Japan, China, Taiwan, never ending war on China seas territorial disputes

"Japan's prime minister said the national government is considering purchasing a set of islets, the Senkaku islands in Japanese and the Diaoyu in Chinese, islands at the center of a territorial dispute between Tokyo and Beijing, a move that could further strain ties between Asia's two largest economies. The move by Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda's government to weigh nationalizing the privately owned property is the latest salvo in a long-standing diplomatic stand-off with China, which also claims sovereignty over the Japanese-administered islands... "An official at the prime minister's office confirmed the central government is in talks with Tokyo and hasn't ruled out an outright purchase of the islands [Senkaku, Diaoyu]. "There is engagement between the prime minister's office and Gov. Ishihara," said the Japanese official, who declined to be named." (End of quotes)

Has Japan the capacity to handle what it is stirring right now? The answer is no. Behind Japanese government move, helped by the conservative Governor Ishihara, is there the perception that this move could endanger peace and security in the China seas? Years after years, we witness the appearance of a more " resilient " and forceful militarized Japan. 

As seen with its interaction overseas with PKO missions since late 20th century and now (Cambodia, Golan Heights, Mozambique, East Timor) and assistance (Djibouti) by the Coast Guards, by the JSDF, Ground, Maritime, and the JP Air Force for transportation. Last year, the JSDF were very instrumental helping the 3/11 victims of the quake and the tsunami. The JSDF of Tohoku military units came to rescue Fukushima after the nuclear accident. 

Does the public perceive it? Yes and if the elder do not like it, those who did not the WW2 are reminded by moves of neo-conservatives and right wing groups. And for the younger generation, scotched to their mobile screens, we can see lots of Manga, movies, novels aiming at remobilizing the nationalist conscience. Again I noticed recently this trend with films which depicts the heroism of the Japanese forces or Coast Guards against evil forces or stane creatures coming from the seas... 

How will China answer? Hard to predict, the Dragon is busy with its own inland policies but I know that Beijing won't ever give up any claim on sovereignty. Shock therapy again. One known device of the psychological governance...

What do the hard-liners say in Japan? After World War II Japan renounced claims to a number of territories and islands including Taiwan in the 1951 Treaty of San Francisco. But under the treaty the Nansei Shoto islands came under US trusteeship and were then returned to Japan in 1971, under the Okinawa reversion deal. Japan says that China raised no objections to the San Francisco deal. And it says that it is only since the 1970s, when the issue of oil resources in the area emerged, that Chinese and Taiwanese authorities began pressing their claims.

Several incidents happened between Japanese and Chinese fishing boats. China says being the owner of the islands (apparently it is inaccurate since a Japanese owner has been identified) and therefore started fishing, at one serious incident the Japanese Coast Guard took a Chinese fishing boat into custody for trespassing and also for violent navigation. After a few days to a week, the Japanese government released the crew.

Now Tokyo wants to buy the islands and integrate those as Japanese public domain.

(Images: agencies, otaku-streamers)

Fukushima: "C'est la faute à l'homme"

Kiyoshi Kurokawa

Photograph ©JLK 2012

"...donc si on suit la logique de la commission d'enquête du parlement japonais sur l'accident nucléaire du 11 Mars 2011 de Fukushima: "Fukushima, c'est la faute à l'homme!" Oui il fallait y penser et Voltaire n'y est vraiment pour rien!" -quotes from my Facebook wall, url down this post.


Fukushima parliament investigation commission president, Dr. Kurokawa invited at the press club today, he was grilled about the different version of reports provided in Japanese and in English. Problem, the English version is not the translation of the original document in Japanese. It is the translation of notes of the commission chair Kurokawa who criticized the Japanese culture and the traditional system applied by the country saying it is responsible for the Fukushima nuclear accident.


Fukushima Parliament Investigation: Confusing Chair? A report of my fellow colleague Mure Dicky of the Financial Times had this written in today's edition of the FT on the Fukushima investigation commission by the Diet and the estrange sometimes "agent provocateur" and eccentric scientist chair Kiyoshi Kurokawa, chairman of the Diet's Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (following my post of Friday). 

