Monday in Washington, October 17, 2016

ENERGY AND THE NEXT U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION. 10/17, 10:00-11:30am. Sponsor: Center for a New American Security (CNAS). Speakers: Kevin Book, Managing Director, ClearView Energy Partners, LLC; Elgie Holstein, Former Chief of Staff, Department of Energy; Hon. David Goldwyn, Chairman, Atlantic Council’s Energy Advisory Group, Former Assistant Secretary, Energy for International Affairs; Hon. Robert McNally, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Center on Global Energy Policy, Columbia University, Former Senior Director, International Energy, National Security Council; Elizabeth Rosenberg, Senior Fellow and Director, Energy, Economics and Security Program, Center for a New American Security.

US ARCTIC COUNCIL CHAIRMANSHIP: ACHIEVEMENTS & REMAINING PRIORITIES. 10/17, Noon. Sponsor: Atlantic Council. Speakers: Ambassador Mark Brzezinski, Executive Director, U.S. Government Arctic Executive Steering Committee; Melanie Nakagawa, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Transformation, Bureau of Energy Resources, Department of State; Cathleen Kelly, Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress; Moderator: Ambassador Paula J. Dobriansky, Senior Fellow, The Future of Diplomacy Project, Harvard University JFK Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Former Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs; Introducer: Ambassador Richard Morningstar, Founding Director and Chairman, Global Energy Center Atlantic Council.

FUKUSHIMA AFTER 2047 DAYS: CURRENT REVITALIZATION ON THE GROUND. 10/17, 3:00-4:00pm. Sponsor: CSIS Proliferation Prevention Program. Speakers: The Honorable Masao Uchibori, Governor of Fukushima Prefecture, Japan; Sharon Squassoni (Moderator), Director and Senior Fellow, Proliferation Prevention Program, CSIS.

WEAPONS OF MATH DESTRUCTION. 10/17, Noon-1:30pm, Washington, DC. Sponsor: Open Technology Institute. Speakers: Cathy O’Neil, Data Scientist and Activist; David Robinson, Co-founder, Upturn; Rachel Levinson-Waldman, Senior Counsel, Liberty and National Security Program, Brennan Center for Justice; Daniel Castro, Vice President, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF); K. Sabeel Rahman, Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School.

ECONOMIC DISRUPTION, POLITICAL UPHEAVAL, AND SOCIAL STRIFE IN THE 21ST CENTURY. 10/17, 2:00-3:00pm. Sponsor: Governance Studies, Brookings. Speakers: Darrell M. West, Vice President and Director, Governance Studies, Brookings; Ed Luce, Washington Columnist and Commentator, Financial Times; David Corn, Washington Bureau Chief, Mother Jones; Jill Lawrence, Commentary Editor, USA Today.

LEADERSHIP AND SPACE: A CONVERSATION WITH SIMONETTA DI PIPPO. 10/17, 4:30-5:30pm. Sponsor: Women in Public Service Project, Wilson Center. Speakers: Simonetta Di Pippo, Director, United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs; Gwen Young, Director, Women in Public Service Project; Federiga Bindi, Director, Foreign Policy Initiative at the Institute for Women's Policy Research.

Asia and the threat of untethered nationalism

BY Jeff Kingston, Director Of Asian Studies, Temple University Japan and APP member

The Japan Times, October 1, 2016

George Orwell famously commented that nationalism is one of the “worst enemies of peace,” feeding on grievance and insecurities, appealing to primordial instincts and unifying by invoking past traumas. Indian author Rabindranath Tagore also warned about this “great menace,” arguing that nationalism enables people to escape responsibility for their immoral actions. More recently, Haruki Murakami wrote that it is “like cheap alcohol. It gets you drunk after only a few shots and makes you hysterical. It makes you speak loudly and act rudely … but after your drunken rampage you are left with nothing but an awful headache the next morning.”

But it could be considerably worse than a throbbing hangover.

