International Affairs Forum Interview

October 16, 2006
By Jason Miks

Steven C. Clemons serves as the Executive Vice President of the New America Foundation and is the Director of the Japan Policy Research Institute. He is a founding member of the Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy. His blog – The Washington Note – is one of the most widely read such websites in Washington. Steven C. Clemons is also on the Center for International Relations’ Editorial Board. Jason Miks has recently caught up with him in Tokyo for this interview.

International Affairs Forum: You had an op-ed in the Washington Post a couple of months ago warning that political debate in Japan is being stifled by far-right nationalists. What do you see going on here?

Steven C. Clemons: I think what is beginning to happen, why the issue of right wing intimidation of Japanʹs blue chip intellectuals, business leaders and politicians matters, is that for the first time since I can remember, you are seeing cases of self censorship by Japanʹs best and most thoughtful parts of civil society.

The right wingers in Japan have been lurking around politics for centuries, so that is not interesting. But in the Washington Post article I compare this to the 1930s. This is to some degree an unfair comparison because Japan now is nothing like Japan in the 1930s, and I know that. But there arenʹt a lot of good metaphors to show people what is happening.

Also, Japan is cocooned to some degree from a lot of these big conflicts about identity. Many people just avoid it. So it is important to look at these issues when there are times of stress, or crises.

So it is not like we see storm troopers outside. But you do see a kind of thought-control going on. I wrote the piece because of an incident in which the Japan Institute for International Affairs took not just one controversial article, but a whole raft of material, off its website. It was a remarkable act of contrition by one of Japanʹs leading former diplomats, at a kind of official government foreign policy think tank.

What is happening is that Japan got a lobotomy in the 1950s from the United States. And that lobotomy pre-empted a lot of thinking about Japanʹs national interests - about what sort of global engagement it wanted to have, what kind of military forces etc. So now Japan needs to have a discussion with its people about what sort of nationalism it wants to wear. When Junichiro Koizumi became prime minister he began to tack to the right simply to cover himself from attacks from people like Shintaro Ishihara [Tokyo’s ultranationalist governor]. But that opened up an appetite in Japan for more and more flirtation with symbols such as Yasukuni shrine... and an opportunity for the current Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to rise.


While I am thrilled that Abe went to China and seems to be saying a lot of the right things, his career so far has been marked by pugnacious nationalism rather than healthy nationalism. You can look at other nationalists like Ichiro Ozawa [leader of main opposition party the Democratic Party of Japan]. Heʹs not perfect, but heʹs a much healthier kind of nationalist in terms of what a normal nation would look like. And heʹs sometimes also a hawk... so it’s not a question of being a hawk or a dove, it’s a question of whether you can organize your nationalism around both national interests and national security issues and do it in a way so it doesnʹt engage in international rejectionism, which I think is happening.

IA-Forum: Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe surprised many with early visits to China and South Korea. Do you think he recognizes the need to repair relations, or was he prodded by the United States into doing it?

Steve Clemons: I donʹt think he was pushed by America, because I donʹt think America has much influence in this case. I think he was pushed by the prospect of the Upper House elections just around the corner and that when he looks at the polls in contrast to Koizumi, his numbers are already falling, because when people look at him they see a strident nationalist who is making Japan less safe.

This doesnʹt mean people donʹt want to see people confront China over bad behavior or even confront North Korea. I basically support what Japan has done with regard to North Korea. But he is saying a lot of things that, to some degree, alienate the fundamentalist right wing in Japan who are supporting him. This creates tension for them, which I think is a positive thing. But it also creates doubt among the more reasonable or moderate parts of Japanese society about whether he is saying a lot of these things to get along and to be pragmatic about his current political weakness, and whether he will turn back, when he gets through the more difficult times. It may be that we are not seeing the real Abe. In my view we should keep our powder dry and stand back and see what happens.

IA-Forum: Abe got a boost in his political fortunes in the Liberal Democratic Party leadership race by taking a tough line on North Korea, following its missile tests in July. Do you see Abe
trying to exploit the North Korea situation in the future for political gain?

Steve Clemons: He became big because of the abduction [of Japanese citizens by North Korean agents] issue. North Korea has been a useful issue for him to exploit for his own success. Will he continue to milk that? Yes, he probably will. But now that he is prime minister he canʹt just be highly strident. He needs to produce results now. So I suspect that what you will see is a softening, a less crude commentary from him about that, and hopefully he will move in that direction. This is what he has done in his first few weeks in office. I have my doubts about him though. I knew his father very well. In my mind Shintaro Abe was one of the great, under-appreciated, diplomats when he was Minister of Foreign Affairs. He was almost single-handedly trying to solve the Iran-Iraq war. Unfortunately Abe does not remind me much of his father. He reminds me more of his grandfather, [Prime Minister Nobusuke] Kishi, who was much more of a strident, hard-edged nationalist who defined military means as the way for Japan to assert its interests.

