Reposted from the Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus. 『アジア太平洋ジャーナル：ジャパンフォーカス』から転載。
Remembering the victims, on the 71st anniversary of the ending of the Battle of Manila (February 3 - March 3, 1945). マニラ市街戦（１９４５年２月３日から３月３日）終結７１周年の記念日に、被害者に思いを馳せながら。
 |
Memorare-Manila 1945, Intramuros, Manila. Upon embarkation from Haneda, emperor Akihito said, "A great many innocent Filipino civilians became casualties of the fierce battles fought in the city of Manila. This history will always be in our hearts as we make this visit to the Philippines," but during their stay in the country, he and empress Michiko never visited this memorial dedicated to the 100,000 civilian victims of the Battle.
マニラ市イントラムロス地区にあるマニラ市街戦被害者の追悼碑。明仁天皇は出発時羽田で、「...マニラの市街戦では、膨大な数に及ぶ無辜のフィリピン市民が犠牲になりました。私どもはこのことを常に心に置き、この度の訪問を果たしていきたいと思っています」と語ったが、フィリピン滞在中、彼と美智子皇后はこの戦闘の１０万人の民間人被害者を追悼する碑を訪れることはなかった。 |
Political agenda behind
the Japanese emperor and empress’ “irei” visit to the Philippines
Kihara Satoru and
Satoko Oka Norimatsu
Emperor
Akihito and empress Michiko of Japan visited the Philippines from January 26 to
30, 2016. It was the first visit to the country by a Japanese emperor since the
end of the Asia-Pacific War. The pair’s first visit was in 1962 when they were
crown prince and princess.
The
primary purpose of the visit was to “mark the 60th anniversary of
the normalization of bilateral diplomatic relations” in light of the
“friendship and goodwill between the two nations.”[1] With Akihito and Michiko’s
“strong wishes,” at least as it was reported so widely in the Japanese media,[2] two days out of the
five-day itinerary were dedicated to “irei 慰霊,” that is, to mourn
those who perished under Imperial Japan’s occupation of the country from
December 1941 to August 1945.
The
Japanese term “irei” literally means to “comfort the spirit” of the dead, and
is used generally to mean notions such as to “mourn,” “pay tribute (respect)
to,” and/or to “remember” those who die in abnormal situations like wars,
natural disasters, accidents, and crimes. Another word commonly used for such
purposes is “tsuito 追悼,” – literally “to
remember the dead with sadness.” The latter term is regarded as more neutral
and secular, and is used for those who die of natural causes as well. The two
are often used interchangeably, but some problematize the term “irei” as having
a religious meaning, one tied to Shintoism, and the two should be distinguished
carefully.
Folklorist
Shintani Takanori points out that notions of remembering the dead in Japanese
culture, with its tradition of “enshrining the dead as gods,” cannot be easily
translated into Anglophone culture. The word “irei” has a connotation beyond
“comforting the spirit” of the dead, which embeds in the word the possibility
of the “comforted spirit being elevated to a higher spirituality” to the level
of “deities/gods,” which can even become “objects of spiritual worship.”[3]
Shintani’s
argument immediately suggests that we consider its Shintoist, particularly Imperial
Japan’s state-sanctioned Shintoist significance when the word “irei” is used to
describe the Japanese emperor and empress’ trips to remember the war dead. This
is particularly the case given the ongoing international controversy over
Yasukuni Shrine, which enshrines those who died for the emperor in battles during
the period of the Empire of Japan, notably during the Asia-Pacific War. Following
Shintani, in this article we italicize the term irei to call attention to the difficulty of translating the complex
notion into an English term.[4]
Akihito
and Michiko had paid such irei visits
previously to Iwojima (1994), Nagasaki, Hiroshima, Okinawa and Tokyo (aerial
bombing) to mark the 50th of the war end in 1995, Saipan (2005), and
Palau (2015). The Japanese media across the board applauded their visit to the
Philippines, as one that demonstrated the pair’s sincere gesture of remorse
over the scars of war. It is, however, necessary to carefully examine political
calculations behind this visit.
1.
A
precursor to Japan-U.S.-Philippines military unification
First,
this visit took place in the midst of increasing military cooperation and
alliance among the United States, Japan and the Philippines, based on a strategy
of opposing China’s advancement in the South China Sea.
