politics

Abe re-elected prime minister

44 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2018 GPlusMedia Inc.

44 Comments
Login to comment

Wow, what a surprise.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

God im sooooo relieved to hear that, can sleep easily now.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Like it or lump it, that's democracy!

Although I have to admit looking at the top photo, the man sat at the very top right hand side, above the line of ministers looks like he really doesn't care! lol!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Hmm... More stagnation but stocks are going up!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

About as surprising as Robert Mugabe or Valadmer Puton or Xi Ping Pong getting another 5 years to strip any weath left from the population then punish them for not having wealth. Another champagne for the rich, I'm guessing there are corks hitting the ceiling at a tax payer funded party gold plated special needs unit right now.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

What do they mean by re-elected? There was no reason for an election in the first place.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Trump told Abe, "... there is no room to doubt the Japan-U.S. alliance."

That's a very interesting comment. Note that the U.S. military footprint on Japan is an undeniable hard fact. A total of 87 U.S. military facilities occupying 1027 ha including jointly used with the SDF are in Japan. Japan shoulders more than 70 percent of maintenance and operating costs for  U.S.-military exclusive use bases. In exchange of this the U.S. is supposed to defend Japan as stipulated in the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty. But I’m afraid it may be no more than a mere verbal promise. Who knows?

Today's Ryukyu Shimpo reports that the SDF is planning to set up the Japanese version of a marine contingent. SDF units have been training amphibious warfare skills under the direction of U.S. marines for some time. The aim of such training is more than apparent. They are to replace U.S. marines and fight an amphibious warfare for the sake of of U.S. marines now stationed in Okinawa, the active elements of who are scheduled to move to Guam, leaving their supposed tasks to the SDF.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Next top story: "The sky is blue today"

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Like lemmings to slaughter

1 ( +3 / -2 )

So we are all back to how things were 2 months ago.

Abe is prime minister - check

Cabinet is the same - check

ldp has a majority in lower house - check

ldp has a majority in the upper house - check

Abe hasn't changed - check

So the govt and the election process has spent $100s millions on an uneccessary election (only about pride) to arrive at where we left off.

Ahhh!  Japanese politics. You couldn't make this stuff up.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

GoodlucktoyouToday  05:23 pm JST

What do they mean by re-elected? There was no reason for an election in the first place.

They don't appear to have a separate leadership convention before the election but hold the party leadership vote after the election.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"Like it or lump it, that's democracy!"

No. The number of votes, compared to the number of seats allocated according to the Japanese election law, proves that "It's not the people who vote that count, it's the people who count the votes."

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Leave them alone they just want to sleep and wake up in 1930.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I think the CHinese President also just gave himself extended power, did he not? And just like the people aren't asked there, they aren't asked here. Actually, there WERE asked here, and the majority said that while they wanted the LDP to retain power, they did not want ABe to do so. But, what does ABe care what the people think, so long as his wet dream of changing the Constitution and seeing hte Olympics fall under his reign come true, public be damned. Every single sentence out of the man's mouth from now on will be "According to the mandate given to me by the people..." regardless of the fact they explicitly doing want him doing what he's doing.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Why do we even have elections? When the LDP keeps a majority every time! Do me a favor Abe and end the democracy once and for all. It clearly does not work for this country it seems:( If people praises stability above personal rights, then we have a thing called "one-party state". It's your choice!

In the blink of an eye, Abe can do this! So it's time to sharpen your minds, and succeed in preventing a dire future for Japan. Itagaki Taisuke tried, but failed-and we had a fascist Japan:( I'm sure the Yamato-people can prevent a dire future together!! Just read between the lines on Abe, and you'll see what he's up to.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

One can hardly call this an election given that the outcome was known even before. This is more an oligarchy of old boys doing their business in front of an apathetic and foolish population.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

not good at maths, but total voting population minus votes for LDP equals what percent of the japanese population?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Congradulations, Nikkaku Sori Daijin.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Although I have to admit looking at the top photo, the man sat at the very top right hand side, above the line of ministers looks like he really doesn't care! lol!

lol back at you, if you knew who he was you would understand just why he has a "don't give a crap" kind of look.