Is peace in Asia threatened by untethered nationalist sentiments? Nationalism is only one of many risks to peace in Asia and is probably not the main factor propelling the region toward the abyss of war. Nationalism is fairly robust across the region, but extrapolating from that to war is not as straightforward as it may seem.

click to order

As I wrote in Nationalism in Asia: A History Since 1945, my recently published monograph, there is a basis for cautious optimism that nationalism will not instigate war in Asia, with one caveat: Significant economic disruptions could unleash nationalistic demons that might derail peace. Of course, European diplomats — the so-called sleepwalkers — were similarly optimistic on the eve of World War I, when it was assumed naively that strong economic ties between Germany and Great Britain made war unthinkable, until the nightmare erupted.

Interstate peace has prevailed in Asia since 1979 — the Sino-Vietnamese border clash — because nations have prioritized economic development and improved living standards. But nationalism could become more dangerous as policy priorities shift and the consequences of globalization intensify — especially in conjunction with sovereignty disputes that are arousing nationalistic passions between rivals. While the risk of localized conflicts within the region cannot be dismissed, nationalism is unlikely to trigger a wider war, with one prominent exception.

The most dangerous flashpoints in Asia are in Kashmir, the Korean Peninsula and the East and South China Seas — these seas being where territorial disputes between China and its neighbors are amplified by regional hegemonic rivalry between the U.S. and China.

The volatile cauldron in Kashmir involves Indian, Pakistani and Kashmiri nationalisms in a region that has experienced three wars since 1947 and a massive Indian occupation involving some 500,000 troops. This presence alienates most Kashmiris and stokes separatist aspirations, while Pakistan’s opportunistic support for cross-border terrorism ratchets up nationalist tensions between nations with decidedly prickly relations. Here, nationalism could exact a huge price on both India and Pakistan, two nuclear-armed enemies. Even if war is averted, however, the deplorable situation in Kashmir is an awkward reminder to India of its shortcomings.

Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons program is a regime-survival strategy — one that is destabilizing the region by incrementally recasting the geostrategic landscape with each new test. North Korea’s hyper-nationalistic rhetoric and state failures distract from how adroitly the nuclear card is being played — various combinations of sticks and carrots have failed to curb the Kim dynasty’s quest for the bomb over the past two decades. While nationalistic passions run high throughout the Korean Peninsula, they are unlikely to ignite war. Miscalculations and mistakes by North or South Korea, and strategic rivalry between China and the U.S., are more likely to drive conflict than nationalism.

China is not building artificial islands in the South China Sea to appease grassroots nationalism.

Neither is it defying a recent ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in favor of the Philippines over territorial claims because of hyper-nationalistic impulses. Strategic aspirations and policy choices are not driven by such sentiments even if they are sanctified by them. Certainly there is a rising tide of nationalism in Xi Jinping’s China, one that draws on a narrative of national humiliation and aspirations to restore the Middle Kingdom to its “proper place” atop Asia. Demonstrators and angry bloggers may revel in this self-righteous nationalism, but they don’t decide state policy; leaders make choices based on shrewd calculations of national interests, often in defiance of nationalistic fervor. Nationalism may complicate efforts to prevent a confrontation in the South China Sea (or over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea) from escalating, but would not preclude such a scenario if deemed necessary. The Chinese government has demonstrated its capacity to orchestrate demonstrations and stoke anger — and a matching ability to contain it. China’s leaders are not immune to the nationalist sentiments they stage-manage, but time and again they have stepped back and acted shrewdly rather than being swept along by popular fervor.

The greatest danger of nationalism is internal. Since 1979, Asia has enjoyed an absence of major conflicts between states despite some skirmishing and saber-rattling. In contrast, there has been a significant degree of nationalistic violence within borders. Domestic turmoil stirred up by nationalism is manifested in civil unrest, ethnic and sectarian conflict and secessionist insurgencies.

Internecine conflicts are endemic in Asia, including in China, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Thailand. Mainstream nationalism in these diverse societies “others” minorities. It tends to be intolerant, challenging cultural, religious, ethnic and linguistic identities in ways that provoke a backlash that can escalate into communal clashes and insurgency. The security-first approach to dealing with such violence — relying on military and police operating with impunity — is counterproductive, throwing fuel on the fire.