IA-Forum: Koizumi was the third longest serving post-war Japanese prime minister. Do you expect Abe to be this successful?

Steve Clemons: At this moment I donʹt. I see him disliked by significant parts of the LDP. If he stays moderate and centrist, he alienates his base. If he moves towards a healthy nationalism, he loses credibility with those who put him in power. If he swings back, he looks duplicitous. I think he has a built-in fragility. But that does not mean he wonʹt find a way to stay around for a while. Koizumi, I would say, was not policy savvy, but he was certainly savvy politically. Thereʹs no doubt that Abe is more ideologically driven than Koizumi was and my sense is that he doesnʹt have the same facility with the art of politics that Koizumi clearly had.

IA-Forum: The current leader of the DPJ, Ichiro Ozawa, once wrote about his vision of Japan as a ‘normal country’. What kind of ‘normal’ would be healthy for Japan?

Steve Clemons: When you compare Japan and Germany in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq, Germany, despite my problems with the anti-Americanism that Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder cultivated, Germany seemed to earn back its sovereignty. It showed that it would be a peer of the United States in common challenges. Japan in contrast turned out to be disappointing in this respect. I think Germany is psychologically better off for it.

A normal nation is one that figures out when it is going to converge with certain interests of other global players and when not. In my view the Iraq war and the way Koizumi sent the Self Defence Forces over was a rejection of the kind of multilateral institution building that Japan had been working hard on.

There are degrees of democracy, but Japan is still a group driven society, which can often be anti-democratic. So when I see right wing thugs engage in intimidation and violence or systematic harassment, I believe it stifles that modern debate from taking place. You canʹt have one wing of the political environment have a disproportionate effect by stifling debate elsewhere. A normal nation has to get over this lobotomy and Ozawaʹs book laid out many of these questions beautifully.
.
IA-Forum: Thank you very much for your time.

Comments? Please send them to editor@ia-forum.org

International Affairs Forum Op-Ed:

October 15, 2006
By Jason Miks

Too Close for Comfort? Will Japan under Shinzo Abe finally be able
to shed its image as a U.S. satellite state?

Last month British Prime Minister Tony Blair delivered his final speech as Labour leader to the annual party conference. Well-judged and eloquent, it was good enough to make one forget his low approval numbers and left one wondering why he is being pressured to leave the office – despite unprecedented political successes.

One major reason is his relationship with U.S. President George Bush which has alienated even some of his moderate allies. The price of friendship between the two leaders, they argue, was being drawn into the ongoing and costly war in Iraq. But while Blair has beein excoriated at times – at least in Britain – for his close relationship with Bush, he is not the only politician to have his friendship with the US administration questioned. Until late last month, Blair shared the label of “lapdog” with then Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. Indeed, Koizumi’s decision to commit troops to Iraq took him out on a longer limb than Blair. Although Japan’s forces were limited to non-combatant roles, their deployment still set off a fierce debate at home as use of military force in international disputes is expressly barred by Article 9 of the Japanese constitution. And military co-operation between the US and Japan is likely to grow closer still as Japan acts with growing national confidence and heightened concerns over North Korea’s military activities.

The close working relationship that Koizumi and Bush struck up was much in evidence during Koizumi’s trip to the U.S. in June, with the Japanese leader’s reception noticeably warmer than that offered China's President Hu in April. And this closeness has extended well beyond the military sphere. In counter terrorism the two have worked closely on projects such as the Container Security Initiative and in terms of trade Japan is the United States’ fourth largest partner. The warm relation between the two leaders corresponded with the broadly favourable view of the US held by many Japanese – 63 per cent, according to a recent Pew Global Attitudes study. Growing up in the immediate post war period, Kazuhiro Suzuki speaks for many of his generation when he talks of the appreciation he feels for US reconstruction efforts following World War II. “We owe a lot to America,” he told me when I asked his opinion of the occupation. “We imported ideas from them, technology, and they gave us our constitution.”

Indeed he thinks the close security cooperation has been hugely beneficial for Japan’s development since World War II. “The relationship has been very good for Japan because we have not had to worry about defense. America provided that for us, which allowed us to invest in industry,” he added. In the decade following the Second World War this bond was cemented by Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida, who believed that Japan’s well-being depended on maintaining close political ties with the United States, a focus on economic rebuilding and relying on the US for protection. This so-called ‘Yoshida Doctrine’ has been a dominant feature of Japan’s foreign policy landscape ever since, despite challenges from right and left.

