By Feng Zhaokui
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe decided recently to delay the
Upper House election, originally scheduled for July 22, till a week
later on July 29. In the mean time, Abe, who once declared he would
make "constitutional reform" the focal point of this election, will
have to shift his focus to the "pension issue" instead because of
intense public concern and worries over the government's
mishandling of pension records.
Japan's social security system consists mainly of two systems -
medical care and pension insurance, which are of close interest to
the Japanese people.
The country's pension insurance system contains three elements:
basic pension, employee's pension insurance, and mutual aid
insurance. Basic pension, which covers farmers, self-employed
people, housewives and students above 20 years of age, derives its
funds from premium paid by participating individuals and the
government fiscal budget; the employees' pension insurance cashes
in on salaried workers' monthly pay, which is matched by their
employers; mutual aid pension insurance, which serves national and
local government employees and college teachers, is built on
individual contributions and matching sums from the government.
The nation's pension management has long been a mess under the
care of the Social Security Agency, particularly in 1997, when a
lot of insurance payment records were misplaced during operations
to switch the National Pension's numbering scheme to a unified
Basic Pension Insurance number scheme to avoid multiple numbers for
each individual.
As a result, many pensioners could not receive their monthly
checks because the agency failed to locate their records. The
problem caused widespread anger and anxiety among the public and
some expressed their dismay with Abe's administration, saying they
hoped Japan would first become a worry-free nation before turning
into a "beautiful" one, apparently in a satirical reference to
Abe's popular book Building a Beautiful Nation.
Against this backdrop, Japanese political parties, including the
Liberal Democrats Party (LDP) and Democrats, are engaged in fierce
debates over the problem of misplaced pension insurance records.
And the issue has become the weapon of choice for opposition
parties such as the Democrats against the ruling LDP.
As the Upper House election approaches, one of the most
frequently used phrases people keep hearing politicians utter these
days is "for the people". The LDP claims it is urgently rushing
through the special act on the reform of the Social Security Agency
"for the people", while the Democratic Party is demanding a
thorough investigation into the issue of more than 60 million
pension payment records that cannot be confirmed, albeit also "for
the people".
In fact, when the LDP accused the Democrats of "fanning
discontent" over the pension issue to advance the party's "own
interest and strategy", people also found the LDP was doing the
same in its bid to douse the flames and minimize the impact the
pension issue has inflicted on the party's Upper House election
prospects.
In July 2004, the LDP suffered a serious setback in the 20th
Upper House election because of the pension issue (it failed to
secure the 51-seat bottom line with only 49 seats, while the
Democrats won 50 seats, 12 more than predicted, to emerge as the
biggest victor). The memory of this defeat is still painfully
fresh.
The pension system has been the most important issue in Japan's
elections because of its vital significance to people's lives and
well-being. The main reason the LDP lost in the 2004 Upper House
election is that the voters were upset about the ruling party's
strong-arm tactics to force its pension system reform bill
(including such details as increasing the pension payment rate and
lowering the amount per withdrawal) through Parliament just before
the election.
In other words, the real motive behind Abe's decision to delay
the Upper House election is to allow the LDP some breathing space
and let the pension "hot potato" cool down as much as possible,
while "for the people" is just a bumper sticker. It appears this
catchy phrase does not mean what it says after all.
Compared to the LDP's "for the people" battle cry, the most
frequently used word by Abe since taking office has to be "the
country". Revising the pacifist Constitution and breaking away from
the post-war state system, the ultimate aim of such moves is to
realize the dream of becoming a "political major power" and "normal
country". In other words, the constitutional reform is "for the
country".
Whether "for the country" can be understood as "for the people"
depends on whether the "country" in policy makers' minds truly
serves the fundamental and long-term interests of the people.
The post-war pacifist Constitution brought the Japanese people a
period of unprecedented peace and prosperity. That said, it is
reasonable to revise or amend some of the articles to fit the
changing situation after 60 years of implementation (which is
exactly the reason for the New Komeito party to call for
constitutional amendments instead of revision).
But, the ruling LDP has its mind firmly set on rewriting Article
IX (especially its second provision) - the core of the post-war
pacifist Constitution - so that Japan will continue to put up with
United States occupation (some Japanese scholars believe Japan
remains occupied as long as US military bases stay there) while
building up "an army capable of fighting alongside its American
ally." Just ask any ordinary Japanese citizen.
If then Prime Minister Yoshida Shigeru succeeded in his attempt
to rewrite the pacifist Constitution back in the 1950s, Japan would
have been obliged as an ally to send troops to join US forces
fighting the Vietnam War. Is that really what the Japanese people
would have wanted?
From this point of view, the real significance of "for the
country" could very well be the opposite of what "for the people"
stands for, though the two phrases are different by just one
word.
The author is a researcher from the Institute of Japanese
Studies with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
(China Daily July 10, 2007)