Nationalism within is a menace because it sustains antipathies, sabotages reconciliation efforts and limits governments’ room for compromise. It does this while amplifying anxieties that undermine trust and cooperation between fellow citizens and accentuating divides between communities. Targeted communities that are marginalized, find their ambitions thwarted or endure the indignities of discrimination have good reasons not to buy into the mainstream and are open to alternatives, including violence.

So while the world worries about the possibility of irrational nationalism sparking war in Asia, domestic chauvinism is exacting a toll of blood and repression from Mindanao to Papua and Kashmir to Xinjiang.

American Public Opinion on US Foreign Policy 2016

On October 6, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs in partnership with The Washington Post and the Wilson Center released its 2016 Survey of American Public Opinion on US Foreign Policy entitled America in the Age of Uncertainty, (48 pgs, conducted June 10-27, 2016] with a panel of experts—Council President Ivo Daalder, Wilson Center President Jane Harman, Kori Schake of the Hoover Institution, report author and senior Council fellow Dina Smeltz, and moderator Jackson Diehl of The Washington Post.

Trump backers are the least likely to support globalization and to say that free trade has been good for the US economy. They are also least likely to support the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. 

However, Trump has questioned long-standing tenets of US foreign policy, including US alliance commitments to Japan and South Korea; while Trump’s core supporters stand with his policy stances on trade, globalization, and immigration, they do not align with his views on broader international engagement. 

Among the overall public, 89 percent say that maintaining existing alliances is very or somewhat effective at achieving US foreign policy goals. That view has bipartisan support: Democrats (94%), Republicans (88%), and Independents (86%) all view maintaining existing alliances as very or somewhat effective, as do 84 percent of core Trump supporters. 

Trump’s supporters favor projecting US military power abroad through basing. Core Trump supporters are as or more likely than other Americans to support long-term US military bases in Japan and South Korea. In general, support for maintaining U.S. military bases in South Korea is at an all-time high with 70 percent polled saying that the United States should maintain long-term bases, up from 64 percent in 2015. Maintaining bases in Japan found overall support at 60 percent, and maintaining bases in Australia at 46 percent.

One reason for this increased support appears to be the growing perception of North Korea as a critical threat to the United States. In 2016, six in ten Americans thought that North Korea’s nuclear program is a critical threat to the United States. That trails only international terrorism (75 percent critical) and is virtually tied with the possibility of unfriendly countries becoming nuclear powers (61 percent) on a list of 13 possible threats. For North Korea’s nuclear program, this is a 5 percentage point increase from 2015 when the question was first asked.

An overall majority of Americans favor cooperating with China (63%) over actively working to limit its influence. The report suggests that although Donald Trump has gained traction in the presidential race, his views on important issues garner only minority support from the overall American public.

Press Release: https://www.thechicagocouncil.org/press-release/poll-trump-taps-longstanding-trade-and-immigration-fears-finds-minority-constituency

European Foreign Policy toward Asia moving toward security concerns

presentation at Carnegie in Washington

On June 28, 2016, High Representative Federica Mogherini presented the EU Global Strategy on foreign and security policy--Shared Vision, Common Action: A Stronger Europe, A Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign And Security Policy, European Union, July 7, 2016, 60 pages--to EU leaders meeting in Brussels at the EU summit. Ms. Mogherini was mandated to prepare the new strategy by the European Council in June 2015.

At the press conference, she said:

"The purpose, even existence, of our Union is being questioned. Yet, our citizens and the world need a strong European Union like never before. In challenging times, a strong Union is one that thinks strategically, shares a vision and acts together. This is even more true after the British referendum. We will indeed have to rethink the way our Union works, but we perfectly know what to work for. We know what our principles, our interests and our priorities are. This is no time for uncertainty: our Union needs a Strategy. We need a shared vision, and common action."

In regard to Asia, the Strategy says:

…We will deepen economic diplomacy and scale up our security role in Asia.

The EU will engage China based on respect for rule of law, both domestically and internationally….drives westwards by maximising the potential of the EU-China Connectivity Platform, and the ASEM and EU-ASEAN frameworks. The EU will also deepen trade and investment with China…seeking a level playing field, appropriate intellectual property rights protection, greater cooperation on high-end technology, and dialogue on economic reform, human rights and climate action.

