Editorial :: Okinawa's air base battle

January 30, 2010

The U.S. and Japan have an agreement to relocate a Marine Corps base, but local politics are in the way.

Okinawa. Site of the largest U.S. amphibious assault in the Pacific and the final major battle of World War II. Last territory to be handed back to Japanese control -- in 1972. And now, the first point of friction between the Obama administration and the 4-month-old government of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama.

As host to nearly three-quarters of the U.S. troops stationed in Japan, Okinawa residents have long felt that they shoulder more than their fair share. So it's not surprising that the future of a U.S. Marine base has become a contentious issue. But if it is handled properly, it shouldn't threaten the strategic relationship between the United States and Japan.

Since 1960, a treaty has granted U.S. armed forces use of Japanese land and facilities in return for protecting the country and responding in the event it is attacked. Understanding that keeping troops in highly populated areas can raise tensions, the United States agreed in 1996 to reduce its military footprint in Okinawa. But it took another decade to forge a deal to transfer 8,000 troops to Guam and move the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma air base from the crowded city of Ginowan to tiny Nago, on the southern end of the island.

The Pentagon is understandably frustrated. The 2006 agreement still had not been implemented in September, when voters booted out the party that had ruled Japan for half a century and elected Hatoyama's Democratic Party of Japan, which, along with coalition members, promised to reconsider the deal. This week, Nago elected a new mayor who is opposed to the base, with its noisy helicopters and airstrip to be built on landfill in pristine waters. Hatoyama has pledged to reexamine all options and issue a decision in May.

Some politicians will try to place the base controversy in the context of the left-leaning Hatoyama's desire to improve relations with China and the rest of Asia -- which they believe is leading to weakened relations with the U.S. That is a mistaken view, as the base issue was festering long before even Hatoyama's predecessor began reaching out to Beijing. When it comes to China, Japan is only doing what the U.S. is doing: engaging with a major economic partner while keeping an eye on its military capabilities.

The way to protect the U.S.-Japan relationship is to recognize that in Japan, as elsewhere, all politics is local. U.S. Ambassador to Japan John V. Roos took a step in that direction with a speech Friday advocating for the Nago deal, but pledging to make the base environmentally and economically friendly. U.S. officials must continue to press the case with the Japanese people. Otherwise, come up with a Plan B.

Japan's secret pact with U.S. spurs debate

Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has created a panel to investigate Japan's role in a decades-old secret pact allowing nuclear-armed U.S. vessels to dock at Japanese ports, against Japanese laws.


Photo: Koji Murata, a political scientist at Doshisha University in Kyoto, Japan, has discussed in his classes the issue of the secret 1969 accord between Tokyo and Washington allowing nuclear-armed U.S. naval vessels to continue docking, despite Japanese laws to the contrary. His personal opinion is that there are times when the government can withhold the truth.

By John M. Glionna

January 17, 2010

Reporting from Kyoto, Japan - Professor Koji Murata likes to ask his political science students a tough policy question: Is it ever proper for a government to lie to its constituents?

Class opinions vary, but Murata, a scholar of international security issues at Doshisha University in Kyoto, has his own view.

"I think it's OK to lie to the public for the public good," he said. "As long as what you say is not contrary to national intent, really important secrets must be kept."

The philosophical question has gained urgency in the wake of revelations here of a decades-old secret pact between Tokyo and Washington that allowed nuclear-armed U.S. vessels to dock at Japanese ports, despite laws here against it.

For 40 years, the government denied the existence of the 1969 agreement between President Nixon and Prime Minister Eisaku Sato, the architect of Japan's post-World War II pacifism and staunch antinuclear policies.

Successive Japanese administrations were wary of a public outcry in a nation that suffered two devastating nuclear attacks 65 years ago.

Days after he took office in September, however, Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama assigned a panel of government officials and historians to investigate Japan's role in the agreement.

Since the end of the Cold War, nuclear-armed U.S. ships have stopped docking in Japan, officials say.

The findings, due out this month, could further complicate a tense standoff between Hatoyama and the Obama administration over Japan's calls for the removal of a controversial U.S. military presence on the southern island of Okinawa.

"This revelation makes maintaining a stable alliance even more challenging," said Carl Baker, director of programs at the Center for Strategic and International Studies' Pacific Forum.

Many Japanese applauded Hatoyama's effort to create a more open government but said they felt betrayed by leaders who had publicly railed against nuclear arms, only to secretly acquiesce to the demands of a powerful nation.

Some are particularly incensed that the deal was struck with the United States, which dropped the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima at the end of World War II, killing as many as 220,000 people.

Bloggers have ridiculed Sato's 1974 Nobel Peace Prize, calling Japan's longest-serving postwar prime minister a hypocrite.

As she boarded a train home to Tokyo recently, Aikiko Shiono said she felt betrayed by the pact and the government stonewalling.

"Japan is the only country on Earth to suffer the devastation of a nuclear bomb," said Shiono, who works for a political think tank. "We shouldn't allow nuclear weapons to enter our country. We have to keep advocating to the world how Nagasaki and Hiroshima were a tragedy. To do otherwise is an insult to the victims."

Sitting a few seats ahead, Shiono's father said he disagreed.

"There are things the government has to hide from us," said Kenji Kobori, 60. "They have to make some tough decisions. Some of those have to remain secret."

The agreement, which scholars say violates a Japanese law forbidding nuclear weapons from being made, possessed or stored on this country's territory, was made public by American officials after the U.S. military stopped sending nuclear-armed ships to Japan in 1991.

Despite the U.S. government's admission, Japanese leaders continued to deny that there was such a pact.

"They did not exist," then-Prime Minister Taro Aso said during a nationally televised news conference last year in response to a reporter's query about the pact and revealing documents.

The deal restoring Okinawa to Japanese sovereignty reportedly hinged, in its secret portions, on the U.S. retaining the right to dock nuclear warships at the base in case of emergency.

Security analysts were divided over Japan's handling of the secret agreement.

"I think it's always useful for citizens to know what their government is up to, even decades after the fact," said Jerome Cohen, a legal expert at the New York University School of Law. "We learn what to do for the future from our mistakes of the past."

Baker said the issue was more complex than learning a history lesson.

"Is it useful to bring out information about this pact now? These kinds of things are never useful when it comes to national security."

He said the revelation could play a role as Tokyo and Washington hammer out a deal on a new location for a controversial U.S. Marine Corps air station on Okinawa.

"This is another thorn to deal with, on top of everything else between the two nations," Baker said. "Part of me says that, like it or not, history has to be revealed. But how far do you take it? At what point do you trade off national security for full disclosure? Should we start disclosing past CIA operations? We know they existed.

"It's a tough issue. There's just no easy answer."

One former Japanese government official said that such secrets are kept by all nations.

"It isn't just Japan," said the former ambassador, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

The ambassador said Sato was empowered to enter into such a deal to help Japan secure the return of Okinawa. But he said the deal should have been made public years ago.

"It was a lie, and they should have corrected it after the Cold War ended and the U.S. nuclear ships stopped coming," he said.

Murata, the political science professor, says the debate will continue in his classes as to how Japan should treat U.S. nuclear vessels in the future.

"It was a betrayal and it went on for decades," he said. "Now the government has finally come clean. But the question remains: With an unstable North Korea, how do we assist our closest ally without a secret pact?"

Shrine a litmus test for Japan's premiers

By John M. Glionna
August 11, 2009

The press will be staking out the Yasukuni shrine to Japan's war dead to see whether Prime Minister Taro Aso visits on the date of Japan's World War II defeat. Premiers do and don't.

Reporting from Tokyo -- Every Aug. 15, the normally serene Yasukuni shrine in the center of Tokyo becomes the setting for a stakeout.

