Time to reflect
Yan Wei

JAPAN’S controversial stance on its activities during World War II recently sparked a new round of international political contention. But this time, the center of the storm is not its Asian neighbors like China and South Korea but the United States, Japan’s longtime ally.
The U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee adopted a resolution on June 26 calling on Japan to formally acknowledge, apologize for and take responsibility for forcing women from countries it occupied into sexual slavery during World War II. The resolution passed by a 39-to-2 vote in the 50-member committee.
The non-binding resolution also demands that Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe issue a public apology and stop all actions within the government that would refute any claims that the atrocities never happened. The measure is expected to go to a full House vote in mid-July.
“The Japanese right-wing forces cannot assert themselves in an unbridled manner on the international stage,” said Zhou Yongsheng, a professor and expert of Japanese studies at China Foreign Affairs University. “China and South Korea have reached consensus on the ‘comfort women’ issue and now the United States is joining them. The emergence of a shared view among these countries will help rein in the right-wing forces in Japan.” Despite the strong alliance between Washington and Tokyo, American lawmakers are sending a clear warning to Japanese right-wing forces with this resolution, a move that is set to have profound implications for the two countries’ relations, Chinese foreign affairs experts said.
The resolution’s adoption highlights an “appeal for justice” on the issue in the United States, Zhou said. It is generally believed that the U.S.-Japan alliance is “as firm as iron,” but if Japan maintains its controversial stance on the “comfort women” and other historical issues, the United States will change its policy of non-intervention, he added. In recent years, Japan’s whitewashing of the aggression it waged against neighboring Asian nations in World War II not only has strained the country’s relations with China and South Korea but also has affected American interests in East Asia, Zhou said. With Japan’s insistence on glossing over its wartime past, Chinese and South Koreans believe that the United States tacitly endorses Japan’s right-wing policy-a move that is detrimental to the U.S. image in the region, Zhou added.
“Japan’s denial of wartime history is tantamount to a denial of the United States,” he said. Jin Xide, Deputy Director of the Institute of Japanese Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), holds similar views. Since the end of World War II, the United States has been “seemingly neutral” on disputes about historical issues between Japan and the Asian countries it invaded, he said. As a member of the anti-fascist bloc in the war, the United States has long held a permissive attitude about Japan in light of its own strategic interests, he said. But now Washington realizes that as it becomes increasingly isolated in Asia, Tokyo is not able to be an effective ally, he added.
The morality of U.S. policies has come under more intense scrutiny in East Asia, because the United States often interferes in international affairs with its formidable hard and soft power, Jin said. Because of this, its position on “comfort women” and other historical issues concerning Japan’s military aggression has become morally untenable in recent years, he said.
Asia’s rapid economic rise is another reason why the Americans have started rethinking their policy toward Japan, Jin said. East Asia has become an important part of the world economy and is gradually turning itself into the third most important economic power on par with North America and Western Europe, he added.
As East Asia modernizes, its people are growing more sensitive to public opinion and are intolerant about what they perceive to be the United States’ indifferent approach, Jin said. The Americans realize that they will lose their moral high ground if they continue to turn a blind eye to historical issues in East Asia. “Historical issues will become a new facet of U.S.-Japan relations, which were mainly about economic and security cooperation in the past,” Jin said. “The move is bound to have far-reaching implications for future U.S.-Japan relations.”
It is believed that the Japanese military forced up to 200,000 women-known as “comfort women”-mainly from China, South Korea and other countries that it occupied during the war to work as sex slaves in Japanese military brothels. Changing attitude toward Japan’s wartime past have been brewing in the United States for the past couple of years. During the second half of 2005, the U.S. media began to criticize Japan for its stance on its wartime aggression and atrocities. Although the U.S. Government did not take sides with the media, it tacitly encouraged reflections on those issues as it came to realize the damage caused by Japan’s mishandling of them, Zhou said.
