Japan require making China's dependence on Middle Eastern oil the United States' ultimate security trump card.

China must never conceive that it can ever have energy security except at the discretion of the United States.

Jenkins reports in...

U.S. Army Sgt. Charles Jenkins, who deserted in 1965 by defecting across the DMZ to North Korea, has turned himself in to the Army in Japan. Poignancy is best found in understatement, especially in the dignified, "Sir, I'm Sgt Jenkins, and I'm reporting," upon Jenkins' surrender to Lt. Colonel Paul Nigara. Essentially, Jenkins is simply resuming his Army career, forty years later and with little prospect for promotion.

Odds are, because of the pressures of US-Japan relations, Jenkins will not spend the last years of his life in Leavenworth, but the Law's pound of flesh will be extracted before any merciful arrangement can be found. At any rate, Jenkins' almost proud acquiesence to that reality, and to this strange fate of his, has its own kind of poetic grace. If anything, the Japanese public will find that even more appealing given their culture; something for the Army to keep in mind.