The watchers are Japan's media. And they're watching for politicians, keeping count of who does and who does not show at this shrine to the war dead on the emotionally charged anniversary of Imperial Japan's surrender in World War II.

With its soothing lanterns and elegant rice-paper walls, the 140-year-old Yasukuni is a place of contemplation and contention. The Shinto shrine is the repository for the souls of the roughly 2.5 million soldiers who died in the emperor's wars, and supporters say it serves the same purpose as Arlington in a country that has no national war cemetery.

But others -- including many in those countries who were victims of Japan's aggression in the 20th century -- see Yasukuni as a guardian of the militarist values that led to millions of deaths. Their anger stems from the decision by the Shinto priests controlling the shrine to accept the souls of 14 Japanese leaders executed after World War II as war criminals.

Photo: Visitors walk past paper lanterns at Tokyo's Yasukuni shrine, repository for the souls of the roughly 2.5 million soldiers who died in the emperor’s wars; in the 1970s, the priests accepted the souls of 14 leaders executed as war criminals after World War II. Many object to politicians making visits there, especially on Aug. 15, which marks the defeat of Japan in the war.

The willingness of politicians to visit such a site angers China and South Korea, which suffered under Japanese occupation, as well as Japanese citizens unhappy with what they see as Yasukuni's revisionist view of the war. By paying respects at the shrine, critics say, Japanese politicians betray an unrepentant view of Japan's role in the war's origins.

"It's an annual ritual," said journalist and historian Miki Tanikawa of the "will they or won't they go" speculation. "Reporters know the strong foreign reaction to a prime minister's official visit here -- the anger and resentment."

This year, the eyes are on Prime Minister Taro Aso, who has described past Chinese protests as meddling in Japan's internal affairs. Reason enough to go, Aso used to say when he was not prime minister and used to stop by the shrine himself. As a Cabinet minister, he even suggested the emperor should pay a visit.

As prime minister, it's politically more dicey. Sure, Junichiro Koizumi used to go every year when he was prime minister (though he waited until he was on his way out of office before going on Aug. 15), calling it "a private affair." But the cost was a freeze with the Chinese government, whose leaders refused to have anything to do with Koizumi, sending relations between Asia's two biggest powers into the tank.

Koizumi's successor was Shinzo Abe, a strong nationalist whose grandfather was a wartime Cabinet minister, and who also used to praise the merits of going to Yasukuni. But Abe's first order of business upon becoming prime minister was to improve those soured ties with China. The shrine took a back seat. In office, he never went.

Yasukuni was built in 1869 during the Meiji Restoration as Japan ushered in a new era as a modern state. Its romantic appeal stems from the well-told story that soldiers going into battle would console each other by saying they would meet in the afterlife at Yasukuni.

The controversy did not really arise until 1978, when the Shinto priests at the shrine agreed to accept the souls, until then excluded, of 14 "Class A" war criminals. After that, Emperor Hirohito, who had visited the shrine in 1975, refused to go again.

But trouble erupted in 1985 when then-Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone upped the ante by making one of his visits on Aug. 15, the 40th anniversary of the war's end. China furiously protested, and some Japanese filed lawsuits, claiming that the prime minister's visit violated a constitutional separation of church and state.

In ensuing years, some prime ministers avoided Yasukuni, while others made secret visits. Meanwhile, hundreds of lawmakers continued to show up, many with fanfare.

The media attention has irked politicians who insist that they come not as public servants but as private citizens. Critics counter that they use tax money for limousines and bodyguards and sign the guest register as national representatives.

In 1996, when asked how he had signed the book, then-Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto snapped: "Mind your own business."

Koizumi was less opaque. Flanked by guards, his visits usually lasted only a minute or two. At times, he brought offerings such as a floral wreath and waved to bystanders as though making a campaign appearance.

"I cannot understand why worshiping at Yasukuni is objectionable," he said in 2005. "And I cannot understand why foreign governments interfere in this matter of the heart."

But emotions are not stirred by external protests alone. Much of the controversy is related to the adjacent war museum, which presents what critics say is a white-washed view that dismisses evidence of Japanese atrocities. The result is a slew of books, documentaries, lawsuits and even cyber attacks that have temporarily closed the shrine's website, turning Yasukuni into a proxy battle over Japanese history and identity.

"Why are war criminals together with those who served their country honorably?" said Kichiro Homma, 70, during a visit to the shrine to honor two brothers who died in World War II. "They were the ones who started the war. They sent our young into battle -- people who didn't want to leave their families and go to war."

The shrine's response is steadfast: The dead are martyrs of the state whose names cannot be removed. "All souls at Yasukuni are the same," said Yoshihiro Miyazawa, the shrine's public relations director. "You cannot separate them."

Other shrine visitors aren't so diplomatic.

"This is Japan," said Takeshi Kashiwaya, a 39-year-old music salesman. "We will say what we will do and not do. The rest of the world should mind its own business."

That was Aso's line before he became prime minister. But in office he seems to be backing off, saying Monday that Yasukuni is a place for "quiet prayers."

"I think it is wrong to make people who sacrificed their precious lives for the state a political or election issue or fodder for newspapers," he said. "They should be far away from the [media] frenzy."

From his vantage point just outside Yasukuni, pigeon keeper Shizuo Akiya has watched the prime ministers come and go. He objects to their visits, he said, but doesn't speak out. Like many of his countrymen, he prefers to just let Yasukuni be.

"The Japanese have never really examined what happened in World War II, what we did, what we were responsible for," he said. "I don't think we can. It would be just too painful."

john.glionna@latimes.com

U.S. Navy ship gets a conflicted reception in Japan

Associated Press
February 21, 2009

Deployment of the aircraft carrier George Washington to a port near Tokyo is officially welcomed, but its two nuclear reactors touch a nerve.

Yokosuka, Japan -- As Masahiko Goto sees it, the U.S. aircraft carrier George Washington is not a ship. It's a floating nuclear disaster waiting to happen near one of the world's biggest cities.

Its recent deployment to a port near Tokyo was welcomed by brass bands, an open-house crowd of 30,000 and promises of greater security for Japan and the region. But to opponents here, it all boils down to two nuclear reactors and one big question: Are they safe?

"It is unthinkable that we have reactors floating in the bay," said Goto, a lawyer who is leading an effort to have the ship banned from Japan. "If there was a problem, it would affect not just our city, but Tokyo and the heart of Japan."

Photo: The U.S. aircraft carrier George Washington was greeted with protests in September.

The George Washington is the first and only U.S. nuclear-powered warship with a home port outside the United States, and Japan -- the only country ever attacked with nuclear weapons -- has special sensitivities about anything nuclear.

"That word just sets off all kinds of bells and whistles here," said Rear Adm. James Kelly, commander of U.S. Naval Forces, Japan. "But just because you're using the 'R' word -- the radiation word -- doesn't mean it's bad."

Two recent incidents have raised concern.

The ship's arrival in September was delayed after a fire broke out in its lower decks May 22 while it was docked in the U.S. for repairs. It took nearly eight hours to find the source of the flames, by which time the fire had burned through eight decks and damaged 80 compartments.

The blaze was blamed on improper storage of hazardous materials, unauthorized smoking and other missteps. The Navy estimates the damage from the fire at $70 million. The reactors were unaffected and there was reportedly no danger of a radiation leak.

But a month earlier, information emerged that the U.S. submarine Houston had leaked radiation during visits to two Japanese ports, provoking headlines and a formal Japanese government protest.

Goto and others, who are pushing a referendum on whether Japan should host nuclear-powered vessels, say these incidents undermine the Navy's assertion that the George Washington is safe.

Capt. J.R. Haley, who took over as commanding officer of the carrier as part of a sweeping disciplinary action after the fire, says safety procedures have been tightened.

