The main threat against Japan? Its own leader

On July 21, 2013, Shinzo Abe's LDP will probably win the House of Councillors elections, and the controversial Prime Minister move closer to his dreams of revising the Constitution, discarding the peaceful nature of Post-War Japan, and restoring the belligerent nature of Imperial Japan. The publication of the annual white paper "Defense of Japan" is the perfect occasion to mobilize the base ahead of the elections.

Abe has made no secret of his intentions to modify the fundamental Article 9 of the Constitution, which clearly defines Japan as a peaceful nation ("Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes"*), and prior to that, to change the Article 96, which makes it difficult to change the Constitution itself. Right now, you first need the two thirds of each of the two Houses to vote the change, then a popular vote to ratify the text**.

In order to optimize his victory in elections that vast moderate majority don't perceive as vital for the future of Japan, Abe needs a strong mobilization from his ultra-nationalist base. That's one of the reasons why his government has recently been reviving tensions with Japan's neighbors around Dokdo, Senkaku, or Kuril islands. And should uproar and anger explode across the region, they would once more be used to trick the peaceful people of Japan into believing that this anti-democratic government is actually protecting the interests of a people surrounded by hot-tempered barbarians.

Very significantly, the "Defense of Japan 2013" annual white paper issued on July 9 by the Ministry of Defense justifies the first increase in Japan's defense budget in 11 years by depicting East Asia as a region on the brink of war, where everybody's beefing up their military capacities, and where diplomacy is not even mentioned as an option: North Korea's nuclear threats got more serious than ever, "China’s activities in the sea/air area surrounding Japan involve its intrusion into Japan’s territorial waters, its violation of Japan's airspace and even dangerous actions that could cause a contingency situation", "Russia continues to intensify its military activities", and even Southeast Asian countries are forced to modernize their military forces.

Of course, the Abe Government has been pouring oil on every possible fire to make diplomacy as irrelevant as possible, and the document hints at more than just increases in Defense spendings: towards a structural revision of the National Defense Program Guidelines and the Basic Policy for National Defense, and potentially a redefinition of key concepts such as "military power", "self defense", "right for belligerency" or, why not, "control over the military by democratic political authority".

The new National Defense Program Guidelines expected by the end of the year - in other words after the elections - are expected to include the capacity, for Self Defense Forces - provided the name sticks -, "of striking military targets in enemy countries" (see "White paper echoes Abe's plans to strengthen Japan’s defense" - Asahi Shimbun 20130710).

What we'd like to hear is Shinzo Abe state loud and clear, here and now, ubi et orbi, and with all the specifics, his precise vision and his ultimate goals, how he would rewrite the Constitution, in which terms he would redefine the nation, what would be allowed and not allowed for its defense. But unlike Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto, Shinzo Abe always wisely / cowardly comes short of fully speaking his mind out. And if he never leaves any room for misinterpretations, he knows how to use symbols and circular references when he's venturing into the most outrageous territories, as he recently proved during his sick tribute to the infamous Unit 731 (see "Can't top that? Shinzo Abe posing as Shiro Ishii, the Josef Mengele of Imperial Japan").

So will the right for peace triumph over the right for belligerency? With an opposition unwilling to risk infuriating the ultra-conservative minority that corrupts and controls Japan's whole political system, the population remains overwhelmingly unaware of the dangers. But one thing is sure: belligerence being defined as an aggressive or warlike disposition or behavior, Shinzo Abe himself is more than ready for action.

And in this most defining moment, the main question remains***: will the great people of Japan wake up at last, and say no to Shinzo Abe, or will it let him continue saying and doing whatever he fancies, and let the whole nation follow him along this suicidal path?

blogules 2013

Since 2003, nonsensical posts about noncritical issues in nonenglish (get your blogules transfusion in French)
NEW: join blogules on Facebook!!! and Twitter (@stephanemot, @blogules)

* Note that the repudiation of pacifism happens to be the first article in the definition of fascism, as written by Benito Mussolini himself in 1932: "Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. It thus repudiates the doctrine of Pacifism -- born of a renunciation of the struggle and an act of cowardice in the face of sacrifice. War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have courage to meet it. All other trials are substitutes, which never really put men into the position where they have to make the great decision -- the alternative of life or death". Note also that the last element of Mussolini's definition of fascism refers to imperialism, another key ingredient in today's Imperial Japan nostalgia: "For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence". (source: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.asp - long time no recycling for this definition - see "Red Blogule to neo-fascists - LET'S FACE IT THEY'RE FASCISTS" - 2004/05/27)

** see previous episodes, and on Seoul Village: "ABE forced to back down a bit. For the moment. Next PR stunt: KIM Jong-un"

*** see "Dear Japan, Say No To Fascism"

And now for something completely different

"It’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds".

