THE DAILY YOMIURI - December 3, 1998

Japan Must Confront Political Taboos

by Steven C. Clemons

One of the many dilemmas facing Americans who comment on things Japanese as well as for Japanese people commenting on U.S. issues is how to sensitively discuss taboo subjects in the other respective culture.

The Oxford dictionary defines the noun "taboo" as a prohibition or restriction imposed by social custom, or as a transitive verb, to exclude or prohibit by authority. But violating taboos, challenging them with nouveau logic, is an important part of any dynamic society, particularly a democracy in which the ruling elites can be challenged by others if they win the hearts and enthusiasm of enough voters.

Many Western Japan-watchers have been hopeful that the Japanese political system is finally entering a stage of greater public empowerment and political choice, both essential to a healthy democracy.

The recent coalition agreement between Jiyuto (Liberal Party) and the Liberal Democratic Party may make it easier for a true contest to take place between center-left Minshuto (Democratic Party of Japan) and the center-right LDP in future elections.

But progress toward democracy in which elected politicians have greater weight in policy generation, while career bureaucrats see their own influence decline, is very difficult to measure. One clear benchmark to assess progress, however, is the confrontation and demystification of taboos in Japan. This is a critical part to succeeding at real structural reform in the Japanese economy and in society as a whole.

Taboos are never easy to discuss, but on occasion, political advantage goes to the person who speaks the unspeakable. Shintaro Ishihara accomplished this with his book, "The Japan That Can Say No." He stated things about U.S. dependency on Japanese technological superiority, about Japanese national interests and about Japan's divergence from the United States over time that no one dared to say quite so boldly, and credibly, given his position in the LDP.

In a way, Eisuke Sakakibara, vice finance minister for international affairs, ventured into this territory with his 1997 trial balloon of establishing an Asian Monetary Fund, perceived by some in the U.S. Treasury Department as an affront to U.S. political supremacy at the

International Monetary Fund and University of Chicago-style neoclassical economic orthodoxy. But clearly, Sakakibara took on, if only for a moment, a significant taboo subject.

One of the United States' most emotionally convulsive taboos of its own that is discussed more frequently is "race." Along these lines, there is enormous interest in results of DNA testing of various relatives of Thomas Jefferson--Declaration of Independence author and third president of the United States--and his slave, Sally Hemings. The results show that the author of the Bill of Rights and the words "all men are created equal," produced offspring with his own African-American slave.

This subject has deeply divided historians for years, but the scientific evidence recently produced has established that Jefferson fathered racially mixed children.

Although some might not agree, this news is likely to be healthy for the United States--and already, the descendants of Jefferson from both his Anglo-American wife and his African-American mistress are treating the news in a mostly positive manner.

Accepting the scientific results, even the most strident historians who argued for years against the notion of a liaison between Jefferson and his slave are rewriting their textbooks. This kind of change is essential to democracy as well as the by-product of free thinking and true, open-ended inquiry. But the United States does not handle all such cases well.

Political correctness made it impossible to produce a balanced exhibition of the B-29 bomber Enola Gay and the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima at the Smithsonian Institution. Japan's protests on the same subject helped get the United States to cancel plans to produce a postage stamp marking the 50th anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb--one of history's most important, if tragic, episodes. But the subject was too taboo.

Not all taboos, however, are so sizzling with intrigue and danger. Some of the most important taboos can take place over policy issues, particularly in Japan, where debate and discussion are curtailed for some reason. Ever since the consumption tax was raised from 3 percent to 5 percent, instigating a precipitous collapse in Japan's economic activity, some have wondered why Japan has elected to avoid serious discussions about any holiday or relief from the consumption tax. 

Japan has promised to inject nearly 1 trillion dollars into its economy, into bad banks, into public works projects, and into a beleaguered Asia-Pacific economy--but until very recently, the government and its most credible opponents, Minshuto, refused to discuss any modification of the consumption tax.

Just two months ago, the Japan Society in New York sponsored a forum with the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, D.C., with very prominent Japanese journalists speaking about Japanese media and politics. I asked why if Japan was seeing the emergence of a strong opposition party under Naoto Kan's leadership, no party (other than the Japan Communist Party) had called for relief from the consumption tax.

From a U.S. perspective, such a proposal from the "opposition" would only be natural--even if there was a downside to actually securing a real consumption tax reduction. In politics, the ruling party can deal with the problems of implementation, but the opposition would have enjoyed the luxury of making a friend in every housewife who hated the consumption tax and would have attacked the primacy of the Finance Ministry and caused discomfort for the chief LDP shadow shogun and "father of the consumption tax," Noboru Takeshita.

Beyond the political positives, though, a cut in the consumption tax might have induced more real spending across all income ranges in Japanese society, boosted near-term economic activity and quieted criticism from U.S. Treasury Department officials. 

At this forum, one famous journalist from TV Asahi refused to answer the question about why the media had failed to adequately discuss a reduction of the consumption tax. Instead, he harangued several Washington policy analysts for thinking too much about the consumption tax, which he said "all Japanese people accept and enjoy."

Later, another Japanese journalist assured me that the odd behavior we saw from the panel was the result of the consumption tax being a taboo issue that none of them could easily discuss in public. This, however, is the problem. The role of the media is to speak the unspeakable; civil society is built upon the willingness of the media and other corners of society to speak out.

One can perhaps imagine the surprise in Washington when Jiyuto leader Ichiro Ozawa and his party broke the silence and insisted that the LDP take a look at possible modifications to the consumption tax. I have little expectation that this tax will actually be reduced, but at least the issue finally came forward for discussion.

The fact that Ozawa did bring the consumption tax into the realm of policies that could be discussed indicts all those who were silent before and complicit in keeping an important policy option removed from the Japanese public.

The Diet should be an arena robust with ideas. Parties should compete for the public's affection and support, and choice should drive the process. But if Kan and Minshuto are real--and not in some scripted affair with the Finance Ministry, Takeshita and other behind-the-scenes power brokers--then one might have expected the consumption tax to be one of the party's targets.

I believe that 1999 promises to be a year ripe with taboo challenges if the contest between parties continues. Proposals to reduce Japan's host nation support may appear; the joint U.S.-Japan defense guidelines legislation may spark more heated, public discussion about Japan's national interests; and Okinawa, despite Masahide Ota's loss to Keiichi Inamine in the recent gubernatorial election, may continue to press the U.S military to reduce its footprint on the island.

Perhaps there were reasons not obvious to U.S. observers that kept the consumption tax from receiving scrutiny earlier on, but it seems clear that for democracy to continue to unfold in Japan, many of the last century's taboos should be undone before the next century begins.