Yet the Koizumi-Bush rapport masks a shift in recent years. Japan has been wrestling with its identity for decades. As its economic bubble burst and after the critical reception of its Gulf war chequebook diplomacy, the question of Japan’s role in the world and its relationship with the US has been hotly debated. Many Japanese feel that they are tied too closely to the US and, though grateful for the security this arrangement has provided, long for greater diplomatic independence.

Such independence has been more in evidence under Koizumi as Japan has been more willing to stand up for itself. A ban on beef imports from the U.S. to Japan – despite intense U.S. pressure – was upheld over BSE concerns. Japan’s refusal of a US request to bear 75 per cent of the costs of relocating 8,000 marines from Okinawa to Guam was another show of increasing self-assertion.

Akihiro Takahara, a 30 year old systems engineer from Aobadai, Kanagawa, believes this independence is a good thing. “I think the partnership between Koizumi and Bush has made the relationship more balanced,” he said. “If a prime minister always says yes, yes, yes, then this is bad. Koizumi has been much more willing to negotiate.”

Takahara sees the changing relationship as something that will continue to evolve as Japan grows in confidence.

“When my parents were growing up people wanted to have what America had. Many people were very poor,” he said when asked about these changing attitudes. “But now Japan is a richer and more advanced country than it was then. We have our own style now and don’t have to follow America as much.”

This change is still lost on some policymakers in the U.S. Congressman Henry Hyde, Chairman of the House International Relations Committee, earlier this year sent a letter to the US House of Representatives’ Speaker to press Koizumi to cease his controversial visits to Yasukuni shrine if he wanted to address Congress. Instead of a pledge to appease the influential congressman, the Japanese response was the diplomatic equivalent of a shrug of the shoulders.

What will be interesting now is to see if this shift continues under new Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Abe has already made an interesting break with precedent by making his first trip as leader to Beijing, not Washington. Earlier this year, I asked the Political Minister Counsellor at the US embassy in Tokyo whether he thinks the close working relationship between the US and Japan will continue smoothly with the leadership change. He said he believes it will - that the two countries “have more in common than a common enemy” and that the close working relationship was not dependent on a personal relation but largely common values.

As Japan seeks to find its place in the world and becomes increasingly assertive, there will likely be more disputes with the US, regardless of who the respective leaders are. As if to point down that road, this year’s Pew survey also showed plummeting support amongst Japanese for the US-led “war on terror”. So long as the United States government remembers that having a independent minded ally is preferable to a browbeaten one and so long as the United States does not forget the importance of Japan over its understandable focus on China, the future for U.S.-Japanese relations and the Asia-Pacific realm look bright enough.

Cold Comfort: the Japan Lobby Blocks Resolution on WWII Sex Slaves

By Ken Silverstein
October 5, 2006 · Washington Babylon

Even as top congressional Republicans were protecting Mark Foley from exposure for soliciting teen pages, they were simultaneously helping Japan cover up its past record of institutionalized rape and sexual enslavement of Asian women. The Japanese cause was greatly aided by Bob Michel, a highly paid lobbyist and former G.O.P. congressman with close ties to the party's leadership.

For the past seven years, a coalition of Korean-American, human rights, and religious groups have been pressuring congress to urge Japan to accept responsibility for forcing women and girls into sexual slavery during the World War II era. This shouldn't be terribly controversial, since the historical facts are clear.

Beginning in the 1930s, Japan rounded up as many as 200,000 women and girls, mostly from Korea, China, and the Philippines, and forced them to serve as prostitutes for its soldiers in order to increase troop “morale.” The Japanese called these sex slaves “comfort women”; many were raped and beaten, and some were killed after they acquired sexually transmitted diseases or became “overworked.” Some of the women were so humiliated that they never returned to their homes after the war, and many of those who did kept quiet about their experiences.

Japan long insisted that the comfort women were willing prostitutes and only acknowledged the sex slavery system in 1993 after documents discovered in the Japanese Army archives proved its true nature. The Japanese government backed the establishment of the quasi-governmental Asian Comfort Woman Fund in the mid-1990s but it has refused to offer direct compensation. Many of the women and their families have refused to accept money from the fund because they say Japan has never taken responsibility for its actions.