Quotes of FT article titled "Fukushima crisis 'made in Japan': "... In a message prefacing the English language summary of the commission's final report, Mr Kurokawa blamed the plant's failure on "our reflexive obedience; our reluctance to question authority; our devotion to 'sticking with program'; our groupism; and our insularity". "What must be admitted – very painfully – is that this was a disaster 'Made in Japan'," he wrote. "Had other Japanese been in the shoes of those who bear responsibility for this accident, the result [might] well have been the same." In his preface to the Japanese version of the report, Mr Kurokawa offered a more measured critique of the cultural background to the crisis, blaming the mindset created by postwar effective one-party rule, seniority systems and lifetime employment rather than the nation's culture as a whole."

End of quotes.

Things you can say in English and things you cannot say in Japanese? So again a question: Why on earth a Diet investigative commission on Fukushima report has 2 versions for the same gatherings of facts, analysis and recommendations? 

"Ignoratio Elenchi in Latin". A "red herring in English". Is there an intentional attempt to mislead or confuse the Diet, the readers of the report? 

Now the thing is certainly about Kurokawa Sensei's strong personality, I do not dislike it at all. But as I know of it, it might not exactly fit the Establishment of Japanese politics, cultural, and science world. On this, here is an insightful report - interview of Kiyoshi Kurokawa, earlier August 9th 2011 in the Tokyo Weekender. "Kiyoshi Kurokawa the Maverick" always feels he is surrounded by enemies, quotes: “(When I worked) at Tokyo University, in a way I was surrounded by enemies,” Kurokawa tells me. “I’m very outspoken, and so the Japanese establishment hates me. I’ve had some negative experiences through that, so that’s why I’m always speaking to the younger generation. They are the ones that matter for our future and can change their lives.”

http://www.tokyoweekender.com/2011/08/kiyoshi-kurokawa-the-maverick/


Question: do you change the society by shooting at it as one friend of the press put it yesterday? Mister Kurokawa might very well feels very lonely in the future although he certainly did a very interesting job to shake the walls. Something an other Maverick I know a little, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, perfectly understood before to retire definitely from front politics.



* Joel's Facebook page:
http://www.facebook.com/joel.legendrekoizumi

Japan expected political explosion after Earthquake, Tsunami and Fukushima

Tens of thousands of citizens occupy 
Japanese government district

Tokyo June 29th 2012.

On Friday June 29th 2012 a White Paper on Science and Technology was presented to the foreign media in Japan. A monument of "Tatemae" with worrying words like "Toward a Robust and resilient Society". But if we look deeper, it is an attempt to hide the lack of preparation of the Japanese big players and rulers in case of natural disasters in a country prone to such unfortunate events. (earthquake, tsunami, industrial accident, atomic explosion, poisoning, radiation, etc.)

On this last point the summary of the Sciences and Technology's photo (PHOTO) I added here elaborates the future agenda of concerns that Japan should not rule out, such as avoiding to see Japan contrive to hang itself for lack of careful preparation. One of the most fundamental right the people here are expecting. 

Apparently, the Japanese government, the administration and the related industrial interests were not yet aware of catastrophic impacts raised by the earthquake, the tsunami and by the Fukushima NPP accident before they opted for atomic energy more than half a century ago. Quotes: 

1) Effect of radiation on human health

2) Promotion of decontamination

3) Securing food safety.

Nuclear safety regulation, SPEEDI etc.

End of quotes.

White Paper

We understand that this is a review of what did not work well before and since 3/11. We can desperately regret that 20.000 people died of the 3/11 earthquake and the tsunami and half a million people lived in precarious conditions and that millions are worried about the impact of atomic radiation in their daily life, because Japan had not deeply thought about the nature of its territory and land ! We are stunned that Japan did not think about these risks before to build cities or atomic energy plant on the shores of its archipelago.

Studying the papers of the SC & Tech White Paper is nothing else than demonstrating the lack of serious consideration to daily life by those who have in their mandate and duties to assure the safety of life in Japan, today. 

And I assume that the a multitude of spin-doctors are going to say that foreign media are again sending false rumors such as what we did in March 2011, when we said, wrote, voiced that there was a meltdown in Fukushima NPP...! 

Maybe rulers' greed is one explanation. There are others.