In
November 2015, President Obama visited the Philippines for the APEC summit and
on board the Philippine’s Navy ship BRP Gregorio del Pilar, a former U.S. Coast
Guard vessel, he stressed the two countries’ “shared commitment to the security
of the waters of this region and to the freedom of navigation,” and reiterated
the U.S. plan to increase military aid to its allies in the region.[5] Shortly after Obama’s
visit, the U.S. announced an increase in its annual military aid to the
Philippines to 79 million dollars.[6]
The
Supreme Court of the Philippines, as if in response, ruled on January 12, 2016
that the Enhanced Defense Co-operation Agreement (EDCA) was constitutional. The
10-year defense agreement signed in 2014, which would allow expansion of U.S.
military activities in the Philippines, “rotating ships and planes for
humanitarian and maritime security operations.”[7] EDCA had met the legal
challenge which claimed that the pact infringed the nation’s sovereignty.[8]
U.S.
Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, in a January
12 meeting in Washington with their Filipino counterparts, welcomed the Philippine
Supreme Court’ decision. Carter said that the Philippines “is a critical ally
of the United States as we continue and gather and strengthen our rebalance to
the Asia-Pacific region… our commitment is ironclad.”[9] According to a news report
of January 13, the Philippines will offer eight military bases for the United
States to build facilities to store equipment and supplies.[10] These moves are
understood in the context of rising tensions in the South China Sea, including
territorial disputes between China and the Philippines over islands in the
South China Sea. The Philippines brought the case to the UN-appointed permanent
court of arbitration (PCA) in the Hague in 2013, and the final judgement is
expected in mid-2016, with the likelihood of being in favour of the Philippines.[11]
Japan
and the Philippines have been holding reciprocal visits. In June 2015, Prime
Minister Benigno Aquino III visited Japan as a state guest, and in the June 4
“Joint Declaration – A Strengthened Strategic Partnership for Advancing the
Shared Principles and Goals of Peace, Security, and Growth in the Region and
Beyond,” the two governments agreed to “expand their security cooperation”
through means such as “participation of Self-Defense Forces in disaster relief
activities in the Philippines,” and “the expansion of bilateral and
multilateral trainings and exercises for capacity building.”
In
the following month, Prime Minister Abe visited the Philippines as part of a three-state
tour that included Singapore and Malaysia, and in the bilateral summit,
announced Japan’s provision of 10 patrol vessels through a yen loan “in order
to enhance the capacity of the Philippine Coast Guard.” These moves all address
the “South China Sea issue” which Abe indicated “is a matter that concerns the
regional and international communities.”[12]
In
April 2016, the Japanese Defense Minister Nakatani Gen is expected to visit the
Philippines to discuss with his Philippines counterpart, Defense Secretary
Voltaire Gazmin, Japan’s provision of military equipment to the Philippines
such as TC-90 training aircraft and expanding joint military exercises between
Japan’s Maritime Self-Defense Force and the Philippine Navy.[13]
Akihito
and Michiko’s visit to the Philippines should be understood in the context of such
increasing military alliance involving U.S., Philippines and Japan. The Abe
administration has used symbolic irei trip
to pave the way for Japan to play a more active military role overseas under
the “use of the right to collective self-defense” enabled by the set of laws
rammed through last year that changed the interpretation of the Article 9, the
pacifist clause of Japan’s post-war constitution.
Emperor
Akihito on the other hand, during the Imperial Palace banquet to welcome
President Aquino on June 3, 2015, emphasized the need for the Japanese to
remember the “loss of many Filipino lives” as a result of the “fierce battles
between Japan and the United States” that took place in the Philippines, with
“a profound sense or remorse.” He offered his “deepest condolences to all those
who lost their lives then.”[14] Significantly, however, Akihito
has refrained from any word of direct apology on such occasions, just as in his
trips to Saipan and Palau.
The Philippine
Star,
one of the most-read broadsheet in the Philippines, rightly observed:
Akihito has repeatedly expressed regret for the
damage caused by the war but has never offered a straightforward apology.
The furthest he has gone is to express "deep" remorse in an address
last year marking the 70th anniversary of the end of the war.[15]
The
fact that he, and Japanese society as a whole including the government,
generally leave the matter of war responsibility ambiguous, and the fact that
Japan is once again becoming “a country that can fight wars” under the
U.S.-Japan military alliance and the set of “war bills,” are not unrelated.