Japan has always been able to block attempts to pass a congressional resolution on the exploitation of comfort women, partly because it runs a lavishly-funded Beltway lobbying operation. The Bush Administration has quietly assisted in attempts to block a resolution on comfort women. According to Mindy Kotler, the director of Asia Policy Point, a research center on Japan and northeast Asia, the Administration views Japan as the key regional bulwark against an emerging Chinese regime that may be hostile to the United States in the future. “The administration wants Japan to be a central part of America's Asian security architecture—above Australia, India, and the British Navy,” she said. “Any issue that the Japanese have defined as disturbing has been shunted aside to ensure that nothing upsets the alliance with Japan—and I mean nothing, whether it's a trade dispute or taking responsibility for the comfort women.”

Not long ago, though, it looked like a measure had a decent chance of getting through. The coalition pressing Congress on the issue had traditionally sought to win a concurrent resolution, which must be approved by both chambers. This year the coalition worked for a resolution in only the House, and one was finally brought forth in April by Democrat Lane Evans of Illinois and Republican Chris Smith of New Jersey. The non-binding measure called on Japan to formally “acknowledge and accept full responsibility” for the sexual enslavement of “comfort women” and to stop denying its crimes—for example, by stripping mention of the topic from school textbooks.

The resolution was referred to the International Relations Committee and quickly gained co-sponsors, which alarmed the Japanese government. Enter Bob Michel, a top Washington lobbyist with Hogan & Hartson and a thirty-eight-year House member from Illinois, who served fourteen years as the G.O.P.'s minority leader. The Japanese government pays his firm about $60,000 per month to lobby on the sole matter of historical issues related to World War II, which also include claims concerning Japan's vile abuses of American P.O.W.s, including the use of slave labor. (Michel, incidentally, is only the most prominent of a small gang of lobbyists which Japan retains to handle World War II issues.)

Michel, I'm told, met in late May with Illinois Congressman Henry Hyde, chairman of the International Relations Committee. He told Hyde that passing the resolution would be crippling blow to America's alliance with Japan and reminded the congressman that Japan's sexual enslavement of several hundred thousand women had taken place some sixty years earlier—bygones should be bygones. Japan's then–Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi had already announced that he'd be visiting the United States at the end of June (when he would visit Graceland with President Bush and sing “Love Me Tender” in the Jungle Room) and Michel argued further that it would be embarrassing to Japan if the measure was approved around that time. “The whole deal came to a stop,” says a source who was working to pass the measure. “I've never seen anything like it. We had a lot of momentum and suddenly it was just dead.”

But the groups working on the issue kept at it and got a big break in September when Hyde shifted gears and backed their cause. He was apparently moved by an emotional trip he made to Korea and two other Asian countries over the August recess. More importantly, Hyde was said to be angered by Koizumi's decision on August 15—the date of Japan's defeat in World War II—to visit the Yasukuni Shrine. More than 1,000 war criminals have their names inscribed in the shrine's Book of Souls, including Hideki Tojo, the wartime prime minister who ordered the attack on Pearl Harbor and who was hanged in 1948. Koizumi's visit provoked outrage across Asia and didn't sit well with Hyde, the last remaining combat veteran of the Pacific campaign to sit in the House.

With Hyde on board, the source says, “We went from zero to 100 immediately.” Several members of the International Relations Committee did push to soften the resolution (removing, among other things, language that explicitly defined the treatment of comfort women as a “crime against humanity”). The advocates reluctantly accepted those changes, and on September 13, the Committee passed the resolution by unanimous consent.

Supporters believed the measure was now unstoppable. They expected it would soon be put on the “suspension calendar,” which would allow the resolution to pass the full House with a simple voice vote. The only obstacle to passage at that point was potential opposition from House Speaker Dennis Hastert—also of Illinois, and a former colleague of Michel's—or House Majority Leader John Boehner, who controls the voting calendar.

On September 22, twenty-five congressional co-sponsors of the measure, including Mike Honda of California, the leading Japanese American in Congress, sent a letter to Hastert and Boehner asking them to bring the resolution to the floor before Congress adjourned for the November elections. But mysteriously, no word was heard from the G.O.P. leadership about when the resolution would be brought to a vote.

Exactly what happened next is not clear, but word on the Hill is that the Bush Administration, Michel, and other Japanese lobbyists went to work on Boehner—and on Hastert, who reportedly is hoping to be named ambassador to Japan after he retires and who made clear that he was unhappy with the resolution. By last Wednesday, Boehner's office had made clear that the comfort women resolution would not be brought to a vote before the end of the week—a key deadline since Congress would be adjourning until after the midterm elections. (Michel declined to return calls, as did the offices of Congressmen Boehner and Hastert, both of whom may be preoccupied with other pressing matters at present.)