Similar resolutions were proposed in 2005 and 2006, but they were not passed. Abe’s “irrational remarks” in March about the lack of evidence that the Japanese imperial army directly coerced foreign women into brothels across Asia is what prompted the final adoption of a resolution this year, Zhou said.
In recent months, Abe has stressed his endorsement of the landmark apology issued by Japan in 1993 to the “comfort women.” He also expressed his sympathy for those women who suffered sexual slavery on an April visit to the United States.
Some Japanese politicians still firmly deny the country’s forced use of “comfort women” during the war. Forty-four lawmakers, including several close to Abe, took out a full-page advertisement in The Washington Post in June, denying that the Japanese military forced women into sexual slavery.
Although sex slavery is one of the major atrocities committed by the Japanese military, the “comfort women” issue has been unresolved during the past decades mainly because of the Japanese Government’s denial and refusal to offer compensation to the women, Jin said. He anticipates that the U.S. resolution will put pressure on the Japanese to resolve the issue by offering a formal apology and material compensation to the victims, he added. Japan’s “lack of sincerity” on the issue indicates that the final resolution of the matter still is a long way off, he added.
Mike Honda, a U.S. Congressman from California who was the resolution’s prime mover, said now is the time for Japan to issue an “unambiguous apology,” as opposed to what he called half-hearted expressions of remorse in the past, Agence France-Presse reported.
The resolution represents “the voice of people who had no voice in the past,” said Honda, a Japanese-American who was interned by U.S. authorities along with his family during the war, according to the report.
A major consideration underlying the U.S. resolution is that the “comfort women” victims are elderly and many pass away each day, said Zhang Guoqing, a researcher at the Institute of American Studies at the CASS. Japan should resolve the issue as soon as possible so that they can enjoy the “belated justice” while they still are alive, he said.
In 1995, the Japanese Government created an independent fund financed by private contributions to compensate the “comfort women.” Many former sex slaves refused the payments because the Japanese Government did not officially offer them.
Honda’s personal beliefs, voters’ support and the efforts of Asian groups in the United States were crucial to the resolution’s adoption, Zhang said. The U.S. Congress and the mainstream media wanted to “teach Japan a lesson” so that it can cope with its historical past and its relations with neighboring countries in a more reasonable and moderate manner, he added. Varied reactions
Some Japanese civil groups welcomed the U.S. resolution. The Japan Action Network for the Issue of Military Sexual Slavery issued a statement that Japan’s national policy of creating the “comfort women” system during World War II caused severe suffering to women in countries it invaded. The U.S. resolution echoed international public opinion, the group said. Abe appeared unfazed by the U.S. resolution, saying that he was not in a position to comment on a decision by Congress. He told reporters that he was “convinced that Japan-U.S. ties remain unshakable,” the Associated Press (AP) reported.
Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuhisa Shiozaki hinted that Japan would not issue any further apology on the wartime brothels, despite the passage of the resolution by the House committee, AP reported. But while some Japanese politicians are sticking to their hard-line position on the “comfort women” issue, the U.S. resolution has dealt a severe blow to Japan politically, Jin said. Under the framework of U.S.-Japan alliance, Japan has never been able to rid itself of U.S. control, Jin said, adding that American influence over Japan should not be underestimated. Although the resolution is not a bilateral treaty, it will subject Japan to political pressure from both the United States and international public opinion, he said.
“Abe is a representative of the right-wing forces in Japan,” Zhou said. “These people are always ready to whitewash Japan’s wartime history whenever possible.”
But Abe is showing signs of flexibility. He became Japanese prime minister because he changed his perception of Japan’s wartime history, contentions over which escalated under his predecessor Junichiro Koizumi and led to his stepping down last September, Zhou said. “As prime minister, Abe will not allow historical issues to strain Japan’s relations with China and South Korea,” Zhou said. “However, the right-wing beliefs implanted in him are not expected to change drastically. If conditions allow, he may air some right-wing views again, but he also will be prepared to correct his remarks for Japan’s national interests”.