As for the Houston, the Navy disclosed that the submarine had leaked during stops at Sasebo and Okinawa between 2006 and 2008. It said the problem was discovered in July, when the vessel was in dry dock. A Navy report said about a gallon of water spilled on a crew member July 17 when a fitting came loose.

The report said that no similar leakage had occurred in the last 50 years, and that the amounts were extremely small and posed no health risks.

"The Houston was a very minor issue," said Rear Adm. Michael Connor, commander of Submarine Group Seven, which operates around Japan. "It was a small issue that plays out because it has the word 'nuclear' in it."

Connor said that the Navy wasn't required to disclose such small leakage but did so to gain trust. "We've told the government of Japan that we are going to tell them about every little thing," he said.

He rejected Goto's worst-case scenarios, saying the vessels' reactors are much smaller and tougher than commercial ones, and generate much less power. "There is no comparison," he said.

Port visits by nuclear-powered warships are banned by some countries, but not Japan. Since 1964, such ships -- mostly submarines -- have visited Japanese ports more than 1,200 times, Navy records show.

Kelly said nuclear-powered carriers are newer, faster, have greater range and don't carry millions of barrels of diesel fuel, meaning the risk of oil spills is much lower.

The Navy says a U.S. carrier is needed, and no nonnuclear one is available. The last conventionally powered carrier, the now-decommissioned Kitty Hawk, was replaced by the George Washington.

"Why are we here? No. 1, the defense of Japan. No. 2, the defense and security of the region," Kelly said.

"A carrier has got to be out here, clearly."

The U.S. can reclaim 'smart power'

Opinion
Hard and soft power used together can give the country the tools to lead.

By Joseph S. Nye Jr.
January 21, 2009

President Obama reminded us Tuesday that "our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint." A week ago, in her confirmation hearings to become secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton said: "America cannot solve the most pressing problems on our own, and the world cannot solve them without America. ... We must use what has been called 'smart power,' the full range of tools at our disposal."

Smart power is the combination of hard and soft power. Soft power is the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than coercion or payments. Opinion polls show a serious decline in American attractiveness in Europe, Latin America and, most dramatically, the Muslim world.

The resources that produce soft power for a country include its culture (when it is attractive to others), its values (when they are attractive and not undercut by inconsistent practices) and policies (when they are seen as inclusive and legitimate).

When poll respondents are asked why they report a decline in American soft power, they cite American policies more than American culture or values. Because it is easier for a country to change its policies than its culture, this implies that Obama will be able to choose policies that could help to recover some of America's soft power.

Of course, soft power is not the solution to all problems. North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il likes to watch Hollywood movies, but that is unlikely to affect his nuclear weapons program. And soft power got nowhere in attracting the Taliban government away from its support for Al Qaeda in the 1990s. That took hard military power in 2001. But other goals, such as the promotion of democracy and human rights, are better achieved by soft power.

A little more than a year ago, the bipartisan Center for Strategic and International Studies' Commission on Smart Power concluded that America's image and influence had declined in recent years, and that the U.S. had to move from exporting fear to inspiring optimism and hope.

The commission was not alone in this conclusion. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has called for the U.S. to commit more money and effort to soft-power tools, including diplomacy, economic assistance and communications, because the military alone cannot defend U.S. interests. He pointed out that military spending totals nearly half a trillion dollars annually -- excluding Iraq and Afghanistan -- compared with a State Department budget of $36 billion. In his words: "I am here to make the case for strengthening our capacity to use soft power and for better integrating it with hard power."

The Pentagon is the best resourced arm of the government, but there are limits to what hard power can achieve on its own. Promoting democracy, human rights and the development of civil society are not best handled with the barrel of a gun. The effects of the 9/11 terrorist attacks threw America off course. Terrorism is a real threat, but over-responding to the provocations of extremists does us more damage than the terrorists ever could. Success in the struggle against terrorism means finding a new central premise for U.S. foreign policy to replace the "war on terror." A commitment to providing for the global good can provide that premise.

America can become a smart America -- a smart power -- by again investing in global public goods, providing things people and governments of the world want but have not been able to get in the absence of leadership by the strongest country. Development, public health and coping with climate change are good examples. By complementing U.S. military and economic might with greater investments in soft power, and focusing on global public goods, the U.S. can rebuild the framework that it needs to tackle tough global challenges.

Style also matters. In 2001, columnist Charles Krauthammer argued for what he called "a new unilateralism," which recognized that the United States was the only superpower and was so strong that it could decide what was right and expect others to follow because they had little choice. But this style turned out to be counterproductive. Insensitivity to style and the perception of others can undercut soft-power efforts.

Obama faces a difficult international environment, but previous presidents have managed to employ hard, soft and smart power in equally difficult contexts. In 1970, during the Vietnam War, America was viewed as unattractive in many parts of the world, but with changed policies and the passage of time, the United States managed to recover its soft power. It can happen again.

Joseph S. Nye Jr. teaches at Harvard and is the author of "The Powers to Lead." He is the coauthor, with Richard Armitage, of "A Smarter, More Secure America," the CSIS commission report on smart power.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-nye21-2009jan21,0,3381521.story

Miura Suicide in Los Angeles

Kyodo

• Miura's wife leaves Los Angeles for Tokyo with husband's remains
  Oct 25 04:57 AM US/Eastern
  NARITA, Japan, Oct. 25 (AP) - (Kyodo) — The wife of Japanese businessman Kazuyoshi Miura arrived at Narita airport outside Tokyo on Saturday evening with his remains after his suicide in Los Angeles before his trial over the killing of his former wife in the early 1980s in the U.S. city. continued ...


• No evidence Miura's death was not suicide: L.A. police
  Oct 20 07:12 PM US/Eastern
  LOS ANGELES, Oct. 20 (AP) - (Kyodo)—There is no evidence that the death of Japanese businessman Kazuyoshi Miura at a Los Angeles jail Oct. 10 was anything other than suicide, a Los Angeles Police Department official said Monday. continued ...


• Miura's death likely murder, pathologist hired by lawyer concludes: AP
  Oct 20 05:11 AM US/Eastern
  (AP) - LOS ANGELES, Oct. 19 (Kyodo)—The lawyer for Japanese businessman Kazuyoshi Miura, whose recent jail cell death was declared suicide by hanging, said Sunday a pathologist he hired concluded that he was murdered, the Associated Press reported. continued ...

The Japan Times

• Pathologist can prove Miura was slain in L.A. cell, Geragos says
  Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2008
  LOS ANGELES (AP) The high-profile lawyer for Kazuyoshi Miura, whose jail cell death was declared suicide by hanging, said Sunday that a pathologist has concluded the businessman was slain. continued ...

Los Angeles Times

• Attorney says Kazuyoshi Miura was killed in L.A. jail
  October 21, 2008
  The Japanese businessman accused of conspiring to kill his wife reportedly had committed suicide. His attorney, Mark Geragos, however, says Miura's wounds were consistent with a choking and beating.
  By Andrew Blankstein
  A Japanese businessman who reportedly committed suicide in a Los Angeles jail cell suffered wounds consistent with a choking and beating, his lawyer said Monday. continued ...

AFP Agence France-Presse

• LA police discount 'murder' claim in Japanese man's suicide
  Oct 20, 2008
  LOS ANGELES (AFP) — A Japanese businessman who was found dead in prison shortly after arriving in Los Angeles to face trial for killing his wife committed suicide and was not murdered, police said Monday. continued ...

Associated Press

• LA police to respond to accusation in Miura death
  Oct 20, 2008
  By LINDA DEUTSCH
  LOS ANGELES (AP) — Los Angeles police have called a news conference to address a lawyer's claim that a Japanese businessman accused in a decades-old murder conspiracy died in his jail cell of homicide, not suicide. continued ...


