My opinion of this week(548):
According to a recent news, DPJ (Democratic Party of Japan) decided to accept to make a prior consultation with ruling parties to form a common policy on the amendment of political fund law. DPJ must have accepted to make preparatory consultation on this issue for ruling parties agreed to accept some fundamental principles which both ruling and opposition fronts insisted to put into amendment of the law. It seems to be a good move.
The problem is that DPJ is still against to make any prior conference with ruling parties on the new oil supply law which replace the Anti Terrorism Law which expires on November 1. DPJ says that they are against to make any prior consultation on the new law so far as the government does not present several basic facts on the activities of oil supply made by Maritime Self-Defense Force at Indian Ocean. I can see the reason why DPJ resist to make any prior conference which ruling fronts request to make prior to formal discussion at the diet session which starts next week.
But many people cannot understand why DPJ is so inflexible to make any prior consultation on this very important issue regardless the fact that they may not change their disagreement with the new law. I agree with such feeling of general public in many ways.
Some DPJ law makers often compare the prior consultation to bid-rigging. I agree with the principle that any of bid-rigging sort of actions or easy give and take negotiation must be rejected in any of such prior talks on such many of important policies. But if it is urnest and serious talks, there is no reason why DPJ oppose to make any of such prior consensus building which is very necessary for making any democratic decision in political world. Such consensus building process is often refer to as Nemawashi in Japanese word which seems to be a good traditional Japanese style of consensus building.
Any of such prior, informal discussion is required at any political worlds in any countries as a matter of facts. It is not a special kind of process in Japanese political world.
Any of such prior consultation in various styles is entirely different from any bid-rigging sort of process which is necessary to make any democratic decision making at diet as well. I would suggest DPJ to be more flexible to accept offers on any prior talks from ruling fronts including the oil supply law.
2007/10/20
Tadashi HAYASE
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Why did US congress make such a silly vote?
My opinion of this week(547):
"WASHINGTON ? Turkey recalled its ambassador to Washington on Thursday and denounced as "unacceptable" a congressional panel's vote declaring the early 20th century slaughter of Armenians by Ottoman Turks a genocide.
Even as the Bush administration scrambled to try to stem the diplomatic fallout, Turkish President Abdullah Gul castigated the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Thursday for its 27-21 vote, saying the decision "has no validity and is not worthy of the respect of the Turkish people."
-Los Angels Times Oct 12 2007
When I read this article of Los Angels Times, I remember the same kind of vote by US Lower House to condemn Japan on the issue known as wartime comfort women on July 30th of this year. The existence of such fact in war time was confirmed by a former cabinet which expressed a regret for what happened during the war time. But due to the lack of careful consideration of the then Prime Minister Abe and advocacy advertising made by some group of Japanese diet members expressing their views on the issue to stop such vote by Lower House, the vote to condemn Japan was finally made at US Lower House.
The decision itself has no validity, and Japanese government accepted it very calmly and people showed almost no reaction against it. But it is true that there were a number of people who were concerned with the fact that US ,the most important allied country for Japan made such vote to condemn Japan on the issue happened 60 years ago. Many Japanese might have been hurt in some way and felt adverse sentiment against US.
I understand what happened in Turkey at this time. The total nation showed such a great anger against the vote of US congress. While the case of comfort women happened 60 years ago, the case of Turkey happened 90 years ago, almost a century ago. It is a part of history of very very long time ago.
History of human being and human societies is a history of wars, in other words a history of murders between various territories and countries, domestic or foreign whatever they may be. There are a great number wars and cases of slaughter in many of those territories all over the world including Europe, America, Middle East, Asia and so on. Parties concerned with any of such wars and disputes share various kind of views from historical, cultural religious, and ethical point of views. Historian mainly work on them.
It seems that US congress often acts like a judge evaluating a foreign history in such manner. How can they condemn the case in Turkey which happened almost a century ago? I just don't understand why they do this. What is their purpose to do this? How do they relate such denunciation with the current diplomatic relation with Turkey?
I remember what I wrote in my BLOG on August 1 the day after US Lower House made a condemn vote for wartime comfort women case. In my BLOG, I suggested Japanese congress to make a condemn vote against such an inhuman act of dropping atomic bomb at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. Nothing can be comparable with such nhuman act like dropping atomic bomb when it comes to historical slaughter.
I don't think it is just a emotional reaction but it is quite fair way to warn against US congress to stop such unreasonable votes against foreign countries.
2007/10/13
Tadashi HAYASE
"WASHINGTON ? Turkey recalled its ambassador to Washington on Thursday and denounced as "unacceptable" a congressional panel's vote declaring the early 20th century slaughter of Armenians by Ottoman Turks a genocide.
Even as the Bush administration scrambled to try to stem the diplomatic fallout, Turkish President Abdullah Gul castigated the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Thursday for its 27-21 vote, saying the decision "has no validity and is not worthy of the respect of the Turkish people."
-Los Angels Times Oct 12 2007
When I read this article of Los Angels Times, I remember the same kind of vote by US Lower House to condemn Japan on the issue known as wartime comfort women on July 30th of this year. The existence of such fact in war time was confirmed by a former cabinet which expressed a regret for what happened during the war time. But due to the lack of careful consideration of the then Prime Minister Abe and advocacy advertising made by some group of Japanese diet members expressing their views on the issue to stop such vote by Lower House, the vote to condemn Japan was finally made at US Lower House.
The decision itself has no validity, and Japanese government accepted it very calmly and people showed almost no reaction against it. But it is true that there were a number of people who were concerned with the fact that US ,the most important allied country for Japan made such vote to condemn Japan on the issue happened 60 years ago. Many Japanese might have been hurt in some way and felt adverse sentiment against US.
I understand what happened in Turkey at this time. The total nation showed such a great anger against the vote of US congress. While the case of comfort women happened 60 years ago, the case of Turkey happened 90 years ago, almost a century ago. It is a part of history of very very long time ago.
History of human being and human societies is a history of wars, in other words a history of murders between various territories and countries, domestic or foreign whatever they may be. There are a great number wars and cases of slaughter in many of those territories all over the world including Europe, America, Middle East, Asia and so on. Parties concerned with any of such wars and disputes share various kind of views from historical, cultural religious, and ethical point of views. Historian mainly work on them.
It seems that US congress often acts like a judge evaluating a foreign history in such manner. How can they condemn the case in Turkey which happened almost a century ago? I just don't understand why they do this. What is their purpose to do this? How do they relate such denunciation with the current diplomatic relation with Turkey?
I remember what I wrote in my BLOG on August 1 the day after US Lower House made a condemn vote for wartime comfort women case. In my BLOG, I suggested Japanese congress to make a condemn vote against such an inhuman act of dropping atomic bomb at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. Nothing can be comparable with such nhuman act like dropping atomic bomb when it comes to historical slaughter.
I don't think it is just a emotional reaction but it is quite fair way to warn against US congress to stop such unreasonable votes against foreign countries.
2007/10/13
Tadashi HAYASE
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)