Greetings,
"The Global Forum of Japan (GFJ) E-Letter" has so far been delivered once every month, but hereafter it will be delivered bimonthly, the next number being delivered on 1 June 2009. It will be delivered electronically, free of charge, to readers in the world interested in Japanese thinking on relations of Japan with the rest of the world and other related international affairs by the Global Forum of Japan (GFJ), private membership organization in Japan for policy-oriented international exchanges.
It will provide the global audience with our news on "GFJ Commentary" and "GFJ Updates."
If you wish to unsubscribe, please enter your email address in the "unsubscribe" box at the following link:
http://www.gfj.jp/eng/e-letter/unsubscribe.html
President, GFJ
"GFJ Commentary"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"GFJ Commentary" presents a view of members of GFJ on relations of Japan with the rest of the world and other related international affairs. The view expressed herein is the author's own and should not be attributed to GFJ.
----------------- - - - -----------------
Suggestions From Japan for Post-Kyoto Protocol Framework
By SUZUKI Keisuke
Member ofthe House of Representatives
(Liberal Democratic Party of Japan)
Only about a year ago, one of the most pressing global issues was soaring crude oil prices. This makes me realize the transient and fast-changing nature of the economic trends. In the face of soaring crude oil prices, such alternate solutions as biomass energy or energy-saving technology attracted much attention, and so did countermeasures against global warming in the world. Now, in contrast, with energy prices standing stable and a sense of crisis on the wane, environmentalissues at large seem to be slightly losing worldwide attention.
But the year 2009 should mark a momentous milestone towards forging a post-Kyoto Protocolframework to address global warming, which will come into effect from 2013. The success ofmeasures against global warming hinges on how far the greenhouse gas emission could be reduced. And, the international community has almost reached a consensus on the total requiredamount of emission cuts in order to control the certain level of global warming. Besides, it has agreed on the need to achieve an amount of reduction calculated on world's spare economic capacity. Thus far, it was the language of science. But here comes in politics, where each country is firmly committed to the pursuit of out-and-out national interests, over the question ofallocating to each responsibility of reduction. The discussion over when to set emission baseline or whether reduction is calculated by total amount or basic Unit for Energy is not the language of science but simply that of politics.
While Japan is duly required further to reduce its emission as a country with the highest level of energy efficiency in the world, more importantly, it is in a position to launch a scientificapproach more positively and offer scientifically feasible and realistic models for reducing greenhouse gas emission. As far as developing countries are concerned, from my own experience, it is important to be so careful and realistic as to prepare different bases for calculation of reduction targets, respectively for the industrial and transportation sectors, which can be rather sassily controlled by government control and allows for scientific calculation, and for the private sector, which is easily influenced by individual decision maker.
In this connection, I have been trying to convince the Japanese government on such occasions as meetings of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) of Japan that it is apparently unscientific to entrust each government to work out its own medium-term goal of reduction by using its own standard of calculation, and thus it is necessary to apply the same global standard of calculation to each country to formulate a medium-term goal including at least that of reduction potential. Instead of locking horns with other countries over the reduction targets estimated in each country behind closed doors, it is required of Japan now to convince the international community of a need to examine what kind of model is most scientific. As for the industrial sector, sufficient knowledge has been accumulated through such framework as Asia-Pacific Partnership for Clean Development and Climate (APP). Japan should communicate those ideas above to the world before it is too late. Upon having fixed the reduction potential of each country through scientific approach based on scientific data, we should discuss who should bear the cost of the technology required; manufacturers which developed the technology, developed countries or developing countries as beneficiaries.
Here is an idea. As it is not fair that a developer should bear the cost of transfer and licensing oftechnology, and in order not to discourage development incentives or future innovation, it is preferable that the technology transfer should be conducted on a commercial basis with due respect for intellectual property rights. And in cases of developing countries except emerging ones, the costs required for it are to be born by developed countries through funds when necessary. What do you think of this?
(This is the English translation of an article, which originally appeared on the BBS "Giron-Hyakushutsu" of GFJ on February 4, 2009 and was posted on "GFJ Commentary" on 26 February, 2009.)
----------------- - - - -----------------
How We Should Respond to Terrorism
By HOSONO Goshi
Member of the House of Representatives
(Democratic Party ofJapan)
There was a massive terrorist attack in Mumbai, which claimed many victims including Japanese citizens. Countless such tragedies have been reported since September 11 terrorist attacks. When the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) was discussing within the party whether or not to support Anti-Terrorism Special Measures Law, we fiercely debated over what should be done to wipe out terrorism. Some said that we could not drive out terrorists without using force, while others said that eye-for-eye use of force does not end terrorism so we must focus on civilian aid. Not yielding a point, the two sides were at a deadlock. But a senior member of the party, who was in youth a radical student activist, broke the ice by saying "In my own experience in the past as a terrorist manque, we must call to arms, at least temporarily, to sweep terrorists away." I was really shocked at the remark of this fellow, who is an ex-member of former Socialist Party of Japan. Eventually, this gave a momentum in the party for the support of the air strikes against terrorists' bases in Afghanistan.