• LA police say no sign of foul play in Miura death
  Mon Oct 20, 9:43 pm ET
  By LINDA DEUTSCH, AP Special Correspondent
  LOS ANGELES – No evidence of foul play was found in the jail-cell death of a Japanese businessman accused of a decades-old murder-conspiracy involving his wife, a police official said Monday. continued ...

Taro Aso is named Japan's prime minister

By Hisako Ueno and John M. Glionna,
Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
September 23, 2008


The outspoken, sometimes quirky nationalist is known for various blunders as a foreign minister.

TOKYO -- Taro Aso, an outspoken nationalist and avid fan of Japanese animation characters, was chosen Monday by the ruling Liberal Democratic Party to become Japan's third prime minister in less than two years.

Aso, 68, will replace Yasuo Fukuda, who quit this month amid lingering economic woes. Aso won in a landslide vote over several other candidates, including Yuriko Koike, the first woman to run for the nation's highest office.

Photo: Taro Aso, 68, won in a landslide vote over several other candidates, including Yuriko Koike, the first woman to run for the nation's highest office.

The lower house of parliament is expected to approve his appointment Wednesday.

"As I traveled around the regions, I became even more convinced that the economy was in a recession," the former foreign minister said at a news conference.

A career government official who studied at Stanford and in London, Aso has shrugged off criticism that he is too hawkish. For Japan's Asian neighbors, his comments as foreign minister brought back uncomfortable memories of the nation's military expansion more than half a century ago.

The grandson of a postwar prime minister, Aso emerges from the same nationalist school that urges Japan to be less apologetic about its imperial past and more assertive about its current global role. He criticized the verdicts of the Tokyo war crimes tribunal and had been a regular visitor to the controversial Yasukuni Shrine, which honors Japan's war dead, including some who are designated as war criminals.

Aso has held four Cabinet posts. Supporters point to his determination: He lost races for prime minister three times, eventually bouncing back to fill important government posts.

An often-quirky character whose nationalistic platform has been popular with young and old, Aso is a former Olympian in clay-target shooting and professes to be a big fan of Japanese comic books, or manga. His cheerleading for Japan's pop culture has brought him popularity among many younger voters.

He has vowed, after years of stringent government spending, to prioritize rebuilding Japan's economy, which has boosted his appeal among smaller companies and in rural communities, constituencies that tend to have a high percentage of older voters who feel they have long been off the government's radar.

Aso is scheduled to travel to New York later this week to attend the opening session of the United Nations General Assembly, providing the first test of world reaction to his administration.

"Aso is confident in his diplomatic ability, but the question remains whether he will be acknowledged or not by the world," said Takashi Uesugi, a political analyst in Tokyo. "Right now, the international community is coming to terms with the fact that a guy with a gaffe-prone image has become the top leader of Japan."

Some foreign analysts agree, saying Aso's nationalism may stymie U.S. foreign policy in the region.

"He's not always careful in his choice of words and his prior positions have certainly irritated the rest of Asia, most importantly China," said Steven Vogel, a UC Berkeley political scientist. "And any strain between China and Japan is not good for us. It makes it harder to forge regional agreements and make any progress in the region."

Aso faces an uphill battle within Japan as well, where the opposition party controls the upper house of parliament. The scenario will make it difficult for him to pass any controversial legislation, including continued support for the U.S. military actions in Afghanistan.

He may also encounter resistance within his government in any economic reforms or in any efforts to pursue a more nationalist agenda with China and South Korea, analysts say.

"He's going to face three very serious fronts -- Asia, the upper house and static within his own party," said T.J. Pempel, a former director of the Institute of East Asian Studies who teaches political science at UC Berkeley. "No politician wants to fight a three-front war."

Referring to Aso's fascination with Japanese comic book characters, Pempel added: "It's going to be hard to be the action figure he wants to be."

john.glionna@latimes.com

Ueno reported from Tokyo and Glionna from San Francisco.

Case of Japanese man accused in wife's 1981 slaying in L.A. continues

By Ann Simmons, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
August 16, 2008

A hearing on a defense motion to dismiss murder and conspiracy charges against a Japanese national accused in his wife's 1981 slaying in downtown Los Angeles ended today without a ruling.

Torrance Superior Court Judge Steven Van Sicklen continued the case against Kazuyoshi Miura, now 61, who was found guilty of his wife's murder in Japan in 1994 but was later acquitted.

Mark Geragos, who is representing Miura, argued that his client can't be tried for the crime in the United States without unconstitutionally placing him in double jeopardy.

However, the prosecution, headed by David Jackson, countered today that the crime of conspiracy does not exist in Japanese law and, therefore, Miura could still be prosecuted on this charge in California.

Prosecutors allege that Miura staged his wife's killing on a Los Angeles street by saying she was shot by street thugs. Originally viewed as a "tragic hero" who personified every Japanese tourist's fear of being harmed in the United States' crime-ridden inner cities, Miura later was charged in Japan for masterminding the killing after suspicions rose that Miura had planned the killing to collect $650,000 in life insurance money.

As Los Angeles and Japanese police worked together, Miura was convicted of the crime by a Japanese court and sentenced to life in prison. But that decision was reversed by the Tokyo High Court in 1998 when a judge determined that the wife's assailant was unknown.

The current case against Miura hangs on the question of whether the charge of conspiracy exists in Japan. If Miura had not been charged with conspiracy there, it would not be double jeopardy to try him under California's conspiracy law.

Miura listened to the proceeding through a live video hookup in the U.S. territory of Saipan as Mark West, a Michigan law professor who specializes in Japanese comparative law, testified for the prosecution that there is no such thing as a stand-alone conspiracy law in Japan. Geragos countered by challenging West's qualifications to render such an opinion, asking whether he'd taught any courses in California criminal law or the history of California conspiracy law, to which West replied he had not. Geragos then told the judge he objected to West's qualifications to offer such testimony, but the judge did not disqualify him as an expert.

West's questioning grew heated when Geragos demanded that the professor define the meaning of the Japanese word kyobo, which was used multiple times in the Japanese court ruling. West said the word can be translated as "conspire," but also could mean "collude" or "plot." In response, Geragos showed West the translation of the Japanese high court ruling, in which the word "conspiracy" is used repeatedly, but West didn't wavered from his opinion.

A visibly agitated Geragos responded by asking West if he had a predetermined bias in the case, which West denied.

Talking to reporters after the proceeding, Geragos said he was "gratified" by West's testimony because it clearly demonstrated that his client had already been prosecuted under this theory of conspiracy in Japan. "The Japanese high court's own translation . . . says conspiracy. They know the difference between conspiracy and plotting."

There is clearly a conspiracy theory in Japanese law, he said. "The whole thing is much ado about nothing. [Miura] was already acquitted. . . . That's the end of it."

Jackson, also speaking to reporters, said he was "pleased and proud" to have this preeminent legal scholar testify. "The question was answered," Jackson said. "There is no law of conspiracy in Japan. A double-jeopardy theory would not pass muster."

It is unclear when testimony will resume in the case. Geragos will possibly call his own expert on the Japanese legal system.

Photo: Kazuyoshi Miura was convicted of murder in Japan in 1994 but later cleared. A hearing on a defense motion to dismiss murder and conspiracy charges here ended without a ruling.

Click for Los Angeles Times to view video coverage.

China defends military buildup

By Peter Spiegel, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
June 1, 2008

Responding to veiled U.S. criticism, a senior Chinese general at a Singapore security conference says Beijing's defense spending is solely for self-defense and is in line with that of other nations.

SINGAPORE -- A senior Chinese general insisted Saturday that Beijing's military buildup was solely for self-defense, as he sought to assure a gathering of Asian defense officials that China was not seeking to dominate the region.