The measure could conceivably be revived during the upcoming lame-duck session, but for now it looks like Japan has again bought itself victory on the Hill. “The reality is that there is little we can do for the comfort women,” says Kotler. “They've lived with this hell for sixty years and most of them are going to find peace soon. The real importance of the bill is that it would serve as a precedent for going after the miscreants and perpetrators running today's rape camps and help protect future generations of women from similar violence.”

U.S. to triple troops in Guam, but 'no earlier than 2010' for Marines

Japan Economic Newswire
Tuesday , October 3, 2006

WASHINGTON, Oct. 3 - (Kyodo) -- The U.S. military plans to triple its troops in Guam to 21,010 from the current 6,450 to make the island into the "hub" for its Western Pacific operations, according to a Guam posture plan recently compiled by the Pacific Command and obtained Tuesday.

But given time and other constraints for building facilities, the relocation of the "significant" number of 8,000 U.S. Marine Corps troops from Okinawa "will begin no earlier than 2010," says the 91-page unclassified portion of the Guam Integrated Military Development Plan.

The plan also says the command function will not be relocated from Okinawa until the final stage of the four-phased project.

Of the total troop level, the Marines will be increased to 9,700 from three as of March 31, 2005, including the 8,000 from Okinawa under a bilateral agreement earlier this year, it says.

A U.S. defense source said the remaining 1,700 troops are assumed to be moved from California. But he did not rule out a further relocation from Okinawa, saying a new accord is necessary if the United States wants to relocate more from there.

"So for now, the only definite number (for moving Marines to Guam) is the 8,000 from Okinawa," the source said.

The Hawaii-based command drew up the comprehensive plan in July to detail construction projects for necessary facilities and to provide feasibility and base planning guidelines in carrying out various force realignment initiatives.

The unclassified portion was distributed earlier this month to related concerns in Guam for explanations by the command's Deputy Commander Lt. Gen. Daniel Leaf, who spearheaded the drafting work.

The initiatives include the command's "Integrated Global Presence and Basing Strategy" and the road map agreed between Tokyo and Washington in May for implementing the realignment of the U.S. military presence in Japan, including the relocation of the 8,000 troops of the 3rd Marine Expeditionary Force in Okinawa to Guam by 2014.

The strategy involves four major elements:

-- Relocating the Marines' ground and air assets from various locations.

-- Creating a forward operating port in the U.S. territory for modern littoral warfare ships, combat logistics force ships, nuclear-powered and other submarines, surface combatants and high-speech transport vessels.

-- Continuing efforts to develop Air Force global intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, and strike hub by deploying three "Global Hawk" unmanned spy planes, up to 12 mid-air refueling planes, up to 48 fighters and six bombers.

-- Developing and maintaining a robust Western Pacific logistics hub.
"The island of Guam is strategically located at the boundary between the Pacific Ocean and Philippine Sea within easy reach of some of the most important areas in Asia," the plan says.

The assessment echoes the 20-year defense strategy adopted in February by the U.S. Defense Department in its Quadrennial Defense Review report.

In the report, the Pentagon called for "greater Pacific presence" to deal not only with North Korea but also with China, which it said has "the greatest potential" to compete militarily with the United States, as well as terrorism and other instabilities in Southeast Asia.

Other planned troop increases are to 4,560 from 1,930 for the U.S. Air Force, to 5,600 from 4,350 for the U.S. Navy, to 630 from 30 for the U.S. Army, to 170 from 140 for the U.S. Coast Guard, and establishment of a 350-strong special operations forces troop.

As for the Marines, construction projects and relocation will come in four phases -- infantry battalions and some supporting units, ground combat headquarters and remaining supporting units along with some logistic support forces, air combat and remaining logistic support forces, and lastly the command elements, according the plan.

But the plan stresses the need to begin work on utility and transport infrastructure "as early as possible in the development timetable," and also cites constraints from environmental assessment which is expected to take at least 24 months to complete.

The unclassified portion does not include estimated costs, but highlights uncertainties as capacity and other problems "could inherently constrain the level of potential force relocation and base development on Guam."
But still, Japan has agreed to share $6.09 billion, or 59 percent, of the estimated $10.27 billion cost for facilities and infrastructure development in Guam for the Marines' relocation.

The relocated Marines will comprise 300 officers and 2,500 enlisted personnel for the command, 350 officers and 2,550 enlisted personnel for ground combat, 125 officers and 1,425 enlisted personnel for logistic support, and 250 officers and 2,150 enlisted personnel for air combat.

The plan calls for a littoral warfare training center in the Apra Harbor area for the Marines to promote exercises to enhance the interoperability with "regional host-country marine and maritime forces," apparently referring to joint operations with Japan's Self-Defense Forces.

But given the limited size of Guam, organizational training activities need to be conducted at other Marianna locations or elsewhere in region, it says.

How a lowly samurai inspired Koizumi to put rebels to sword

September 28, 2005
By Richard Lloyd Parry and Robert Thomson

Japan's reforming Prime Minister tells of his great political gamble
Interview transcript

Late in the 16th century, after a century of continual civil war, Japan was adrift and in despair. Out of nowhere came a lowly samurai named Oda Nobunaga, who won a series of brilliant victories, overcame the corrupt aristocracy and dominated Japan.

He was an aesthete, art patron and merciless killer. His most notorious act of brutality was to burn down 3,000 Buddhist temples outside Kyoto and butcher their inhabitants. And 400 years later, Oda Nobunaga is a source of inspiration, if not a role model.

"I am learning greatly about the harsh life of a samurai warlord," Mr Koizumi told The Times in his first interview since winning an election that has turned Japan’s political order on its head. "Every day they faced death. There are a lot of lessons to be learnt." Like his samurai exemplar, Mr Koizumi has risen from relative obscurity to set in motion a transformation of Japanese politics.

After taking office in 2001 during Japan’s worst postwar recession, he has overhauled the country’s debt-stricken banks, presided over a modest economic recovery and sent troops to Iraq, overcoming a half-century taboo on the dispatch of Japanese military force overseas. In the past few weeks he has carried out a political purge as devastating, in its way, as Oda Nobunaga’s liquidation of the monks of Kyoto.

It began last month with the defeat in the Upper House of Japan’s Diet of legislation that would have brought about Mr Koizumi’s lifelong political goal — the privatisation of Japan’s post office services. To the dismay of his friends, as well as enemies, the Prime Minister forced a snap election. His Liberal Democratic Party split as opponents of the postal Bills deserted their leader to run as rebel independents.

Mr Koizumi fought the election on a simple set of either/or choices. Postal privatisation or not? Continuing structural reform or a return to the old ways? With me — or with the rebels? "This election was about asking the Japanese people to turn around the Diet’s decision," he says.

The result was a massacre. The LDP leapt from 212 MPs to 296; together with their small coalition partner, they control 327 out of 480 Lower House seats. Half of the rebels were wiped out, and 83 new MPs, most of them fervent Koizumi supporters, were elected.

Yesterday, in an exclusive interview in his official residence, he talked about his bitter victory, about the exhausting war against his party enemies, and about the tension between Japan and its neighbours caused by his visits to the nationalist Yasukuni Shrine.

Who could name any of the seven prime ministers who came and went in the ten years before Mr Koizumi? Traditionally it was a job passed from one grey man to the next, and between the competing factions that made up the LDP. Mr Koizumi has put a personal stamp on the office.

It is on his orders that his aides have taken what for Japanese bureaucrats is a radical step: casting off their jackets and ties in favour of open-necked shirts, intended to reduce the need for air conditioning.

Perhaps because of the presence of The Times photographer, the Prime Minister wears a tie today. He talks for 40 minutes in his staccato style, punctuated by jabbing, emphatic hand gestures.

Mr Koizumi’s obsession with postal reform goes back decades. As a young politician he wrote not one, but two, books on the subject (Reasons to Reassemble the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications was followed by Reasons to Privatise Posts and Telecommunications). "I have been saying all along that my top priority has been the privatisation of Japan Post," he says. "I have called it the bastion of reform. I said that if this can be realised it will be a political miracle. Now it looks likely that the miracle will happen."

The importance of privatisation has less to do with stamps and letter boxes than with Japan’s postal savings, the vast pot of 355 trillion yen (£1,800 billion) deposited in low-interest accounts by Japan’s cautious and conscientious families. As a vast reserve of money under government control, it has served as a "pork barrel piggy bank": a fund for the inefficient and wasteful public works projects such as dams, bridges and airports that enrich local construction companies while depleting tax revenues and harming the environment.

The problem for Mr Koizumi is that this money has for decades been the lifeblood of the party he leads. LDP members won supporters and secured their seats by lobbying for money from central government to be spent on construction projects in their constituencies. Mr Koizumi’s reform plans are an attack on an entire system of political patronage. "It was not just the opposition but members of the ruling parties who were opposed," he said. "In a democracy, it’s no wonder that people doubted its feasibility."

But in the end, the matter of the postal reform was less important than the manner in which it was pursued: aggressively, confrontationally, by a man with a knack of presenting himself as both Prime Minister and underdog.

