To the government’s critics, it was a long and shocking act of official stonewalling: Agreements long hidden in Foreign Ministry files allowed nuclear-armed US warships to enter Japanese ports, violating a hallowed principle of postwar Japan. Yet their very existence was officially denied.
Now, in a clear break from the past, a new prime minister has gone where none of his predecessors dared go: He has ordered a panel of ministry officials and academics to investigate the secret agreements.
The findings, due out this month, are part of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama’s wide-ranging campaign to wrest power from the bureaucracy and make government more open than under the conservatives, who ruled Japan for most of the past 50 years.
They could also intensify public debate about the future of Japan’s long-standing security alliance with the US. Hatoyama, a liberal who took office in September, has called for making the relationship more balanced, starting with efforts to evict an unpopular US base from the island of Okinawa.
That Japan agreed to let nuclear-armed ships enter its ports and waters ceased to be a secret some years ago with the declassification of US documents. Such ships had routinely docked in various Japanese ports since the 1960s, sometimes setting off protests.
But in a nation where memories of Hiroshima and Nagasaki drive a fierce aversion to nuclear weapons, a formal admission of the secret agreements would be a stunning reversal and confirm that previous governments systematically lied to the public.
“The Foreign Ministry repeatedly denied their existence, even in statements before parliament,” lawmaker Muneo Suzuki said in an interview.
Suzuki held top political posts at the Foreign Ministry, yet although he had heard about the secret documents, he said that even he could not pry them out of his officials.
“The Foreign Ministry should be held deeply accountable,” said Suzuki, who has switched sides and is now a member of Hatoyama’s coalition.
Historical accounts show that Prime Minister Masayoshi Ohira, who died in office in 1980, considered going public on the secret pacts, but was advised against it by his aides as politically too dangerous.
Only a few Foreign Ministry bureaucrats have spoken out in recent years.
One, Kazuhiko Togo, said he and other high-ranking officials kept quiet for fear that disclosure of the agreements would trigger riots and perhaps topple the prime minister.
“The political costs were too great,” Togo said.
Even after US officials acknowledged the pacts in the 1990s, leaders of the long-ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) persistently denied them, right up to Taro Aso, the last LDP prime minister before Hatoyama’s Democrats took over.
“They did not exist,” Aso said in a nationally televised response to a reporter’s question last July.
“It all goes to show how far behind Japan is in administrative transparency,” said Koichi Nakano, professor of political science at Sophia University in Tokyo.
Even the name of revered Eisaku Sato, the prime minister viewed as the architect of Japan’s postwar pacifism and resistance to nuclear weapons, has been thrust into the debate.
Three weeks ago, Sato’s son revealed a document he found in Sato’s desk after his death in 1975 and which he had kept hidden.
The 1969 document, signed by Sato and US president Richard Nixon, showed they agreed that US-occupied Okinawa would be returned to Japan, but that the US would retain the right to have nuclear weapons on the island if the necessity arose. The agreements on Okinawa were a key part of the secret pacts that also covered US warships entering ports throughout Japan.
Back then, it was the height of the Cold War, and the US felt it needed a free hand to confront nuclear-armed China and the Soviet Union.
But the deal with Nixon was a clear violation of Sato’s pledge that Japan would not make, own or allow the entry of nuclear weapons. Sato won the 1974 Nobel Peace Prize in large part for pushing those principles. According to Japanese media accounts, the trade-off drove him to tears of remorse. But the principles became policy all the same.
The previously declassified US documents include State Department papers on the 1960 US-Japan security pact, accounts of meetings at which the entry of warships with nuclear weapons was discussed and a memorandum on the 1969 Nixon-Sato meeting, where the Okinawa deal was discussed.
And even in the 1990s, after US warships stopped carrying battle-ready nukes and the issue became moot, it remained sensitive enough for governments to go on misleading the public.
Japanese today are more shocked by the cover-up than by the deed itself, but they remain attached to the non-nuclear principle.
A survey by the Mainichi newspaper, which interviewed more than 4,500 people, found 72 percent of the 2,600 respondents want to stick with the principles, and the number rose to about 80 percent among Japanese in their 20s and 30s. No margin of error was given.
Shoji Niihara, a scholar of US-Japan relations, said Japanese are hoping their new reformist prime minister will redefine Japan’s relationship with the US and work with President Barack Obama in his call for a world free of nuclear weapons.
“There’s a strong feeling that Japan was never truly treated as an independent country,” he said.
Robert Wampler, a senior fellow at the National Security Archive, an American group that seeks to declassify historical documents, welcomed Hatoyama’s investigation.
“The longer they denied this, the harder it was for them to come forward and say they weren’t telling the truth. They backed themselves into a corner on this one,” Wampler said in a telephone interview from Washington.
Bunroku Yoshino, a former Foreign Ministry official who oversaw relations with the US, did his part on Dec. 1.
Testifying in a lawsuit brought by a former newspaper reporter, 91-year-old Yoshino reversed his earlier denials and acknowledged signing some of the Okinawa agreements.
“It is a major historical truth,” he said afterward.
With escalating US-China competition and mutual distrust, the trend of supply chain “friend shoring” in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the fragmentation of the world into rival geopolitical blocs, many analysts and policymakers worry the world is retreating into a new cold war — a world of trade bifurcation, protectionism and deglobalization. The world is in a new cold war, said Robin Niblett, former director of the London-based think tank Chatham House. Niblett said he sees the US and China slowly reaching a modus vivendi, but it might take time. The two great powers appear to be “reversing carefully
Taiwan is facing multiple economic challenges due to internal and external pressures. Internal challenges include energy transition, upgrading industries, a declining birthrate and an aging population. External challenges are technology competition between the US and China, international supply chain restructuring and global economic uncertainty. All of these issues complicate Taiwan’s economic situation. Taiwan’s reliance on fossil fuel imports not only threatens the stability of energy supply, but also goes against the global trend of carbon reduction. The government should continue to promote renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, as well as energy storage technology, to diversify energy supply. It
Former Japanese minister of defense Shigeru Ishiba has been elected as president of the governing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and would be approved as prime minister in parliament today. Ishiba is a familiar face for Taiwanese, as he has visited the nation several times. His popularity among Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) lawmakers has grown as a result of his multiple meetings and encounters with legislators and prominent figures in the government. The DPP and the LDP have close ties and have long maintained warm relations. Ishiba in August 2020 praised Taiwan’s
On Thursday last week, the International Crisis Group (ICG) issued a well-researched report titled “The Widening Schism across the Taiwan Strait,” which focused on rising tensions between Taiwan and China, making a number of recommendations on how to avoid conflict. While it is of course laudable that a respected international organization such as the ICG is willing to think through possible avenues toward a peaceful resolution, the report contains a couple of fundamental flaws in the way it approaches the issue. First, it attempts to present a “balanced approach” by pushing back equally against Taiwan’s perceived transgressions as against Beijing’s military threats
RSS