With this, President Obama could let Sarah Palin drown in her own blood libelling pool if he weren't a truly compassionate leader : "we cannot do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on each other".

From Tucson, AZ to Tunis now: the great people of Tunisia managed to push dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and his Trabelsi clique out. But some of their thugs remain loose on the street, and at the other end of the hate line, fundamentalists are more than ever eager to wedge their ways into the country. They obviously were not invited at the table for the national unity government : the unity they seek doesn't quite fit the democratic agenda.

From Tunis to Juba: here, the democratic agenda is set and a new country is about to emerge from the referendum. Complete with controversial borders, and strategic pipelines, Southern Sudan is also the perfect target for hatemongers.

From Tunis and Juba to Abidjan: these days, Laurent Gbagbo is probably paying some attention to what's happening in other African countries. To the Ben Ali scenario, I'm sure he'd prefer to see Ivory Coast split in two. Of course, without any democratic process.

From Tunis to Washington, DC : no need to wait for the next WikiLeaks batch to know that Ben Ali's quick retreat to Saudi Arabia owes something to US diplomacy. A small compromise, but an overall B+ for Secretary of State Clinton in this (at long last) booming region. Maybe Chinese diplomats contributed : all of a sudden, supporting local dictators in exchange for raw materials is not as politically correct as it used to be.

Cynics would say that after this African Yalta, the Chinese will keep nurturing their dictator in North Sudan, while Americans will start pumping oil in South Sudan.

Another victory for Africa yesterday ? The new Front National leader has African origins : like her dad Jean-Marie, Marine Le Pen shares her origins with all of us French, Americans, Chinese... you name it. But I don't think she's going to celebrate this politically and scientifically correct fact. In a way that heals.


blogules 2011

If Americans knew

It's easy to twist figures or maps, but they simply can't lie when unfairness is so obvious.

Founded by journalist Alison Weir, If Americans Knew (ifamericansknew.org) is one of many trying to fill the gaps, but this site targets the American audience and that's an essential step towards peace in the Middle East.

Fair pedagogy is crucial, and the American audience must hear Palestinian voices as well as Israeli voices. Right now, that's not the case : US media tend to take the Israeli side even when Israeli leaders err on the wrong side of the road

Traditionally, Americans are not well informed of what's going on overseas in general. And too often, they can only see one side of the coin. It's not only a matter of networks being biased, but also of viewers with a short attention span for things not American.

Yet change seems to be coming with new voices (Obama, J Street...), and the internet. In spite of the Israeli blackout (foreign media were blocked outside of the strip), all major channels had to somehow mention things happening in Gaza because these things were all over the web, because that was the "story" to "tell".

What Americans have been told for decades is that Palestinians are terrorists and Israeli under siege. What the world is realizing is that terror has changed sides, that Palestine is under siege, and that if hatemongers are gaining ground in Gaza, it's mainly because hatemongers are winning in Tel Aviv.

BTW, excellent and timely report from the Red Cross today.

blogules 2009

Can't buy me love

The US sponsors peace process in the Middle East : 30 billions for Israel and 12 for Egypt. The sums are already allocated for weapons made by Uncle Sam. The White House's PR artists found that system more PC than their usual sale pitch ("we widened the Federal deficit by giving away 42 more billions to US death industries"). Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries added 20 billions to the pool in order to get the same Weapons of Mass Destructions as their neighbors.

France sponsors environmental policies in Africa : Nicolas Sarkozy helps Libya get drinkable water and Gabon restore its forests. The Elysee Palace's PR artists preferred that version to their usual sale pitch ("we sold a nuclear plant to Muammar al-Qaddafi and we gave 50 millions to Omar Bongo"). To make good measure, France will generously allow Libyans to purchase 100 millions worth of weapons Made In France.

Diplomats, no. Deep loot mats, si.

Back to square one, back to Ground Zero

Bin Laden determined to strike in US.

It took six years to say it out loud, the creation of a Department of Homeland Security, the death of thousands of US civilians in the 9/11 attacks, of thousands of US soldiers in Iraq, of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians who lost their country along with their dictator.