Lt. Gen. Ma Xiaotian, the People's Liberation Army deputy chief of the general staff, pointedly said that any instability in Asia was being caused by countries seeking to expand regional military alliances and develop missile-defense systems -- a clear reference to U.S. aims in the Pacific.

Photo: Lt. Gen. Ma Xiaotian, the People's Liberation Army deputy chief of the general staff, left, walks with U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates to a Singapore security conference. Ma defended China’s military buildup, contending that the measure is for self-defense.

"It is imperative China's armed forces keep up with this tide of world military development," Ma said. "China's growing economy and fiscal revenue make the defense budget increase both a logical and imperative reality."

He added: "China is a peace-loving country and its people are a peace-loving people. Notwithstanding the vicissitudes of the international situation, China will always adopt a defensive military policy."

Ma's remarks echoed assertions made by other Chinese leaders in recent months. But by delivering them at a major annual conference shortly after a keynote address by U.S. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, Ma appeared to be seeking to directly refute long-standing U.S. criticisms on a high-profile international stage, a rarity for Chinese military leaders.

China only last year began sending senior military leaders to the annual Singapore security conference after repeated requests by the U.S. and other allies, who argued it was an important forum for discussions with wary neighbors.

Ma used the podium to make an almost point-by-point refutation of Gates' address, in which the U.S. Defense chief implied that China's secretive military buildup could lead to a regional arms race.

Ma said China's increasing defense spending was needed to keep up with military advances made by other governments and was no different from that of other rapidly growing countries that have used newfound prosperity to invest in weaponry.

A senior U.S. Defense official traveling with Gates said Ma did not bring up Pentagon criticisms of China's defense spending during a 15-minute private meeting with Gates later in the day.

"There was no pushback from Gen. Ma," the official said, adding that in previous meetings, the United States has tried to assure Beijing that its missile-defense partnership with Japan was aimed at North Korea, not China.

Despite Ma's public refutation of U.S. criticisms, American officials said they were pleased that China was participating in the debate on the issues, calling it a sign that Beijing was gradually acknowledging international concerns.

"What they're quibbling over is how much they're complying with the norm," the senior U.S. official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. "That's a very different thing than saying it's none of your business, which is what they used to say."

peter.spiegel@latimes.com

Japan cinemas step away from film

By Bruce Wallace and Hisako Ueno,
Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
10:21 PM PDT, April 1, 2008



The documentary about the controversial Yasukuni war shrine is targeted in a campaign of harassment by ultranationalists.

TOKYO -- A campaign of harassment by nationalists has led several cinemas to cancel screenings of an award-winning movie about Yasukuni Shrine, the controversial memorial that venerates Japan's war dead and war criminals alike.

Five cinemas in Tokyo and Osaka have dropped plans to show the documentary "Yasukuni" beginning April 12, saying they feared for the safety of staff and patrons if they showed the film by Chinese director Li Ying.

His film addresses the question of Japanese amnesia about the nation's wartime past by examining the clashing views about Yasukuni. Many Japanese regard the 19th century Tokyo shrine as the appropriate place to pray for the country's 2.5 million war dead, whereas critics see it as a symbol of unapologetic militarism.

Both the director and the cinema owners said they had received threatening calls warning them against showing the film. Some of the theaters had been targeted by right-wing activists demonstrating in their signature black sound trucks, blasting nationalist slogans and tirades against the film at deafening volume through loudspeakers.

"The loud trucks came around the cinema and we consulted with the police, but they said it was not easy to arrest" the protesters, said Manabu Matsumoto of Humax Cinema, which runs a theater in Tokyo's tony Ginza district. "We had to give up [on showing the film] because we could not guarantee the safety of our staff."

The capitulation to intimidation has raised questions about the strength of Japan's commitment to protecting constitutional guarantees of free expression. Politicians from the main parties have been tepid in their criticism of extremist violence, even as ultranationalists have used threats of protests to shut down public conferences in recent months.

A conference on the changing role of women in Japanese society was canceled last fall after organizers were threatened by right-wing groups claiming to be protecting traditional values. And the annual gathering of Japan's teachers union, a longtime bane of ultranationalists, was canceled when a hotel chain reneged on a contract to play host to the event, citing fears of disruption for other guests.

So far, mainstream politicians have shown almost no inclination to ensure that "Yasukuni" is screened. Culture Minister Kisaburo Tokai said Tuesday that he regretted the cinema owners' decision to cancel the screenings.

"It is too bad if pressure and harassment resulted in this kind of situation," he said.

Yet many here say officials contributed to the backlash against the film. In March, a group of lawmakers demanded an advance screening of "Yasukuni," ostensibly to determine whether its production was an appropriate use of public finds. The government contribution to the film's financing was loudly denounced by politicians opposed to its message.

Critics contend that this opposition, propelled by elements of Japan's conservative media establishment, sparked the animosity of right-wing extremists by creating an impression that the documentary was anti-Japanese. The Directors Guild of Japan issued a statement blaming the politicians for taking steps that "psychologically suppress filmmakers' free and creative activities."

"The politicians were the ones making sensational claims that this is an 'ideological film' and an 'anti-Japanese' movie, and it was their remarks that inflamed nationalist feelings," said director Li, who has lived in Japan for 20 years.

"Yasukuni" arrives at a time when many Japanese filmmakers are taking a revisionist view of their country's wartime conduct more pleasing to conservatives, such as last year's "I Go to Die for You," which romanticized the sacrifice of kamikaze pilots.

Li describes his film as an examination of selective memory and the central role the shrine plays in sustaining ambiguity about war guilt.

At the film's core are the interspersed scenes of Yasukuni's last living swordsmith as he cuts and polishes his last sword. Swords produced at Yasukuni during the war were used on battlefields by officers, and the movie underscores the discordance between the aesthetic beauty of the traditional blades and their function as weapons that in the worst cases were used to slaughter unarmed POWs.

"The Japanese remember only what is convenient," Li said. "When they look at these swords now, they see them only as an art piece. They forget how they were used."

bruce.wallace@latimes.com


See Also:

Freedom Next Time. Japanese Neonationalists Silence Yasukuni Film

David McNeill

John Junkerman interviews Li Ying

Neo-nationalists have shut down a Chinese-directed movie about Japan’s controversial war memorial Yasukuni, the latest in a string of incidents threatening freedom of expression in Japan.

Alleged rape angers Japan

By Bruce Wallace
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

February 22, 2008


The suspect is a U.S. Marine on politically sensitive Okinawa. Some say official outrage is more for show.

TOKYO -- The Japanese prime minister has described the alleged rape of a 14-year-old girl by an American Marine as "unforgivable." The foreign minister declared that Japan has "had enough" of such incidents. And the government's most senior Cabinet official promised that Japan would raise the issue of misconduct with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice when she visits next week.

Photo: ON OKINAWA: Women gather to protest the alleged rape of a 14-year-old girl by a U.S. Marine. The American presence rankles many on the island. Critics also say the government’s condemnation of the incident is at odds with treatment of rape victims.

Few events have animated the top levels of government recently as much as the alleged rape this month on Okinawa Island, which has a large U.S. military presence that has long been a source of tension with residents. Senior Japanese politicians have continued to berate the United States, citing other less serious incidents involving troops, despite expressions of regret from U.S. Ambassador Thomas Schieffer and new restrictions on off-base travel for U.S. forces in Japan.

The suspect, 38-year-old Staff Sgt. Tyrone Luther Hadnott, is in Japanese custody. Japanese news media, quoting police sources, have reported that he denies raping the girl but admits forcibly kissing her.

The intensity of the reaction arises, in part, from a 1995 gang rape of a 12-year-old Okinawa girl by three U.S. servicemen that provoked massive anti-American demonstrations, and from the desire of the United States and Japan to avoid similar protests.