The Philippine
Star
seems to understand this trip in terms of such political goals:
While he has been jeered on previous foreign
visits, Akihito was welcomed with full state honors in the Philippines, which
now depends on Japan as a leading trading partner, provider of development aid,
and a major ally as Manila confronts an assertive Beijing in contested
territories in the South China Sea.[16]
2.
“Independence
of the Philippines” and “Battle of Manila”
Emperor
Akihito during this trip gave two formal speeches, at Haneda Airport upon
embarking and at the state banquet hosted by President Aquino in the
Philippines. In these speeches, he mentioned “Independence of the Philippines”
and the “Battle of Manila” of February 1945. The Japanese media generally
praised these references, but Akihito failed to clarify critical elements of
these historical events.
Imperial Japan that
hampered Philippine’s independence
In
his remarks during the state banquet in Manila, Akihito mentioned José Rizal (1861-1896) twice, and
applauded him as a “national hero” who “pressed for independence” from “Spanish
control.”[17]
The couple even visited and placed flowers at the José Rizal Monument on the morning of January 27.[18] Rizal, a doctor, author,
artist, was an anti-colonial leader who inspired the Philippine Revolution
(1896-98) that freed the country from the three centuries of Spanish rule, only
to be taken over by the U.S., after the Philippine-American war (1899-1902) that
pitted Filipino revolutionaries against the U.S. Army.
If
Akihito emphasized the “independence of the Philippines,” why did he only refer
to “independence from Spain,” which was more than a century ago, and not independence
from the United States or from Japan? It is worth recalling that the
Philippines was at the brink of independence in 1941 on the eve of the Japanese
invasion. While his father Hirohito’s army in effect thwarted Philippines’ independence
and delayed it till after the Japanese war, his praise of José Rizal appears more like an
intended concealment of the history of Japan’s own invasion and colonization of
the country, which was ironically the very chapter of history Akihito wanted to
address in this visit.
§ There
was a special sentiment towards Japan on the part of the Philippines, which was
invaded just before its independence from the U.S. In the International
Military Tribunal for the Far East, the Filipino judge Delfin Jaranilla argued
all Class-A war criminals be sentenced to death. Carlos Romulo, Secretary of
Foreign Affairs of the Philippines at the time of San Francisco Peace Treaty
told Japan “to demonstrate your spiritual repentance and proof of renascence
before we extend our hand of forgiveness and friendship.” [19]
Horrors of the
Battle of Manila and Emperor Hirohito’s responsibility
Akihito’s
speeches touched on the Battle of Manila (February 3 to March 3, 1945), in
which “a great many innocent Filipino civilians became casualties of the fierce
battles fought in the city of Manila,” and said that the loss of many Filipino
lives in the battles on Philippine soil is “something we Japanese must never
forget.” True, approximately 1.1 million people in the Philippines were killed
in the battles on their islands, including those who were slaughtered by the
Japanese Army. It is also unquestionable that the biggest responsibility of the
war lay with Emperor Hirohito, who issued the imperial edict that started the
war.
Hirohito’s
responsibility is particularly noteworthy where the Battle of Manila is concerned,
because on February 14, 1945, his close aide Konoe Fumimaro urged him to
surrender, saying “defeat is inevitable,” in the document known as “Konoe Memorandum.”
Hirohito rejected Konoe’s advice, saying it would be “difficult unless after
one more successful battle.” If Hirohito had heeded Konoe’s advice, the
casualties of the Battle of Manila would have been significantly less. Likewise,
all the deaths of the six months between then and Hirohito’s surrender of
August 15, including those of the aerial bombings of Tokyo (March 10) and other
cities, the Battle of Okinawa, atomic-bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and
civilian and military (including POWs) casualties in all areas affected by the
Japanese war across Asia-Pacific would have been avoided.
If
Akihito were to voice his concern over the “great many innocent Filipino
civilians” who became “casualties of the fierce battles fought in the city of
Manila,” should he have not first apologized for his father’s war
responsibility? It is this history that “we Japanese must never forget,” not a
concealed or glorified version of history.