The war on terror is a total failure : the US helped islamists draft millions of new sympathizers and thousands of new terrorists, and even provided them with a new real size training ground. Whether US troops leave Iraq or not, these apt pupils will put into practice their cultural learnings for make benefit glorious nation of Amerika as well as of all other nations.

Furthermore, instead of fighting the right battle at the root of terror, the US have fueled anger, despair and unfairness, deliberately slaughtering what was left of the peace process in the Middle East and especially between Israel, Palestine and Lebanon.

The man in charge proposes peace talks the way he has always been talking about peace : are you with us or against us ? are you good or evil ? will you help us remove from power this Saddam / Hamas we empowered all by ourselves ?

White blogule to the NYT - The State of the Union in Words

Dear compassionate reader,

Last year, I would release a scoop for your eyes only : the State of the Union speech as initially written by George W. Bush. A few days later, you could measure the gap between his fundamentalist way of thinking and the official propaganda*.

This year, a new face joined the sitcom for Season VII : behind the Kommander in Thief sitted Lobby Dick Cheney, as usual and with his trademark snarl, but also Nancy Pelosi, completing a perfect Good vs Evil picture.

And the New York Times offered an exciting gimmick to fully enjoy the show : an online search engine comparing the usage of keywords during all SotU speeches since 2001**. For example, the words Iraq/Iraqi(s) were never used in 2001, twice in 2002, and respectively 21, 24, 27, 16 and 34 times the following years. There is even a graphic showing the positions of all occurences in all speeches.

If you compare "Security" with "Social Security", you can notice all 15 occurences of the former were actually associated with the latter in 2001. One year later, only 2 of 19 occurences of Security had something to do with health.

Bush bats a steady 5,000 words and 53.5 "America" per speech, plus 5.7 for "United States". "China" is not exactly at the top of his mind : he uttered it once this year, tying the humble record of years 2002, 2003 and 2006. The "World" ? Dubya didn't care for it when he took office (2 mentions), gave it some consideration after 9/11 (19-26-13-15-27 between 2002 and 2006), and put it back to the bottom drawer in front of a semi-hostile audience yesterday (10).

The word "peace" has never been so unpopular in his mouth : 3 miserable appearances in 2007 after a solid 6- 5- 10- 5- 12- 8 streak. On the other hand, "war" is back to its peak levels : 11 vs 2-13-13-12-5-2.

Don't be fooled by this overall rather balanced 46-58 "peace-war" ratio : from 2001 to 2007, the POTUS mentioned only 19 "liberty" and 20 "democracy" vs 44 (non-social) "security" and 145 "terror".

Another propaganda favorite looks almost abandoned this year : the "Freedom" agenda knocked only 3 times at our door (vs 8-14-5-8-21-17). W seems to have some trouble selling values this season, so he sticks to less vague concepts and pitches below the waist, where Joe Sixpack can catch a neither fast- nor knuckle- ball. Significantly, the part of "freedom" in the overall occurences of "free" is also at its lowest point : 27% vs an average 65%, after last year's staggering peak (94.4%!).

Anyway... what George W. Bush said is one thing, how he looked another and what he'll do yet another. The actual State of the Union remains that of the Divided States of Amerika.

* "White blogule to the State of the Union speech - complete and uncut edition" (20060126), followed by "Red blogule to Demokracy - professor Bush's vision" (20060204)
** see nytimes.com/ref/washington/20070123_STATEOFUNION.htmlx

VOTE FOR AMERICA - VOTE AGAINST BUSH IF YOU ARE A TRUE REPUBLICAN

If you are a true Republican and if you are a true Conservative, you MUST vote against your party.

Back in 2004, you missed the opportunity to kick George W. Bush out of the White House and restore the values that built America. If you don't realize by now how far you have been betrayed by this President, here are a few wake up calls :

- the Bush Administration doesn't fight terror but feeds it. You've heard about it, you may even understand some of it, but that's not the worst piece of news : all this is done on purpose

- this president turned America into a outlaw and a pariah, insulting the very values he pretends to represent : how can you be proud of your country and how can it remain a model democracy overseas when its leader refuses any kind of accountability before the international community as well as before its own Congress, when it legalizes torture and abductions, when it denies its own citizens basic human and legal rights ? Do you believe this "compassionate republican" ? Do you think this president does what is best for his country or what is best for his own hidden agenda ?