And the mood was darkened further Thursday with reports of another U.S. serviceman under investigation on suspicion of raping a Filipino woman in an Okinawa hotel.

But many here, though they share in the condemnation of sexual assault, argue that Japanese politicians are speaking out forcefully only because of the acute sensitivities of Okinawa's status as host to about 42,500 Americans, the bulk of the U.S. military presence in Japan.

Japanese officials privately acknowledge that their recent criticisms are motivated, in part, by the need to assuage Okinawa public opinion, especially at a time when Washington and Tokyo are seeking to relocate a major Marine air base in the face of strong local opposition.

"It's all a performance," said Kantoku Teruya, an Okinawa lawmaker in the upper house of Japan's parliament.

"They are afraid of Okinawa's growing rage over the base relocation, so they imposed a curfew and promised to tighten discipline.

"But they've promised this before. And it is not working."

Critics of the government say serious crimes committed on Japan's main island have never drawn such stern rebukes, pointing out that the 2006 slaying of a 56-year-old Japanese woman by a U.S. sailor, later sentenced to life in prison, was handled without fanfare.

Japanese police and U.S. military statistics show that serious crimes committed by American servicemen in Japan have decreased in the last five years. And critics say the lecturing tone of the Japanese government is discordant in a country where rape victims are so poorly treated that there is no 24-hour rape crisis hotline, and the 1,948 rapes reported to police in 2006 are believed to be far below the actual number.

"Most of the clients I see won't go to the police because of the way they are treated," said Takako Konishi, a psychologist who assists female victims of violence at Tokyo's Musashino University. "There is still a concept in Japan that women are responsible for putting themselves in bad situations, and women don't want to risk criticism from their friends and family by going public."

Some rape victims in Japan describe their experience with police as deeply humiliating. An Australian woman raped by an American serviceman in 2002 recalls being questioned for several hours without police providing medical care or an opportunity to shower.

They also demanded that she return to the scene of the crime to reenact the rape for police photographers, a standard Japanese police practice. Prosecutors would not press charges, but she won damages in a civil case.

Critics of the government also note that U.S. military authorities continue to investigate allegations of rape against four Marines in Hiroshima last fall, whereas the Japanese justice system refused to press charges. The initial investigation was led by Japanese police, but prosecutors dropped the case without explanation in November.

The problem, many here contend, is that Japanese attitudes toward violence against women remain rooted in antiquated male beliefs.

In 2003, the Weekly Bunshun magazine quoted then- Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda telling reporters in an off-the-record briefing that "there are lots of women who dress in a seductive way. I wonder if they know that half of human beings in the world are male. All men are black panthers."

He later said his message was intended to be completely different.

Fukuda, 71, is now the prime minister, leading his government's condemnation in the Marine's case.

"It's good to hear their formal condemnation of rape, but I fear our politicians are just behaving paternally," said psychologist Konishi. "They single out American soldiers because they see this as a matter of Japanese property being violated by outsiders."

bruce.wallace@latimes.com

Hisako Ueno of The Times' Tokyo Bureau contributed to this report.

Pentagon assessing Russian flyover

By Paul Richter
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
February 13, 2008



A bomber passed low over the Nimitz near Japan. Most U.S. officials are downplaying the incident, but others are concerned.

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon is trying to assess whether a low-level flight by a Russian bomber over American warships in the Pacific Ocean last weekend was a sign that Moscow is returning to a worrisome "Cold War mind-set," a top Defense official told Congress Tuesday.

Marine Gen. James E. Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said officials want to know why a Tupolev Tu-95 "Bear" bomber flew over the aircraft carrier Nimitz and other U.S. vessels in international waters near Japan.

The flight came at a time when the Russian air force has begun reinstating the kind of long-range bomber patrols it conducted routinely during the Cold War.

"We're just trying to go back now and look at what message was intended by this overflight," Cartwright told the Senate Budget Committee. "What are the implications of that activity and how do we best address that?"

His comments were the latest sign of Bush administration concern about friction with Moscow over issues such as U.S. plans for an anti-missile system in Eastern Europe, looming Kosovo independence and Washington's strengthened relations with Ukraine, Georgia and other Russian neighbors.

The Putin government also has clashed with the administration over American efforts to halt Iran's uranium enrichment efforts.

Senior U.S. officials, who need Moscow's cooperation for U.S.-sponsored Middle East initiatives, have publicly played down the frictions and dismissed the idea that a Russian threat has re-emerged on their watch. Last month, for example, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice declared that talk of a new Cold War was "hyperbolic nonsense."

Yet privately, U.S. officials have acknowledged that they are concerned about Moscow's increasingly adversarial stance.

The Russian bomber and three others that accompanied it were intercepted by U.S. F-18 fighter jets and escorted as they flew over the U.S. aircraft carrier group, in keeping with normal procedures. Cartwright said the bombers did nothing "unprofessional," and noted that they were in "free and international airspace" at all times.

Adm. Gary Roughead, the chief of U.S. naval operations, told reporters in a briefing Tuesday that the bombers had given no warning of their intent to fly over the U.S. warships, and said that in his view it was "not prudent" to fly over an aircraft carrier.

But he said he did not regard the patrol as provocative. "I know I'm not playing this up very much, but that's the way I see it," he said.

The Russian RIA Novosti news agency Tuesday quoted a Russian official as not understanding the reason for American expressions of concern.

"We are surprised by all the clamor this has raised," the agency quoted Russian Air Force spokesman Col. Alexander Drobyshevsky as saying.

As the Russians have resumed air patrols in recent months, their aircraft have been intercepted and escorted at various points by British, Norwegian, Danish, Finnish, Canadian and Japanese fighters. Last Saturday, Japanese officials issued a protest to Moscow over what they said was a Russian bomber's violation of Japanese airspace over an island south of Tokyo.

In light of Russia's renewed military buildup, some U.S. military officials in Europe have cautioned the Pentagon against its planned withdrawal of two divisions from Europe. But other Defense officials, including Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, a longtime expert on Soviet issues, have played down the threat, interpreting it only as a sign of energy-rich Russia's desire to reassert its importance on the world stage.

At the Senate Budget Committee hearing, Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) said he was worried about the threat and concerned that U.S. spending to contain militant Islam would siphon funds needed to deal with a possible return of problems with Russia. "Confrontations between us and Russia that didn't exist before are real today," Domenici said.

Asked about American preparations for a potential Russian threat, Cartwright called it "one of the things that would keep me up at night."

paul.richter@latimes.com

China explains snub of ships

From the Associated Press
November 30, 2007

BEIJING -- A Chinese government official said Thursday that his country's last-minute cancellation of a U.S. Navy visit to Hong Kong was not the result of a misunderstanding, as Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi reportedly told President Bush on Wednesday.

Instead, said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao, it was because Sino-U.S. ties had been "disturbed and harmed" by the U.S. Congress' tribute to the Dalai Lama and by American arms sales to Taiwan.

Congress awarded its highest civilian honor to the Dalai Lama last month. Though the Tibetan spiritual leader is lauded in much of the world as a figure of moral authority, Beijing claims he seeks to destroy China's sovereignty by pushing for Tibet's independence.

Then, the Global Times, a tabloid published by the official party publication People's Daily, cited an unidentified senior colonel in the People's Liberation Army as criticizing Washington's decision to sell Taiwan an antimissile defense system.

That "obviously sent the wrong signals" to Chen Shui- bian, Taiwan's pro-independence leader, the colonel was quoted as saying. China considers Taiwan a renegade province.

"At a time when the U.S. side is seriously harming China's interests, there is no logic under heaven by which China should then be expected to open its heart and embrace it," the paper said in its Thursday edition.