3. Disguise of
Japan’s responsibility as perpetrator of war and nationalism
Now,
who did Akihito and Michiko meet and who did they not meet? Where did they go
and where did they not go?
Japanese
war-bereaved and former “comfort women”
The
first war memory site that the couple visited was the Tomb of the Unknown
Soldier at the Heroes’ Cemetery in Taguig in metro Manila on January 27. Japan’s
national newspaper Asahi Shimbun
reported that this visit took place at the insistence of the couple that the
trip include a visit to Philippine war victims as well as Japanese war victims.[20] It appears that in the
absence of their suggestion, Hirohito’s heir as emperor of Japan would have
only visited the war memorial for fallen Japanese soldiers in his state visit
to the Philippines.
Akihito
and Michiko, however, could have visited another site too if they had truly
wished to mourn the civilian victims of the Battle of Manila. They did not
visit the monument dedicated to the victims of the Battle, “Memorare-Manila
1945,” although it is located near the José Rizal
monument that the couple did visit on January 27. Memorare-Manila 1945 was built
by the civilian survivors and their descendants in February 1995, the 50th
anniversary of the Battle. It is a painfully vivid representation of the
civilian suffering in the Battle, with the “figure of a hooded woman slumped on
the ground in great despair for the lifeless child she cradles in her arms. Six
suffering figures surround her, a glimpse of the great despair brought about by
the gruesome massacres that were perpetrated all over the city inflicted by
Imperial Japanese soldiers on civilians during the liberation of the city.”[21]
 |
| Marker of Memorare-Manila 1945 |
The
Inscription on the marker says: [22]
This
monument is erected in memory of the more than 100,000 defenseless civilians
who were killed during the Battle for the Liberation of Manila between February
3 and March 3, 1945. They were mainly victims of heinous acts perpetrated by
the Japanese Imperial Forces and the casualties of the heavy artillery barrage
by the American Forces. The Battle for Manila at the end of World War II was
one of the most brutal episode in the history of Asia and the Pacific. The
non-combatant victims of that tragic battle will remain forever in the hearts
and minds of the Filipino people.
Is
it possible that the pair would have wanted to visit this memorial too if they
had the chance, just as they made an unplanned stop at the memorials for the
Korean victims and that for the Okinawan victims in their war memory trip to
Saipan in 2005? In his formal speeches, Akihito made references such as “During World War II, countless Filipino, American, and
Japanese lives were lost in the Philippines. A great many innocent Filipino
civilians became casualties of the fierce battles fought in the city of Manila”
(At Haneda Airport on January 26), and “During this war, fierce battles between
Japan and the United States took place on Philippine soil, resulting in the
loss of many Filipino lives and leaving many Filipinos injured” (at the state
banquet on January 27), avoiding carefully who
actually killed those Filipino civilians. Perhaps the direct reference to
“Japanese Imperial Forces,” Akihito’s father’s army, as the perpetrator of the
“heinous acts” at Memorare-Manila 1945 was too inconvenient for the Japanese
government which was intent on keeping the former emperor’s war responsibility
as vague as possible.
The
discrepancy between Akihito’s word that extended his remorse for the innocent
victims of the war and the fact that he and his wife only visited war memorials
for the fallen soldiers is another indication that any focus on the civilian
casualties of war would be inconvenient to the true purpose of this trip for
the two governments: to solidify and advance the bilateral military alliance.
To reinforce that point, even though the Japanese media labelled this trip as “irei no tabi,” a trip for irei, and the imperial couple appeared
to have embraced that purpose throughout the trip, the Imperial Household
Agency’s official definition of the trip[23] does not mention it,
whereas that for the previous trips to Saipan[24] and Palau[25] clearly stated that
purpose.
The
highlight of Akihito and Michiko’s trip, at least as shown in its extensive
coverage in the Japanese media, was their visit on January 29 to the Japanese
Memorial Garden at Cavinti township of Laguna province, built by the Japanese
government in 1973 for irei of the
approximately 518,000 soldiers who died in the Philippines, one of the biggest
Japanese military casualties in all the Asia-Pacific battlefields.[26] The pair presented flowers
and bowed, as 170 relatives of the Japanese war dead looked on, some quietly weeping.