- it is time for you to understand Bush's agenda is neither conservative nor even neo-conservative : the aim of the game is to make fundamentalism mainstream across the world and in the US. And fundamentalism cannot survive in a peaceful environment - fundamentalism feeds from fear, anger, war, frustration, injustice, unfairness, the absence of debate... the very way this Administration is running and ruining the country. Don't expect these guys to lead Amerika nor the World to peace.

- this has nothing to do about genuine faith or religion : this is about changing politics, science, society, about raping the very idea of democracy to please a bunch of madhatters

- if you don't consider US fundamentalists as mad as Islamist fundamentalists, consider this : from the very start, your leaders wanted Iraq to collapse and be parted, Iran to become the superevil it is now and Israel to infuriate its neighbors. All this because the craziest among them believe the final battle between Israel and Evil must happen as soon as possible in order to provoque the return of the Messiah during their lifetime... How is that for an "intelligent design" ?

You may like your Republican representative or your senator but do you really think America can afford two more years of impunity for the Bush Administration ? Do you really want to see what these people (from the White House, not from Capitol Hill) will do to make sure they remain in power after Dubya's second term ?

What will you tell your children and grandchildren ?

Vote for America, vote against Bush.

White blogule to UNIFIL v 2.0 - Touche, Mr Bolton

As expected, France will contribute with about 2,000 soldiers to the new UNIFIL. The Quai d'Orsay managed to get what it wanted : a stronger force, a stronger UN, a stronger Europe and above all (let's hope) a stronger Lebanon. Not a remake of the 1995 fiasco in Bosnia. Not the dirty quick fix the US diplomacy dreamt of.
Bush dared criticize France for doing nothing but there is a big difference between doing nothing during the bombing of Lebanon (follow my stare) and putting a positive pressure on peacemakers during the ceasefire. I tend to believe the second option to be more efficient for a durable peace in the region. Besides, I prefer the French position (send 200 troops first, add 2,000 once the conditions are confirmed) to the Italian (promise 3,000 troops first, send 2,000 once the frame is set).
As expected, some Israelis are starting to wonder what went wrong. Many do ask the right questions : did we have to wage this war in the first place ? why did we use forbidden US weapons against civilians ? can we trust our leaders ? what's wrong with our country at the national and the international level ?... Unfortunately, others speak louder with the wrong answers : victory was at hand but politicians failed the military and didn't go all the way, Israel needs a tougher regime.

Red blogule to fundamentalists - bases are loaded

The disarmament of Hezbollah is under way thanks to... Hezbollah itself : the organization is methodically getting rid of its stocks of weapons over Israel. Tel Aviv's attacks are not meant to destroy Hezbollah but to make sure Eretz Israel has strong enemies for the decades to come and thus, to make sure Israeli fundamentalists remain in power. Paradoxically and just like Bush's counterproductive "War on Terror" helps terrorists recruit new followers, new waves of antisemitism will lead more Israelis towards the welcoming arms of their country's extreme right.
Whether from Iran, Israel or the USA, fundamentalists don't want peace : peace means living without fear nor coercion ; peace means opening up and accepting the world as it should be, diverse and tolerant ; peace means the irrelevance of fundamentalism.
Look at them cheer up all over the world : radical Sunnis and radical Shiites applauding each other's victories ; Amerikan New-Born Neo-Cons and Iranian radical islamists using each other as evil witches to be hunted in a sick medieval obscurantism remake...
US "diplomats" don't seem to care much when masses of pro-Hezbollah demonstrators hit the streets in Baghdad. They don't seem to worry when Israel ruins the heritage of Yitzhak Rabin and infuriates the whole world as well as Bush did back in 2003 with an unecessary war doubled by a provocative occupation... The White House's most radical wings are actually rejoicing.
I wonder when the US citizens will eventually realize their country is led by lunatics devoted to putting out fire with gasoline. It will take decades to repair the image of the country overseas (not to mention implementing actual peace) - but judging by the 2004 landslide victory of immoderate conservatism across Amerika, I don't believe the restoration of the values that made America respected to be a priority.

Red blogule to Operation Summer Rain - peace drowned in monsoon

Israel won't enjoy longlasting peace if its government keeps humiliating Palestinians. Just like Bush's Amerika, Sharon-and-now-Olmert's Eretz Israel openly mocks at intra-and-international laws, exacerbates hatred, fuels radicalism, extremism and terrorism, loses all respect and credit from moderates.
Just like Sharon got rid of Arafat, Olmert can wack Hamas but it doesn't matter since the annilihation of each of every one constructive hope today means the creation of thousands of new ennemies tomorrow.
And all this for what ? Just artificially keeping a minority of ultra-conservatives and fundamentalists alive ; species bound to extinction in a peaceful world.
Where on Earth are Israel's moderates ? Why are they keeping silent ? At least, we know why the US are not doing anything to stop this sick joke...