                                                PART II

Tokyo Nagatacho June 29th 2012 

In the second part (in French) I write today about the strange "Interference between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and World Health Organization (WHO) after the report by Michel Ferney, Professor Emeritus at the University of Basel, Michel Ferney was astonished, with the Chernobyl accident as currently in Fukushima: "a strange absence" of the World Health Organization (WHO). His article was published in Rue89 but I add here an extraordinary report published in 1957 about health dangers and mental health when dealing with Atomic Energy, by WHO-OMS... 


Les étranges "Interférences entre l'Agence Internationale de l'Énergie Atomique (AIEA) et l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé (OMS) par Michel Fernex, Professeur émérite de médecine tropicale. Faculté de médecine, Université de Bâle. 


Les promoteurs des centrales atomiques, et l'AIEA en particulier, ont de tout temps investi dans une propagande bien orchestrée, pour que cessent les craintes "injustifiées" des populations face au nucléaire commercial. Ces craintes risquaient de gêner le développement rapide des centrales atomiques. Pour l'AIEA, il était essentiel de trouver le moyen de mettre fin aux publications de travaux, susceptibles d'inquiéter les populations et les responsables politiques ainsi que le présente ce rapport: 


" En 1957, une publication de l'OMS sur les "EFFETS GÉNÉTIQUES DES RADIATIONS CHEZ L'HOMME" souligne les dommages provoqué par les mutations ponctuelles, et leurs rapports avec les doses de rayonnement.Le travail signé par le professeur américain H.J. Muller, un biologiste célèbre, lauréat du Prix Nobel, de même que les travaux sur les mutations chez l'homme, risquaient de mettre en danger l'industrie atomique du fait de ses atteintes à la santé. Muller avait en particulier relevé que des doses de rayonnement très faibles pouvaient produire des altérations du génôme, sans que l'on puisse déceler de rapport linéaire entre les doses les plus faibles et ces altérations. 


L'année suivante, en 1958, l'AIEA et l'OMS, deux organisations des Nations Unies, concluent un Accord, qui contraint l'OMS à ne plus entreprendre de recherches, ni publier de documents pouvant gêner la promotion des centrales atomiques, et de conserver un caractère confidentiel à certaines informations sensibles. 


L'article 1 de cet Accord stipule en effet que : "Chaque fois qu'une des parties se propose d'entreprendre un programme ou une activité dans un domaine qui présente ou peut présenter un intérêt majeur pour l'autre partie, la première consulte la seconde en vue de régler la question d'un commun accord." 


L'Article III précise en outre que : 


1) L'Agence Internationale pour l'Énergie Atomique et l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé reconnaissent qu'elles peuvent être appelées à prendre certaines mesures restrictives pour sauvegarder le caractère confidentiel de renseignements qui leur auront été fournis... 


2) Sous réserve des arrangements qui pourraient être nécessaires pour sauvegarder le caractère confidentiel de certains documents, le Secrétariat de l'AIEA et le Secrétariat de l'OMS se tiennent mutuellement au courant de tous les projets et tous les programmes de travail pouvant intéresser les deux parties. 


Cet Accord retire en conséquence à l'OMS la possibilité d'analyser, de manière indépendante, l'impact des installation atomiques sur la santé. La confidentialité instaurée par cet Accord est par ailleurs contraire à la Constitution de l'OMS (voir pp.1 à 18 de la référence 1). En effet, parmi les 22 fonctions qui doivent permettre à l'OMS d'atteindre ses objectifs pour la santé dans le monde, figurent les points suivants: 


- fournir toutes informations, donner tous conseils et toute assistance dans le domaine de la santé 


- aider à former, parmi les peuples, une opinion publique éclairée en ce qui concerne la santé


Malgré les contradictions entre la Constitution de l'OMS et les paragraphes de l'Accord cités ci-dessus, l'Accord entre l'AIEA et l'OMS a été approuvé par la 12e Assemblée Mondiale de la Santé, le 28 mai 1959. 