The EU will deepen its economic diplomacy in the region, working towards ambitious free trade agreements with strategic partners such as Japan and India, as well as ASEAN member states, with the goal of an eventual EU-ASEAN agreement.….We will promote non-proliferation in the Korean peninsula.

In East and Southeast Asia, we will uphold freedom of navigation, stand firm on the respect for international law, including the Law of the Sea and its arbitration procedures, and encourage the peaceful settlement of maritime disputes…We will help build maritime capacities and support an ASEAN-led regional security architecture.

In Central and South Asia, we will deepen cooperation on counter-terrorism, anti-trafficking and migration, as well as enhance transport, trade and energy connectivity. Across the Indo Pacific and East Asian regions, the EU will promote human rights and support democratic transitions such as in Myanmar/Burma.

Full text: http://europa.eu/globalstrategy/sites/globalstrategy/files/eugs_review_web.pdf

Is Abe A True Nationalist? No just another ultra nationalist

Tomomi Inada

by Kevin Rafferty, journalist and commentator

The Japan Times, August 9, 2016

OSAKA - Now that he has announced his latest stimulus package, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe faces a dilemma: Will he now put his energies into the more difficult task of nursing the economy back to full health, including treating long-term cancers eating at society? Or will he perform a bait and switch again to claim that his Diet majority gives him the authority to change the Constitution?

Abe's appointment of the strongly nationalist Tomomi Inada to the key and sensitive post of defense minister can hardly be reassuring either to Japan's neighbors or to the majority of Japanese who don't want to change the country's long-revered constitution. A small test will be whether Inada visits Yasukuni Shrine in the next week to honor the country's war dead, as has been her wont. [She was sent out of the country to avoid the issue.]

But her appointment and political gossip that she is being lined up to succeed Abe when his term expires in 2018 — unless he changes the rules to be able to continue in office — suggest that Abe and friends are hell-bent on amending the Constitution, in their eyes a humiliating imposition by the victorious U.S. forces.

Abe had specifically asserted that the election was about economics, not about the Constitution, On a television program before the election, Liberal Democratic Party Vice President Masahiko Komura declared that "there is zero possibility" that Abe would revise the war-renouncing Article 9 of the Constitution, even if he won a two-thirds majority.

Put on the spot immediately after the results came in, Abe declared, "The nation has given me a powerful mandate to further accelerate Abenomics. I am grateful for this." But in the cold light of victory the next day, he changed his tune, claiming that it was his "duty" as leader of the LDP to revise the Constitution, which he regards as being forced on defeated Japan by the WWII victors. "We have always set a goal of revising the Constitution," he said. "That is my duty."

His appointment of Inada, known for her visits to Yasukuni and vigorous challenges to claims of Japanese wrongdoing during the Pacific War, suggests that Abe has his eye on what he considers his main mission, constitutional change.

Giving priority to changing the Constitution would be a major mistake, ultimately for Japan.

Winning big with a relatively low 54 percent turnout on an economic platform does not give Abe a mandate for constitutional change. This would be dishonest and wrong, especially since all opinion polls show that most Japanese do not want to change the Constitution. A recent poll by public broadcaster NHK showed that only 26 percent agree with constitutional reform, and only 11 percent believe that it is a priority.

Also worrying, Abe has not come clean about how he plans to revise the Constitution, whether he would merely abolish Article 9, thus allowing Japan to have a fully-fledged military, or whether he wants to change the whole document along the lines of an LDP draft.

The full LDP document is both far-reaching and flawed. Besides creating military forces, it would change the relationship between the citizen and the state, giving more powers to the government, diminishing the rights of citizens, as well as imposing new duties on them. It would put the family, not the individual, as the fundamental unit of society.

Such a document requires a full airing and debate clause by clause, which has not taken place even within the LDP. It would be dangerous to try to propose such a constitution without having the full commitment of the Japanese people.

Abe and his colleagues have hesitated because opinion polls have consistently reported that the people — sensibly — don't see the urgency in changing the Constitution.