Though the practice of treating the emperor as a god was halted at the end of
WWII as the emperor became only “human” and was redefined as a “symbol” of the
nation in the post-war constitution, the fact that many Japanese still revere
the emperor was clear in the emotional welcome of Akihito and Michiko by the
families of the war dead and those of Japanese descent living in the
Philippines. The Inquirer published a
report on this event titled, “Demigod image of Japanese emperor remains among
followers.”[27]
There did not seem to be any resentment in these people’s minds in seeing the
son of Hirohito, under whose command their loved ones died. They were among the
half million Japanese men, the majority of whom died of starvation and disease.[28]
After
the ceremony, Akihito and Michiko spoke to the families of the war dead, offering
words of consolation like, “You must have gone through a lot of hardship.”[29] Families expressed their reactions
in such phrases as, “My mind is full of emotions,” according to Japanese newspaper
reports.[30] This is how the melodrama
was created between a “merciful Emperor and Empress” and the families of the
war dead and surviving soldiers. Japanese public broadcaster NHK aired the
whole event live, as a special program, making it the main event of their visit
to the Philippines. The visit was supposed to be about “friendship and
goodwill,” but the emperor’s central message was presented as irei of the fallen Japanese soldiers.
There
was another group of people who were eagerly awaiting the arrival of Akihito
and Michiko, whether they noticed them or not. They were a group of Filipinas
who were “comfort women” victims of the Japanese military sex slavery system,
and their supporters, about three hundred in all. On January 27, while the pair
was visiting the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at the military cemetery, the lolas (grandmothers) belonging to the
group Lila Pilipina and their supporters stood at Chino Roces Bridge in Manila
for an hour under blistering sun, “urging President Aquino to tell Emperor
Akihito to issue a public apology and give reparation to all ‘comfort women.’”[31]
Lila
Pilipina was joined by a women’s group and political party Gabriela, whose
representative Luzviminda Ilagan expressed frustration over President Aquino’s
neglect of this issue during the emperor’s state visit, creating “an image in
media and academe about his pacifism and ‘deep remorse.’” Ilagan said:
“Deep remorse as a personal sentiment by the Emperor will never
be accepted by the war victims as official apology. Worse, it could all be a
publicity stunt to mask moves by the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe abetted
by US President Barack Obama to remove Japan’s anti-war constitutional
provision and boost military missions abroad. Filipinos should be wary and
oppose being dragged into another bloody war and another generation of comfort
women.”[32]
On
January 29, eight women who are members of another survivors’ group Malaya
Lolas gathered in front of the Japanese Embassy in Manila and lit candles,
while Akihito and Michiko were visiting the memorial for fallen Japanese
soldiers.[33]
Did
Akihito and Michiko know about these rallies for the former “comfort women”? If
they spent so much time in meeting with, and giving “kind words” to the
families of the Japanese military members and Japanese Filipinos, should they
have not also met with and listened to the voices of those “comfort women”
survivors, who were victimized by Japan, and still waiting for the government’s
unequivocal apology, state compensation, and inclusion, instead of exclusion,
of the history in Japanese school textbooks?
The Inquirer’s
editorial addressing the visit echoes this sentiment:
For the generation of Filipinos who witnessed and
lived through the atrocities of World War II, the Japanese Emperor’s visit to
the Philippines this week is bound to summon painful memories that make
forgiveness extremely difficult. The voices of the surviving Filipino “comfort
women” who were captured and turned into sex slaves for Japanese soldiers may
have been the most persistent. But they are not alone in asking: Is there an
obligation to forgive and to forget?
Almost none of these emotions were reported in the mainstream
Japanese media, which are known for their adulatory coverage of all matters
related to the imperial family.
Ignored “Bataan
Death March”
Bataan
Peninsula is just about the same distance from Manila as Caliraya is, where the
emperor and empress lay flowers at the monument to remember the Japanese war
dead. This is where the “Bataan Death March,” which is central to the Filipino collective
war memory, took place.