(The Daily Mail-Beijing Review Articles Exchange Items)


Will multiple negotiations help smooth transition?
Nasim Zehra

IN PAKISTAN, multiple back channel communication involving the president’s men, the PML-Q, Benazir Bhutto, the Sharif brothers, opposition leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman and to some extent the Saudis does raise some possibilities of a smooth transition from military-led democracy to a civilian democracy.
Negotiations are centred principally in London and Islamabad. President’s emissaries have held new rounds of dialogue with Benazir Bhutto and the Sharifs. In Islamabad, the PML-Q president and the president’s men have also engaged with Maulana Fazlur Rehman.
Even with the Chief Justice, the talk of reining in the SC’s political activism and the outburst by PML-Q parliamentarian Sher Afghan notwithstanding, the presidency has recognised the need for confidence building measures (CBM). Two CBMs taken include change in the government’s legal team and consultation with the Chief Justice on the selection of the new law secretary’s appointment.
The endless and mostly contradictory statements of all parties tend to convey strife and bickering. Yet the developments of the last few days suggest that the minds at work in the presidency are focusing on cease-fire, negotiations and reconciliation. The changing internal and external environment has induced flexibility in General Musharraf’s position, specifically related to giving up his position as the army chief and the timing for the return of Benazir and the Sharifs.
The negotiations do, as they must, involve give-and-take they have already initiated the process of political reconciliation. Public statements of various groups notwithstanding, it appears that none of the parties are ready for any direct confrontation. They all have some bottom line demands and positions but have also made negotiating space available. The back channel negotiations are an attempt to prevent confrontation among any of the forces on the Pakistani political scene. Despite the changing balance of power in Pakistan away from the establishment, it is a sign of maturity that all the parties understand that for Pakistan the best way forward is through dialogue and negotiations. They all must co-exist.
The president is keen for re-election by the current assembly and endorsement by the newly elected assemblies. To enable smooth and credible re-election he is seeking the support of all political parties. Also, as the issue of his re-election as army chief comes under increased criticism internally and externally with, also some risk of SC decision against a COAS as presidential candidate, the president is extremely keen to get the two year constitutional bar on a state servant from holding any public office removed within the next week or so. For this to successfully move a constitutional amendment in addition to the ruling coalition JUI or PPP votes are needed. JUI has 36 votes in the national assembly and 17 in the senate. Negotiations with both parties are underway.
The president has willing negotiators in the PPP and the PML-N leadership. For the Sharif brothers if the great plus has been the August 23rd Supreme Court judgment the Saudi factor and the threat of arrest on their immediate return provide reason to engage. Also like Benazir Bhutto the Sharifs realise that the Musharraf and the army factor, for now deeply linked, can neither be ignored nor taken on in the streets. The SC has constitutionally eroded some power of the establishment but Pakistan executive and the army has to work closely to successfully tackle the current challenges. Also Musharraf does call the shots.
The statements of the Sharif brothers in the last few days have signalled a clear shift their relatively softer stance towards Musharraf. Nawaz Sharif has now said that he would attend an All Parties Conference convened by the president. Benazir while now becoming impatient with Musharraf not ‘delivering’ on the CBMs he promised in their Abu Dhabi meeting, has remained consistently clear that she believes that Musharraf is necessary to tide Pakistan over the domestic and external challenges it currently faces but that she will not support him until he is in uniform. She supports General Musharraf’s reform agenda for Pakistan. The quid pro quo she seeks for herself includes withdrawal of cases and the removal of the third time bar for premiership. The outcome of these negotiations will become clear in the coming days. The presidential election schedule will be announced in the first week of September. The presidential elections are planned for the last week of September.
While the unforeseen in politics cannot be ruled out, it seems that in the coming phase through mutual adjustments the major political forces may arrive at a settlement which would also not involve fundamental compromises by the politicians or General Musharraf. Neither PPP nor PML-N will support a uniformed president. And General Musharraf will not wait for re-election by the new assembly. The rest may all be negotiable.—Khaleej Times
 

21st century Turkey
Eric Margolis

JUST before Turkey widely admired foreign minister, Abdullah Gul, was sworn last week in as that nation new president, the chief of staff, General Yasar Buyukanit, thundered centres of evil threatened secularism in Turkey. This was a brazen warning the generals might overthrow the civilian government for the fifth time since 1960.
Next, the generals commanding Turkey 515,000-man armed forces second largest staged a shocking act of insubordination and anti-democratic behaviour. They refused to attend the inauguration President Gul who comes from the moderate Islamist Justice and Welfare Party, better known by its acronym, AK.
If there was ever a moment for the US and NATO to show support for democracy it was at President inauguration. Turkey new generals should have been told to go back to their barracks and polish their medals. But aside from a few peeps of tepid support for Turkey new president from mid-level western officials, the US and NATO remained silent.
The generals had good reason to be upset. An oligarchy made up of the military, its secularistallies, and a shadowy deep government of intelligence agents and figures on the wrong side of the law has ruled Turkey for the last 84 years behind a parliamentary government. This westernised minority includes officers, industrialists, judges, academics, media owners, bureaucrats, and an urban upper class. Secularists have held power since modern Turkey was created in the 1920 as a corporate state by army commander and national hero, Mustafa Kemal, known as Ataturk.
Last month, Turkey AK Party, which has mildly Islamic roots, won a landslide victory in a free, fair vote. Secularists, who had been blocking from the presidency, got only 20 per cent of the vote. Turkey elite has long unsuccessfully tried to impose western culture and values on Turkey conservative, deeply religious farmers and recent urban newcomers who make up 70 per cent of the population. Claims by the secularists AK would impose Iranian -style Islamic government on Turkey were rejected by a majority of voters. What some leading secularists really feared was that AK would launch investigations of their sweetheart arms and business deals, and links to the deep government.
Victory likely means the end of the cult of Kemalism and Turkey role, to paraphrase description of Prussia, as ‘an army disguised as a nation. In many ways, Turkey remains stuck in the 1920 or 30. The cult of Ataturk has become a state religion that often seems to want to replace Islam, a faith that Mustafa Kemal detested. It is high time for Turkey to forget the 1920 and march into the 21st Century.
In recent years, AK, led by PM Recep Erdogan, proved itself Turkey most progressive, popular party since World War II. Under Erdogan, AK made important advances in human rights and justice, improved relations with the restive Kurdish minority, fought corruption, and stabilised Turkey chronically chaotic finances. AK also did away with many repressive laws that limited free speech and criticism of the government. However, criticising the military, and insulting Turkey still remain crimes. The government still controls the Muslim religious establishment and writes every Friday sermon given in the nation mosques.—Khaleej Times