EDITORIAL: What next for the DPJ?

Just eight months after he took office, Yukio Hatoyama announced his resignation as prime minister on Wednesday. Even though he had lost the trust of voters, Hatoyama still deserves to be criticized. The irresponsible way in which he abandoned his job is not befitting of the leader of a nation.

Ichiro Ozawa also relinquished his post as secretary-general of the ruling Democratic Party of Japan. A great majority of Japanese had been calling for his resignation over a scandal concerning his political funding.

These two DPJ leaders, who played pivotal roles in realizing the regime change in last year's Lower House election, are stepping down simultaneously.

Hatoyama touted the nation's first-ever change of government through a democratic vote as a "bloodless Heisei Restoration," drawing an analogy between his party's victory and the Meiji Restoration, a revolution in the 19th century that set Japan on the path toward modernization.

Hatoyama declared "the return of political power to the people." Voters enthusiastically welcomed the DPJ's ascent to power as the beginning of a new era in their nation's politics. The leadership duo and the DPJ have done a serious disservice to the nation by dashing the people's expectations of a new era in politics.

Going back to square one

Although the Hatoyama administration was mired in crisis, we argued that the DPJ should not play musical chairs with the post of prime minister for the simple objective of improving its chances in this summer's Upper House election.

Being given a public mandate to govern through an election carries real legitimacy and importance, unlike that of a leader selected through backdoor wheeling and dealing within the ruling party.

Hatoyama's resignation also continues the recent trend of frequent changes in the country's leadership. This can seriously jeopardize Japan's efforts to tackle key domestic and foreign policy challenges. Such instability makes it difficult for the government to pursue policies from a long-term perspective. That, in turn, hurts Japan's international clout.

What would be more serious, however, is if the perception spreads among disillusioned voters that they made the wrong choice when they decided to change the government.

Many changes would not have happened had it not been for the regime change. They include the program review for budget savings, the restructuring of the budget in line with the DPJ's promise to put greater priority on people's well-being in budgeting than on public works projects and the revelations about Japan's secret agreements with the United States concerning nuclear weapons and other issues.

On the other hand, the DPJ-led government was hit by a series of money scandals that were reminiscent of the era under Liberal Democratic Party rule. There have been no signs of improvement in the Hatoyama administration's poor ability to govern, as symbolized by its disastrous mishandling of the Futenma airfield relocation issue in Okinawa Prefecture and its inaction in the face of the nation's deteriorating fiscal health.

The positive results of the government change have been overshadowed by the negatives of the Ozawa-Hatoyama leadership. Eventually, the public started turning a deaf ear to whatever Hatoyama said. In his resignation speech on Wednesday, Hatoyama admitted as much.

It is imperative to stem the growing cynicism about politics and disillusionment with political parties among the Japanese voting public. The important opportunity created by the historically significant government change must not be wasted.

If the two resignations help set the stage for a fresh start of the "Heisei Restoration," they should be regarded as part of the necessary healing process. The real challenge for the DPJ starts now.

Ozawa should leave the political scene

The departures of the prime minister and the party secretary-general will not make it that much easier for the DPJ to repair its reputation and regain public confidence.

The makeup of the current DPJ has not allowed it to outgrow the legacies of the days when it was a ragged collection of "refugees" from other parties with widely different political stripes.

There are huge differences, not only in political credos and policy positions but also in political approaches and tactics among the members of the predecessor of the DPJ, such as Hatoyama and Deputy Prime Minister Naoto Kan, and former LDP lawmakers like Ozawa. The outgoing secretary-general is widely seen as a politician who inherited the political tradition of the LDP factions led by Kakuei Tanaka and Noboru Takeshita, who served as prime minister in the 1970s and in the 1980s, respectively.

Despite the differences, Hatoyama placed total trust in Ozawa to manage party affairs, election campaigns and parliamentary maneuvering. Ozawa is known for his strong-arm Diet tactics based on the power of a majority, single-minded focus on election victories and bare-knuckle politics of patronage. As no DPJ lawmaker dared to speak out against Ozawa, the ruling party was criticized for allowing the political veteran to behave like an autocrat.

The DPJ should not forget that Hatoyama also disappointed voters by remaining on the sidelines and doing nothing to change the old-style politics and autocratic party management practiced by Ozawa.

When voters went to the polls last year, they were casting ballots to end politics as usual, as embodied by Ozawa, and usher in a new era. The new style of politics they wanted to see centered on the following: eliminating the collusive ties among politicians, bureaucrats and businesses; promoting full disclosure of information; injecting transparency into the policymaking process; and seeking consensus on policy issues through frank and lively debates.

If the DPJ is to return to its original mission of establishing such politics, it needs to free itself from Ozawa's influence and make a clean break from his approach to politics.

Hatoyama has said he will not run for the next Lower House election and will retire from political life. Ozawa should consider doing the same.

Ozawa has some important political achievements to his credit, including political reforms and the regime change last year.

As things stand now, however, the best way for the DPJ to start its efforts to regenerate its political strength is to clean up the negative legacies of the Ozawa-Hatoyama leadership.

Don't rush to elect a new leader

The party presidential election to choose Hatoyama's successor is an important opportunity for the DPJ to engage in serious soul-searching about the eight months of mismanaged policymaking and revive its political vigor.

This should be a process of competition among candidates to win support from fellow party members for their leadership through serious debates on policy issues.

It is also a good opportunity for the ruling party to take a fresh, hard look at its election manifesto, which is full of promises to dole out goodies to garner votes.

Surprisingly, however, the DPJ has decided to elect a new leader at a meeting Friday of party members of both houses of the Diet. This is a move designed to avoid extending the current Diet session and ensure that the Upper House election will be officially announced on June 24 and held on July 11, as scheduled.

The party is apparently hoping to benefit politically from an early election held soon after the new Cabinet takes office and before the opposition parties come up with an effective strategy to deal with it. But voters are not so naive as to fall for such a populist tactics.

There are many issues to be discussed and things to be done through the presidential election. They include scrutinizing the structural problems of the Ozawa-Hatoyama leadership and figuring out ways to solve the problem of its poor governing ability, which is often derided as a sign that the party has many visions but no ideas about how to realize them.

The party also needs to review its economic, fiscal, diplomatic and security policies. There is no room for a rash decision.

While it was in the opposition camp, the DPJ severely criticized the LDP for changing prime minister frequently without calling an election that allows voters to choose their government. The DPJ must now act in a way that is consistent with its past criticism.

The new prime minister should dissolve the Lower House to call an election as early as possible to seek a fresh public mandate after laying out his policy program for voters to judge.

--The Asahi Shimbun, June 3