On
April 9, 1945, the Japanese Army conquered Bataan, and forced about 76,000
prisoners of war (66,000 Americans, 10,000 Filipinos) to march from the southern
tip of Bataan Peninsula to Camp O’Donnell, 11 km west of Capas, about 100 km,
for days (partly also traveling by rail, in “cramped and unsanitary boxcars”),
during which captives were “beaten, shot, bayoneted, and in many cases,
beheaded.” Only 54,000 reached the camp and many who made it eventually died at
the camp of starvation and disease.[34]
The
Bataan Death March, in violation of international law concerning treatment of
POWs, is notorious as one of the events symbolic of Japanese military’s
atrocities. For the people of the Philippines, this history is not something
that is in the past and forgotten. Indeed, a marathon, called the “Bataan Death
March 102/160 Ultra Marathon Race,” dedicated to this history, is held every
year.[35] This year, the 102 km ultra
marathon started on January 30, the day Akihito and Michiko left the country. Was
this just a coincidence?
There
are many monuments along the route of the Bataan Death March to commemorate the
suffering and perseverance of the POWs. If the Japanese emperor and empress’s
intent was to “irei also for the
Filipino war victims,” not just Japanese war dead, should they have not also
gone to Bataan and presented flowers for the victims of the deadly march well-known
in the Philippines and internationally?
And
what about the American POWs? In fact, after a brief mention of the loss of
American lives in his speech at Haneda Airport upon embarkation, Akihito did
not acknowledge the American casualties or the abuse of POWs at all for the
entire stay in the Philippines. Another form of selectivity in his irei was total exclusion of the
thousands of Filipino resistance guerilla fighters who fought the Japanese Army
throughout the occupation period. Akihito’s emphasis in his referral to the
Filipino casualties were the “innocent civilians.”
There
is a commonality between the sexual slavery survivors, whom Akihito and Michiko
did not meet, and the memorials of “Bataan” and the “Battle of Manila” that the
pair did not visit. It lies in the fact that they are symbolic of the war
atrocities committed by the Empire of Japan. Would it be too much to suggest
that the intent behind the emperor and empress’ trip was to evade Japan’s war
responsibilities rather than face them?
How
did the Japanese media report this trip? The newspapers quoted words of
yearning from the war bereaved, former Japanese soldiers, and Japanese
Filipinos. The media reports also stressed the “words of consideration” from
the couple toward those from Japan and of Japanese descent. The politically
moderate Asahi Shimbun editorial of
January 29 noted, “The royal couple went all the way to the sites where fierce
battles took place to show their wish for peace. We would like to share their
feelings and thoughts.” Left-leaning Tokyo
Shimbun’s editorial of January 26 said, “We would like to share the emperor
and empress’s wish for peace conveyed by their numerous precious words.” Right-leaning
Yomiuri Shimbun, the biggest national
paper in the world, summarized the royal couple’s visit in its January 31
editorial that the way the emperor and empress sincerely face the history of
the past war “must have made a strong impression on the minds of the people of
the Philippines.”
A
common feature of these commentaries across the political spectrum is a new
kind of nationalism that attempts to mobilize Japanese nationals (kokumin) under the imperial couple – a
nationalism that hides Japan’s responsibility for its aggressive war and aims
to unite Japanese nationals under such a distorted “history.”
4. Emperor and
empress’s “irei trip” is a forerunner
for Abe-led constitutional revision
Prime
Minister Abe made clear that he would make constitutional revision a main issue
in the upcoming Upper House election (July 2016) and seek to amend the Constitution
following the election. In short, the imperial couple’s trip to the Philippines
for irei of the war dead was a
forerunner of constitutional revision.
a)
Expansion
of the emperor’s “public acts” stipulated in the constitution
The
“imperial diplomacy” by the emperor and the empress is not included in the
“acts in matters of state” allowed for the emperor in the current constitution.[36] The government has
attempted to justify “imperial diplomacy” arguing that these are the emperor’s
“public acts”. In the absence of any constitutional stipulation for such acts, an
attempt was clearly being made to expand the emperor’s authority.
