Here I am on China Radio
International
.
I got a message from a political scientist,
who will go unnamed for now since he is at a crossroads in his career with
regard to China and I don’t want to spook his chances. To quote:
“It seemed to go well. I was surprised that
the Chinese analyst agreed with you so often, particularly on the idea of
Japan's right to have a conventional military.”
To the point, as ever, this guy. My
response, edited slightly:
“There was nowhere near enough time at the
event…to cover all the points, of course, but even so, I felt that between the
time that the coordinator dashed off the questions and sent them to us and the
event, the minders of the show decided to tone down the hostile elements. I
told a government contact about my impression, but was informed that the
Chinese authorities have actually been giving Japanese counterparts the cold
shoulder lately because they felt that the Abe government had been unre[s]ponsive
to (what were in their view) Chinese concessions on the Senkaku Islands. I
think there are a couple of ways to explain what seems at first glance to be a
contradiction.”
That exchange ended there. I’ll be happy to
give anyone my explanations, but there’s a price. In the meantime, the
questions, and my answers, in preparation for the event below. Is it my
imagination, or was there a significant change between the preparation and the
event? And why, if so?
PART
1 (10:05-10:20)- The Political Forces of Japan
OVERVIEW
(Brief Opening Thoughts)
How
do you see the senate election result? Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has
won control of both houses of parliament, giving his Liberal Democratic
Party-led coalition the strongest grip on power since 2007. So what does it
mean for Japan? Does it mean the LDP or Abe can do what he wants without any
worries from party politics?
It means that Prime Minister Abe has a
three-year window in which he can be pretty much sure that he can secure any
legislation short of constitutional amendments that are necessary for any
policy measures that have the support of the ruling coalition parties. Party
politics and Komeito remain as constraints, but Mr. Abe’s hand has been
strengthened.
How
do you evaluate different political forces, the DPJ, LDP and New Komeito’s
performance during the senate election?
The DPJ did about as well or as poorly as
could be expected, given the circumstances. Three years, three prime ministers,
a divided party leadership, plus the fallout from the Fukushima disaster. It
did not have a coherent leadership and a coherent policy platform, which probably
hurt. The LDP ran a conservative campaign, avoided overreach. It didn’t try to
win too many seats, and did everything it could to keep Komeito onside. On
policy, it did its best to avoid commitments that could alienate significant
constituents.
Why
did the DPJ and New Komeito get much more support now?
To quote Yoshihide Suga, the Chief Cabinet
Secretary, in anticipation of the election, “the economy, economy, economy,
economy.” The stock market, export value, consumption, summer bonuses, GDP: visible
economic improvements, and they are connected in the public mind with
Abenomics. This is reflected and magnified by the media, and the voters were
responding.
What
is the turnout?
-Low
= voter apathy. Does that single endorsement and still give Abe a clear mandate
to pursue his pet interests and agenda?
It
was low, but the LDP received a much bigger number of votes than it did in the
2010 upper house election, when the turnout was much higher. So yes, I think
that Mr. Abe’s claim to a popular mandate is justified. But it is still
constrained by the presence of the New Komeito, vested interests, and is
subject to the effect of major changes in the economic circumstances.
Some
have described this as a mandate on Abe and a chance for redemption, having led
them to defeat at the 2009 vote. How is he regarded as a personality and as a
politician by the voters?
Mr. Abe is still something of a cypher to
the general public. He’s not a particularly effective public speaker and rarely
says anything memorable. But his mistakes are few and he’s quick to backtrack
when he makes them. And nothing succeeds like success. 2007 is forgiven—forgotten,
even. If the Japanese economy stays on track over the next three years, he’ll
gain more confidence, loosen up a little, and the public will come to better
appreciate his fundamentally decent if unspectacular personality.
The
LDP was pushed from power just three years ago, what’s its political influence
now and how did it regain power and then enhance it in such a spectacular way?
Is there something different about LDP policies this time around or are they
basically the same party?
The LDP didn’t regain power, it had power
dropped into its laps. Remember, in last year’s lower house landslide victory,
the LDP’s share of the proportional vote, when it couldn’t rely on the
Sokagakkai vote, was almost as low as it was when it was absolutely slaughtered
by the DPJ in the 2009 election. I don’t think that the LDP has changed that
much. Familiar faces, familiar factions, familiar stakeholders. On policy, take
away the monetary policy, which has been highly effective so far, and look
beyond the tree to the forest and there’s not much that we didn’t see before
the last time around. And Mr. Abe owns that monetary policy, not the LDP. I do
hope that the LDP—Mr. Abe too for that matter—will surprise me and push a truly
transformative agenda for the Abe administration’s third arrow.
How
did the opposition Democratic Party of Japan get ousted from power so easily in
the 2012 elections after a landslide victory in 2009?
-the
result of introducing the consumption tax to repay the Japan public debt, the
DPJ lost around 75% of its pre-election seats
The DPJ did not have a coherent,
consistent, and executable policy agenda. It did not have a coherent,
consistent, and executable policy making process. Over time, it may have been
able to bring the neoliberals, big-government welfare-state proponents,
labor-unions, and old-school special-interest politicos together as an
effective ruling party. But the first prime minister frittered away most of his
political capital on a policy non-starter, the second one failed to come across
as leader in Japan’s biggest post-WW II crisis, and schism took out a sizeable
chunk of bedrock support. Remember, the consumption tax hike was more LDP than
anything else.
The
LDP may be commanding a healthy majority in both Houses of Parliament but is it
fair to say that they, too, have been shedding voters since the 1990s, whilst
DPJ have only momentarily offered voters an alternative on an irregular basis?
That’s not unique to Japan if you look at
the European democracies. But take away the Communist and Social Democrat vote
and the rest of the political parties are essentially fighting over more or
less the same set of voters. And the New Komeito is always going to take its
cut, 11 percentage points and up. Now, the LDP doesn’t look so bad as the
numbers initially suggested.
NEW
KOMEITO
The
New Keomeito party is the coalition partner to the LDP with over seats, what
does this represent to the voters?
It is widely believed that more or less the
same set of people votes for the New Komeito year in, year out, and the cohabitation
has been in place since 1999 and withstood the test of three years in
opposition. That is all there is to it. Now a few people may be voting for New
Komeito for its moderating effect on the LDP, but their numbers are surely very
small.
PART
2 (10:20-10:32)- the Message of the Election
MESSAGE
OF THE ELECTION
What
is the central message of this election? Are the voters most concerned
about economics, territorial tensions, or else?
The economy. Not nuclear power plants,
certainly not territorial issues. And with Abenomics maintaining momentum
through election day, the politically divided opposition parties didn’t have a
chance.
Abenomics
ABENOMICS
Abe
says he aims to lift the economy out of recession. He says he will do this
through hyper easing policy and increased government spending. Generally
how would you describe Abenomics and can work?
If there’s are economists on the panel,
I’ll be happy to defer to them. That said, the first arrow was a huge political
bet that an inflation target backed by strong quantitative easing by the
central bank would change inflationary expectations, setting a virtuous circle
in motion. So far, it has worked. The biggest know uncertainty is the 2014
consumption tax hike. If that takes the wind out of the economic sails, then
Abenomics will be in trouble. The second arrow is a flexible fiscal policy.
Frankly, I’m skeptical about this one. Spending 200 trillion yen over ten years
to make Japan more disaster resistant? Any 10-year spending plan with lots and
lots of zeros behind a round number even before we’ve figured out what the real
needs makes no sense to me. I’d be much happier if they replaced this with a
10-year fiscal plan for achieving primary balance. The third arrow is
essentially structural reform. But will the Abe administration commit itself to
serious agrarian reform? Labor and social safety net? Corporate taxation?
Education? Frankly, I’ll be happy if we get even half a loaf. But maybe my
standards are unrealistic from a political of view. I’ll be more than happy if
the Abe administration proves me wrong.
The
LDP leader Shinzo Abe favors forcing the central bank to do whatever it takes
to meet an inflation target of 3 percent. He is calling for “hyper easing”,
strong intervention in the currency market and increased spending on public
works, is this the right economic plan for Japan?
The risks of hyperinflation from
quantitative coupled with an inflation target, are very low, economists tell
me, while the potential payoff appears to be pretty big. Currently, it seems to
be working. And some of its critics are moving the goalpost. But remember, the
Abe administration is not intervening in the currency market at all.
Intervention is what South Korea did to keep the Won down, which in turn was
nothing compared to the near-total control that the Chinese authorities have
over the Renminbi rate. As for public works, Spending 200 trillion yen over ten
years to make Japan more disaster resistant? Any 10-year spending plan with
lots and lots of zeros behind a round number even before we’ve figured out what
the real needs makes no sense to me. I’d be much happier if they replaced this
with a 10-year fiscal plan for achieving primary balance.
Will
the rest of the world standby while Japan actively weakens its currency?
When you run a clean float like Japan, or
the United States, an easy-money monetary policy will push the value of that
currency down, other things being equal. The yen appears to have stabilized
around the 100 mark; the rest of the world appears willing, or at least resign,
to live with that. The idea, I suppose, is that a robust Japanese economy makes
up for whatever negative effects there are on their respective national
economies. Besides, right now, it appears to be the Fed pulling back from its
QE that’s spooking the emerging economies.
How
significant is it that when Abe came into office at the end of 2012, the Nikkei
index averaged 10 230 but in recent months, it’s come gone to an average of
around 14 000. The B
It’s a measure of the confidence that market
players have in the near-future prospects of the Japanese economy and more
specifically Japanese businesses. But it does have a real effect on the
economy, since it appears to be connected to a rise in consumption and housing
sales and it does make it easier to raise money through the equity market.
-The
Bank of Japan’s Regional Economic Report for 4th July upgraded its economic
assessment for 8 of the country’s 9 prefectures.
It’s good to hear that the brighter outlook
is increasingly shared in the provinces.
What
about unemployment and wages – have they changed greatly since Abe returned to
power? Likewise, interest rates on home loan have risen
That’s a good question. Unemployment figures
are improving, but that has been going on fairly consistently since 2009. Wage
are not going up yet, but summer bonuses are. So it remains to be seen whether
the virtuous circle: consumption-investment-hiring… is really under way.
THE
ECONOMY
Abe
says the economy is his top priority yet some of the economic harm has come
from a trade dispute with china amidst territorial disputes, and the nuclear
power energy is causing many problems in getting the nation’s power needs
sorted out. Can he just focus on economics or will he have to solve these
other problems first?
First, the Senkaku issue certainly does
have a negative effect on the China business of Japanese retailers and
conspicuous brand-name manufacturers. But the impact on the Japanese economy is
limited to the extent that these businesses source within China. There appear
to be other inconveniences, but they rarely appear to be something that businesses
can’t handle on their own. Second, the nuclear power plant stoppage is in
essence a roughly 0.7% tax on GDP, or tribute if you will, paid to natural gas
exporting countries. As for the matter of electricity supply, each regional
monopoly greeted the summer months with a margin of capacity over expected peak
demand. So it’s not as acute a problem as you might imagine. We would be more
worried if we growing at a 7.5% clip like the Chinese economy.
Japan
has the largest debt of any sovereign nation, can it really afford to spend its
way out of the current crisis?
Easy-money monetary policy is not about
“spending its way out of [any] current crisis.” It’s about kicking the Japanese
economy out of a chronic deflationary equilibrium. But I am skeptical about
fiscal policy, if that’s what you’re talking about. Spending 200 trillion yen
over ten years to make Japan more disaster resistant? Any 10-year spending plan
with lots and lots of zeros behind a round number even before we’ve figured out
what the real needs makes no sense to me. I’d be much happier if they replaced
this with a 10-year fiscal plan for achieving primary balance.
HYPER-EASING
injecting
money into the economy by printing money instead of borrowing it. Can
this policy truly inject stimulus into the economy?
Hyper-easing is not about injecting
stimulus. To the extent that it lowers the effective interest rate, it makes it
easier for the government to borrow too, but that’s not the point.
Abe’s
goal is to fight deflation, has this been a serious issue for the nation? Will
this finally turn that problem around?
Deflation has essentially put a zero-nominal
interest floor under the real interest rate. Most mainstream economists believe
that this affects the real economy negatively and who am I to argue with them?
Will the inflation target be achieved on a sustainable basis? I don’t do
economic forecasts and real economists are divided on that question.
THE
YEN
Is
the Hyper easing policy about injecting money into the Japanese economy or
boosting exports by devaluing the Yen?
It’s about achieving an inflation target. A
weaker yen is the low-hanging fruit, the immediate benefit accruing to exporting
businesses. Mr. Abe was obviously aware of this when he launched his Abenomics
program.
Abe
has promised bold stimulus to restart growth and curb deflation. He has also
called for a weaker yen to bolster exports. Since these calls the yen has fallen
by 16% against the dollar and 19% against the euro over the past 4 months. Does
this mean his policies are working? Are his policies overly focused on currency
weakening rather than actual stimulus?
It’s about achieving an inflation target. A
weaker yen is the low-hanging fruit, the immediate benefit accruing to
exporting businesses. Mr. Abe was obviously aware of this when he launched his
Abenomics program. But it’s not something that you mention in polite company ,
and he rarely if ever has alluded to the effect since he was criticized for
doing so early on.
STIMULUS
The
Japanese cabinet has approved a stimulus package of more than 20 trillion yen.
10 trillion is earmarked for infrastructure spending over the next 15 months,
what type of infrastructure does Japan need at the moment?
I should look into this issue more closely,
but I haven’t, so I’ll refrain from passing judgment. However, there is a
genuine, massive backload of aging infrastructure built in the go-go years that
require repair or replacement. But some of them may no longer been
socioeconomically viable. I’d like to see them sorted out for prioritization
before putting numbers on the price tags.
Abe’s
party has a long history of pork barrel and wasteful infrastructure spending,
is he promising more of the same or will it be different? Past efforts to pour
millions into concrete and steel have had limited impact, will this new
spending go to other places?
I should look into this issue more closely,
but I haven’t, so I’ll refrain from passing judgment.
Half
of the infrastructure spending will come from national debt, can the country
truly afford to borrow more?
I am not a fiscal expert. So far, so good.
But yes, there must be a limit as a matter of logic. In the long run, we do
have to more or less balance revenue and expenditures and we do have an
unfavorable demographics.
GLOBAL
IMPACTS
Will
Japan’s easing lead to foreign capital flood into the emerging markets like
Brazil? If so, how should emerging markets avoid inflation caused by it?
Limited capital controls may be a sensible short-term defense against
destabilizing inflows of hot money, should it be implemented by emerging
countries?
I’m not so sure, but isn’t that what
countries like Brazil and India want, now that the US Fed talk about moving
away from QE is drawing money out of those emerging economies?
CHINA
IMPACT
Should
China have such concern? How will a weaker yen affect China? Will it lead to
escalated trade frictions and increase China's inflationary pressure? Can China
take any counter measures?
Why should China worry? Our businesses
don’t compete much in third countries, and Chinese exports to Japan are still
significantly cheaper than Japanese products in broadly similar product categories.
How
will Japan’s devaluation of yen impact China’s exports and imports? It seems to
hurt Germany since they have the same products mix for exports, but does China
have the same export products with Japan?
China shouldn’t worry. Japanese businesses don’t
compete much in third countries, and Chinese exports to Japan are still
significantly cheaper than Japanese products in broadly similar product
categories.
Does
this affect the free trade talks either individually with both China and South
Korea, as well as the three-way trade agreement that China craves but not Japan
or South Korea?
Not at all. China has a firm grip on its
currency that no country on a float has. As for the trilateral FTA, I think
both Japan and China want this to happen. The South Korea government should be
a little more ambivalent, since it has to get it ratified by its parliament.
Also, South Korea sees Japan as a competitor.
Will
the devaluation of yen lead to the relative appreciation of Chinese currency
RMB? Will the Chinese government allow the RMB to appreciate in response?
Yes, by definition, in terms of the
effective exchange rate. But the Chinese authorities measures the exchange rate
against a currency basket, of which the yen is a significant but by no means
dominant part, no?
Part
3 Right-wing orientation
How
much has Abe’s personal views on Japanese history and past actions been a
factor in being overwhelmingly endorsed by voters in both last year’s general
election as well as the Upper House election?
It has had little effect on voter behavior.
It didn’t help him in 2007 and it didn’t hurt him in 2013.
In
Japan, fresh calls for constitutional amendment from various political parties
have got louder. Is it easy now for him to start procedure of constitutional
amendment?
-Abe
has described his lifework to be revising Art 9.
-Article
9 of the Constitution renounces war and prohibits the possession of military
forces.
-Abe
first made the argument to amend it back in 2006-07 when he was Prime Minister.
-Abe
wants to revise Art. 9 to allow Japan to possess a military that can defend
itself as well as participating in the defense of its allies.
-He
is proposing to revise Art 96 first which sets the provisions for
constitutional amendments, that is to lower the threshold needed in the Diet in
order to get the bill passed in order to amend Art 9. A referendum will then
follow.
-Abe
has been careful in not pursuing this too aggressively.
It has become somewhat easier, to the
extent that parties that want to amend Article 9 in a way that gives the
government more leeway in using the military for collective defense
How
enthusiastic were voters about the Constitutional amendment in casting their
votes at the ballot box?
-A
vast majority of voters favour the pacifist Art. 9 for its principles and
ideals but do agree that a self-defense force as a necessary option.
