Seminar Series in Preparation for the Conference on African Development, Article on Japanese ODA

→Japanese

In June of this year, the Japanese government will hold the TICAD5 (Tokyo International Conference on Africa 5) (in Japanese). At the TICAD4 five years ago, the Health and Global Policy Institute (HGPI) was able to develop many ties (1, 2).

These past ten years, I have had many opportunities to be involved with Africa. Many pages will come up if you search “Africa” on this website.

As one of the activities in preparation for the TICAD5, the Health and Global Policy Institute (HGPI), in partnership with the Japan Center for International Exchange (JCIE) (1) will hold a series of five seminars on Africa. The theme is how Japan should work with Africa, which has many problems but is developing.

The first seminar (in Japanese) was a discussion moderated by the new Chairman of JCIE Mr. Ken Shibusawa, with myself, as the representative of HGPI, and Shigemi Sato, who connects Japan and Africa through businessmen.

Many young people came and we had a pleasant and meaningful time.

It is important that this kind of series will make more people think about the perspective of “Africa and Japan in a global world,” and also raise awareness of what Japan can offer to the world.

Since 1960 onwards, Japan has given much development assistance to many developing countries in Asia. Dr. Murakami of HGPI recently wrote a review of the Japanese ODA policy in the Harvard Asia Quarterly. Such research is important when considering the future of Japan’s international policy.

Following these past twenty years of the global era, it is important to think broadly with everyone about what kind of policies we should implement. There should be more opportunities for diverse business in the future.

In the twenty-first century, the world is changing in an unpredictable way, moving into a precarious era. We must learn from the past, watch the world carefully, as well as have a sense of how Japan is viewed from the world.

 

In San Francisco and at Stanford University

→Japanese

EDF is an environmental advocacy group set up in 1967, during a period when many new movements were sprouting up. This was the period when Rachel Carson’s seminal book ‘Silent Spring’ came out, as well as the period when the Vietnam War was escalating.

At EDF, scientists and lawyers come together in order to solve pressing social problems through policies and politics. I was in the US around that time (in 1969) and so feel I know the social background out of which this movement rose up.

I was invited by the board of trustees of this organization to join its ‘Science Day’ event, and I decided to accept and so found myself in San Francisco. I think they invited me because the theme this time was nuclear energy.

I reached San Francisco a day early on the 4th of February, and was invited to give a seminar the next day at APARC in Stanford University. Another reason I was there was to meet professor Takeo Hoshi, who had just joined Stanford from UC San Diego where he had been for about 20 years.

My seminar was attended by Masahiko Aoki and many others, and I was also able to have an informal discussion of around 2 hours after my hour-and-a-half seminar.

The EDF meeting the next day was attended by the likes of Burton Richter and John F. Ahearne (a key member of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) which compiled a report for the Three Mile Island Accident (March 1979), who then become Chairman of the Commission two months after the release of the Kemeny Report), all giants in their respective fields, and thanks to the participation of many experts in environmental and energy problems, a lively discussion took place. It was interesting to be in a conference with such a long discussion.

I stayed at Cavallo Point, located in Sausalito, at the foot of the Golden Gate Bridge.

The good Californian weather made it an enjoyable 3 days.

 

Davos -2

→Japanese

8416648714_e38330172e

Copyright by World Economic Forum.
swiss-image.ch/Photo Remy Steinegger.

Many business and government leaders from all over the world come to gather at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos. There is a great advantage with so many people here at one time in this small village, as there are plenty of opportunities to make behind the scenes arrangements in politics and business. The interviews (1, in Japanese) by Ms. Iida of NHK were also possible because she was in Davos. Those whose work is conducted behind the cameras, like Ms. Iida, are also very busy. Aside from the usual work, many extra preparations are necessary before coming to and after arriving in Davos, such as setting up appointments, reserving places and times, and chasing and getting hold of people.

Even for business conferences, there is a rule that only one top person from each company can attend (even secretaries are not allowed), so there is a whole other set of meetings held outside of the conferences at hotels.

On the 25th (Friday), there was a breakfast meeting of around twenty people from Japan and China. As no politicians attended the meeting, we enjoyed a frank discussion. Afterwards, the Global Agenda Council was held in which the three chairs of Japan, China and South Korea (China was the representative) held a one hour private discussion.

