They were Tokyo’s worst-kept diplomatic secrets: Clandestine Cold War era agreements with Washington that obligated Japan to shoulder the costs of US bases and allow nuclear-armed US ships to sail into Japanese ports.
For decades, Japanese leaders have gone to great lengths to deny the pacts’ existence, despite mounting proof to the contrary from the testimony of former diplomats and declassified US documents. The most sensational instance came in 1972, when a reporter who unearthed evidence of one of the treaties was arrested on charges of obtaining state secrets, reportedly by means of an adulterous affair.
Now, the so-called secret treaties are causing problems again, this time in how Japan is handling its suddenly rocky relationship with the US. The new government in Tokyo, whose election last summer ended a half-century of nearly unbroken control by the Liberal Democrats, wants to expose the treaties as a showcase of its determination to sweep aside the nation’s secretive, bureaucrat-dominated postwar order. Last fall, the foreign minister appointed a team of academics to scour Japanese diplomatic archives for evidence of the treaties. Its findings are due later this month.
The problem is that the inquiry is coming at a delicate moment in Japan’s ties with its longtime patron, the US. The government of Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and US President Barack Obama’s administration are already divided over the relocation of a US air base on Okinawa. By exposing some of the less savory aspects of Japan’s military reliance on the US, the investigation has drawn criticism, particularly from conservatives in both nations, as an effort by the left-leaning Hatoyama government to pull away from Washington.
However, those involved in the investigation in Japan, both within and outside the government, insist that it is not about challenging the US alliance. In interviews, the current central figures in the case — including Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada, a retired Japanese diplomat who helped reveal the pacts’ existence and the reporter who got the original story, Takichi Nishiyama, now 79 and fighting to restore his reputation — described the probe as an effort to expose agreements from the 1960s and early 1970s that were too old affect current diplomatic relations.
Okada and the others emphasized that the existence of the treaties had already been made public in the US. Some also said that the Japanese probe was drawing attention only because it was so unusual for this nation to reveal its past after years of obfuscation under the Liberal Democrats. They said the investigation was a highly symbolic gesture by the new government to make Japan’s stunted democracy more forthcoming and accountable to its own people.
“The prime minister and I cannot just stand before parliament and deny the secret treaties, as has been done until now,” Okada said. “We are just doing what the United States has already done.”
Diplomatic experts agree that exposing the treaties will have little or no direct effect on the alliance, partly because the US announced in the early 1990s that it was no longer carrying nuclear weapons on most of its warships.
But the probe could have unintended consequences if it uncorks long-suppressed public debate on a point that Tokyo has, until now, purposefully left vague: whether Japan, which bans nuclear weapons from its territory, can continue to rely on the US’ nuclear umbrella, which may require it to allow such weapons on US ships and planes in a time of crisis.
This could lead to calls to remove the US bases, rewrite Japan’s Constitution to allow a full-fledged military or even develop the country’s own nuclear deterrent, political observers said.
“This is the biggest contradiction of the postwar period,” said Masaaki Gabe, a professor of international relations at University of the Ryukyus. “The Democratic Party could be opening a Pandora’s box of public debate.”
Experts says there were four known secret pacts, made when the two countries revised their security pact in 1960 or during negotiations for the return of the Ryukyus to Japan in 1972. One of the first to expose them was Nishiyama, then a rising reporter at the Mainichi Shimbun.
His revelations provoked a battle pitting the public’s right to know against government demands for secrecy that many likened to the Pentagon Papers in the US. But unlike the Pentagon Papers case, Nishiyama lost.
Public attention quickly turned to his arrest and the details of his affair with a Foreign Ministry worker, which he admitted took place. However, he says the tabloid aspects of the case were highlighted by prosecutors to divert public attention from discussion of the secret pacts themselves. Japan’s Supreme Court found Nishiyama guilty of obtaining state secrets in 1978, and he has been filing lawsuits ever since, seeking an official apology and the disclosure of documents related to the treaties.
“Why do the Japanese people only learn about their own government from documents disclosed in the United States?” he said. “This is crazy.”
Nishiyama and a handful of civic groups seeking evidence of the pacts got a boost in 2000, when the US began declassifying documents related to the secret agreements. An unexpected breakthrough came four years ago, when a diplomat who had testified at Nishiyama’s trial that the pacts did not exist — Bunroku Yoshino, one of the negotiators of Okinawa’s return to Japan — came forward three decades later to admit that he had lied.
“After dozens of years have passed, you cannot keep distorting history,” said Yoshino, now 92.
Okada said he was aware of the criticism that the investigation was anti-American, which he called a misunderstanding. He said exposing the truth would actually strengthen the alliance by righting a past wrong that had led many Japanese to doubt the sincerity of their own government and the US.
“Telling the facts to the people is extremely important for democracy,” he said, adding that the change in Japan’s government “is a great chance” to do so.
I came to Taiwan to pursue my degree thinking that Taiwanese are “friendly,” but I was welcomed by Taiwanese classmates laughing at my friend’s name, Maria (瑪莉亞). At the time, I could not understand why they were mocking the name of Jesus’ mother. Later, I learned that “Maria” had become a stereotype — a shorthand for Filipino migrant workers. That was because many Filipino women in Taiwan, especially those who became house helpers, happen to have that name. With the rapidly increasing number of foreigners coming to Taiwan to work or study, more Taiwanese are interacting, socializing and forming relationships with
Chinese social media influencer “Yaya in Taiwan” (亞亞在台灣), whose real name is Liu Zhenya (劉振亞), made statements advocating for “reunifying Taiwan [with China] through military force.” After verifying that Liu did indeed make such statements, the National Immigration Agency revoked her dependency-based residency permit. She must now either leave the country voluntarily or be deported. Operating your own page and becoming an influencer require a certain amount of support and user traffic. You must successfully gain approval for your views and attract an audience. Although Liu must leave the country, I cannot help but wonder how many more “Yayas” are still
Earlier signs suggest that US President Donald Trump’s policy on Taiwan is set to move in a more resolute direction, as his administration begins to take a tougher approach toward America’s main challenger at the global level, China. Despite its deepening economic woes, China continues to flex its muscles, including conducting provocative military drills off Taiwan, Australia and Vietnam recently. A recent Trump-signed memorandum on America’s investment policy was more about the China threat than about anything else. Singling out the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as a foreign adversary directing investments in American companies to obtain cutting-edge technologies, it said
The recent termination of Tibetan-language broadcasts by Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) is a significant setback for Tibetans both in Tibet and across the global diaspora. The broadcasts have long served as a vital lifeline, providing uncensored news, cultural preservation and a sense of connection for a community often isolated by geopolitical realities. For Tibetans living under Chinese rule, access to independent information is severely restricted. The Chinese government tightly controls media and censors content that challenges its narrative. VOA and RFA broadcasts have been among the few sources of uncensored news available to Tibetans, offering insights
RSS