"There are people who oppose me, leaders of the ruling party who call me a dictator, ‘Hitler’," he says. "It is rather a complicated picture. Partly (I won because of) appreciation of my track record over the past four years and public support for the reforms I’ve advanced. I think these are all intertwined."

The postal Bills are being debated in the newly re-elected Lower House this month; in the Upper House, most of the MPs who threw it out are expected to capitulate this time.

Mr Koizumi’s electoral success is balanced by what looks increasingly like a damaging failure of foreign policy: the unnerving tension between Japan and its powerful neighbour, China. Chinese suspicion of Japan goes back to the invasion of the 1930s. Ten years ago, on the 50th anniversary of the end of the war, things improved a little when the Japanese Prime Minister offered an apology for Japan’s wartime conduct.

This has been reaffirmed, with varying degrees of emphasis, by subsequent Japanese leaders, including Mr Koizumi. The problem is that he has revived the custom, abandoned by Japanese prime ministers in the 1980s, of paying an annual visit to Japan’s Yasukuni Shrine. There the spirits of the war dead are enshrined as Shinto deities, along with those of 14 Class A war criminals. The reaction from South Korea, and above all China, has been ferocious. In April mobs of demonstrators stoned the Japanese consulate in Beijing.

In June seven former prime ministers pleaded with Mr Koizumi to reconsider; recently, he has been less explicit about his determination to make a pilgrimage this year. But yesterday he gave the impression that he would visit Yasukuni before the year’s end.

"I believe Chinese leaders are aware of my intentions," he said. "China is opposing my visits to Yasukuni Shrine for political reasons. In addition, I’d assume that China doesn’t welcome a growth in Japan’s political influence. They are opposed, for example, to Japan becoming a permanent member of the UN Security Council because they want to check Japan’s influence."

He passionately denies a commonly expressed suspicion: that under his leadership, Japan is undergoing a resurgence of nationalism. "What you see is not nationalism," he says. "I believe that Japanese people have deeply reflected over the past. They have remorse about the Second World War, and the strong conviction that they must never again wage war."

Perhaps the biggest mystery surrounding Mr Koizumi concerns his future. LDP rules require that he step down as party leader, and therefore as Prime Minister, in a year — a time limit with which he appears quite happy. "I’ll do my level best and in September next year I shall retire," he says. "I believe I can fulfil what I need to do."

But Mr Koizumi’s personal popularity is so much higher than his party’s that many LDP MPs know that without his leadership they will lose their seats. He does not rule out the possibility of standing again, but sounds as if he is looking forward to retirement.

"As Prime Minister I enjoy music, but it’s CDs in bed," he says. "When I quit I’ll go to concerts and movie theatres instead of films on DVD."

After Oda’s defeat and suicide, it took two more warlords before peace came to Japan. It may be that, like his hero, he will come with hindsight to look more like a transitional figure than the revolutionary he appears. Perhaps the best he can hope for is that, unlike Oda’s, his career ends peacefully and on his own terms.

HARDLINE CHIEFS

ODA NOBUNAGA

(1534-1582)
Historical legacy Reunified Japan in late 16th century
Greatest massacre The warrior monks of Mt Hiei, near Kyoto, 1571
Hobbies The tea ceremony
Career end Hara kiri after military defeat in 1582

JUNICHIRO KOIZUMI
(1942-?)
Historical legacy Reformer in early 21st-century Japan
Greatest massacre Rebels against Postal Privatisation Bill, 2005
Hobbies Listening to Elvis
Career end Due to step down September 2006

KOIZUMI'S WORDS

‘Leaders of the ruling party call me a dictator, Hitler. It is complicated’

‘I am reading about the harsh life of a samurai warlord. Every day they faced death. There are a lot of lessons to be learnt’

‘China doesn’t welcome a growth in Japan’s political influence’

‘Japanese people have very deeply reflected on the past. They have remorse about the Second World War and more than any other people have the strong conviction that they must never again wage war’

Defense chief Kyuma cautious about permanent SDF dispatch law

Sep 26 11:46 AM US/Eastern

TOKYO, Sept. 27 (AP) - (Kyodo) — New Defense Agency Director General Fumio Kyuma said Tuesday he sees difficulties in compiling a single law that would allow Japan to dispatch the Self-Defense Forces overseas for international peace cooperation activities as the circumstances in such deployments may vary from case to case.

"There are various cases involved in sending the SDF abroad," Kyuma said in a late-night press conference at the agency. "I think there will be some difficult aspects in trying to put all the cases together under one law."