In the afternoon, there was the usual conference between the leaders of the world’s chemical companies which I have been invited to. It allows people to listen in and study. The regulars from Japan were Mitsubishi Chemical, Sumitomo Chemical, and Teijin but many elements are involved and the topics are now broadening from chemistry to include biotech-sciences.

On the 26th, Saturday, there was a panel titled “The Japan Growth Context” (1), which was moderated by former British Ambassador to Japan Sir David Wright and was comprised of the following panelists: Minister Motegi of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (I heard that Minister Motegi was moving about the conference arena by himself afterwards), President Hasegawa of Takeda Pharmaceutical, Chairman Kobayashi of Mitsubishi Chemical, Mr. Heizo Takenaka, and myself. As NHK news reports, there are high expectations for the Abe Cabinet, but the question is what to do about economic growth. Around one hundred people were in the audience, of which about eighty percent were Japanese, and several good questions were raised. I spoke mainly of the significance of the Fukushima nuclear accident, the delay in the women empowerment in the Japanese society (WEForum’s 2012 report shows that Japan is ranked 102 out of 134 countries on the Gender Empowerment), and the insular mind-set of many Japanese people’s, though these are topics I always discuss.

Afterwards, I went to a private conference on US foreign policy, and later rode the cable car up the Weissfluhjoch in Parsenn, to enjoy the beautiful weather. Everyone was skiing. I rested there a little while and then returned back down to the conferences.

At night, I attended a soiree. We took a mountain tram to reach the luxury hotel, Schatzalp, where it was held. The hotel is the sanatorium in Thomas Mann’s book Magic Mountain.

Professor Takeuchi of Harvard Business School and his wife were with me; Professor M. Useem of the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, who chaired my earlier panel (see my posting ‘Davos -1’) introduced me to many people and I had a very enjoyable evening.

The next day, I woke up early and took a bus to Zurich. The flight from Zurich delayed two hours before departure. I arrived in Narita at three in the afternoon the next day.

 

Davos -1

→Japanese

First Day (January 23): As I was coming down with a cold last week, I was planning on being absent from this year’s World Economic Forum Annual Meeting at Davos like I had last year (I was busy with the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC)). However, it was decided that I would be a panelist on Saturday, and although I had been hesitating for these past two or three days, I decided to also serve on a panel Thursday morning. Booking a flight was the issue but I was lucky enough to find an opening on the Swiss Air direct from Narita to Zurich, on Wednesday morning and departed.

I arrived at Zurich Airport and met with Davos regulars such as Dr. Sadako Ogata and other people going to the forum. I arrived in Davos around six in the evening, went through the registration and to the hotel. I met with a few friends but mostly slept afterwards.

Second Day (January 24): I went to the forum from the morning. There are many to chose from, but I attended “Fostering Entrepreneurial Innovation” from nine. I wanted to study up on the subject and also wanted to see Clayton Christensen. These past three years, he has suffered from three major illnesses and but he looked well and had no trouble speaking. Afterwards, we talked about his illness and his book “How will you measure your life” (the Japanese translation is a bit strange- “Innovation of life”), which is an incredible read and which I recommend to young people. We discussed that he would like me to visit him, even if it’s just briefly, when I travel to Boston in February.

After that, I went to “Catastrophic Risks in the 21st Century”, of which I was a panelist. One of the panelists was Judith Rodin, who is the first woman to be the president of Ivy League university. I had wished to meet her for some time, and since Judith and I found several key mutual friends from when I was at the University of Pennsylvania, our conversation flowed even before the panel discussion started. I handed all of the panelists the English Executive Summary of the NAIIC report. I was not able to attend thewell-acclaimed speech by Prime Minister David Cameron then in the main auditorium, but I’m sure I will eventually see it online.

In the afternoon, I attended “Is Democracy Winning?” which was moderated by Nik Gawing and held in partnership with the BBC. It was a difficult topic but the four panelists <>, the questions from the audience and comments by scheduled audience were outstanding. I felt that it would be very hard to have such a discussion in Japan.

