By Alexander Martin and Mitsuru Obe
Finance Minister Taro Aso has come under fire for comments that some listeners interpreted as suggesting Tokyo should look to Nazi Germany as a model in changing its pacifist constitution — though aides deny that intent.
The reported comments from the gaffe-prone politician quickly drew criticism from a Jewish human rights group as well as from South Korea, which suffered under Japan’s past militarism. Earlier this year, Mr. Aso angered Seoul by visiting a controversial Tokyo war shrine.
During a Tokyo speech Monday, Mr. Aso — who also serves as deputy prime minister and was once prime minister — said Japan should learn how Germany’s constitution under the Weimar Republic was transformed by the Nazis before anybody realized what was happening.
“Germany’s Weimar Constitution was changed before anyone noticed. It was changed before anyone was aware. Why don’t we learn from that technique,” Japanese media quoted Mr. Aso as saying. The comments were confirmed by his office.
His aides said Mr. Aso was in his local district on the southern island of Kyushu on Wednesday and couldn’t be reached for comment. But they said his remarks were taken out of context, and Mr. Aso didn’t say anything to praise Nazi Germany. Rather, he was trying to convey how discussions over constitutional revision should be conducted in a calm environment.
“Minister Aso referred to pre-war Germany as a negative example for Japan,” said Ichiro Muramatsu, one of Mr. Aso’s secretaries. “Continuing emotionally charged discussions could lead the discussions into a wrong direction. Mr. Aso didn’t in any way support the Nazi constitution or the way they changed the Weimer constitution.”
A report by Kyodo news agency also quoted Mr. Aso as saying how the Weimar constitution was the most “progressive” in Europe at the time, but that the Nazis emerged under it. “Even under a good constitution, things like that happen,” he was quoted as saying.
Whatever Mr. Aso’s intended meaning, the extended quotes in the Japanese media suggest that, as is sometimes the case, his comments were a bit rambling, and the point was articulated in an ambiguous manner that could leave members of the same audience reaching different conclusions — or at least scratching their heads.
Mr. Aso was speaking at an event organized by the Japan Institute for National Fundamentals, a conservative think tank that has called for revising the constitution. The group has also stirred controversy by denying widespread claims Japan’s military was involved in forcibly recruiting women to work in battlefield brothels during the war.
Mr. Aso’s reported comments immediately drew criticism from South Korea, whose relationship with Japan has been strained by disputes over Japan’s wartime actions and territorial disagreements, and which views warily Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s drive to revise the postwar pacifist constitution.
South Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman Cho Tai-young told reporters Tuesday that Mr. Aso’s remarks “obviously hurt many people.”
“It is also clear how such remarks are seen by the peoples of neighboring countries invaded by imperial Japan in the past. I believe that the Japanese political leaders should be careful with their words and behavior,” Mr. Cho said, according to an official ministry transcript.
The Los Angeles-based Jewish human rights organization, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, also released a statement Tuesday urging Mr. Aso to clarify his remarks.
“What ‘techniques’ from Nazis’ governance are worth learning–how to stealthily cripple democracy?” the statement quoted rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the SWC, as saying.
“Has Vice Prime Minister Aso forgotten that Nazi Germany’s ascendancy to power quickly brought (the) world to the abyss and engulfed humanity in the untold horrors of World War II? The only lessons on governance… from the Nazi Third Reich are how those (in) positions of power should not behave,” Rabbi Cooper concluded.
Japan’s top government spokesman declined to comment, saying the issue was up to Mr. Aso. “I believe this is something that Minister Aso should respond to,” Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga told a news conference.
Mr. Aso is no stranger to verbal gaffes and political controversy. In 2001, Mr. Aso, then the economy minister, told a roomful of foreign journalists: “It’s good that foreigners are working in Japan. This may be arbitrary and biased, but a good country is a country where rich Jews would want to live.”
During his 2008-2009 premiership, he said doctors were “lacking in social common sense,” and that stock market players were “not trusted.” He once publicly uttered a sigh of relief that it was a “good thing” that a 2008 rain storm “took place in Okazaki,” where two people died in the storm, and not in more populous Nagoya.
After becoming finance minister last December, Mr. Aso found himself in the hot seat after local media reported he said the country’s elderly should die without using expensive life-sustaining treatment funded by taxpayers. He denied the reports, saying he was misinterpreted. He also drew attention in June for suggesting the main reason Japan’s banks avoided the subprime crisis was that their poor command of English stopped them from making the complicated investments.
