今日、我が国の安全保障にとって最大の懸念事項は中国の動向である。中国に対し、日米同盟が死活的な重要性を持つことは言うまでもない。だが同時に、「日米同盟があれば安心だ」と胸を撫で下ろすのは、呑気を通り越して間抜けと言うべきである。 続きを読む 日米同盟と尖閣① ～2016年8月5日の衝撃
カテゴリー別アーカイブ: 日本
アメリカ・ファーストと対北朝鮮軍事オプション⑤～アメリカ・ファーストが軍事オプションの背中を押す？
もう一つは、トランプ政権特有の「アメリカ・ファースト」の色眼鏡を通して見た時、これまでに説明したような、対北軍事オプションを実行した場合の問題点がクリアされてしまう可能性がある、ということだ。端的に言えば、同盟国である韓国や日本に被害が出ようとも、米本土を核の脅威から守ることを優先すべき、という発想である。 続きを読む アメリカ・ファーストと対北朝鮮軍事オプション⑤～アメリカ・ファーストが軍事オプションの背中を押す？
アメリカ・ファーストと対北朝鮮軍事オプション④～トランプ政権と重なる北朝鮮攻撃の「最後の機会」
北朝鮮による核・ミサイルの開発・配備をやめさせようとし軍事オプションを検討すれば、米辱政府は以上のような厳しい現実に必ず直面する。トランプ政権になってもそのあたりの事情は何一つ変わらない。常識的に考えれば、トランプ大統領もこれまでの大統領と同じく、軍事オプションには踏み切れないだろう。だがこの政権については、北朝鮮の突きつける現実を過去の政権とは違ったレンズを通して眺めることになるかもしれない、という要素を考える必要がある。 続きを読む アメリカ・ファーストと対北朝鮮軍事オプション④～トランプ政権と重なる北朝鮮攻撃の「最後の機会」
アメリカ・ファーストと対北朝鮮軍事オプション③～どこを攻撃するというのか？
米国が軍事オプションを控える中、北朝鮮は核・ミサイル開発を営々と続けてきた。その結果、北朝鮮のミサイル能力は米国が先制攻撃するには「進化しすぎた段階」に入り、米国が軍事オプションに踏み切る際のハードルを一段と引き上げている。 続きを読む アメリカ・ファーストと対北朝鮮軍事オプション③～どこを攻撃するというのか？
アメリカ・ファーストと対北朝鮮軍事オプション②～ソウルを「人質」にとられている
北朝鮮の核開発を止めるための軍事オプションを検討するのはトランプ政権が初めてではない。1994年、北朝鮮は寧辺にある原子炉から核燃料棒を取り出して核兵器開発を大きく進めようとしていた。これに対し、クリントン政権は北朝鮮の核施設に対する軍事攻撃を真剣に検討した。 続きを読む アメリカ・ファーストと対北朝鮮軍事オプション②～ソウルを「人質」にとられている
アメリカ・ファーストと対北朝鮮軍事オプション①～北朝鮮攻撃の誘惑
トランプ政権は現在、北朝鮮政策の見直し作業を行っており、そこでは軍事オプションも検討の俎上に乗っているという。従来の常識で考えれば、米国政府が軍事オプションを採用することはありえない。しかし、トランプが「アメリカ・ファースト」の理念に心底忠実であれば、北朝鮮の核施設等に対する先制攻撃オプションが現実のものとなる可能性も（極めて困難な決定だが）完全にゼロではない。その場合、日本も人的・物的な被害を受けるとともに、先の大戦以降初めてとなる「戦争」に踏み切ることも覚悟しなければならなくなる。 続きを読む アメリカ・ファーストと対北朝鮮軍事オプション①～北朝鮮攻撃の誘惑
Japan and the U.S. Economy under President Trump
The economic policy of President Trump will have both positive and negative influence on Japanese economy. As the BOJ has just upgraded its forecast for this year, Japanese economy will certainly merit, at least for a short term, from the possible economic boom in the United States as a result of Trump’s economic policy such as radical tax cut, increase in fiscal spending, and drastic deregulation. The Abe administration already seems to try to gain Trump’s gratitude and find business opportunities for Japanese companies by encouraging and helping Japanese business to invest more in the States. For a long term, however, a robust U.S. economy may have destructive impact on Japan.
Donald Trump and Shinzo Abe’s “Departure from the Postwar Regime”
Mr. Donald Trump will take office as the 45th President of the United States later today. As I ceased to update my blog from personal reasons after he won the election on November 9, I should publish at this timing what I think about Japan and the United States under President Trump.
In the field of international commerce, Trump’s intension to withdraw from already signed Tran-Pacific Partnership agreement is certainly a blow to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe as Japan just ratified it only a month ago. On national security front, however, Abe must be thinking, or will soon start thinking, to take advantage of the advent of President Trump for realizing his dream of “departure from the postwar regime.” In other words, Abe potentially has an incentive to “deal” with the new president of the United States.