Red blogule to the UN Bomber - remember FDR words

As George W. Bush is rehearsing his United Nations speech, I propose a few words by a great American President who designed this institution, a man he is so often pretending to resemble ; Franklin Delano Roosevelt :

. "Why should one outlaw nation be able to run amock and murder or maim a brother nation without being called to account for it, without being prevented from further misdeeds in the community of nations?"

. "We have learned that we cannot live alone, at peace; that our own well-being is dependent on the well-being of other nations-far away. We have learned that we must live as men, not as ostriches, nor as dogs in the manger. We have learned to be citizens of the world, members of the human community. We have learned the simple truth. Emerson said that "the only way to have a friend is to be one". We can gain no lasting peace if we approach it with suspicion and mistrust and with fear. We can gain it only if we proceed with the understanding and confidence and courage which flow from conviction."

No wonder Dubya sends his UN Bomber to get rid of such a subversive outfit.

And no wonder the US reject France's proposal of a tax on plane tickets : NWA and Delta can't be listening to Villepin's speech while reading chapter 11.

Red blogule to quagmires and bayous

To those who doubted Bush was a fake, Cindy and Katrina exposed the truth : a quagmire abroad and a bayou at home, that's how deep the US have sunk. "Our Dear Compassionate Leader", a born again Christian with a well trained Texan accent, turns out to be a selfish and amoral stubborn New England brat, enjoying two more days off in his own ranch when real people from the South die in their own feces.
Time to rehearse the National Anthem's lyrics, folks :
Q :
Oh, say can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming?
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
A :
Err... no, actually I can't see. I did see quite a few rockets and bombs but the banner people tend to follow is that of the Red Cross.
On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, now conceals, now discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines on the stream:
'Tis the star-spangled banner! O long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.
A :
Lemme get you some glasses. The reflection on the stream is a dead body.
And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has wiped out their foul footstep's pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.
A :
"That band" is still at large at the White House. "The hireling and slave" happen to be US citizens. Some were ordered to bring "the havoc of war and the battle's confusion" overseas, others found no refuge and ended in "the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave".
Q :
Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the heaven-rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
A :
"Rescued land"? "Victory" ? "Peace" ? That remains to be seen. Blame the power that hath made the US a despised nation : Lord Dubya, King of the Banana Republic of the Divided States of America.

Red blogule to deniers

Dubya doesn't mind Karl taking a leak.
Tony doesn't see any link whatsoever between Iraq and 7/7.
Ariel doesn't understand how his Gaza trick could terminate the peace process.
The fact is Rove deliberately crossed the line.
The fact is Blair deliberately betrayed his fellow citizens.
The fact is Sharon deliberately sticks to his usual hardline : he turned the Gaza strip into an unmanageable ghetto, getting rid of it will unknot the demographic dilemma for Israeli radicals, and the inevitable failure of "independant Gaza" will end all talks about Cisjordania (not to mention Jerusalem).
The fact is no one can stop them as they keep insulting History.
Shame on terrorists, but furthermore shame on those who were supposed to eradicate terror.

White blogule to good intentions - Mind the gap

Strike the pose, George. You'll have your snapshot next to that of Jimmy & Anwar, or even better that of Billy, Yasser & Itzhak. All smiles at home, at your dear lil' White House on the prairie. After blocking all peace attempts for over 4 years and setting the World on fire... Luckily enough, you can put the blame on Arafat or even Powell for the failures of your first mandate. Not on you ("Make no mistake" is your middle name)... But tell you what : I'll even swallow my pride and endure your presence on that picture for posterity if you manage to make Palestine happen during your second mandate. Heck, even Russia celebrates Stalin for Yalta's 60th anniversary.
And you're also tackling that deficit issue now ? What a week ! Well... even divided by two this remains a huge deficit to be compared to the comfortable surplus you inherited. And you don't even take into account your little extras in Iraq. I'm sure a very efficient cut will be performed, but it's likely to be on your project by the very majority you got elected on that radical program of yours a couple of monthes ago...
I should rejoice and yet I can't help but smell a rat. Let's name it Karl for convenience. How is dear Karl gonna cope with the hardliners for 2006 and 2008 ?