Speaking at a meeting with his coronavirus task force on April 7, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe finally took the step to declare a state of emergency over the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in the country.
The state of emergency which will last until May 6 (for now) has not been introduced on a countrywide scale, but it applies to two of Japan’s largest cities and urban prefectures, Tokyo and Osaka. Apart from Tokyo and Osaka, the declaration also applies to five other neighboring prefectures (of Japan’s 43 prefectures proper).
The state of emergency has been applied in Tokyo and Osaka for fairly obvious reasons: these are two of Japan’s most densely populated cities (where more than half of the country’s population is concentrated), and the largest number of coronavirus cases has been recorded there. The epidemic is spreading to other parts of Japan from these two cities.
However, according to the figures, the picture in Japan still looks nothing like that of the United States and some European countries. As of April 13, 7370 confirmed cases had been recorded (+622 new cases per day), and 123 people had died (+15 per day). However, the number of people infected has doubled since April 7.
Perhaps, like other relatively wealthy countries in this regard, Japan is only beginning its journey, setting out on a path that has already been well trodden by other disadvantaged countries. Yet commentators also note the positive impact that measures which were adopted at an earlier stage by local authorities (primarily in Tokyo) have had, which rely on people being disciplined and voluntarily adhering to the Japanese recommendations to self-isolate and work from home, adhering to the rules of social distancing, and maintaining good personal hygiene.
In other words, at the time when Prime Minister Abe made this speech, there were no signs that the spread of the epidemic was reaching an explosive stage, and the strictly medical side of the reason for declaring a state of emergency in this part of the country was mainly to cope with the number of cases that had already been confirmed. This has been interpreted as confirmation that the entire medical system for providing care to the patients who are in most urgent need of it was being pushed to the “the brink of collapse”.
Apart from the looming shortage of beds and medical equipment to treat these patients (patients suffering the “initial” stage of the virus are already being sent home to be quarantined), there could be a shortage of medical staff. One of the main reasons is doctors and nurses contracting the infection.
That being the case, the state of emergency in Japan is far more relaxed than the measures which were imposed in the Chinese city of Wuhan and measures which are now being imposed in the worst affected areas of several European countries and the United States. If Prime Minister Abe’s own statements are anything to go by, he is mainly hoping to fight the spread of the coronavirus by implementing the same measures previously put in place by the Governor of Tokyo, which have little or no element of coercion. The Prime Minister only talks about the possibility of getting the police to play a more active role in enforcing these measures, which will effectively be limited to raising “the level of alertness”, presumably with citizens who are not very responsible.
As is the case in other parts of the world, the Japanese government has to make a difficult choice between prioritizing the needs dictated by the strictly medical aspect of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, and minimizing the negative impact it will inevitably have on the economy, which is already making itself known in a very real and measurable way. The very next day after the state of emergency was declared, three leading Japanese carmakers announced they were planning to put around 20,000 domestic workers on “temporary” leave. One of these companies is Nissan, which reported a sharp decline in production in the United States and Europe.
When Abe announced the state of emergency, he primarily focused on the economic aspect when he spoke about the country facing the greatest crisis since the end of World War II. In order to cushion the economic impact of the pandemic, almost $ 1 trillion is being allocated to support “households” and businesses (about 20% of Japan’s annual GDP).
Comments which have mostly been made by the British press draw attention to Abe’s motive for declaring this state of emergency in parts of the country, which claim it is an attempt to divert the attention of the public and his opposition away from a series of regular scandals and allegations of corruption which have been made about the Prime Minister throughout almost his entire political career. Yet he is still considered one of Japan’s most successful politicians throughout the entire postwar era.
An article previously published in NEO cites one of these scandals as being related to suspicions that Abe allegedly rented a luxury five-star hotel in Tokyo at the taxpayer’s expense to celebrate the annual “cherry blossom” festival in the spring of 2019. The cherry blossom gathering hosted by Abe was attended by members of his Cabinet (accompanied by their spouses), officials from the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, and “alleged mafia guests,” who may share some common interests with the party and government.
More of Abe’s dirty linen was aired two weeks before the state of emergency was announced, which has also been discussed in NEO. The scandal that broke at the beginning of 2017 seemed to have been completely forgotten by Japan’s current domestic politics. However, the scandal resurfaced in a letter that appeared in the press on December 23, 2019, written by the wife of a Finance Ministry official who took his own life, which makes allegations against Prime Minister Abe and Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Taro Aso.
In summary, the theory that the Prime Minister announced a state of emergency to avert public attention away from these minor embarrassments did not just appear out of nowhere.
Finally, it is worth taking a closer look at the legislative and political aspects of the action taken by the Japanese government. First of all, is should be pointed out that the “Cabinet” section of the current Constitution of Japan, which came into effect in 1947, does not contain the slightest hint that the Prime Minister would have the kind of power to restrict civil liberties. On the contrary, this founding document is packed with articles that stipulate the need to respect the rights of various different groups of citizens, including the freedom of assembly, movement, and so on.
This is perfectly understandable, given that Japan was under de facto US occupation when the constitution was written, and the Americans essentially molded Japan based on their own model at the time, which included drafting the country’s constitution. They have influenced practically everything except matters of defense and security (which the new Japanese state renounced completely with Article 9 on “Renunciation of War”), and have also influenced the amount of authority the central government has.
The way Japan turned this law that was imposed on it into an advantage to avoid being drawn into the postwar military adventures of its occupier and Big Brother actually reflects a popular philosophy in martial arts, especially the Japanese martial art Aikido, which involves using your opponent’s strength, or “ki” (energy), to your own advantage.
However, as Japan rose to become one of the world’s leading powers, the country’s leadership inevitably had to consider taking more responsibility to solve a wide range of tasks that come under the general category of “security”.
Security tasks also involve dealing with the consequences of various different kinds of “non-military” disasters. These would include industrial accidents and natural disasters such as earthquakes and hurricanes, as well as epidemics. The legal justification for granting the government the authority to take the necessary measures was that it would be in extraordinary circumstances.
The recent amendments made to a national influenza law from 2012 on March 10 this year were adopted within this framework in response to the specific nature of the situation at hand with the spread of the coronavirus. These revisions granted Prime Minister Abe the authority to declare a state of emergency in part of the country.
It is worth noting that this was the first time in Japan’s entire postwar history that this kind of bill was passed. A state of emergency was not even declared after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in March 11, 2011, the overall negative impact of which is still being felt in Japan today, and was hardly less severe than the impact of the coronavirus crisis the country is facing today.
In terms of the political motivation for declaring a state of emergency on April 7 this year, it was a step that fits in nicely with the gradual process of postwar normalization in Japan, which will sooner or later (but more likely sooner) culminate with Japan’s rejection of all the constitutional restrictions it was prescribed by Big Brother America back in 1947.
At any rate, Japan (like its former Axis Power ally Germany) is making its comeback as a big fish in the sea in world politics. All of the fish that are big enough will eventually make it down the smaller streams and rivers, and swim out into the same deep blue sea.
There are clearly several motives behind the Japanese Prime Minister’s declaration of a state of emergency over the spread of SARS-CoV-2. But the most interesting motive is, of course, political by all appearances.
Vladimir Terekhov, expert on issues in the Asia-Pacific Region, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
