Between
Yoichi Masuzoe’s victory as the foregone conclusion and the treacherous roads
from yesterday’s snow, I am not going to cast a vote in today’s election for
the governor’s office in Tokyo. Instead, I am offering a brief explanation of
where I got wrong-footed with my idea that Morihiro Hosokawa, the former prime
minister, had a fighting chance.
It
became pretty clear only a couple of days, if that, after he threw his hat into
the ring that Hosokawa was going to lose. His best, perhaps only, chance, lay
in generating sympathetic and to the extent possible positive media coverage at
the onset and sustaining it through the early stages of the campaign so that irresistible
pressure would build up for the other substantive antinuclear candidate, Kanji
Utsunomiya, to fold camp and throw his support behind him. Instead, he postponed
his official announcement while he hastily cobbled together a platform that would
go beyond his antinuclear message and backtrack on earlier comments reported in
a book advocating the rejection of the vastly popular 2020 Tokyo Olympics. This
made him come came across as indecisive and unprepared, an impression that was
reinforced when he refused to take part in the customary debates featuring the
main candidates. Yoichi Masuzoe, the favorite receiving the support of the LDP
and Komeito, claiming that a debate without his purported main rival would be
meaningless, also pulled out, causing the debates to be canceled, but Hosokawa
deservedly took the blame for the turn of events that robbed the public of the
opportunity to hear out the candidates and, most importantly to Hosokawa’s
campaign, alienated the reporters covering the election. Hosokawa finally made
it to the starting line five days behind schedule, but he’d lost most of his
momentum by then. And the nuclear power industry and the Abe administration
must have breathed a sigh of relief. And the DPJ, which had offered its support
to Hosokawa, found that the pig in the poke that it had bought had for all
practical purposes turned toes up.
Hosokawa
was stunningly ill-prepared for his run, which in hindsight may have been more
or less to be expected from a 76 year-old who had retired from politics when he
turned 60 and largely spent his time since then making pottery with his own
kiln. However, it is also instructive that it was also reminiscent of his 1994
announcement as prime minister that he would seek a consumption tax hike from
3% at the time to 7% with the proceeds to be spent for “national welfare” purposes.
The problem was that he had essentially taken an idea from the Ministry of
Finance and made it public with little concern over the possible response from the
general public or the coalition parties supporting. Facing widespread opposition,
he took his proposal off the table in a couple of days, but the damage was
done.
This
casual approach to policy issues reminds me of Yukio Hatoyama and to a lesser
extent his brother Kunio Hatoyama, two other men born to privilege whose casual
attitude towards the politician’s word and its consequences stands out. There is
no reason to believe that a noble upbringing breeds irresponsibility. But it is
difficult to imagine people with such obvious flaws having the kind of
political careers that the three have enjoyed without their family backgrounds.
No comments:
Post a Comment