Indeed, in a world which experienced such horrible incident as September 11, counterattacks against terrorists were urgently called for. And, I was among those who backed that policy at that time. I still believed in that decisive remark of the senior member. But, it should have been "temporary." I suspect that those subsequent force-dependent policies such as the war on Iraq and counter-terrorist sweep operations in Afghanistan outlasted their validity. We have opposed the war on Iraq and emphasized the need to provide civilian aid to Afghanistan. But we could not stop those policies persued by the Bush Administration and the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) of Japan. President Obama says that the war on Iraq was a mistake. His willingness to talk with dictators and terrorists could risk compromise with them. But still he has a chance to break a deadlock. The Iraq war and Afghan War have often been referred to as "War on Terror." But I must say that this notion is fatally misleading. Although it is necessary in some cases to call to arms to wipe out terrorists, they could not be the enemy against which to wage a frontal war, because hotbeds of terrorism are, regretfully enough, deeply embedded in each society. The point is that we must stamp out 'terrorism.' Now is the time for us, Japanese, to determine how our own counter-terrorist strategy should be, instead of merely following that of the United States.
(This is the English translation of an article, which originally appeared on the BBS "Giron-Hyakushutsu" of GFJ on December 2, 2008 and was posted on "GFJ Commentary" on 23 January, 2009.)
----------------- - - - -----------------
For more views and opinions in the backnumber of "GFJ Commentary," the latest of which are as follows, please refer to:
http://www.gfj.jp/eng/commentary/backnumber.html
No.20 The Question is Afghanistan
by IRIYAMA Akira, Guest Professor of Cyber University, Executive Research Advisor of International Development Center of Japan
(10 December 2008)
No.19 Hailing Prime Minister Aso's Stance towards China
by YUSHITA Hiroyuki, Visiting Professor of Kyorin University
(20 November 2008)
No.18 Georgia Crisis Reveals Limits of the European Neighborhood Policy
by KOKUBO Yasuyuki, Professor of University of Shizuoka
(15 October 2008)
No.17 Japan's 'Virtue' and the Abduction Issue
by YAMAUCHI Masayuki, Professor of The University of Tokyo
(30 September 2008)
No.16 On Japan's Use of Space for Defense Purposes
by KINOSHITA Hiroo, Advisor of National Small Business & Information Promotion Center
(23 August 2008)
No.15 For the Agriculture with Security, Safety, Low Price and Stability
by IWAKUNI Tetsundo, Member of the House of Representatives (Democratic Party of Japan)
(24 July 2008)
"GFJ Updates"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"GFJ Updates" introduces to you latest events, announcements and/or publications of GFJ.
Events
------------- - - - -------------
JFIR and its two sister organizations, Global Forum of Japan and Council on East Asian Community, taking advantage of an occasion of a visit to Japan of a prominent person on international and other affairs, regularly organize a "Diplomatic Roundtable" meeting, which is an informal gathering of members of JFIR and its two sister organizations for a frank exchange of views and opinions with the visiting guest. The 47th "Diplomatic Roundtable" meeting on the topic of "Japan-US Relations Under the Obama Administration" was held on 9 March 2009. An introductory presentation by Mr. W. Michael MESERVE, Minister Counselor for Political Affairs of the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo, was as follows.
The Obama Administration has been undergoing a drastic change in the U.S. foreign policy since the inauguration of the presidency, which is typified by the Secretary of State's remarks, "America cannot solve the problems of the world alone, and the world cannot solve them without America." And "Emphasis on soft-power and international harmonization" is a basic stance for the U.S. new diplomacy.
President Obama has been running on a platform of "Change," but the U.S. policy towards Asia and Japan will be continuously important and it will be a symbol of "Unchanged Policy." And it was the most distinctive evidence that Japan was the first country in Hillary Clinton's first overseas trip as U.S. secretary of state, saying "Our alliance with Japan is a cornerstone of American policy in Asia, essential to maintaining peace and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region." U.S. and Japan should work on global issues such as climate change and global health, and Japan's increasing assistance to Afghanistan will be highly appreciated.
====================================================================
Please send your comments and/or questions to:
info@gfj.jp
To customize your subscription, or unsubscribe, please refer to:
http://www.gfj.jp/eng/e-letter/e-letter.htm
Executive Governor: WAKABAYASHI Hideki
The Global Forum of Japan
2-17-12-1301, Akasaka, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 107-0052
JAPAN
Tel: +81-3-3584-2193
Fax: +81-3-3505-4406