Pour mieux comprendre la portée de cette restriction de l'information des populations, il faut lire le numéro 151 de la Série de Rapports Techniques de l'OMS. La conclusion du chapitre: "Politique à suivre en cas d'accident et de dangers imprévus", à la page 50 de ce document s'exprime en ces termes sybillins:  "Cependant, du point de vue de la santé mentale, la solution la plus satisfaisante pour l'avenir des utilisations pacifiques de l'énergie atomique serait de voir monter une nouvelle génération qui aurait appris à s'accommoder de l'ignorance et de l'incertitude et qui, pour citer Joseph Addison, le poète anglais du XVIII siècle, saurait chevaucher l'ouragan et diriger la tempête". 


Cette conclusion traduit un mépris des populations, tout à fait contraire à l'esprit et à la lettre de la Constitution de l'OMS. En novembre 1995, lors du congrès organisé par l'OMS sur Tchernobyl à Genève, M. Claude Haegi, représentant le gouvernement de Genève, a lu ce texte en assemblée plénière. Une autre phrase a été citée par M. Haegi est celle exprimée par M. Blix, Directeur Général de l'AIEA, 4 mois après la catastrophe de Tchernobyl, et publiée le 28 août 1986, dans le journal le Monde. M. Blix y affirme que, vu l'importance de l'énergie atomique, le monde pourrait supporter un accident comparable à celui de Tchernobyl par an. M. Haegi de conclure : "Un Tchernobyl suffit. Il faut tendre vers une sécurité quasi totale." Cette contribution, comme tant d'autres n'a pas été mentionnée dans le document fourni après ce congrès." End of quotes.


Notes: http://www.akademia.ch/~sebes/textes/1998/98Fernex1.html#Tast.


NB: I have the original 1957 1958 WHO OMS documents in my files.

Japan Consumption tax: Not now! 

Katz says "Japan is under psychological depression!"

Richard Katz Editor of the well know "Oriental Economist"

Richard Katz shouted at prime minister Noda about the 100% increase of the consumption tax: "Total Nonsense" says the Editor of the Oriental Economist at the press club today. Katz describes the tax as the "wrong tax at the wrong time." The problem according to the influential newsletter's editor is that Japan "is not growing and that low growth expands deficit." 


Good news? Japan's assets are huge, 60% are overseas, Japan is not Greece, it is the third economic power. But an increase of consumption tax is risky and can cause a recession. Let's hope the benefit of the tax does not only go to the firms and forget the people... He considers the Japanese media are too lenient vis a vis the Japanese ministry of Finances. "Reporters repeat things without really understanding what they are talking about" or he told also are complacent with their self censorship... 


Japan he said is now under a psychological depression. " Car sales are down by half compared to 10 years ago"? Really? He also said that people do not have money to spend and consume and use their savings, 5 to 10% of it. So why charge the consumers with a 100% tax to come? On Fukushima Katz reminded the audience that 84% of Japanese don't trust the government on the "cold shutdown".


Maybe the Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto or an other charismatic leader is now expected by voters says Katz who definitely appears to the public as an ice-cube in the coke. Refreshing! We exchanged "名刺" meishi together.

The Tepco fuzzy world

Notorious Masataka SHIMIZU ex-Tepco president 

Is Japan rewarding those who ruin and bring shame on the nation? 日本は、国を破滅させ国家の恥を晒す人たちに報いるのですか？


National Diet of Japan, my brief comments on Tepco and the 19 meetings of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC)【国会事故調】

After hearing ex-Tepco president Shimizu at the Diet investigation panel, Shimizu was in charge of the Fukushima Dai I nuclear power plant, I simply would say that he is an example of what Japan produced the worst as servile protector of his business, his bureaucratic career and his Japan nuclear village, Shimizu  stated in front of the panel and the audience, that he did not remember much of what he did during the March 2011 days of international emergency! How awkward.

I have to say a few things about the Japanese press and the Fukushima Diet Naiic investigation panel and first impression is that actually this panel has a method and it is a first for such panel to investigate, and it is hard. The witnesses (Kan, Edano, Shimizu, Sato etc.) are not under oath as this was not decided by Parliament. They do not have this practice they say according to Dr. Kurokawa. The project is here to let Japanese and foreign public to draw their own conclusions on what happened during this Fukushima accident and since March 11. So the panel seems to exist as a tool that is set between, say, a Congress investigation and the South African reconciliation process, but it is still vague.