U.S. criticizes China for ship snub

By Julian E. Barnes
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
November 28, 2007


Denying minesweepers refuge in Hong Kong during a storm was a violation of mariner protocol, officials say.

WASHINGTON -- Top U.S. Navy officials sharply criticized China on Tuesday for refusing to allow U.S. warships to stop in Hong Kong last week, signaling a potential fracture in American-Chinese relations just a short time after a visit to Beijing by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates.

On Nov. 20, the Chinese refused to allow two minesweepers, the Patriot and Guardian, to enter Hong Kong to refuel and take refuge from a storm.

The next day, the Chinese refused to permit the aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk and its strike group to make a scheduled four-day port call to Hong Kong for the Thanksgiving holiday.

Chinese officials have not yet provided an explanation for denying access to Hong Kong, and top U.S. military leaders have not spoken directly with the Chinese military.

The denial of access for the Kitty Hawk was later reversed. But by that time, the carrier group was already en route to Japan after long-planned holiday reunions between American service members and their families had been ruined.

Adm. Timothy J. Keating, the head of U.S. Pacific Command, and Adm. Gary Roughead, the chief of naval operations, both took sharp exception to the Chinese government's refusal to allow the minesweepers to come into port when threatened by rough seas.

"As someone who has been going to sea all my life, if there is one tenet that we observe it's when somebody is in need you provide [assistance] and you sort it out later," Roughead said.

Roughead noted that neither of the vessels was damaged by the storm and both were refueled at sea by a tanker.

China's denial of refuge for the minesweepers was perplexing and at odds with international mariner traditions, Keating said.

"This is, kind of, an unwritten law amongst seamen, that if someone is in need, regardless of genus, phylum or species, you let them come in; you give them safe harbor," Keating said. "Jimmy Buffett has songs about it, for crying out loud."

The Chinese have recently played host to a series of high-level visits by U.S. military officials. Gates' visit on Nov. 5 followed an earlier visit by Adm. Michael G. Mullen, just before he became chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

U.S. officials have been working to improve military-to-military relations with China in hopes of coaxing the People's Liberation Army to be more forthcoming about its budget and military doctrine.

But China frequently maintains silence about the reasoning behind its military moves, as it has done in the case of the American warships.

Hong Kong is a popular harbor for U.S. warships. Both Keating and Roughead said that the Navy continued to plan on using Hong Kong as a port of call.

About 50 U.S. Navy ships visit Hong Kong each year, Navy officials said.

The last naval ship to be denied access was the destroyer Curtis Wilbur in 2002. The Chinese never provided a reason for that denial.

The U.S. wants to establish a permanent hotline between the Pentagon and China's defense establishment. Although the Chinese have agreed in principle to the phone line, they have delayed its implementation and the technical details have yet to be finalized.

Keating said he hoped to go to China in January, but the Chinese had not yet approved the visit. If the trip happens, he said, the denial of refuge would be the top issue on his agenda.

julian.barnes@latimes.com

Bush assures Japanese premier

By James Gerstenzang
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
November 17, 2007



The president says he will not ignore North Korea's abductions when negotiating on nuclear weapons.

WASHINGTON -- President Bush assured Japan's new prime minister, Yasuo Fukuda, on Friday that he would not ignore the abduction of Japanese citizens by North Korea as the United States negotiates with the regime in Pyongyang over its nuclear weapons program.

The president and Fukuda agreed to work together to counter nuclear development in Iran as well as North Korea, as Bush offered a political embrace to the prime minister, who faces unease at home about U.S.-Japanese relations.

The fate of Japanese abducted by North Korea during the 1970s and 1980s is an issue of extreme political sensitivity in Japan. Tokyo believes that 17 abductees may still be alive.

Fears have arisen in Japan that, to win North Korea's cooperation in stemming nuclear weapons proliferation, the United States may remove it from the list of nations that sponsor terrorism, a step toward improved relations.

The president seemed to go out of his way to note that he and the prime minister discussed the issue during their approximately 70-minute meeting in the Oval Office. He said that "one of the most moving moments of my presidency" was when he met at the White House with the mother of an abducted girl.

Bush said he understood "how important the issue is to the Japanese people, and we will not forget the Japanese abductees, nor their families."

But he did not address whether North Korea would be removed from the terrorism list.

North Korea has admitted that it kidnapped 13 Japanese to teach its spies about Japanese language and culture. It released five in 2002, and has said the other eight are dead.

Bush said the two leaders had agreed to keep pressure on North Korea to fulfill its promise to abandon its nuclear weapons programs. He also said he and Fukuda had agreed to increase international pressure on Iran if it did not end its efforts to enrich uranium, a key step in developing civilian nuclear power but also in building a nuclear warhead.

The administration has said it would seek a third round of U.N. Security Council sanctions to squeeze Iran to give up what the United States says is a program to develop nuclear weapons. Iran says it is working to produce civilian nuclear power.

Bush and Fukuda took no questions during their statements before sitting down to a lunch of Kobe beef short ribs.

Fukuda, the fourth Japanese prime minister during Bush's presidency, took office in late September. He has been wrestling with the parliament's reluctance to resume Japanese refueling operations in the Indian Ocean, which support U.S. Navy vessels deploying to the Persian Gulf region, and demands to keep the abduction issue alive with the United States.

Fukuda reiterated that Bush had promised his support on the abduction issue and "his commitment for unchanged support." Tokyo has essentially said there can be no lessening of sanctions against North Korea or warmer relations with the regime until progress is made on returning the abductees.

Japan has stopped its refueling work because legislation authorizing it expired Nov. 1, and the government lacks the votes to win renewal. The prime minister said he had told Bush he would seek approval of legislation permitting "early resumption" of the refueling.

Bush, praising the contribution to the coalition effort in Afghanistan, said Japanese vessels had refueled 800 ships from 11 nations. For the U.S., the Japanese role may carry more diplomatic than military significance, because it shows that it has a major Asian partner in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

james.gerstenzang @latimes.com

Times staff writer Bruce Wallace in Tokyo contributed to this report.

Testing the limits of Japan's friendship

By Michael Zielenziger
November 16, 2007




Why the seemingly bulletproof Pacific alliance has frayed under the Bush administration.

Today's meeting in Washington between President Bush and yet another new Japanese prime minister -- the third in five years, if you're counting -- is certain to underscore the peculiar tensions now burdening an alliance that once seemed so essential to long-term U.S. strategy in Asia.

Although it is tempting to blame the usual absence of strong Japanese leadership for the friction, another key factor should be recognized: the Bush foreign policy team's tendency to bully global allies. Finally, a Japan that for years felt it had no choice but to follow Washington's dictates is now chafing at the demands of a U.S. administration that fails to recognize the constraints facing a country still grappling with the task of becoming a "normal nation."

We Americans like to believe that Japan remains our closest of friends. The U.S. security treaty with Tokyo is, as former Ambassador to Japan Mike Mansfield said, the United States' "most important bilateral relationship in the world, bar none." We depend on Japan not only to buy our Treasury bills and supply us with Toyota hybrids but also to be our land base to contain the potential ambitions of China.

Yet if our alliance is so robust, why did the Japanese military earlier this month end its mission in the Indian Ocean refueling ships in the U.S.-led campaign to stabilize Afghanistan? And if the Japanese government is vital to the efforts to dismantle North Korea's nuclear production facilities, why do Washington and Tokyo disagree on whether Pyongyang ought to be dropped from the State Department's list of nations that sponsor terrorism? Finally, if Japan really is our closest ally in the Pacific, why have Tokyo and Washington argued for more than a decade on crucial financial and deployment issues regarding U.S. forces in Okinawa?

