Democratic Values
Fundamental to reconciliation is responsibility and accountability. Nation states accept responsibility for their misdeeds, and their allies keep them accountable. Democratic Japan, however, does not find it politically necessary or feasible to take responsibility on the history issues. Equally significantly, its allies do not find it important to hold Japan accountable for its history or to its democracy.
For example, a September Japanese government directive to monitor opposition party document requests has not garnered attention outside Japan. On October 3rd, JiJi English-language press reported that the LDP has urged all Japanese ministries and agencies to consult with the ruling party when opposition parties ask for government documents. Naoto Kan, acting president of the biggest opposition party, the DPJ, criticized the LDP for trying to take direct control of government documents, calling the practice an “attempt to destroy democracy.” European and American leaders have been utterly silent.
There always has been reluctance among the Western democracies to criticize Japan’s version of democracy. Maybe it is because Japan is Asian and different. Maybe it is because Japan is the supposed bulwark against Communism in Asia. Maybe it is that the monitoring systems so vigilant in the West are nearly non-existent in Japan. Whatever the reason, Japan is rarely made accountable for its democracy or held to the same standards of responsibility as other G-7 countries.
Only recently has Japan been scrutinized for its lack of laws prohibiting human trafficking, child pornography, and child abduction. The unwillingness to regulate these actions reflects a certain social perspective on the roles of women and children in Japanese society. These are issues about morality and values. They are not necessarily political, or even elements of a democracy. Every society has attitudes on how to treat its weakest members that shape its values. In the West, these social values have become part of our politics, and now are inseparable from our notion of democracy.
The LDP’s effort to manage access to the government exposes the flaws in the structure and practice of Japan’s democracy. Many of the basic instruments that construct a democratic political system are weak or non-existent in Japan. It is troubling that the bureaucracy can allow, and no laws seem to exist to prevent, the ruling party from monitoring the requests of an opposition party. Japan’s public interest groups are limited and underdeveloped, physical intimidation is used by all parties as persuasion, and the press self-censors its investigations. Civil society, which is considered by the UN a pillar of democracy and a critical mechanism to protest heavy handed government moves, is ancillary and fragile in Japanese politics.*
Until recently, a political regime or form of government was merely an instrument to enforce and enhance values. Today, many now see democracy as a value in itself. In 2005, the UN declared democracy “a universal value.” This reflects some sort of international consensus that the political construction of democracy is of social worth. By implication, the UN declaration signals that democracy is something worth preserving, defending, and monitoring. An attack on a democracy is seen akin to an attack on a child by a predator. This UN-initiated view suggests that existing democracies now need to be held accountable for maintaining their democratic governments.
Europeans have embraced this responsibility. At the end of September, two rightist parties -- the Freedom Party and the Alliance for the Future of Austria -- won a combined 29 percent in Austria’s parliamentary elections. Both parties advocate an end to immigration and the expulsion of foreigners and asylum seekers who commit crimes. There is alarm that this voting strength will turn Austria’s government to the right with extreme rightist parliamentary leaders. In 1999 elections, the ultra-rightist Freedom Party won 27 percent of the vote and was included in the government, leading to months of European Union sanctions over statements seen as anti-Semitic or sympathetic to the labor policies of Adolf Hitler's. Elected government or not, Austria’s fellow Europeans did not feel that the extreme rightist views of some of Austria’s parliamentarians were appropriate for a democracy.
The Western democracies made it clear (and will again) to the Austrians that they were accountable to more than themselves for their democracy. A turn to the far right in Austria threatened the prevailing values that had developed among Europe’s other democracies. In postwar Europe, some attitudes are unacceptable for a stable society.
With this in mind, we must look at Japan’s democracy and ask aloud what expectations other democracies hold of Japan. It is a concern that there are not louder protests in Japan to the LDP’s interference with the democratic process, but it is of equal concern that the protests are not also coming from its international, democratic partners. The bar for Japan seems to be held too low.