Maybe it fails of not having a possibility to bring the result of testimonies in front of the Justice. This would eventually happen as people have sued Tepco already. Indeed we are here in Japan in a democracy with strict separation of powers Executive Legislative and Justice in what I observed in the practice of these three powers.

The second thing I observed during these 19 meetings and hearings of the Diet Fukushima investigation is the great work or Mr. Nomura who was in charge of asking questions to witnesses (as a Prosecutor could do), Nomura-san is a quiet, remarkable in the method, the logic and the grilling of a person testifying, impressive.

Last comment is about the Japanese media. Japanese reporters ask very tough questions during press conferences opened to all journalists from all around the world, especially the Japanese free lance journalists (many have a regular basis collaboration with media actually) but the sad thing is that the Japanese big media (5 big TV and in particular the 5 big newspapers group:　朝、毎、読、日経、産経 ) do not publish all they reported and were told. Why?

Last but not least, as my fellow colleague from Reuters newswire (ex Bloomberg) Aaron Sheldrick writes: "... in a sign of the close ties that bind corporate Japan, Shimizu will later this month become an outside board member of Fuji Oil Co., which is owned by AOC Holdings Inc., a firm in which Tepco has an 8.7 percent stake." Is Japan rewarding those who ruin and bring shame on the nation? 日本は、国を破滅させ国家の恥を晒す人たちに報いるのですか？

WHO-OMS report on Fukushima, "allegedly questionable"!

Picture by Antonio Pagnotta©2012

Scientific criticisms  are emerging  following the publication of the report of the WHO  on Fukushima after the March 11th 2011 earthquake  and tsunami. (Bilingual French and English)

Part I

Regarding  the  "Preliminary dose  estimation from

the  nuclear  accident after  the 2011  Great East

Japan  Earthquake  and  Tsunami" published  by the

WHO   (OMS)   World   Health   Organization  2012.

Criticisms  about  the  methodology  adopted,  and

about   the  conclusions.   Here  is   a  critical

analysis  of this report  prepared by  a scientist

who works on Chernobyl  and follows  the Fukushima

case from France.

I  could  obtain  a  copy  of  this  document. The

report  focusses  on 5  major themes  of questions

which  are  puzzling  the scientific  community, I

publish  them  here,  they  provide a  pretty fair

assessment of the questions asked today:

"...  Above  all,  we  have  to denounce  the link

between  "dose  assessment"  and   Earthquake  and

Tsunami. If there were no  nuclear power  plant in

operation   along   the   coast   of   Japan,   no

radioactive   contamination   would    have   been

reported.  The  (WHO)   title  should   have  only

referred  to  the  destruction  of  the  Fukushima

Dai-ichi  nuclear  power  plant! The  report title

formulation is chosen to focus  the main  cause of

the   radioactivity   doses   received    by   the

population on the tectonic plates  and not  on the

concentration   of   radioactive    materials   at

facilities subject to the failures of men  and the

upheavals of the nature..."

"... it is  now necessary to  provide answers  to 5

questions that this report raises:

-Why the WHO, which has no human  means to  do the

job, brought its label to  the publication  and by

taking  full  responsibility  in  the eyes  of the

media and public opinion?

-Where  and with what  experience and  history are

involved the main contributors to the  present WHO

report?

-What   position   would   it occupy    in   the

communication     "allowed"      regarding     the

consequences of the accident?

-What  is  the   scientific  context   of  this

assessment? Is it appropriate?

-Can the report bring the Japanese  authorities to

reconsider their handling of the  crisis affecting

the radiological re-contaminated regions?

In  addition:

FR: "... des informations rassemblées  ci-dessus il

découle  à  l'évidence que  ce rapport  “OMS 2012”

sur Fukushima ne s'inscrit pas dans un  conflit au

sein  de  la   technocratie,  l'OMS   essayant  de

recouvrer  une  petite  part  de  l'autonomie dont

l'accord de  1959 et la  Convention de  1986 l'ont

complètement  privée.  Il  est  donc un  élément à

considérer  comme important  dans la  stratégie de

communication visant à verrouiller  les prévisions

sur  les conséquences  sanitaires de  Fukushima et

l'interprétation  de  celles  que les  médecins et

épidémiologistes indépendants observerons  au sein

des  populations  touchées  par  la  radioactivité

répandue. Tout conduit à penser  que la  machine à

broyer le réel est déjà lancée à plein  régime. Il

n'y a pas eu d'irradiations aigües  à Fukushima.