He is one guy in the LDP that could be a potential challenger to follow Abe as next PM. His chances are getting slimmer as Abe stays in power.

His name is Shigeru Ishiba

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shigeru_Ishiba

Congradulations, Nikkaku Sori Daijin.

Lol...Nikakku?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Correction::

The figure 1,027 ha in the 1st paragraph of my post above should be: 102,700 ha.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Yuburu!

Thanks for the heads up and info!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

In the ministerial system of parliament, when a PM wants to seek or confirm the view of the electorate, he or she can call an election before term is up. That is a fairly common practice in Europe and Britain. So why are you people ridiculing this happening in Japan?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

He will be Japanese PM for six more years. LDP will be popular. with female voters. Sitting with female politicians beside him is plus for the party.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No a a surprise when rural votes count twice as much as urban ones.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

For election of p.m, minority parties has no Say

". But Komeiitio follow LDP.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Abe, please humble yourself: you are elected by your party members, not by the people. Big difference. Now, you deserve the power, handed to you by the party, not by the people. You, as usual, will push your party's agenda, not people's agenda, with full strength. But please do NOT harm the people, do NOT harm the country, and do NOT harm neighbors.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Today's Ryukyu Shimpo reports that the SDF is planning to set up the Japanese version of a marine contingent. SDF units have been training amphibious warfare skills under the direction of U.S. marines for some time. The aim of such training is more than apparent. They are to replace U.S. marines and fight an amphibious warfare for the sake of of U.S. marines now stationed in Okinawa, the active elements of who are scheduled to move to Guam, leaving their supposed tasks to the SDF.

This is classic. You constantly rail against the US military being in Japan and in a case where they are actually leaving, you find a way to still twist it into some kind of anti-US military conspiracy. I guess you would prefer it if the Marines didn't train their SDF counterparts and just left them high and dry while they moved off to Guam?

I mean, creating an SDF amphibious unit wouldn't have anything at all to do with those pesky contested islands where an SDF marine force would be useful or anything like that. Nope.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The figure 1,027 ha in the 1st paragraph of my post above should be: 102,700 ha.

Interesting that the moderators here continue to show preference for this guys constantly off topic posts.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I wonder what value was added in this election ? There are lot of pleasures, smiles, by Abe, for Abe, of Abe. Abe is everywhere on the name list of PM of Japan. He may have another election tomorrow, who knows.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Abe re-elected prime minister

That's news?  Seriously JT?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yubaru,

No, it's not completely off topic. Your comment is, on the contrary. 

My post, and the figure posted there, is relevant to what Trump said. He said, "Japan and America are 100 percent together and there is no room to DOUBT the Japan-U.S. alliance."

Is it necessary for the U.S. President to verbally promise the U.S. will defend Japan despite the fact that the two countries signed a mutual treaty under which Japan must and does provide so much land for the U.S. military to use as bases?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Are you seriously criticizing Trump for saying the equivalent of ‘We’ve got your back’?

Come on man.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

extanker,

If you are speaking to me, then my answer is:

I am not particularly criticizing Donald Trump, the 45th President of the United States, but successive U.S. governments since Harry S. Truman, the 33rd President. The successive U.S. government's foreign policy toward Japan has revolved around the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, a facade, in my opinion, to hide continued occupation of Japan, making the U.S. military presence here look as if it were done at the request of Japan.

This chicanery must be addressed right then and there. I call on U.S. policy makers to pay attention to a voice such as mine.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

This chicanery must be addressed right then and there. I call on U.S. policy makers to pay attention to a voice such as mine.

Since the end of World War II, the United States has never done anything to even hint that it would not support Japan. Is the treaty beneficial to both countries? Of course it is. But the notion that the US would not defend Japan in a time of crisis is completely unfounded and your conspiracy is ludicrous.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

extanker, you say:

But the notion that the US would not defend Japan in a time of crisis is completely unfounded and your conspiracy is ludicrous.