Tonight was the annual “Japan Night” and many people came. I left shortly after it started in order to attend the South Korea and Indonesia receptions. After meeting many people at the receptions, I returned to Japan Night and found that although the number of Japanese had decreased, the place was lively and still packed with many friends of Japan. Compared to the Korea and Indonesia receptions, the crowd was over twice as big and they were perhaps all about food and drink, though the other receptions also had entertainment. However, it can be problematic that some people see this and decide that Japan is just a“soft power.”

Please visit the Davos website <www.weforum.org> to see more.

 

My Thoughts in the Japan Times and the University of Tokyo School of Medicine Alumni Newsletter, “The Iron Gate Newsletter”

→Japanese

Even in the New Year, I have had many interviews regarding the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC). Abroad, not only has the report been well received, but also elements of the process, including public disclosure, transparency, high awareness of the global audience, and efforts to communicate in layman’s English have been evaluated highly.

This may also include feelings of hope for Japan to change, the Abe Cabinet, and the significance of NAIIC.

In February, I will be traveling to many places for NAIIC related panels, awards, and speeches: San Fransisco- Stanford University, Paris (OECD) - Boston (AAAS), Rio de Janeiro (InterAcademy Panel). I will be very busy, but I think of it as being good publicity for Japan.

Recently there has been an article in the Japan Times, “What Japan Needs to Do”, which features interviews with five people including myself, as well as the article, “Making Democracy Truly Work” (in Japanese) in the University of Tokyo School of Medicine Alumni Newsletter, “The Iron Gate Newsletter.”

In this way, the word is getting out.

 

The Fukushima Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Safety, Visits from Foreign Delegates

→Japanese

The “Fukushima Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Safety” is being held this weekend December 15 to 17th in Koriyama City in Fukushima Prefecture, hosted by the Japanese government and co-hosted by the IAEA.

It will be at the same time as the Lower House election.

The list of participating countries is extensive, and shows that they are trying to learn from the Fukushima nuclear accident.

In October, I was notified about the conference by some knowledgeable people abroad. They asked me, “You will take part in the conference right?” but I considered the position of the Japanese government and just nodded, “Hmmm.”

A month ago, a certain Diet member had asked a government official, “Aren’t you going to ask Dr. Kurokawa to participate in the conference?” and an official from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs visited me. The official seemed to be slightly uncomfortable, but after talking for a while it became clear that the government (meaning, the administrative branch of the government) had decided (did not think about it most likely or pressured somehow?) that “there was no reason for me to participate,”there was nothing for me to contribute to the program, and they did not consider me in the list of participants. There is no need for me to force anything, so I told the visitor 'Not to worry, I will not participate).

Actually, during these past two days, delegations from three countries have visited me separately. They praised the NAIIC report and wanted to learn and discuss more. They said they were able to deepen their understanding of each other, as well have a meaningful discussion regarding Japan’s role and future challenges.

In my previous entry, I pointed out that a comparison of the response of the U.S. and U.K. to the NAIIC report with Japan’s response indicates Japan’s delay in “true globalization” and the differences in ways of thinking.

Tomorrow is election day. Please vote no matter what. There are many parties and you may be unsure of who to choose, but you must carefully assess the qualities of each candidate. Your vote will move the democratic system, although it may not change right away.

Especially the young people, starting from this election, you must change your awareness and vote. For you are the ones who will build the future.

It will take time to make the democratic system work.

 

The Significance of the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC), the National Diet or Legislative Branch, and the Election

→Japanese

The National Diet is the legislative branch in Japan and is considered the “highest organ of state power.” But do you really feel this way?

There has recently been some sharp comments regarding NAIIC and the function of the Diet.

It is the article by Nikkei Business Online, “How to heighten the abilities of the Diet members and incorporate the private sector’s wisdom in policies? The appalling reality of the activities of the ‘highest organ of state power.’” (December 14, 2012) (in Japanese).

The Diet is the legislative branch of the three branches of power, which form the foundation of democratic system. However, it is not functioning the way it should be. Whether it will work or not depends on what you demand of the politicians you choose in the election. It will take a long time, but it will determine the future, especially for young people. 

Particularly for young people, from this election onwards, you must change your awareness and vote in elections. From now on, you will build the future of Japan.