L'accident  n'aura  donc  produit  aucune  mort  à

mettre  au  compte  de  la  radioactivité. Dieu

merci ! pourront s'exclamer  Jean-Pierre Chaussade

et Sunichi Yamashita..., s'ils  ne l'ont  pas déjà

fait.  La  radiophobie a  déjà commencé  à exercer

ses   ravages,    que   les   rapports   officiels

déploreront  et  imputeront  à  l'alarmisme des

intervenants        indépendants,       ignorants,

incompétents et irresponsables..."

CQFD,  we wish to  hear the  concerned authorities

about these questions.

Part II

Details on how the atomic club works, in French:

FR:  "...  La  mécanique  de   la  radioprotection

internationale

1. Le dispositif institutionnel

Une brève description de  la structure  du système

institutionnel    international    (onusien)    de

radioprotection et de la manière dont  ses membres

en disposent est ici indispensable.  Annie Sugier,

une   bureaucrate   éminente   de  l'establishment

atomique  français moult  fois décorée  et primée,

présente    le   diagramme    de   flux    de   la

radioprotection  mondiale dans  le Dossier  167 de

l'ASN10.

Au  sommet,  la  Science  qui produit  des papiers

publiés par les revues à  Comité de  lecture. Rien

à  dire,  sinon  que les  budgets de  recherche ne

vont  pas  toujours  vers  les séquelles  les plus

préoccupantes de  la pollution  radioactive (comme

en  Biélorussie  par exemple,  où tout  ce domaine

est délaissé).

L'UNSCEAR, United Nations Scientific  Committee on

the   Effects    of   Atomic    Radiation,   vient

immédiatement après. Son  rôle est  d'examiner les

publications  scientifiques sur  le sujet  et d'en

retenir ce que bon  lui semble.  L'organisme n'est

soumis à aucun contrôle scientifique.  En d'autres

termes il juge souverainement.

En   dessous   se   trouve  la   CIPR,  Commission

Internationale  de  Protection  radiologique,  une

association  caritative   [sic]  qui   reçoit  les

publications  sélectionnées  par  l'UNSCEAR  et en

tire des recommandations.

On  peut  se  rendre  compte  de  l'efficacité  du

filtrage  opéré par  ces deux  acteurs prééminents

du dispositif en regardant comment  Tchernobyl est

pris en compte dans les  dernières recommandations

générales,  Publication  CIPR  103 (2007).  Le mot

Tchernobyl   n'est   cité   que   trois   fois  et

uniquement en relation avec la question  du cancer

de la thyroïde... Un exploit indépassable  s'il en

est. Puis viennent les  instances de  discussion :

AIEA, OMS, IRPA, OCDE,  AEN etc.  Elles retiennent

ce qui leur  paraît pertinent  des recommandations

de    la   CIPR    pour   l'exercice    de   leurs

responsabilités en matière de radioprotection.

En   découlent   les    standards   internationaux

élaborés par l'AIEA, l'OMS, la FAO, l'AEN  etc, et

les  standards  régionaux,  comme  ceux d'EURATOM.

Enfin,   en   dernier   lieu,   nourries   par  ce

processus, les législations nationales.

C'est  presque  beau  comme  l'Antique.  Cependant

l'ordonnance du dispositif  est brouillée  par les

acteurs   qui   en  assurent   le  fonctionnement.

Impossible ici  de fournir dans  le temps  et dans

l'espace le film  des fluctuations  de l'entrelacs

des  appartenances  des  uns  et  des  autres, aux

institutions  qui  le  composent  mais  aussi  aux

industries atomique  et radiologique.  On découvre

sans  surprise  que se  vautrer dans  les conflits

d'intérêt  assure  des  carrières  sûres  vers les

sommets.