* The Democracy Fund
Advancing Democracy through the UN: The Challenges on the Ground by Erica Barks-Ruggles, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Speech at University of California Washington Center’s UNDP Roundtable, Washington, DC, October 2, 2008
Summary of Advancing Democracy through the UN Program 10/2/08
For example, a September Japanese government directive to monitor opposition party document requests has not garnered attention outside Japan. On October 3rd, JiJi English-language press reported that the LDP has urged all Japanese ministries and agencies to consult with the ruling party when opposition parties ask for government documents. Naoto Kan, acting president of the biggest opposition party, the DPJ, criticized the LDP for trying to take direct control of government documents, calling the practice an “attempt to destroy democracy.” European and American leaders have been utterly silent.
There always has been reluctance among the Western democracies to criticize Japan’s version of democracy. Maybe it is because Japan is Asian and different. Maybe it is because Japan is the supposed bulwark against Communism in Asia. Maybe it is that the monitoring systems so vigilant in the West are nearly non-existent in Japan. Whatever the reason, Japan is rarely made accountable for its democracy or held to the same standards of responsibility as other G-7 countries.
Only recently has Japan been scrutinized for its lack of laws prohibiting human trafficking, child pornography, and child abduction. The unwillingness to regulate these actions reflects a certain social perspective on the roles of women and children in Japanese society. These are issues about morality and values. They are not necessarily political, or even elements of a democracy. Every society has attitudes on how to treat its weakest members that shape its values. In the West, these social values have become part of our politics, and now are inseparable from our notion of democracy.
The LDP’s effort to manage access to the government exposes the flaws in the structure and practice of Japan’s democracy. Many of the basic instruments that construct a democratic political system are weak or non-existent in Japan. It is troubling that the bureaucracy can allow, and no laws seem to exist to prevent, the ruling party from monitoring the requests of an opposition party. Japan’s public interest groups are limited and underdeveloped, physical intimidation is used by all parties as persuasion, and the press self-censors its investigations. Civil society, which is considered by the UN a pillar of democracy and a critical mechanism to protest heavy handed government moves, is ancillary and fragile in Japanese politics.*
Until recently, a political regime or form of government was merely an instrument to enforce and enhance values. Today, many now see democracy as a value in itself. In 2005, the UN declared democracy “a universal value.” This reflects some sort of international consensus that the political construction of democracy is of social worth. By implication, the UN declaration signals that democracy is something worth preserving, defending, and monitoring. An attack on a democracy is seen akin to an attack on a child by a predator. This UN-initiated view suggests that existing democracies now need to be held accountable for maintaining their democratic governments.
Europeans have embraced this responsibility. At the end of September, two rightist parties -- the Freedom Party and the Alliance for the Future of Austria -- won a combined 29 percent in Austria’s parliamentary elections. Both parties advocate an end to immigration and the expulsion of foreigners and asylum seekers who commit crimes. There is alarm that this voting strength will turn Austria’s government to the right with extreme rightist parliamentary leaders. In 1999 elections, the ultra-rightist Freedom Party won 27 percent of the vote and was included in the government, leading to months of European Union sanctions over statements seen as anti-Semitic or sympathetic to the labor policies of Adolf Hitler's. Elected government or not, Austria’s fellow Europeans did not feel that the extreme rightist views of some of Austria’s parliamentarians were appropriate for a democracy.
The Western democracies made it clear (and will again) to the Austrians that they were accountable to more than themselves for their democracy. A turn to the far right in Austria threatened the prevailing values that had developed among Europe’s other democracies. In postwar Europe, some attitudes are unacceptable for a stable society.
With this in mind, we must look at Japan’s democracy and ask aloud what expectations other democracies hold of Japan. It is a concern that there are not louder protests in Japan to the LDP’s interference with the democratic process, but it is of equal concern that the protests are not also coming from its international, democratic partners. The bar for Japan seems to be held too low.
* The Democracy Fund
Advancing Democracy through the UN: The Challenges on the Ground by Erica Barks-Ruggles, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Speech at University of California Washington Center’s UNDP Roundtable, Washington, DC, October 2, 2008
Summary of Advancing Democracy through the UN Program 10/2/08
posted by Mindy Kotler Smith at 2:11 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home