Even to get into serious debate about changing the Constitution would consume political energies, alarm Japan's neighbors, trigger military tension and spending in the region, and divert attention from sorting out serious economic problems of Japan's aging and arthritic economy and society.

It is a measure of Abe's stubbornness that he has three times promised the electorate that the economy and Abenomics were his priority, only to get diverted twice by his mission to change the Constitution. We can only hope that it will not be third time unlucky.

Japan's economy badly needs attention, which the latest stimulus does not address. The headline number for the stimulus was ¥28 trillion, but the fillip of new money in the current year will be ¥5 trillion or less. Throwing money at the problem won't work because Japan needs initiative and innovative ideas. The government can lay the foundations, but needs to encourage bright people with new ideas to transform the economy. It needs to bring the energy and talents of women and elderly people into the economy, and needs to discuss how greater immigration could energize a rapidly graying country set in its ways.

It is unlikely these economic revolutionaries will emerge if Abe is preoccupied in creating a Big Brother state.

There is a bigger issue that needs consideration. Abe's constitutional vision is impaired. Inspired by his grandfather Nobusuke Kishi, a wartime minister and postwar prime minister, he wants to make Japan "normal" again; but that normality is the normal of the imperial 1930s. No wonder that Japan's neighbors, including South Korea and China, are sounding alarm bells.

In the 21st century, Japan has to find a new normal that recognizes the importance of a world where Japan is a middling power, even in Asia. It is a difficult task, not least because Beijing is becoming more nationalist and more assertive, using facts and excuses that for 200 years foreign powers have bullied China. There is no future in trying to slug it out with China, either in claims about history or, less still, in military posturing.

There is also the awkward question whether Japan, with its aging and declining population and cash-strapped budget, can afford to be more aggressive militarily. If Donald Trump becomes president of the U.S., he may follow the advice of right-wing loonies to withdraw U.S. forces from Asia — which would send a terrible destabilizing signal and encourage an Asian arms race, which could involve nuclear proliferation.

In the month when the atrocities of war, including slaughter in China, fire-bombings and finally the horror of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, are commemorated, Japan should be leading the way in the difficult quest for a peaceful world.

Someone should have the guts to remind Abe that the policies of his revered grandfather and friends led to widespread misery, death, atomic destruction and defeat. A true Japanese nationalist and patriot would be searching for a better future, not looking back to an inglorious past.

There is a saving grace. Even if he can summon the two-thirds majority in both houses to initiate constitutional change, Abe still needs approval from the people in a referendum. The lessons of Brexit should teach him that it is not a good idea to mess with popular fears.

LDP draft Constitution differentiates between 'big' and 'small' human rights. Mainichi Shimbun, May 28, 2016

Prime Minister of Japan’s Schedule August 8-14, 2016

August 8, 2016


AM
09:22 Meet with National Security Secretariat Secretary General, Mr. Yachi, Cabinet Intelligence Director, Mr. Kitamura, and the Foreign Affairs Ministry’s Foreign Policy Bureau Director General, Mr. Ishikane at the Prime Minister’s Office, followed by former Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Minister, Mr. Ota. Later meet with Supreme Court judges, Mr. Kizawa (newly appointed) and Mr. Yamaura (retiring).
10:09 Attend a cabinet meeting, followed by a meeting of the Reconstruction Promotion Council. Later attend a meeting of the Strategic Headquarters for Space Development.
10:53 Meet with Finance Minister, Mr. Aso, Vice Finance Minister, Mr. Sato, Vice Finance Minister for International Affairs, Mr. Asakawa, and Director General of the Budget Bureau, Mr. Fukuda. Later meet with Economic Revitalization Minister Ishihara, Cabinet Office Parliamentary Vice Minister, Mr. Nishikawa, Cabinet Office Deputy Director General, Mr. Habuka, and Cabinet Office Director Generals for Economic, Fiscal and Social Structure, Mr. Niihara and Mr. Tawa.
11:54 Meet with National Personnel Authority President, Ms. Ichimiya. Minister in Charge of Civil Service Reform, Mr. Yamamoto, Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs’ Director General, Mr. Hagiuda and Chief Cabinet Secretary, Mr. Suga are present. Later attend a liaison conference between the government and the ruling parties. Later meet with Komeito Chief Representative, Mr. Yamaguchi.