It was not a significant issue in this
election—any election in living memory, actually—since the Communists and the Social
Democrats are the only political parties that take up the other side of the
argument but their political presence has been marginal for quite some time.
The New Komeito would probably favor keeping Article 9 as is, but should go
along with recognition of the Self-Defense Force’s military status.
How
true is it that many voters plumped for the LDP not because of their stance on
revising the Constitution but more on economics and a lack of political
alternatives?
100% true. I’m pretty sure that few people
voted for the LDP because of its constitutional views.
Does
the LDP’s solid majority mean the amendment to Art 96 mean a change to Art 9
looks more likely?
(If the JRP, YP and New Komeito give
pro-amendment forces a 2/3 majority) Its chances have improved. It still needs
to bring the JRP, YP, and New Komeito along but the DPJ by itself can no longer
stop the issue from going to a national referendum.
((If the JRP, YP and New Komeito do not
give pro-amendment forces a 2/3 majority) No. It still needs to carry some DPJ
votes, and the DPJ is sure to use this leverage to the best of its political
advantage.
How
does affect the opposition DPJ? Commentators say this is likely to split the
already-weakened party down the middle?
I don’t agree. At the end of the day, the
DPJ leadership can allow its Diet members to vote their conscience on the
matter and call on all the other parties to do likewise.
How
dangerous will it be for regional countries both China and South Korea? Earlier
this year, Japanese officials made irresponsible remarks about the comfort
women or rather sexual slavery issue, which arouse drastic response from South
Korea and China.
-South
Korean president Park Guen-Hye has called on Japan to follow her vision for the
region on a ‘correct understanding of history’, a clear reference to Japanese
past aggression and atrocities.
No need for China or South Korea to worry
at all unless it decides to launch a cruise missile at a US vessel during a
Japan-US joint military exercise. The mayor of Osaka made some ill-advised
comments about sex, the military, and women, comments that were almost
uniformly condemned by the Japanese media. He seemed to forget that there was a
very large number of Japanese comfort women as well. But that, of course, has
nothing to do about slf-defense.
Does
Abe risk anatagonising its nearest neighbours – both with new leadership in
place – so early in their time in office? And how significant is it that
President Park chose China as her second official stop ahead of Japan when in
the past, it would’ve been the other way round?
By seeking to amend the Constitution? Risk
what? And President Park has her own political needs and wants, and it should
have some economic benefits, as an amenable South Korea will make the Chinese
public that much more receptive to South Korean goods and services. But it will
not bring North-South unification any closer, if that’s South Korea’s ultimate
objective.
Japan
may also further its military buildup and will probably go beyond the
exclusively defense-oriented strategy. Will Japan’s self-defense force be
transferred to a normal military? How will this impact the regional stability?
How will China and South Korea respond to it?
The exclusively defense-oriented strategy
will be breached only, if ever, as part of UN-sanctioned operations. China has
a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, so China doesn’t have to worry
about that. South Korea is a formal US ally, so it’s protected as well. Note
also that the Japanese budgetary constraints precludes the kind of the buildup
that China has been engaging in for many, many years.
Media
reports say Japan may nationalise any unclaimed remote islands in its waters in
a bid to bolster its territorial claims. How far will Japan go on this road?
Can the neighbouring countries accept its move like this?
You’ve got this completely wrong. You’re
confusing sovereignty with ownership, which is understandable from an
authoritarian, socialist perspective. Any islands in Japan’s territorial waters
are Japanese territory and vice versa; there’s no question about that. The
problem is that many of those islands may have no owners. In that case, the
state has ownership by default. The government is going to confirm the
ownership, and assume control where it finds that it does have ownership. I
don’t see why that could alarm anyone.
In
recent years, Japan has become more assertive in dealing territorial disputes
with its neighbors. Will it continue on this path?
No it hasn’t. The Japanese government has
not taken the case against South Korea or Russia to the International Court of
Justice. It tried to maintain the status quo on the Senkaku Islands and all it
got for its troubles was a ferocious, totally unexpected backlash from the Chinese
authorities, with Chinese government ships continuing to dip in and out of the
Senkaku waters. It also knows happened in the South China Sea to the
Philippines and Vietnam. Maybe China sees its actions as just one step in its
manifest destiny. But I do think that the Chinese should be aware of how it’s
projecting itself with regard to its neighbors.
Japan
is aiming at a leading role in East Asia affairs. If it continues to be more
right-wing, will it disturb the regional stability?
