After the tragic death of former Prime Minister Abe, Japan will carry out Abe's will and amend its constitution - calling for the unity of the Liberal Democratic Party.
2022-07-10
Category:Japan I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Election activities and security issues
Former Prime Minister Abe was killed by a bullet, and it has been difficult for him to sort out his feelings, but it seems that public opinion is starting to sort itself out somehow. The current situation is targeting the Nara Prefectural Police in the area where former Prime Minister Abe gave a speech. Naturally, if the police had questioned the perpetrator beforehand, or there was a gap of several seconds before the second shot was fired, I myself wonder why the SP could not have arrested him during that time. I also thought about it.
One SP for each former prime minister?
However, when we piece together information that has been reported, it appears that in Japan, after the prime minister retires, there will be one SP. It is speculated that the Nara Prefectural Police, who were in charge of the election speech that day, were providing security for normal campaign activities. And if you look at the video, you can see it in a ３６０-degree open state. It would be difficult to provide security in a ３６０-degree open space. If it is at least １８０ degrees, it is limited to the front, left and right, but even then it seems impossible to completely defend with one SP and regular prefectural police.
Other former prime ministers who have not been seen since leaving office
In other words, does this mean that former Prime Minister Abe went to support candidates in the House of Councilors election in an environment where he could not defend himself even if someone killed him if he had that intention? Therein lies the essence of the problem. Normally in Japan, after a prime minister resigns, he is rarely seen, and his political activities are rarely reported in the media. I don't know if the reason is that security is getting thinner at each level, but that's what happened to successive prime ministers. Considering the danger to myself, that might be the normal thing to do. But Abe was different.
Mr. Abe continued his activities with light security
Former Prime Minister Abe's reason for resigning as Prime Minister was due to worsening of his chronic ulcerative colitis, but after getting better with medication, he began energetically supporting Liberal Democratic Party members for the future of Japan. He even created a YouTube channel and will be cheering for Liberal Democratic Party candidates in the House of Councilors election. This is despite the fact that they are only given the security mentioned above. Considering this, it can be said that Mr. Abe continued to enthusiastically engage in political activities even though his life was in danger.
What Mr. Abe wanted to achieve
I don't know where public opinion will conclude this issue, but my honest feeling is that this is a direct attack on Japan's democracy and an incident that has destroyed the spiritual pillars of the Japanese right. We cannot retreat even one millimeter against this attack. Former Prime Minister Abe is a politician. His earnest wish was to amend the Constitution. If we are to mourn his death, he must accomplish this.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Just because there is a labor shortage doesn't mean it's okay to collect labor from anywhere - let alone anti - Japanese countries.
Even if we overcome deflation and restore international competitiveness through the fiscal stimulus advocated by the late Mr. Abe and Mr. Takaichi, and even if the total amount of money increases and wages rise, if the economy becomes rich, this means that domestic production will rise. , it is said that even with the current production volume, it will no longer be possible to make things as the population declines, so if the production volume increases, there will be an even greater shortage of personnel.
The current dual wage structure for dispatched workers is simply a measure to compensate for the domestic unemployment rate by relocating production bases to emerging countries due to the strong yen. On the other hand, if the yen depreciates, it will become possible to move production bases back to Japan, and some companies have actually returned to Japan amid the current depreciation of the yen. If production bases return, GDP and tax revenue will increase.
In other words, this is the economic growth that the people want, but what is crucially lacking is human resources. It is difficult to believe that Japan's industrial structure, which is dominated by manufacturing, will be easily replaced by AI. While Japan's competitiveness will increase if Abenomics and Mr. Takaichi's economic policies are implemented, I imagine that it will also lead to a shortage of labor in Japan.
Although there was a shortage of soldiers during the Greater East Asia War, it is said that only about 1.6% of recruited soldiers from the peninsula were able to join the Japanese army. If they don't understand the Japanese language, Japanese culture, or the purpose of war, the entire unit will suffer. Even Japanese women were able to work under the Women's Volunteer Corps Ordinance after passing various hurdles, and those who passed were given the approval of the local governor at the time.
There are people in Europe and America who think it would be a good idea to make immigrants and illegal immigrants work, but do they want to make the same mistakes and go down the path of creating social unrest? If human resources are absolutely necessary, the host countries should be limited by considering cultural background, historical and diplomatic compatibility, and Japan should even be involved in the education of Japanese language and culture. It would be better to abandon ideas such as procuring labor from countries that provide anti-Japanese education now.