–Toko Sekiguchi contributed to this item.
Why not? These are Japan Glory’s time, the time when Japan at her peak.
More troubling: that the current JA leaders’ mentality seems to = their fathers’/mothers’ of 1930s/1940s’.
Detailed transcript of Aso-san’s speech: asahi.com/politics/update/0801/TKY201307310772.html?ref=com_rnavi_arank
@Anonymous 12:16 am August 2, 2013
But most problem is on latter half of his speech. In this part, he said that a “silent” discussion without “noise” is important to proceed the change of constitution. And refers German case as example. This part sounds totally inverted from first part.
So, what “noise/noisy” means? Does “noise” mean objections to him? Why he want to avoid “noise” on the discussion of constitution? I think that the democratic discussion requires both for and against for creating mutual agreement. There are no “noise” right?
=================================================================
麻生氏の発言要旨
憲法改正も、護憲と叫んでいれば平和が来るなんて思ったら大間違いだし、改憲できたからといって世の中が全てうまくいく、(と考えるのは)全然違う。改憲は単なる手段で、目的は国家の安寧とわれわれの生命財産の保全だ。この手段をどうやって現実的にするかというとき、狂騒の中で決めてほしくない。よく落ち着いた世論の上に憲法改正は成し遂げられるべきだ。そうしないと間違ったものになりかねない。
ドイツのヒトラーは民主主義によって議会で多数を握って出てきた。ワイマール憲法という当時欧州で最も進んだ憲法下でヒトラーは出てきた。憲法がよくてもそういうことがあり得ることは頭に入れておかないといけない。憲法改正を静かに、きちんと考えてほしい。
靖国神社も静かに参拝すべきだ。国民のために命を投げ出してくれた人に敬意と感謝の念を払わないほうがおかしい。いつから騒ぎになったのか。マスコミ(のせい)だ。騒がれたら中国も騒がざるを得ない。韓国も騒ぐ。だから静かにやろう。
憲法もある日気が付いたら、ワイマール憲法もいつの間にナチス憲法に変わっていた。誰も気が付かないで変わった。あの手口、学んだらどうかね。「いい憲法」「これは」とみんな納得してあの憲法は変わっているから。僕は民主主義を否定するつもりも全くないが、重ねて言うが、喧騒(けんそう)の中で決めないでほしい。
I don’t wish to pretend that my Japanese is better than yours, but I think the difference in our respective impressions may be derived from how you took words like 狂騒 and 喧騒. Those words are definitely stronger than “noise” but more like chaos, panic, and frenzy. And 静かな議論 doesn’t imply a “silent discussion (i.e. no discussion)” but a calm and orderly one. It appears the Finance Minister is encouraging a serious and solid debate and agreement in a calm manner (while you seem to have taken his words as him being against any kind of discussion/opposition).
As for the reference to Germany, he’s saying that Weimar Germany had one of the best constitutions in Europe yet the National Socialists came into power through democratic elections, stressing that the constitution is just a constitution. He’s also saying that the constitutional revision was achieved in a calm and orderly manner based on a national consensus and support. This is in-line with Aso-san’s message to encourage a serious debate and national agreement before revising the Constitution.
=================================================================
“(Explaining my political stance: I’m neither left nor right wing. I agree for the importance of army for protecting us by attacks from other countries. I partially agree about change of constitution including Article 9 if it is discussed well. However, I don’t agree LDP’s constitution draft because it lacks respect for democracy and Constitutionalism.)”
Just to clarify, I’m sure you’re aware that if and when there will be a revision proposal by the Diet: (1) the actual wording will be agreed upon by the main parties and will most likely not be exactly the same as those in the LDP draft; (2) there needs to be a referendum for each article (giving you an opportunity to express your views per article; and (3) the first article to be proposed will likely be Article 96.
The left-wing media has taken the bait. They’re so focused on Weimar Germany, they’re forgetting that Collective Self-Defense, a right that Japan inherently has but is restricted to exercise under the Showa Constitution (according to the Cabinet Legal Bureau), is the primary restriction of Article 9 and the main obstacle to Japan’s national security.
Re-interpretation of Article 9 to permit the Right to Collective Self-Defense will allow Japan to participate in multi-national military exercises with nations such as the Philippines, Vietnam, India, Thailand, and Australia. It will also help in the ballastic missile defense project as well as joint efforts in cyber warfare.