I would argue that it is China’s actions,
if anyone’s that is disturbing regional stability. China is no longer acting as
a status quo power. Ask the Vietnamese. Ask the Filipinos. And China’s
relationship with India remains ambiguous, never mind the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization.
What’s
the US stance on the Japan’s continuously right-wing orientation? Will it have
to rein in Japanese rhetoric?
What right-wing orientation? The US will
surely be happy with the kind of constitutional amendment that the LDP, New
Komeito and the able and will among the opposition parties. They cannot, need
not, “rein in Japanese rhetoric” because Japan is a democracy and any truly
off-the-wall rhetoric—as opposed to statements that are merely not to the
liking of the Chinese or South Korean authorities—is quickly reeled back by the
rhetorician or the rhetorician is the one to suffer the consequences.
PART
4 (10:32-10:47)- Challenges
NUCLEAR
ENERGY
The
Nuclear energy issue has been highly contentious with many critical of the
outgoing DPJ for its relationship with the industry. The LDP is a well
known advocate for nuclear energy, are people really ready to turn the reactors
back on? Do they feel comfortable with the decision?
-Abe
has made clear that he intends to turn the reactors back on.
-50%
of those polled say they are against nuclear energy
-30%
favour nuclear energy.
-Opposition
parties generally against nuclear energy.
Given
how toxic an issue nuclear energy has been, in the long run, the LDP or any
political party has to move away from Japan’s dependence upon nuclear power?
That’s not the way to talk about the issue.
Instead, ask
1)
Will the reactors that pass the
safety test be restarted? The answer is yes.
2)
Will the reactors that do not pass
the safety test be restarted? The answer is no.
3)
Will the reactors that are
currently under construction and meet safety standards be commissioned? The
answer is very likely yes.
4)
Will any more new reactors be
built? Possibly, as old reactors are decommissioned. But don’t bet on it.
Electric utilities may think that it’s not worth the trouble.
Japan
has put the Japan Restoration party third in polls, will they stand by if the
LDP considers negotiating or changing its stance on the Islands in dispute with
China?
The JRP has appeared amenable to admitting
the existence of a territorial dispute. But a doubt that any Japanese political
party will make such a concession unless the Chinese authorities agree to call
off the government ships from the Senkaku Islands and keep Chinese fishing
boats away from the neighborhood.
Can
Japan afford not to put relations back together with China considering the
economic harm of the last few month stemming from their trade and regional
disputes?
Can Japan afford to? After all, it tried to
contain the situation and all it got for its troubles was a ferocious response
from the Chinese government and the Chinese public.
US
RELATIONS
Abe
says strengthening the US relationship is important, will he reverse decisions
about the military base on Okinawa? What other areas will he change to
improve the relationship with the US?
The Abe administration has
How
do Japanese voters see closer China-US?
They will not worry as long as the Japan-US
mutual security treaty is in place. On the economic front, the Japanese voters,
to the extent that they think about the matter, should be happy with a closer
US-China relationship. And nothing would make me happy than China seeking
membership in the Trans-Pacific Partnership with the US in the lead.
TPP
Will
Japan join the TPP? Will that improve relations with the US?
Both
of the main parties are for the TPP. Japan depends on trade so voters approves
of this EXCEPT for farmers who might lose out to a lack of trade barriers.
The answer is yes. But only marginally,
since the relationship is already an excellent one.
REGIONAL
TIES
Japan’s
presence in the region’s key multilateral institutions such as APEC, ASEAN and
the East Asia Summit is another vehicle that should continue to drive Tokyo’s
foreign policy. But besides trade, Will Japan enhance its political and
security relationships with natural allies in the region such as India,
Australia, Mongolia, Thailand?
That certainly is the idea. Japan shares,
to varying degrees, values and economic and security intrests with these
countries. But remember, these countries have their own national interests in
mind, and many of those interest are enhanced by a healthy and constructive
relationship with China. Come to think of it, the same thing can be said for
Japan.
The
Philippines has signaled support for a stronger Japanese military. Will Abe
focus on building a stronger military? Will China stand by if this
happens?
Yes, but let’s put this into some
perspective. The Chinese military budget has been growing for several decades,
while the Abe administration’s first defense budget grew 1% this year. What
does that tell you? Frankly, I don’t think that the PLA worries nearly as much
about Japan’s self-defense forces as it worries about the US military’s
presence in the neighborhood.
No comments:
Post a Comment