It will take time to make the democratic institutions work.

Open your eyes, carefully assess the qualities of the candidates according to your own judgment, and vote.

The first step is to vote in the election.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) Fukushima Investigation Commission, Nagasaki University, and Elections and a Functioning Democratic System

→Japanese

It has been one year since the establishment of the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission and five months since the report was published.

The U.S. Congress gave a mandate to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to establish an independent Fukushima accident investigation commission (the list of Commission members is here) and started their activities this past July. It is possible to see this on the website.

The third series of meetings was held in Japan and was on the progress of the inspections at Tokyo and Fukushima. As this is an independent commission by the legislative branch, the U.S. decided that the Japanese administrative branch of the Government should basically not be involved.

The first day of the meetings in Tokyo was at the National Institute for Graduate Studies (GRIPS). The three days of the meetings began with my presentation and discussions and went on to have hearings. The commission members had each read the NAIIC report closely and their evaluation of the NAIIC was very high.

It was mostly open to the public, but the questions were limited to the commission members. There was a brief report on it in the Asahi Shimbun (in Japanese).

On a different day, I gave the keynote speech at the Daiwa Capital Markets Conference “Global Agenda in Post-Fukushima.” Since over half of the audience and participants are not Japanese, it seemed that English was the language used. I introduced NAIIC as“the first independent investigation commission mandated by the Diet, the legislative branch, in the constitutional history of Japan” and began my speech.

After my speech, a member of the audience came and told me, “I worked as a civil servant at the British Treasury for ten years and afterwards at a private company. It is unbelievable that this the first independent investigation commission by the legislative branch…there are two such commissions in the UK right now…”

Compared to how the report has been assessed abroad, the Japanese response seems to be weak (in Japanese), but this may be due to the public awareness, Diet members and public servants’ lack of understanding about the functions of the democratic system (in Japanese). I also pointed this out in my blog on August 16.

On another day, I went to give a talk at Nagasaki University (in Japanese). There were many young people who participated. There was also a considerable number of high school students and they gave excellent feedback to the university organizing office.

These young people understood that the process of NAIIC is one part of strengthening the functions of the legislative branch.

This is was it means to participate in an election, although the country will not change immediately. It will take time for the democratic system to be built.

Especially for this reason, young people must think hard, participate in the election process and vote, for Japan’s future and for your future.

 

High Sales of the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC) report, and will the Democratic System in Japan Move Forward?

→Japanese

I was pleased upon reading a recent article that the NAIIC report is selling well. This achievement is due to the efforts of the NAIIC team.

How would you evaluate the report? The response abroad has been an unbelievably high assessment (1) of the report.

During election times and also on the everyday level, please question the members of the Diet, who were chosen by the Japanese public, that is each of YOU, whether they are making efforts to implement the report’s recommendations.

When this practice sinks in and becomes established between the public and the Diet members, it will push the democratic systems and the legislative branch to work better.

Even if it is gradual, your future and Japan will change through the process of elections.

Elections are an important way for each individual citizen to be involved in national politics.

 

Visit from the United Nations Human Rights Council

→Japanese

Two weeks ago, Mr. Anand Grover, the Special Rapporteur of the United Nations Human Rights Council, and his team visited Japan. They came as part of an investigation into the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident and the conditions of the damage.

They had well researched the conditions of the victims of Fukushima and the nuclear plant workers and we had an hour-long discussion on many topics. Also, they had read the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC) report quite thoroughly.

The press releases by the Japanese government regarding the north eastern Japan earthquake and tsunami, and especially the governmental response to the victims of the Fukushima nuclear accident have been suppressive and the Special Rapporteur accurately pointed out both the positive aspects and the inadequacies.

It is possible to read this press statement in both Japanese and English. It is not very long, please take a look at it when you have time. The links for the sites are below.

Japanese: http://unic.or.jp/unic/press_release/2869/

English: http://unic.or.jp/unic/press_release/2869/#entry-english

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ET2dVWgOmC4&feature=plcp

The international community is highly aware and has been trying to learn from Japan’s response to the accident from many angles.

This is an issue that is directly connected with trust in the government.