続きを読む Donald Trump and Shinzo Abe’s “Departure from the Postwar Regime”
Japan Updates for the Last Two Months of 2016 (3/3)
In the economic (and social) field, so called the Casino Law, or the Promotion Act of Integrated Resort, passed the Diet on December 15. What a stupid decision! Economic success of Japan since the Meiji Restoration owed a lot to an increase in population and productivity, an expansion of the market to overseas, and overall diligence of the Japanese people. At a time when these elements are being lost, the majority of Japanese politicians are choosing the way to facilitate the deterioration of the morale, and thus the loss of diligence by making the Casino Law.
First of all, casino is immoral. Even today, pachinko business are legally absorbing money from ordinary people and creating persons of gambling addicted. Far from strengthening regulation on it, this country seems to be facilitating the production of lazy people. To my disappointment, the Diet debate was lukewarm at best. While the proponents, including Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, have been bribed by way of political contribution, the opponents have failed to carry strong arguments. They should have made a simple argument: casino or gambling is bad for the society and should be banned. Instead, the skeptics have criticized that the number of gambling addicts would increase. The proponents have easily responded that the casino addicts would receive more hospitable care by using tax revenue from new casino business. Some have even argued that we should lift a ban on casino in order to treat gambling addicts carefully. Maybe they think we should legalize and nationalize the narcotic business in order to enhance the drug addicts?
The Casino Law is economically meaningless, too. The sales of casino industry amount to be approximately three trillion JPY or twenty five billion dollars in Macao, one of the most successful areas in casino business. Let us suppose casino business make a success in Japan. The sales would be one trillion JPY or eight billion dollars, and the profit would be a hundred billion JPY or eight hundred thirty million dollars. That means we will create an enterprise ranking at the 150th place in sales. Well, you may argue that it is better than nothing. If I were the government, I would rather reform the regulatory system and/or creating new areas of business by investing in education and child care, which will more effectively help Japanese economy and employment. I am also concerned with the economic side effect of the spread of casino business, or the facilitation of the deterioration of business morale. Recall the recent and successive scandals related to Japanese prestigious companies such as Toshiba Corporation (fraudulent accounting) and Mitsubishi Motor Corporation (fuel mileage falsification). The collapse of morale and corporate governance lies at the core of business crisis of these companies. Lifting the ban on casino is likely to deteriorate the overall morale in Japanese society and facilitate the weakening of morale in Japanese companies in the long run.
Aside from fundamental judgment on the Casino Law, it will be politically interesting if Abe and the LDP have decided to do what they want even by skipping careful procedures and enough debates in the Diet. The LDP passed the Casino Bill in the House of Representatives after only six hours debate. The Komeito was forced to allow its members whether to support or oppose the bill, and Natsuo Yamaguchi, the leader of the party voted against it.
In the election, the LDP cannot win without the cooperation from the Soka-Gakkai, religious body which supports the Komeito. For their part, however, the Komeito and the Soka-Gakkai cannot cease to support the LDP because they want to stay in power as a part of the government and the ruling coalition. Abe understands it very well. Furthermore, the opposition parties are all unpopular and the media and internet space are well controlled by House of Prime Minister and the LDP. There is a good chance of Abe’s trying to manage the Diet more autocratically, especially after the general election. The next question is what Abe wants to do. It should not be necessarily the passage of specific laws. My guess is any challenges that help the dissolution of the post-war regime of Japan, even if he will continue to stress “Economy First.”
Japan Updates for the Last Two Months of 2016 (2/3)
Another big event in the foreign policy field was Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s visit to Pearl Harbor together with President Barak Obama on December 27. I know it is politically incorrect to criticize it. But I don’t think I should follow others blindly to praise no war pledge made by Abe.
They say that one U.S. media reported the speech of the two leaders were both poetic and impressive. However, I found a clear difference between the two. On the one hand, Obama touched the negative aspects of the U.S. history by remembering the internment of Japanese Americans during the war. The world saw at least some sense of self-reflection on its history there. On the other hand, Abe only glorified the soldiers of the two countries and emphasized that the American soldiers pay respects on the brave Japanese soldiers. I am not insisting that Abe should have apologized. But I regret that the speech would have given really positive message to the American people and the world if he had mentioned even a word on the responsibility of then political and military leaders. Although I don’t like manipulative argument by Chinese, I do not think that the power of reconciliation is fully displayed without the insight into the past.
In reality, it is impossible to expect Abe to think in that way. A man who advocates the dissolution of the post-war regime of Japan does not believe that the World War II was really wrong. In fact, Abe has been refusing to call it a war of invasion. While Prime Minister Abe might have gone with President Obama’s making his legacy at Pearl Harbor, President Obama also seemed to go with Abe’s hypocritical performance.