A  titre d'exemple, la  dernière recrue  du Comité

principal  de  la  CIPR, la  radiobiologiste russe

Natalya   Shandala   est   aussi   Conseillère  en

communication de ROSATOM et  participe à  ce titre

à des chats sur In- ternet, du genre  : “Radiation :

Friend or Enemy ?  ”11. La  Scientologie recourt

aux  mêmes  procédés.   Tout  est   brouillé  sauf

l'esprit de corps, la pensée unifiée, le  rejet de

toute contestation et de  remise en  cause, portés

par    cette   machinerie    bureaucratique   sans

faille..."

Fin de citations de Yves Lenoir, 29 mai 2012.

In Asiangazette, May 30th 2012.

Translation FR to EN, the French version is to be

the original reference.

Quod erat demonstrandum!

Interviewed in 日刊　ゲンダイ

Today is the opening of the Sky Tree Tower (STT) in Asakusa, Tokyo, and it rains like cats and dogs! Later in the day, visitors cannot see a thing because of the clouds and the rain and then are prisoners of the elevators, the lifts don't work because of the wind. Bad luck. Sorry friends but I do not enjoy this new tower that destroys Tokyo's perspective with the Fuji san in the horizon line, and I wrote about it in the Japanese press recently. To me it just looks like a TV antenna pole, as too many seen on Tokyo streets. And it is interpreted as a sign of loosing power for those who rule Japan nowadays with an added Freudian act of compensation: offsetting a psychological difficulty by developing in another direction... 


I was interviewed by Japanese daily newspaper Nikkan Gendai about Japan and this Sky Tree, I could have add that neighbors, as watched on midday news TV program yesterday, are greatly troubled by the tower and by early and late visitors who drop all their garbage in the streets (yes in Japan) or who climb the houses and condominium staircases to take pictures. I saw how the TV reporter himself came to clean up the streets nearby. In term of aesthetic, I prefer Dubai's 828-meter-high Burj Khalifa tower. This STT thing symbolizes destruction of the environment and deploys the overdone arrogance of public work at a time when energy should be saved and construction spared for people and society in a sustainable led policy. 


It's also just an other childish form of arrogance to surpass the 600-meter-high of Canton city Tower in China. (634 versus 610). I do not think it is a security prone tower in case of accident contrary to what the builders say. Besides city planners are worried about terrorism therefore the Tobu Railway Co. which operates the tower planted over 77 cameras to monitor the visitors and locations. True enough... the area is controlled by the anti-social groups (the Akasuka  Yakuza). The only thing here is that it is a record thing, the world tallest built tower. I personally prefer Tokyo Tower and her elegant style especially in the night when lights illuminate the Tokyo sky. Talking about Kizuna (bonds) that often but not always spread in Japan since 3/11, I also would rather like to see % of the money earned by the Sky Tree offered to the reconstruction of victimized Tohoku people... Anyway, just my views in popular Nikkan Gendai newspaper published earlier in May (gendai.net 1,5 million copies sold) 


This interview was published for a Golden Week special edition of a Japanese daily newspaper Nikkan Gendai. 1500000 copies a day, popular evening daily. Gendai disclosed a lot in 1976 about the Lockheed scandal. The interview is about Japan declining power and its symbols. I genuinely am unimpressed by the branding of the Sky Tree so called tallest building (Freudian act of the builders?) I raise the issues of a poor social and managerial environment in Japan, I focus on Olympus, Sony, NEC, too rigid; and altered by a stubborn hierarchy. I warn against a non-combative seniority system that I describe as a sickness paralyzing progress, creativity and talents, especially dispiriting the young generations of Japanese men and women. My interview page 7 by 堀田　佳男 in 　日刊　ゲンダイ.

Also page 5 of the same edition there is an interview of my honorable colleague Karel Van Wolferen who analyzes that politician "Ozawa Ichiro will revive..."

Japan Needs Babies

Picture Antonio Pagnotta©2012

What Japan economy needs is... babies!! I reported on RTL news.「日本経済に必要なのは、赤ちゃん！」私のRTL（ フランス）最新レポートです。Alertez les bébés...!

http://www.rtl.fr/actualites/insolite/article/au-japon-il-se-vend-plus-de-couches-pour-adultes-que-pour-bebes-7748037975


1) Joël Legendre, sur RTL, le 11 Mai 2012 Journal de 18:30


Les ventes de couches pour adultes ont "légèrement surpassé" celles pour bébés,  car on ne fait pas assez de bébé au Japon qui compte un enfant de moins toutes les 100 secondes. C'est la catastrophe pour tout le système socio-économique qui découle de ce vieillissement rapide.