The
Liberal Democratic Party thus attempts to add a clause to the current Article 7
of the constitution that stipulates “acts in matters of state.” In their “Draft
of Revision, the Constitution of Japan” (issued on April 27, 2012), they have added
a clause (in their draft, the 5th clause of Article 6), “…the
Emperor shall perform public acts such as ceremonies held by the state, local
public entities and other public entities”[37] LDP’s Q & A page for its
constitutional revision draft explains this clause, “Some acts of the Emperor
have a public nature. However, the current constitution has no provision for
such public acts by the Emperor. This was why it was deemed necessary to have
clear constitutional stipulation for such public acts.”
b)
Danger
of making state religious activities constitutional
This
article has shown that acts of irei for
the war dead have strong religious connotations. This means that irei trips by the emperor and the
empress may infringe Clause 3, Article 20 of the current constitution, “The
State and its organs shall refrain from religious education or any other
religious activity.” This is why the LDP draft for constitutional revision adds
to the same clause, “…however, this does not necessarily apply to activities
that do not exceed the scope of social rituals and customary acts.” If the
constitution is revised as the LDP wishes, irei
trips by the emperor and the empress may be regarded as one of the “social
rituals,” paving the way for making public religious acts by “the State and its
organs,” including the emperor and the other imperial family members,
constitutional.
c)
Setting
the stage for making the emperor “Head of State”
In
this visit, the Japanese emperor and empress were “state guests,” and the
emperor even reviewed the Philippines’ guard of honour with President Aquino, in
the state-sponsored welcome ceremony on January 27.[38] Emperor Akihito was
precisely treated as “Head of State” throughout the trip. This is also exactly
how the LDP envisions the new role of the emperor, by defining him as “Head of
State” in its constitutional revision draft, a fundamental change from the
“symbol of the State and of the unity of the People” in the current post-war
constitution. The current definition was a departure from the constitution of
the Empire of Japan (the Meiji Constitution) that defined the Emperor as “the
head of the Empire,” “sacred and inviolable.”[39] De facto treatment of the
emperor as “head of state” such as one seen in the Philippines visit paves the
way to officially redefining the emperor one step closer to the pre-1945
definition.
This
is how the emperor and the empress’ irei trip
plays a political role in Abe’s and the LDP’s planned constitutional revision. It
is all the more important that political use of the emperor in coordination
with the move for constitutional revision be critically examined, particularly
given the Japanese media’s virtual gag order on any matter related to the
imperial family. Some liberal-minded Japanese pundits praise the “peace-loving”
emperor to counteract Abe’s warmongering and undemocratic policymaking, but
this is also a dangerous utilization of the person who is a mere “symbol”,
someone who is constitutionally barred from being given any authority over the people
of Japan, in whom sovereignty resides.
Satoko Oka
Norimatsu translated, and expanded Kihara Satoru’s four-part article on the Japanese
imperial couple’s visit to the Philippines in collaboration with Kihara. The
article was posted in Kihara’s blog Ari no hitokoto
(“A Word from an Ant”) on January 23,
February 1,
February 2,
and February
4.
Kihara Satoru, born
in Hiroshima in 1953, is a freelance writer. He was staff writer for Japan Communist
Party’s newspaper Shimbun Akahata, an evening paper, and a local newspaper. He lives in Fukuyama City,
Hiroshima.
Satoko Oka
Norimatsu is an Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus editor, Director of Peace
Philosophy Centre
(Vancouver, Canada), and co-author of Resistant Islands:
Okinawa Confronts Japan and the United States, Rowman & Littlefield, 2012.
Recommended citation: Kihara Satoru and Satoko Oka Norimatsu,
"Political Agenda Behind the Japanese Emperor and Empress' 'Irei' Visit to
the Philippines", The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 14, Issue 5, No. 4, March
1, 2016.
Notes
[8] “Philippine
Supreme Court Approves Return of U.S. Troops,” The New York Times, January 12, 2016.
[10] “Philippines
offers.”
[13] “Japanese defense
minister to visit Philippines as early as April in bid to boost security ties,”
The Japan Times, January 5, 2016
[19] Translator was unable
to find the original source. This is a reverse translation of the Japanese
translation of Romulo’s words that appear in Wakamiya Yoshibumi, Sengo 70nen – Hoshu no ajia kan, Asahi
Shimbun Shuppan, 2014, pp. 174-5.
[23] “Firipin gohomon,
heisei 28 nen,” The Imerial Household
Agency, December 4, 2015.
[24] “Amerika
gasshukoku jichiryo kita Mariana shoto Saipan to gohomon, heisei 17 nen,” The Imperial Household Agency, April 26,
2005.
[25] “Parao gohomon,
heisei 27 nen,” The Imperial Household
Agency, January 23, 2015.
[35] “Bataan Death
March 102/160 Ultra Marathon Race” Facebook