PM
12:35 Meet with Defense Minister, Ms. Inada. Later meet with Economy, Trade and Industry Minister, Mr. Seko.
13:26 Meet with LDP Policy Research Council Chairman, Mr. Motegi. Later meet with Mr. Yachi, Mr. Kitamura, Mr. Ishikane, Defense Policy Bureau Director General, Mr. Maeda and Admiral Mr. Kawano, Joint Staff Chief.
14:38 Meet with Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Sugiyama and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Akiba, followed by a meeting with Prime Minister’s Special Advisor, Mr. Eto.
15:24 Interview open to all media. Later attend a meeting of the Council on Economy and Fiscal Policy. Afterwards meet with Mr. Kitamura, Mr. Maeda and the Defense Ministry’s Intelligence Headquarters Director, Ms. Miyakawa. Mr. Kitamura stay behind.
16:54 Meet with LDP Secretary General, Mr. Nikai and Kochi Prefectural Governor, Mr. Ozaki and others.
17:06 Meet with Mr. Yachi and Mr. Sugiyama. Later meet with Mr. Ishikane, Mr. Maeda and Mr. Kawano, followed by Mr. Yachi, Mr. Sugiyama and Mr. Akiba.
18:49 Meet with Japan Business Federation Honorary Chairman, Mr. Imai and the prime minister’s secretaries at the “Kioi Club” in town of Kioi.
21:34 Arrive at his private residence in Tomigaya.

August 9, 2016

AM
07:02 Depart his private residence in Tomigaya.
07:55 Depart Haneda Airport by JAL flight 605 accompanied by Health, Labor and Welfare Minister, Mr. Shiozaki.
09:19 Arrive at Nagasaki Airport.
10:29 Attend the Nagasaki Peace Memorial Ceremony at the Peace Park in Nagasaki City.

PM
12:19 Attend a “town hall for A-bomb survivors” at Hotel New Nagasaki followed by a press conference.
14:11 Depart Nagasaki Airport by ANA flight 666.
15:38 Arrive at Haneda Airport.
16:22 Meet with National Police Agency Commissioner Generals, Mr. Sakaguchi (newly appointed) and Mr. Kanetaka (retiring) at the Prime Minister’s Office. Later meet with Consumer Affairs Agency Commissioners, Mr. Okamura (newly appointed) and Ms. Bando (retiring). Afterwards meet with Minister for Working-style Reform, Mr. Kato.
18:28 Arrive at his private residence.
20:20 Dinner with friends at “Sumibi-Kushiyaki IW” restaurant in Fujiyoshida City, Yamanashi Prefecture.
22:34 Arrive at his private villa in village of Narusawa.

August 10, 2016

AM
07:22 Depart his private villa in Narusawa.
07:27 Play golf with friends at Narusawa Golf Club.

PM
15:32 Arrive at his private villa.
18:21 Dinner with the prime minister’s secretaries at “Ryo” restaurant in Kawaguchiko.
20:37 Arrive at his private villa.

August 11, 2016

AM
06:19 Depart his private villa in Narusawa, Yamanashi Prefecture.
06:42 Play golf with Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation Vice President, Mr. Takahashi Seiichiro, Kake Educational Institution Board of Trustees Chairman, Mr. Kake Kotaro and others at Fuji Golf Course in Yamanakako.

PM
16:15 Arrive at his private residence in Tomigaya.
18:14 Dinner with Mr. and Mrs. Takahashi and the prime minister’s secretaries at “en boca Tokyo” pizza restaurant in town of Motoyoyogi.
20:35 Arrive at his private residence.

August 12, 2016

AM
09:36 Depart his private residence in Tomigaya.
10:52 Depart Haneda Airport on ANA flight 693.
11:55 Arrive at Yamaguchi Ube Airport.

PM
12:06 Lunch with his secretaries at the restaurant “Curry House NEW OX.”
13:21 Visit his former secretary’s house to express sympathy in Mine City.
14:57 View bronze statue of [poet and songwriter] Misuzu Kaneko
15:58 Meet with Nagato Mayor, Mr. Onishi Kurao.
16:31 Pay homage at Iiyama Hachiman Shrine.
17:07 Visit workshop of ceramic artist, Mr. Sakakura Shinpei.
18:09 Dine with his wife, Akie, Nagato mayor, local supporters, and others at the Japanese inn “Otanisanso” and stay the night there.

August 13, 2016

AM
08:45 Depart Japanese inn “Otanisanso” in Nagato City, Yamaguchi Prefecture, with his wife, Akie.
09:10 Make condolence visit to his supporter’s house.
09:40 Visit his father’s grave [former Foreign Minister Abe Shintaro]. Later, grant interviews to various media outlets.
11:30 Make condolence visit to house of person involved with his support group in Shimonoseki City.

PM
12:03 Hold meeting of his support group at his residence.
13:57 Make condolence visit to house of person involved in his support group.
15:43 Attend Buddhist memorial service for the person involved with his support group held at Shimonoseki Tenreikaikan Hall.
16:09 Visit his supporter at Takeshisa Hospital.
16:33 Make condolence visit to his supporter’s home.
17:20 Arrive at his residence.
18:38 Meet Yamaguchi Bank Chairman, Mr. Fukuda Koichi at Yamagin Museum.
19:17 Deliver speech at the Kanmon Straits fireworks display. View fireworks.
20:29 Enjoy summer festival at Iminomiya Shrine. Deliver speech.
21:05 Visit Uzuhouse mall with his wife, Akie.
21:35 Dine with persons involved with his support group at Japanese restaurant “Kinkei.”
22:52 Arrive at his residence.

August 14, 2016

AM
07:52 Depart his residence in Shimonoseki City, Yamaguchi Prefecture.
08:25 Make condolence visit to his supporter’s house.
09:11 Make condolence visit to his office staff member’s house.
10:18 Commemorative photo with people at Sanyo Jidoshado Tonomi Parking Area in Hofu City.
11:03 Make condolence visit to former Home Affairs Minister Ms. Fubuta Akira’s house in Tabuse Town, with Lower House member, Mr. Nishimura Yasutoshi and Upper House member, Mr. Kitamura Tsuneo.
11:37 Pay respects at gravesite of his grandfather, former Prime Minister, Mr. Kishi Nobusuke, accompanied by Senior Vice Foreign Minister, Mr. Kishi Nobuo and Mr. Fubuta.
11:50 Meet with Mr. Fubuta and Mr. Nishimura at Mr. Kishi’s residence.

PM
12:22 Visit restaurant “Western” at Sanyo Jidoshado Kudamatsu Service Area in Kudamatsu City.
14:31 Depart Yamaguchi Ube Airport on JAL flight 294.
15:46 Arrive at Haneda Airport.
16:21 Arrive at his private residence in Tomigaya.

Complicating Taiwan’s love affair with Japan

By Jeff Kingston, Temple University, Japan and APP member

The Japan Times, Sep 3, 2016

This month, the Ama (grandma) Museum will open in Taipei. It will be a venue dedicated to Taiwan’s wartime “comfort women” who provided sexual services under duress at Japanese military brothels.

The opening of such a museum is surprising because Taiwanese tend to have a more favorable view of their experience under Japanese colonial rule than South Koreans, and a recent poll conducted by Japan’s Interchange Association in Taipei — the de facto Japanese Embassy — found that Japan is Taiwan’s favorite country. These positive perceptions will probably persist regardless of the Ama Museum, a teaching and reconciliation center, but it is another sign that Japan’s history of sexual slavery can not be erased.

Why now? The museum’s opening comes on the heels of the December 2015 deal between Tokyo and Seoul, which requires Japan to provide ¥1 billion to assist Korea’s few remaining victims.

During a March ceremony dedicating the Ama Museum, Taiwan’s outgoing Kuomintang (KMT) president Ma Ying-jeou invoked the South Korea-Japan agreement, stating, “Taiwanese comfort women were Japanese citizens during the war. And they deserve equal treatment.”