He pointed out that Japan's SDF dispatches to Iraq for reconstruction assistance, to the Indian Ocean to provide rear-area logistics support for U.S.-led antiterrorism activities, and to places such as East Timor and the Golan Heights to take part in U.N. peacekeeping operations were all under differing circumstances.

"It would be nice if possible to come up with a single law covering all situations, but then how do you restrict the prerequisites for implementation for each case? There would be cases backed by a U.N. resolution and cases without one," he said.

"The technique for compiling such legislation is very difficult in terms of placing restrictive conditions (on each deployment), so I do not have enough confidence to say at this point that I will work on it," said Kyuma, who also served as Japan's defense chief between 1996 and 1998.

His predecessor, Fukushiro Nukaga, had expressed hope of a permanent law on dispatching the SDF overseas, while Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, in his previous capacity as chief Cabinet secretary, had also called for such legislation to make it easier for Japan to contribute to peace-building around the world.

On whether he plans to visit the war-related Yasukuni Shrine, Kyuma said he is unlikely to do so because he does not see the need to create awkward ties with neighboring countries such as China and South Korea, which have protested at former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visits there.

The defense chief also said he is not willing to pay his respects at the shrine in Tokyo where wartime Japanese Prime Minister Gen. Hideki Tojo, who he said was responsible for fighting a losing battle in World War II, is among those honored.

Kyuma noted that he did not pay homage at the shrine during his first appointment as agency chief under Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto.

He expressed hope that a bill to upgrade the Defense Agency to a ministry and a bill to extend the special antiterrorism law, set to expire Nov. 1, by a year would be passed by the Diet as soon as possible.

At an earlier news conference at the prime minister's office, Kyuma called for discussions on reviewing the Japanese government's interpretation of the right to collective self-defense to reflect the current times.

"There has long been a certain concept of the right to collective self-defense under government policy, but I believe there are various views such as the one which questions the current interpretation 60 years after the war," Kyuma said just after being named defense chief by Abe.

Under the current government's interpretation, Japan has the inherent right to collective self-defense but is not allowed to use it under the Constitution, and therefore cannot take action to defend an ally even when the ally is under attack.

The interpretation is based on Article 9 of Japan's post-World War II Constitution which bars the nation from the use of force for settling international disputes.

Kyuma said he will abide by the current interpretation, but suggested "there is room to examine" whether this interpretation makes it possible to deal with various situations that could come up.

The 65-year-old lawmaker representing Nagasaki Prefecture said Abe had asked him to coordinate with related government ministries and agencies and local governments to implement the Japan-U.S. agreement on the realignment of U.S. forces in Japan.

While some regional governments are opposed to some of the plans agreed to between Tokyo and Washington, Kyuma said he wants to tell the localities that the schemes provide good opportunities such as reducing the number of U.S. Marines in Okinawa Prefecture.

Defense chief Kyuma seeks debate on Japan's collective defense right

Sep 26 07:01 AM US/Eastern

TOKYO, Sept. 26 (AP) - (Kyodo) — Newly appointed Defense Agency Director General Fumio Kyuma called Tuesday for discussions in terms of reviewing the Japanese government's interpretation of the right to collective self-defense to reflect the current times.

"There has long been a certain concept of the right to collective self-defense under government policy, but I believe there are various thoughts such as the one which questions the current interpretation 60 years after the war," Kyuma said just after being named defense chief by new Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

Under the current government's interpretation, Japan has the inherent right to collective self-defense but is not allowed to use it under the Constitution, and therefore cannot take action to defend an ally even when the ally is under attack.

The interpretation is based on Article 9 of Japan's post-World War II Constitution which bars the nation from the use of force for settling international disputes.

Kyuma, who served as Defense Agency director general between 1996 and said he will abide by the current interpretation, but suggested "there is room to examine" whether this interpretation makes it possible to deal with various situations that could come up.

The 65-year-old lawmaker representing Nagasaki Prefecture said Abe had asked him to coordinate with related government ministries and agencies and local governments to implement the Japan-U.S. agreement on the realignment of U.S. forces in Japan.

While some regional governments are opposed to some of the plans agreed to between Tokyo and Washington, Kyuma said he wants to tell the localities that the schemes provide good opportunities such as reducing the number of U.S. Marines in Okinawa Prefecture.

Kyuma said he will make an "appropriate decision" on whether to visit the war-related Yasukuni Shrine while considering various aspects, including Japan's ties with neighboring countries and the thoughts of the bereaved families of those honored at the shrine in Tokyo.

He noted that he did not pay homage to the shrine during his first appointment as agency chief.