Whether the debate on the ability to attack enemy bases is a matter of propriety, possession is an issue, or start is an issue - possession is an issue.
What is the point of the ability to attack enemy bases
1956 Ichiro Hatoyama
1999 Yoshinari Norota
2003 Shigeru Ishiba
1969 Cabinet decision
The debate over the ability to attack enemy bases has led to confusion in public opinion regarding whether it is permissible to attack enemy bases, whether it is permissible to possess such weapons, and what stage refers to the initiation of an enemy attack. appear. Looking at the government's views so far, it has consistently been stated that the ability to attack enemy bases falls within the scope of defense, and the government has also made clear its views on launching such attacks. The question is whether or not to actually own it.
Issues regarding the ability to attack enemy bases
[Possibility] Is it okay to attack enemy bases (enemy territory)?
[Initiation] What is the initiation of an attack by an enemy country (activation conditions)?
[Holding] When and what to hold
Regarding the ability to attack enemy bases, Prime Minister Ichiro Hatoyama already answered in 1956 that in the event of a missile attack, ``It is inconceivable that the purpose of the Constitution is to sit back and wait for self-destruction.'' Since then, the Japanese government has continued to interpret it as constitutionally permissible.
1956 Ichiro Hatoyama
The purpose of the Constitution is that if an imminent illegal violation is committed against our country, and if a guided missile or other attack is carried out on our land as a means of such violation, we should sit back and wait for our own destruction. I don't think I can think of it that way. In such cases, take the minimum necessary measures to prevent such attacks, for example, as long as it is recognized that there is no other way to defend against attacks by guided missiles, etc. I believe that hitting bases with guided missiles is legally within the scope of self-defense and should be possible.
In 1999, Defense Agency Director General Norota responded that the Self-Defense Forces would use the necessary force if there was a threat of an armed attack.
1999 Yoshinari Norota
In situations that do not result in an armed attack against our country, police agencies are primarily responsible for dealing with the situation, but in cases where the general police force cannot respond, the Self-Defense Forces respond by dispatching public order, and are not responsible for suppressing the situation. It's possible. Then, if a certain situation corresponds to an armed attack against our country or the possibility of such attack, a defense operation is ordered, and the Self-Defense Forces will use the necessary force to defend our country. That's why .
In 2003, regarding the launch of an attack on Japan, Director-General of the Defense Agency Ishiba announced that he would turn Tokyo into a sea of fire, and stated that if Japan began injecting fuel, this would be considered the start.
2003 Shigeru Ishiba
Now, I have a question from the committee members: There has been a statement that Tokyo will be reduced to a sea of fire, that it will be reduced to ashes, and for that purpose, in order to accomplish that, in order to make it come true. If they started injecting fuel or did something like that, then their intentions would be clear. This is a case where someone says, "I'm going to shoot this thing and reduce Tokyo to ashes," and then they just start pumping fuel, or they start making preparations, and they start taking action. Well, if you do that, wouldn't that be called a start?. That's true, because the intention is clear and that's what it is. Therefore, what I am saying is no different from what the Minister of Foreign Affairs is saying.
On February 16, 2022, Defense Minister Nobuo Kishi spoke at a subcommittee of the House of Representatives Budget Committee regarding the "capability to attack enemy bases" that the government is considering possessing. , stated that they would not rule out the option of bombing military bases, and acknowledged that it falls within the scope of self-defense.
As stated above, the government has already stated that the ability to attack enemy bases is within the scope of the right of self-defense. Regarding the next issue, ``retention'', there was a Cabinet decision in 1969.
1969 Cabinet decision
Possessing so-called offensive weapons, whose performance is exclusively used for catastrophic destruction of the enemy country's homeland, immediately goes beyond the minimum necessary range for self-defense. Therefore, it is not allowed under any circumstances. For example, the possession of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), long-range strategic bombers, and attack aircraft carriers is not allowed.
This is the current argument for ``possession'' of the ability to attack enemy bases. In other words, the debate is whether it is a minimal weapon for self-defense or whether it exceeds it.
Since the current government opinion has interpreted it as falling within the scope of the right of self-defense, it does not fall under "offensive weapons used only for catastrophic destruction" and can be interpreted as something that can be possessed. . Until now, the government's position has consistently been that possessing the ability to attack enemy bases is within the scope of the right of self-defense, but it has not actually possessed it and has kept it ambiguous. All that's happening now is an effort to actually own it. Possession of the ability to attack enemy bases has already been deemed constitutional, and the launch of an attack by the enemy has been defined, so it would be unreasonable to now say that we are opposed to actually having the ability to attack enemy bases. The premise of the argument seems to be different.
The cabinet decision defines weapons as those used only for the catastrophic destruction of the enemy's homeland, so it is clear that this does not apply to weapons used within the scope of the right of self-defense.
Notes, condolence telegrams, and messages of condolence from leaders of various countries regarding the death of former Prime Minister Abe (added sequentially)
We will only post articles by current and past heads of state, prime ministers, etc. I will omit things at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs level. Since condolences also include posts on SNS, they will be written as "notebook," "condolence telegram," and "condolence message."
President Biden [United States of America] (bookkeeper)"It's a loss, not just to my family and the people of Japan, but to the world. A man of peace and decency, you will be missed." li>
Former President Trump [United States] (condolences)``His assassination is unforgivable. It's not just an atrocity, it's a tremendous loss to the entire world.'' ``He was a great leader. "A tough negotiator." "He has worked tirelessly for peace, freedom, and the irreplaceable bond between the United States and Japan." "I hope that we will pay a swift and heavy price for robbing the Earth of a great being. I wish.”
President Putin [Russia] (condolence telegram)“Respected Yoko AbeRespected Akie AbeYour son and husband Shinzo Abe We would like to express our deepest condolences on the passing of Mr. An outstanding politician who led the Japanese government for a long period of time at the hands of criminals and left many achievements in the development of good neighborly relations between Russia and Japan. I had regular contact with Shinzo, where his great personal and professional qualities were in full bloom.My memories of this remarkable man are the same as his. will remain forever in the hearts of everyone who knew him.With respect, Vladimir Putin"
President Tsai Ing-wen [Taiwan] (colored paper notes)“Taiwan’s eternal good friend, your contribution to Taiwan-Japan friendship and to democracy, freedom, human rights, and peace around the world. Thank you.”
Queen Elizabeth [Commonwealth] (condolence address to His Majesty the Emperor)“Our family is deeply saddened by the sudden and painful passing of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. It was clear that he loved him and wanted to strengthen his ties with Britain even closer than ever before. My deepest sympathies and sympathies go out to his family and to everyone in Japan."
Prime Minister Boris Johnson [United Kingdom] (Condolences)“Very sad news about former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.The global leadership he demonstrated during these unprecedented times is... He will be remembered by many. Our thoughts are with former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's family, friends and the people of Japan. Britain stands with you at this dark and sad time."
President Xi Jinping [China] (Condolences, Condolences)“On behalf of the Chinese government and the Chinese people, and in my own name, I would like to express my condolences to the untimely death of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. We express our ``deepest condolences'' and extend our condolences to Prime Minister Abe's bereaved family. "I once reached an important agreement with him on building Sino-Japanese relations that meet the requirements of a new era. I deeply regret his sudden death." "I will continue to work with the Prime Minister. We would like to continue to develop good neighborly relations and friendly cooperation between Japan and China in accordance with the principles established in the four Japan-China political documents.''
Prime Minister Modi [India] (Condolences)“I am shocked and saddened beyond words by the tragic passing of one of my closest friends. "He was a world-class statesman and an outstanding leader." "We met again on a recent visit to Japan and discussed many issues. He was as witty and insightful as always. I never expected it to happen.'' ``To express our deep respect to Mr. Abe, the nation will mourn on the 9th.''
President Phuc [Vietnam] (Book)“We deeply mourn Mr. Shinzo Abe, a leader of international renown and a great and dear friend of Vietnam.”
Former President Duterte [Philippines] (Condolences)``I feel extremely regretful and deeply saddened to learn of the untimely death of my dear friend, former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.'' I join the people of Japan in mourning the death of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and condemn this senseless act of violence." "Former Prime Minister Abe was not only the first foreign leader to visit the Philippines after my presidential election, but he also visited Davao City. He was also the only foreign leader to visit my home in Japan.'' ``I will always feel that former Prime Minister Abe is close to my heart, and I will cherish the time we spent together.''
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong [Singapore] (condolences)``I just had lunch with Mr. Abe in Tokyo in May.'' ``I am deeply shocked and saddened.'' .”
Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha [Kingdom of Thailand] (condolences)``He was talented, intelligent, and experienced,'' ``He played an important role in promoting friendly relations between the two countries,'' ``For many years, Over the years, he has worked to strengthen the relationship between Japan and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).''
President Joko Widodo [Indonesia] (Condolences)“We offer our deepest condolences to the deceased former Prime Minister Abe.”
Prime Minister Hun Sen [Cambodia] (condolences)``I am deeply shocked and deeply saddened'' ``Mr. Abe was an outstanding figure who contributed to peace, stability and prosperity in the region. Politician.''
President Yun Seok-Yeol [South Korea] (condolence telegram)“I would like to express my condolences to the bereaved family and the Japanese people for the loss of a respected politician who was the longest-serving prime minister in the history of Japanese constitutional history. I would like to express my condolences.'' → What does it mean to be respected? This sparks huge criticism within South Korea.
``Forever good friend of Taiwan
Thank you for your friendship with Taiwan and your contributions to democracy, freedom, human rights, and peace around the world.
Tsai Ing-wen 2022/7/11”
(Colored paper written at the time of condolence) pic.twitter.com/VZFcnd9hfQ? Taiwan in Japan 台北駐日経済文化代表処 (@Taiwan_in_Japan) July 11, 2022
Possibility of the world's largest oil field off the coast of Izura, Ibaraki Prefecture - Hope for investigation and mining including security.
It is estimated that there is a huge oil field off the coast of Izura in Ibaraki Prefecture. A slag called carbonate concrete was formed by the bond between calcium and carbon, and the origin of carbon was unclear by research teams at Ibaraki University and Hokkaido University who found that it was natural gas. From the area of ??the reef, the total amount of natural gas ejected from the seabed is estimated, and the fact that natural gas is emitted means that there is a high possibility that oil resources are buried under it. If oil resources are discovered, they will be one of the largest in the world.
There seems to be an opinion that it is cheaper to buy oil from abroad as before because it takes a lot of time and cost from investigation to mining, but as a problem including security before the economic point of view. I want you to proceed with the investigation. In the first place, QUAD is the area where oil tankers pass from the Middle East, and China is trying to control it, and its original purpose is to prevent those movements.
What if oil comes out in Japan? Will the Spratly Islands issue and the Taiwan Strait issue become less important to Japan? No, it wouldn't be. China is cleverly developing oil resource diplomacy, which is a card of further threat to Asian countries. Achieving a free and open Indo-Pacific by QUAD could sell Japanese oil to Asian countries and reduce China's influence on the Spratly Islands relatively. I would like the country to discuss the overall benefits of having resources, not just the perspective of which is cheaper.
Does Japan procure labor from anti - Japanese countries? - Are you not considering the issues of immigration policy?
It is said that Europe and the United States are reconsidering their immigration policies due to failures, but the United States views immigration from South America as a problem with guns and drugs, not immigration from Canada or Europe. When considered as a white group, they tend to have a lower birthrate, and it is predicted that white people will become a minority in the United States by 2060.
If Europe is facing social unrest due to immigration from Muslim countries, it is certain that this will happen if it accepts immigrants from countries that can be described as hostile religions. In Europe, the periphery means Islamic countries or Africa due to location. However, travel and work within the EU are basically free, so EU countries accept foreigners. The reality is that the West is trying to prevent immigration from dangerous countries.
What is fatal for Japan is that historically it has not been blessed with neighboring countries. If Japan had the issue of which country to procure labor from based on this kind of thinking, then it would be a crazy idea to bring labor from a country that routinely provides anti-Japanese education to its citizens. There are members of parliament.
In Asia, at least in terms of cultural background and religion, there are countries that believe in Buddhism, countries that have an affinity with the Japanese imperial family as a kingdom, have a good level of education, are pro-Japanese countries, and have a strong acceptance of Japan. It would be desirable if there could be collaboration that would allow Japan to be involved with educational institutions in partner countries.
In any case, Japan's efforts to combat the declining birthrate will be over once the second baby boom generation fails to have children. Even if the competitiveness of Japanese companies increases due to the weak yen, they will not be able to bring their production bases back to Japan, and on the other hand, if they continue to flow to other countries, their GDP and tax revenues will simply become income for other countries.