Is Taiwan also seeking a payout? Kang Shu-hwa, executive director of the Taipei Women’s Rescue Foundation (TWRF), which opened the new museum, demurs. Since 1992, the TWRF has been actively addressing the issue of wartime forced prostitution by helping the women involved obtain financial support from the Taiwanese government and seeking justice in the Japanese judicial system by arranging pro-bono legal services.

Planning for the Ama Museum began a decade ago after TWRF had exhausted all legal avenues. To avoid accusations of political manipulation, Kang says she has not taken any donations from the KMT or affiliated organizations. Overall, the KMT has a pro-Beijing bias, and taking donations from it would suggest the museum is being used to fight bilateral history wars. Kang says she has no such intention.

In 1992, TWRF opened a hotline to help identify former comfort women and certified 58 survivors out of an estimated total of 1,000 Taiwanese involved; today, only three remain. They all came from poor families and were often recruited through deception, intimidation and coercion, but in some cases desperate families sold their daughters to brokers. Kang told me that these families were required to cooperate with a directive from the Japanese colonial government aimed at mobilizing young unmarried women for the war effort.

A powerful documentary produced with TWRF in 1998, “A Secret Buried for Fifty Years,” presents the stories of 14 of these women — some as young as 15 at the time. They were told their job would involve cleaning and cooking, but they were also required to provide sex. The stigma of forced prostitution left them traumatized and unable to reach out for moral support or consolation.

Many Taiwanese women were sent to Japanese military brothels (called “comfort stations”) around Southeast Asia. They were virtual prisoners and thus enslaved as sex workers. Survival was a grim ordeal, but their nightmare continued after returning home as they coped with lingering physical and mental wounds. In the documentary, we meet a woman who shared her past with her husband, only to find that he could not handle his jealousy and promptly divorced her. Others just hid their secrets while raising a family and some just avoided marriage.

Kang says that many Taiwanese wrongly assume these women were prostitutes. Japanese, she believes, have also been misled by manga artist Yoshinori Kobayashi’s baseless portrayal of Taiwanese comfort women volunteering to console Japanese soldiers in his manga series “Shin Gomanism Sengen Supesharu — Taiwan-ron” (“Neo Gomanism Manifesto Special – On Taiwan”). Kang says there is too much attention on how women were recruited when the main educational focus should be on how they were systematically mistreated, denied freedom and basic human rights.

Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen, the country’s first female leader, has taken steps to address historical grievances, but not the system of wartime forced prostitution. Kang hopes Tsai will, but was disheartened when Taiwan’s Premier Lin Chuan remarked in July that Taiwanese women volunteered to become “comfort women.” He later apologized for his remarks, suggesting that his view does not pass public muster. Tsai’s Democratic Progressive Party seeks close ties with Japan to counterbalance China, however, so it’s unclear how far she will go on an issue that remains marginal in public discourse.

Kang wants to focus attention on the human rights violations of the “comfort women” system that persist with contemporary human trafficking. Back in 1995, the TWRF successfully lobbied the Taiwanese government to provide funds for survivors, all of whom rejected the compensation the Japanese government was offering through the Asian Women’s Fund (AWF). This support came under President Lee Teng-hui, often considered to be one of Taiwan’s most pro-Japanese leaders.

Beginning in 1998, TWRF backed lawsuits filed in Japan demanding compensation for Taiwan’s surviving victims, but in 2005 the Supreme Court upheld rulings that rejected the case due to the statute of limitations. It was then that Kang decided to establish a museum — its recent opening has nothing to do with Japan’s 2015 settlement with South Korea.

Raising money for the museum has taken time because many firms don’t want to antagonize Japanese business partners, but Kang finally reached her goal, thanks in part to donations from Japan.

The spacious 500 square-meter museum occupies a restored two-story brick building located in one of the downtown areas frequented by Japanese tourists. The first-floor coffee shop and education center opens on Sept. 20 while the permanent exhibition on comfort women opens on Dec. 10, International Human Right’s Day. Currently, TWRF has no plans to sponsor a comfort women statue, which is welcome news for Prime Minister Shinzo Abe given that his tenure as Japan’s leader has coincided with an international boom in such memorials.