|
Japan The Role of Domestic Politics
The influence of Japanese domestic politics on the
conduct of
foreign affairs changed in the mid-1970s. Up to that time,
the
foreign policy debate in Japan had been between
"progressives," who
favored advances toward socialist countries and more
independence
from the United States, and "conservatives," who tended to
identify
Japanese interests closely with the United States-led
alignment of
Western countries. The ruling Liberal Democratic Party
(LDP) was
closely associated with the conservative, pro-United
States
position, while opposition parties often staked out
positions at
odds with the status quo
(see The Liberal Democratic Party
, ch. 6).
General satisfaction in Japan with the peace and
prosperity
that had been brought to the country made it hard for
opposition
parties to garner much support for a radical move to the
left in
Japan's foreign policy. The collapse of communism in
Eastern Europe
and the widely publicized brutalities of communist regimes
in Asia
in the late 1980s further dampened popular Japanese
interest in
shifting foreign policy to the left.
Meanwhile, the ruling LDP modified its base of
political power.
By the 1980s, it had markedly shifted the social
composition of LDP
support away from the traditional conservative reliance on
business
and rural groups to include every category of the
electorate. This
shift resulted from efforts by LDP politicians to align
various
local interests in mutually advantageous arrangements in
support of
LDP candidates. The LDP had brought together various
candidates and
their supporting interest groups and had reached a policy
consensus
to pursue economic development while depending strongly on
the
United States security umbrella.
Domestic political challenges to LDP dominance waxed
and waned
later in the 1980s as the party faced major
influence-peddling
scandals with weak and divided leadership. In 1989 the
opposition
Japan Socialist Party won control of the Diet's House of
Councillors. But the Japan Socialist Party's past
ideological
positions on foreign policy appeared to be more of a
liability than
an asset going into the House of Representatives elections
in 1990,
and the party attempted to modify a number of positions
that called
for pushing foreign policy to the left. In contrast, the
LDP
standard bearer, Prime Minister Kaifu Toshiki, used
identification
with the United States and the West to his advantage in
the
successful LDP effort to sustain control of the House of
Representatives in February 1990
(see The Electoral System
, ch. 6).
In 1993 the coalition government of Prime Minister
Hosokawa
Morihiro pledged to continue the LDP policy of economic
and
security ties with the United States; of responding to
domestic and
international expectations of greater Japanese political
and
economic contributions; and of international cooperation
through
the UN and other international organizations in the cause
of world
peace, disarmament, aid to developing countries, and
educational
and technical cooperation. Foreign policy speeches by the
prime
minister and the minister of foreign affairs were widely
disseminated, and pamphlets and booklets on major foreign
policy
questions were issued frequently.
Political groups opposing the government's foreign
policy
presented their views freely through political parties and
the mass
media, which took vocal and independent positions on
wide-ranging
external issues. Some of the opposing elements included
were
leftists who sought to exert influence through their
representatives in the Diet, through mass organizations,
and
sometimes through rallies and street demonstrations. In
contrast,
special interest groups supporting the
government--including the
business community and agricultural interests--brought
pressure to
bear on the prime minister, cabinet members, and members
of the
Diet, usually through behind-the-scenes negotiations and
compromises
(see
Interest Groups;
The Mass Media and Politics
, ch.
6).
Partisan political activities of all ideological
tendencies
were undertaken freely and openly, but the difference in
foreign
policy perspectives appeared increasingly in the 1980s to
derive
less from ideology than from more pragmatic
considerations. Broadly
stated, the partisan disagreement among the various groups
competing for power had centered on the question of
Japan's safety
from external threat or attack. The dominant view was that
although
the Japanese should be responsible for defending their
homeland,
they should also continue their security ties with the
United
States, at least until they could gain sufficient
confidence in
their own self-defense power, which has been interpreted
as not
being proscribed by Article 9 of the constitution.