The Bush team came to Washington committed to reversing what it saw as the marginalization of Japan's importance under President Clinton. But just as the gamble in Iraq damaged Washington's relationship with Paris and Bonn, it has also soured the relationship with Tokyo. Although it's easy to blame Tokyo for dragging its feet when Washington needs a larger multinational commitment to battle terrorism, it is also clear that the administration bungled things by not investing the energy to understand how its actions would play out in Japan.

The Bush administration seemed to convince itself that Japan was like Tony Blair's Britain: an island nation with a booming economy, shared values and a defense force that could be easily deployed to help U.S. troops. Bush also seemed to feel that a close personal friendship with former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi would somehow transform nagging policy differences.

Such faulty analogies obscure the fact that Japan is governed by a constitution written by the U.S. at the end of World War II, a document that forever renounces the right to wage war. And despite Japan's vast material wealth, its people see themselves as isolated residents of a small island nation nervous about being too deeply engaged in global politics.

For more than 50 years, the Japanese have been content to develop industrial muscle while leaving their defense in U.S. hands. That puts the Japanese woefully out of practice when it comes to strategic thinking about long-term foreign policy interests, and for decades Washington's geopolitical strategists liked it that way. So when Washington demanded "boots on the ground" by a "coalition of the willing" to support the Iraq invasion, Japan found itself in an uncomfortable spot. A vast majority of Japanese didn't want to be involved in armed conflict -- even in a limited role. The pacifist constitution was another barrier. And the Bush administration's failure to win U.N. backing for the war just as Tokyo was seeking a permanent seat on the Security Council mortally damaged that longtime Japanese goal -- Tokyo's most important foreign policy objective.

Despite its dependency on Middle Eastern oil, Japan never really felt the Iraq war was its fight. Instead, the domestic debate was framed indirectly: If Japan didn't support its closest ally in a time of war, who would defend Japan if North Korea launched more missiles over its territory?

But this is not exactly the moment for Japan to engage in some dramatic reconsideration of national strategy and purpose. It is snarled in a raft of domestic challenges, including a long-term deflationary spiral, the stalling of its economic engine, a rapidly aging population and uncertainty about how to deal with China's rise. The Bush team also hasn't recognized other aspects of Japan's consensus-bound culture. Strong leaders rarely dominate. Factional politics almost always trumps international policy. And at 71, Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda is unlikely to boldly remake Japanese politics.

Washington ought to recognize the limits to Japan's support. As long as its trade surplus continues to pile up, Japan prefers its splendid isolation and checkbook diplomacy to the task of genuinely participating in global leadership.

Michael Zielenziger, a former foreign correspondent based in Tokyo, is the author of "Shutting Out the Sun: How Japan Created Its Own Lost Generation."

Japan's welcome mat getting prickly

By Bruce Wallace
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
November 11, 2007



New rules requiring fingerprints and digital photos of visitors are revealing about attitudes toward foreigners, critics say.

TOKYO — The kind of greeting a foreigner receives at immigration upon arrival at an international airport can be a good, if imperfect, indication of the country that waits on the other side of the barrier.

London's Heathrow? Long queues and lousy service.

New Delhi's Indira Gandhi International? Crumbling infrastructure and over-the-top bureaucracy.

Some Middle Eastern airports? Slow-moving lines that can be circumvented with the right connections and cash.

IN QUEUE: People wait in line for security screening at New Tokyo International Airport last year. On Nov. 20, Japan will begin taking digital fingerprints and photographs of foreign visitors.

Now the Japanese government has created new immigration procedures for foreign visitors -- rules that critics say are all too revealing about official attitudes toward foreigners.

On Nov. 20, Japan will begin fingerprinting and photographing non-Japanese travelers as they pass through immigration at air and sea ports. The government says the controls are a necessary security measure aimed at preventing a terrorist attack in Japan.

The new system is modeled on the U.S. program instituted in 2004 that takes digital photos and fingerprints of travelers entering the United States on visas. But the Japanese system goes further by requiring foreign residents -- in addition to visitors -- to be photographed and fingerprinted.

There are exceptions: diplomats, children younger than 16, U.S. military personnel serving in Japan, and long-term residents of Korean or Chinese descent whose presence here is largely owed to Imperial Japan's overseas conquests. But all other foreigners will be scanned each time upon entry.

Critics say the data collection is a dubious terrorism-fighting measure, instead reflecting the government's desire for closer surveillance of foreigners.

"The Japanese government has a long history of not wanting long-term foreign residents, and they really feel they need more control over foreigners," said Sonoko Kawakami of the Japanese chapter of Amnesty International. "The government just wants to gather as much information as possible on people."

The only terrorist spectaculars in Japanese history have come from homegrown groups: the Japanese Red Army, which conducted attacks around the world in the 1970s and '80s, and the Aum Shinrikyo cult, which carried out a sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway in 1995.

But officials say Tokyo's support for the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan makes Japan a target, and taking biometric data such as fingerprints and digital facial photos is the only way to nab terrorists traveling on fake passports.

At least that was the recent contention of Japan's justice minister. He even offered a bizarre personal anecdote to explain how easy it was for non-Japanese to sneak into the country. "A friend of my friend is a member of Al Qaeda," Kunio Hatoyama told foreign reporters in Tokyo, saying that the man had entered Japan numerous times using fake passports and disguises.

Hatoyama later backtracked slightly on his story, distancing himself from any connection to Al Qaeda and raising suspicions that he had embellished his anecdote to press the case for fingerprinting foreigners.

But Hatoyama has long been among the senior public officials who believe Japan is already too open to overseas workers. When he became justice minister in August, Hatoyama made it clear he had no intention of proceeding with earlier plans to allow in more unskilled workers.

That, he warned, could lead to an increase in crime.

Statistics, however, show that the number of crimes committed by foreign visitors is falling. And despite alarm about particularly sensational crimes that attract media attention, Japan's overall crime rate is declining or flat.

That hasn't stopped some senior Japanese politicians from stoking anti-immigrant fires by contending that foreigners living in Japan commit a higher proportion of crimes. And those contentions have sent bureaucrats in search of ways to weed out the "good" foreigners, presumably those with money to invest, from "bad" ones, such as the Chinese pickpocket gangs that get so much media attention here.

The new immigration system appears to be one answer. Fingerprinting is actually a resumption of a system that was abandoned in 2000 after strong protests by long-term Korean, Chinese and Taiwanese residents who resented being fingerprinted in their own country. A jittery, post-9/11 America provided the initiative for the Japanese to revive it.

The law instituting the new regime passed parliament last year with very little outcry. The Federation of Japanese Bar Assns. was a lonely critical voice, complaining that fingerprinting people who had already been granted residency was an infringement on civil liberties. But the government avoided a repeat showdown with the Koreans and Chinese by exempting them from the new requirements.

"The Japanese public does not see this as 'our' problem," said Masashi Ichikawa, a human rights lawyer in Tokyo. "The climate is that it is legitimate to be 'against terrorism,' and that people just have to follow the rules."

The fingerprinting issue underscores the Japanese dilemma in dealing with foreigners.

On the one hand, in this age of increased global mobility, the threat of terrorism, though remote, is a plausible one.

But on the other, the Japanese government needs more foreigners. Japan has low unemployment by global standards and faces a demographic crunch as its population ages and workforce shrinks. Tokyo is fighting to preserve its position as a world financial center as competitors such as Singapore actively cultivate a welcoming aura for foreign businesses.

And Japan is still searching for ways to address its tourist deficit at a time when well-heeled travelers have a widening array of Asian destination choices.

It remains to be seen whether treating every visitor as a potential terrorist, until their fingerprints prove otherwise, is the best way to roll out the welcome mat.

bruce.wallace@latimes.com

Naoko Nishiwaki of The Times' Tokyo Bureau contributed to this report.