La retraite et le 3e âge qu'on imagine calme et paisible dans les kimonos fleuris c'est beau dans les pubs mais faute de revenus et en période de crise. C'est le cauchemar. Car ici les Japonais de 65 ans ou plus représentent un quart de la population, les femmes vivent jusqu'à 86 ans et les hommes 80. Si la tendance se poursuit, la population chutera de 30% entre 2010 et 2060, pour s'établir à 85 millions.


Ce vieillissement est un casse-tête économique pour Tokyo qui s'escrime pour assurer le financement des retraites et répondre aux dépenses de santé.


Poussant la logique des chiffres jusqu'à  l'absurde, Un démographe de l'Université du Sendai, Hiroshi Yoshida a mis au point une pendule démographique. Constat effrayant. Avec 16 millions d'enfants, et au taux actuel le Japon n'aura plus aucun enfant dans mille ans!


Mille ans, Bon, il y a encore du temps aux japonais pour se ressaisir et  faire de jolis bébés! Sinon la démographie ce sera le plus gros problème de la 3e économie mondiale...




2) In addition to my report there is this background for my fellow English speaking blog's followers:


This is not the same demographic and aging problems for France (beyond 2%) for Japan (1.39) or Singapore (1.2) and there are several impacts on our radar screen. As French philosopher Auguste Comte once said: "Japan's demographic challenge will lead to worrying scenarios for Asia." Security: Indeed Japan wont have enough feet to put in those boots, not enough hands to hold the flag" Japan's demographic is a guillotine that cuts down its strategic options... It goes well beyond the desire to have babies. Economy: Many reports were written about this problem with the recent visit of the OECD Angel Gurria who recommends to feminize the working population, or run the obligation to call for immigration. Health: The National Institute of Social Welfare and demographic problems: The Japanese population will drop by a third between 2010 and 2060! We know it since 2006. 75% of the people who will populate Japan in 2040 are already alive. 1 in 20 Japanese will live with dementia or Alzheimers. Marriage is collapsing. 10 million fewer were married in 2010. "Ballooning debt obligations will compound the demographic pressures on economic performance." (Wilson Quarterly: Japan Shrinks by Nicholas Eberstadt) Society: In other words we can talk about a Japan's demographic doom, a time bomb) It pleads in favor in allowing immigrant workers "to come in."

May 6th 2012 the day when Japan was nuclear free

Picture Antonio Pagnotta©2012

"You may believe it's a chaotic world without any rhyme or reason. How you perceive the world not only tells about the world, but it is also a reflection of how your mind works." (Zen philosophy)

May 6th 2012, an important week end, Japan closed its last nuclear power reactor. France elects a new President of La République...


The last of Japan’s 54 nuclear reactors switched off May 5th ! Tomari No. 3 reactor operated by Hokkaido Electric Power Co. shut down Saturday in Japan's northernmost main island of Hokkaido for maintenance. The question is to see if Japan will survive the summer without power blackouts. If yes, citizens may pressure the government to accelerate temporary nuclear shutdowns. A two decades move requested by 54% of people surveyed recently by Tokyo Shimbun. Prime minister Noda's government options are to re-open the nuclear plants of Oi, in the Fukui prefecture, west Japan, a topic monitored by Osaka mayor Hashimoto Toru who wants to make it a national concern. Hard indeed to convince the Japanese, a recent survey by Kyodo news agency established that 60 per cent of respondents are against restarting the Oi reactors. The next political agenda of Japan is opened for a candidate prime minister able to conceive how to develop a sustainable friendly to environment strong economy in the post-Fukushima 3/11 era? Theme which is very dear to the Japanese society who praises prosperity and modernity... I reported on this issue on RTL recently.


A bad news for the contamination of food in Japan, we heard that some indelicate Japanese importers companies have apparently flooded Japanese market with Chernobyl's contaminated food in total legality, the daily Chunichi wrote May 1st. If this info is true, it means that the 500 becquerels safety limit for one year has turned Japan into a trash can for radioactive food from Eastern europe!