I said the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty is a facade to hide a continued occupation of Japan, to which regime Okinawa was firmly incorporated in 1972, making the U.S. military presence look as if it were done at the request of Japan.

Your response to this comment of mine is "the notion that the U.S. would not defend Japan in a time of crisis is completely unfounded and your conspiracy (theory) is ludicrous." Of course, the U.S. would defend Japan because it would never want to lose its hegemony over a colonial Japan and the region surrounding it. 

But your answer doesn't say anything about the true nature of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty which I consider is a facade to hide the ongoing occupation, seamless since the end of World War II. Can you deny it?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Can you deny it?

Yes, I believe my comment calling the idea 'ludicrous' would count as denying it.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

He will be the longest served prime minister of Japan. Second one is his granduncle Mr. Satoh. No three was a long time ago and also from Yamaguchi-Prefecture. Abe family settled in Nagato many many years before Tokugawa appeared.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I consider is a facade

And who cares? It's all a fringe conspiracy theory anyway. If your opinions held any water maybe people would listen,

0 ( +0 / -0 )

extanker,

No, you aren't denying my argument by simply branding it "ludicrous" without giving any reason why you say so.

The U.S. retains almost all the bases that it had in post-war occupied Japan even after Japan recovered its independence in 1951 as the result of the San Francisco Peace Treaty. The trick was Japan had to sign a separate security treaty, on the same day, which guaranteed the U.S. military presence without any hitch..  That evening, the Japanese delegation spearheaded by Shigeru Yoshida, was furtively whisked away to U.S. Army Presidio Base in San Francisco to sign the treaty, the English draft of which they had been shown only hours before.

It's said that John Foster Dulles, then chief negotiator for the U.S., ordered his staff negotiating the terms of the treaty to heed to hammering provisions into it so that the U.S. could keep unrestrained rights to having bases anywhere in Japan for as long and as much as it wants. The relevant security treaty was revised in 1960, but the principle Dulles hammered into it remained the same.

This is the reason why I say the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty is a chicanery and that Japan, particularly Okinawa, is still under virtual U.S. millitary occupation.

So let me repeat my question. Can you deny it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Back on topic please.

There is one very important fact that you insist on ignoring because it doesn't fit your anti-US conspiracy narrative.The treaty states that either party can end the agreement at any time and the US will have 1 year from that date to leave Japan.

From Article X: However, after the Treaty has been in force for ten years, either Party may give notice to the other Party of its intention to terminate the Treaty, in which case the Treaty shall terminate one year after such notice has been given.

It's been in force for much more than 10 years, so all it takes is for Japan to ask the US to leave. That's not an occupation. It's really not a very complicated document, you should try reading it sometime.

So yes, I absolutely still deny it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Extanker,

Sorry, I have been unware until today that you had posted your rejoinder. 

You say on the basis of Article 10 of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, a provision for terminating the agreement, Japan can be said not being occupied by U.S. forces. If you say so, then the bilateral treaty itself can be said to be evidence verifying that Japan is not being occupied because international security treaties are usually signed between independent nations. 

But I've been arguing that the said treaty is an intrigue to hide the very fact that occupation is continuing by dint of the fact that occupation forces and their bases were carried over from the Occupation era seamlessly. The USFJ brass keep telling the Japanese people that troops under their command are always ready to give their life to defend Japan. Hearing such nice words, the Japanese people and the Japanese government will never give notice to the U.S. side of its intention to terminate the treaty.

Donald Trump, your President, candidly commented while in Beijing that no one "can blame a country for being able to take advantage of another country for the benefit of its citizens." Isn't it the case that the U.S. has been taking full advantage of a putatively independent Japan for the benefit of U.S. citizens?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You're too much. None of what you just said matters one bit, since the treaty can be ended at any time. That is not how an occupation works so your argument is null.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Come to Okinawa and see for yourself what the reality is. The reality is occupation.  You know, Okinawa  represents Japan’s reality in a most condensed form.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites