Prime minister Pressures Public Broadcaster
Japan's new prime minister Abe Shinzo, less than a month after
taking office, has declared that his government will direct
"special orders" to the influential public broadcaster NHK
demanding that it "pay attention" to the North Korea abductions
issue. [1,2]
Associated Press reports that "the Ministry of Internal Affairs
will ask a regulatory council to approve ordering state-owned Japan
Broadcasting Corp., or NHK, to boost coverage of abductions in its
overseas shortwave radio broadcasts," in order to, among other
things, "raise international awareness of the abductees' plight,"
according to ministry official Osumi Yutaka. Abe told reporters
that the government must take "appropriate action as we think about
what can be done for the sake of the victims who are waiting in
North Korea for us to rescue them." In response, NHK stated that it
already gives enough attention to the abductions issue and that it
aimed to continue to do so under "independent editorship."
[2]
The move met with widespread hostility, drawing criticism even from
within Abe's own Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). Internal Affairs
Minister Katayama Toranosuke, who has himself previously issued
orders to NHK, drew a distinction, noting that his orders had been
"in general and abstract terms," and that he had "to a large extent
left it to NHK's independent judgment" to make changes. [3] Indeed,
the ministry has in the past restricted its orders to requests for
increased public-interest programs related to government policies
and views. [1] Katayama argued that "it's sufficient for the
government to convey its position in other ways," and wondered if
directly interfering in NHK's affairs will be "a good thing and if
it will be acceptable [to the public]." [3] The leader of the main
opposition Democratic Party Ozawa Ichiro was less diplomatic,
stating that he "question[s] the government using its authority to
unilaterally push national policy." [2] Hattori Takaaki, a
professor of broadcasting systems at Rikkyo University, attacked
the move as going "against the principles of Article 1 of the
Broadcast Law, which stipulates political neutrality and freedom of
expression." [1]
The abductions issue centers on a series of kidnappings of Japanese
civilians by North Korean agents in the period between 1977 and
1983, involving (according to Japan) 16 abductees and (according to
North Korea) eight deaths.
Abe's predecessor, Koizumi Junichiro, had managed in 2002 to
extract an oral apology from Korean leader Kim Jong Il and to
secure temporary release of five of the victims, who returned to
Japan on Oct. 15 of the same year. Yet the Japanese government,
before the five had even set foot on Japanese soil, made a decision
to renege on its promise, refusing to return the abductees and
effectively putting an end to chances for a possible
reconciliation. Relations between the two countries have since
considerably worsened, as Japan -- under pressure from groups
representing the victims' families, championed by Abe and his
supporters -- has cynically used the threat of sanctions and
freezing of humanitarian aid to precipitate "regime change," [4]
much to the approval of Japan's U.S. allies. [5]
The abduction tragedy has been a boon for Abe, whose "hardline"
stance against Pyongyang, repeatedly praised by the Japanese media,
has elevated a little-known politician with a lackluster career to
the status of national hero. Much of this "meteoric rise" -- the
term used by Mainichi Shimbun, a faithful supporter [6] -- is
thanks to a crassly opportunistic strategy of capitalizing on
small-scale, politically-convenient misery to cover up for massive
state and corporate misdeeds.
As McNeill observes: "Day after day for five years, every tiny
development in the abduction drama has been obsessively played out
here in the media," at the expense of "more deadly issues affecting
Japan that have yet to receive anywhere near the same lavish media
attention." Domestically, such issues include, for example, the
link between smoking and cancer, covered roughly 20 times less than
the story of Yokota Megumi -- the most famous of the abductee cases
-- alone. While killing 100,000 people annually in Japan, the
cancer connection, were it to be extensively covered, would
certainly cut into the profits of Japan Tobacco, the third largest
tobacco manufacturer in the world, who understandably prefers these
victims not be granted "appropriate action." [7]
At an international level, the hypocrisy is significantly more
acute. The Japanese government's continued refusal to address its
war crimes stands in stark contrast to its international reputation
as a "peace-loving nation" -- a reputation due in no small part to
its pacifist constitution, the preamble of which Abe refers to as
"degrading." [8] In contrast to the Japanese abductees, who number
at most 80 in total, over one million Koreans were forcefully taken
to Japan to service the military industry, mainly working in mines
under miserable conditions. Former slaves, moreover, include not
only Koreans, but also Chinese, Filipino, Taiwanese, Thai,
Australian, British, and Dutch, to name a few. As Christopher Reed
writes:
"A major argument of those seeking redress from a shamefully
reluctant Japan, is that while it has made numerous 'apologies' of
varying sincerity, none amounts to proper atonement. And atonement
includes financial compensation of which, it is estimated, Japan
has paid one percent of Germany's disbursements." [9]
Arguments that critics are "hung up" on history and should "move
on" [10] -- wake up, in other words, and welcome the "brave new
Japan" of Abe Shinzo [11] -- fail to acknowledge, or simply
willfully ignore, the pre-war and post-war inter-generational
continuity that lines the pockets of leading LDP politicians and
increasingly subverts the democratic process.
Abe's admiration of his "statesman" grandfather Kishi Nobusuke, a
class-A war criminal directly involved in the forcible abduction of
thousands of Chinese workers to Japan in the midst of the war, [12]
stands as one striking example of this legacy; Foreign Minister Aso
Taro's steadfast refusal to acknowledge (let alone pay compensation
for) the crimes of his family business, Aso Group (formerly Aso
Mining Co.), a company that profited handsomely from the forced
labor of 12,000 Koreans "compelled to work under grotesque
conditions," [9] is another.
And there are many more. According to William Underwood, a
researcher investigating Japan's wartime forced labour, most of the
profits from these wartime exploits are "probably still sitting in
Japan's Postal Savings accounts ... including unpaid money for the
much larger contingent of Asian slave workers forcibly taken to
Japan ... worth today about $2 billion." [13]