Proponents of
this view agreed that this self-defense capability should
be based
on conventional arms and that any nuclear shield should be
provided
by the United States under the 1960 security treaty.
The Sino-United States rapprochement of the 1970s and
the
stiffening of Japan-Soviet relations in the 1980s caused
the
opposition parties to be less insistent on the need to
terminate
the security treaty. The Democratic Socialist Party and
the Komeito
(Clean Government Party) indicated their readiness to
support the
treaty, while the Japan Socialist Party dropped its demand
for
immediate abrogation. Only the Japan Communist Party
remained
adamant.
Despite partisan differences, all political parties and
groups
were nearly unanimous during the 1970s and 1980s that
Japan should
exercise more independence and initiative in foreign
affairs and
not appear so ready to follow the United States on matters
affecting Japan's interests. They also agreed that Japan
should
continue to prohibit the introduction of nuclear weapons
into the
country. These shared views stemmed from the resurgence of
nationalism during the post-World War II era and from the
pride of
the Japanese people in their own heritage and in the
economic
achievements of the postwar decades. Although there were
indications that the "nuclear allergy" produced by Japan's
traumatic experience with the atomic bombings of Hiroshima
and
Nagasaki in August 1945 was beginning to moderate, nuclear
weapons
remains a sensitive political issue.
Except for security-related matters, most foreign
affairs
issues involved economic interests and mainly attracted
the
attention of the specific groups affected. The role of
interest
groups in formulating foreign policy varied with the issue
at hand.
Because trade and capital investment issues were involved,
for
example, in relations with China and with the Republic of
Korea
(South Korea), the business community increasingly became
an
interested party in the conduct of foreign affairs.
Similarly, when
fishing rights or agricultural imports were being
negotiated,
representatives of the industries affected worked with
political
leaders and the foreign affairs bureaucracies in shaping
policy.
Because of the continuous control of the government
enjoyed by
the LDP since its formation in 1955, the policy-making
bodies of
the LDP had become the centers of government policy
formulation.
Because the unified will of the majority party almost
invariably
prevailed in the Diet, some observers believed that the
Diet had
been reduced to a mere sounding board for government
policy
pronouncements and a rubber-stamp ratifier of decisions
made by the
prime minister and his cabinet. This situation meant that
significant debate and deliberations on foreign policy
matters
generally took place not in the Diet but in closed-door
meetings of
the governing LDP. Deliberations took place, for example,
between
representatives of the Foreign Affairs Section of the
LDP'S Policy
Research Council and officials of the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs,
MITI, or leaders of major LDP support groups, such as the
Federation of Economic Organizations (Keizai Dantai
Rengokai-
-better known as Keidanren)
(see Labor Organizations
, ch.
6). The
loss of the LDP majority in the July 1993 election for the
House of
Representatives was bound to affect this situation, but it
remained
to be seen how it would affect it.
The role of public opinion in the formulation of
foreign policy
throughout the postwar period has been difficult to
determine.
Japan continued to be extremely concerned with public
opinion, and
opinion polling became a conspicuous feature of national
life. The
large number of polls on public policy issues, including
foreign
policy matters, conducted by the Office of the Prime
Minister, the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, other government
organizations, and
the media led to the presumption by analysts that the
collective
opinions of voters do exert significant influence on
policymakers.
The public attitudes toward foreign policy that had held
throughout
much of the postwar period appeared to have shifted in the
1980s.
Opinion polls reflected a marked increase in national
pride and
self-esteem. Moreover, public discussion of security
matters by
government officials, political party leaders, press
commentators,
and academics had become markedly less volatile and
doctrinaire and
more open and pragmatic, suggesting indirectly that public
attitudes on this subject had evolved as well.
The mass media, and particularly the press, as the
champion of
the public interest and critic of the government,
continues to mold
public attitudes strongly. The media is the chief source
of demands
that the government exercise a more independent and less
"weak-kneed" diplomacy in view of the changing world
situation and
Japan's increased stature in the world.
Data as of January 1994
|
