Peer reviewed analysis from world leading experts

The DPJ: Sacrificing the economy to 'save' agriculture

Reading Time: 4 mins

In Brief

The DPJ’s policy switch on an FTA with the United States only serves to confirm that it prioritises farm votes over economic reform. Last week, DPJ leader Yukio Hatoyama declared that the party had revised its initial manifesto saying that it would to seek an FTA with the United States in order to promote liberalisation of trade and investment because of strong opposition from agricultural lobby groups. Hatoyama’s statement was followed by DPJ Vice-President Naoto Kan’s announcement that agricultural products would be excluded from any FTA with the United States. On 8th August, the DPJ published an officially revised version of its manifesto, which amended the section on the proposed Japan-US FTA to this effect.

There was certainly a crescendo of criticism coming from farm organisations. The Sankei Shimbun reported that nine major agricultural lobby groups, including JA-Zenchu (JA’s peak organisation) and its political arm, the National League of Farmers Agricultural Policy Campaign Organisations (Zenkoku Noseiren) had issued a joint press release strongly condemning the DPJ’s stance. The press release said: ‘it is inevitable that the United States would seek tariff abolition for products in their interest such as rice, wheat, pork and beef, which would have a catastrophic impact on Japan’s agriculture….The DPJ’s manifesto totally betrays farmers’ expectations for income growth and public expectations for increases in the country’s food self-sufficiency. This is absolutely unacceptable’.

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

Several LDP agricultural policy tribe (norin zoku) Diet members such as Yoshio Yatsu, Chairman of the LDP’s Comprehensive Agricultural Policy Investigation Committee and Koichi Kato, the LDP’s highest adviser, also weighed in, holding a press conference at LDP headquarters saying that an FTA with the United States would lead to the destruction of Japanese agricultural industry. This kind of scare-mongering is only to be expected from the LDP given its experience in the 2007 Upper House elections when the DPJ’s direct income compensation scheme for all commercial farm households proved to be such a vote winner in rural prefectural seats, and their fears that the same scenario might play out again in the forthcoming election. The irony is that single-member districts in Japan’s rural areas will prove a much bigger hurdle for the DPJ than Upper House prefectural constituencies, where the personal vote is much lower and policy appeals exert a much stronger pull on voters.

Having backtracked on its initial FTA commitment, the DPJ is now copping criticism from the other end of the economic spectrum. Japanese economist and Professor at Jobu University, Nobuo Ikeda in Newsweek Japan, weighed in, arguing that the impact of the DPJ’s policy switch is that the party is destroying the Japanese economy in order to protect Japanese agriculture. As we know, promoting FTAs is directly linked to the DPJ’s proposal for a direct income compensation scheme. If farm incomes decline, they could be compensated. Although the scheme was criticised as typical baramaki (indiscriminately throwing money at voters or simple old-fashioned pork-barrelling), the DPJ could defend it by arguing that it was a necessary step in the process of liberalising agricultural trade through FTAs. According to Ikeda, the change in DPJ policy removed the only ‘merit’ of DPJ agricultural policy and converted it into baramaki pure and simple.

The Secretary General of the New Komeito, Kazuo Kitagawa, appeared on NHK news, denouncing the DPJ for backtracking on its FTA plan with the United States. His criticism was mainly on grounds of principle: the DPJ is developing a habit of backing down from its pledges in the face of criticism from key lobby groups. Prime Minister Aso also made similar comments.

Japan is falling behind in the FTA stakes and as we know, agriculture is the big stumbling block. Ikeda reminds us that even South Korea has concluded an FTA with the United States, and the South Koreans are more protectionist on agriculture than the Japanese. In fact, as one US Uruguay Round trade negotiator once told me, it was always much harder dealing with the South Korean delegates than with the Japanese because the South Koreans had the unnerving habit of bursting into tears as soon as pressure for market opening was applied.

What is concerning for economists like Ikeda and others in Japan is that, after 41 years as the No. 2 economy in the world, Japan is about to be overtaken by China in terms of GDP size. This would further highlight the decline in Japan’s relative position as an economic powerhouse. Ikeda points out that the world economy (and some would argue, not only the world economy) is now entering an era of US-China hegemony. Some might call this an emergent ‘bigemony’, a position in the ‘new world order’ that Japan once aspired to achieve alongside the United States. Japan is now increasingly concerned about the G-2 (the United States and China) becoming the principal axis of strategic and economic cooperation in the Asia Pacific. Ikeda predicts that it won’t be long before even a US-China FTA is concluded. When the only survival strategy for Japan is to reinforce its export industries, which are the engines of the Japanese economy, the DPJ’s policy switch is now promising to sacrifice the whole economy in order to save agriculture.

Comments are closed.

Support Quality Analysis

Donate
The East Asia Forum office is based in Australia and EAF acknowledges the First Peoples of this land — in Canberra the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people — and recognises their continuous connection to culture, community and Country.

Article printed from East Asia Forum (https://www.eastasiaforum.org)

Copyright ©2024 East Asia Forum. All rights reserved.