Abe's resignation shows his inability to know when to quit
(From The Japan Times Sept. 13 issue)

判断力を欠く安倍首相

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's announcement of his resignation came as a surprise, even to his close aides. Just two days before, he had delivered a policy speech at the start of the extraordinary Diet session, and 15 days before, he had reshuffled his Cabinet.

Mr. Abe's resignation is illogical in view of a statement he made Sept. 9 in Sydney. There he declared to the effect that he would do his utmost to extend the Maritime Self-Defense Force's refueling activities in the Indian Ocean for naval ships of the United States, Britain, France, Germany and Pakistan in an antiterrorism support mission. He said he would stake his job as prime minister on attaining the stated goal, and confirmed that he was ready to resign if he failed to attain this goal.

The law on which the MSDF's Indian Ocean activities are based expires Nov. 1. Although he expressed strong determination to extend the MSDF's mission, Mr. Abe announced Sept. 12 that he would resign.

If he resigns this way, a very likely question is why he did not quit just after his Liberal Democratic Party's crushing defeat in the July 29 Upper House election. The election cost the LDP-Komeito coalition its majority in the Upper House and made the Democratic Party of Japan the top party there, making it impossible for the governing coalition to force bills through the Diet. It should be remembered that the basic political situation surrounding Mr. Abe remains the same as it was at that time.

During the election campaign, Mr. Abe insisted that the key issue be the choice between him and DPJ leader Ichiro Ozawa. The logic then should have been that he should resign if the LDP lost in the election. Despite the LDP's rout, Mr. Abe stayed in power. He explained: "While making an electioneering tour of Japan, I realized that the election results would be severe. But I didn't think I should run away from my duty and allow a political vacuum to occur."

His resignation at this time gives the impression that his explanation after the election was false. Ironically, Mr. Abe himself has created a political vacuum through his delayed resignation.

At a news conference Sept. 12, Mr. Abe cited his failure to get DPJ leader Ozawa to meet with him on the issue of the MSDF's Indian Ocean mission as the direct factor that led him to decide to resign. But how can the failure to persuade an opposition leader to have a meeting justify a prime minister's resignation?

If Mr. Abe is serious about extending the MSDF mission, the governing coalition, which holds more than two-thirds of the Lower House seats, could enact a bill to extend it. Even if it was defeated in the Upper House and sent back to the Lower House, the coalition group has the legal means of enacting the returned bill.

Mr. Abe said he wanted the situation to take a new turn through his resignation and that the "war on terror" should be pursued under a new prime minister, meaning that the new prime minister should do the work of extending or renewing the MSDF mission. He also hinted at a fear that political confusion will arise if the opposition camp passes a censure resolution against him in the Upper House in the event that the Lower House passes a returned MSDF mission bill.

But regardless of who is prime minister, such political confusion can still develop as long as the DPJ opposes continuing the MSDF's Indian Ocean mission.

Explaining his decision to resign, Mr. Abe also said, "I reshuffled the Cabinet with the determination to push 'reform.' But under the present situation and in view of (the lack of) the people's support and trust, it is difficult to push policy measures. So I decided to seek a breakthrough in the situation by taking responsibility." If he talks about the lack of people's support and trust, he should have talked about it right after the Upper House election and taken proper action. The timing of his resignation suggests that as a politician he is incapable of making an appropriate decision at the right time.

安倍首相が12日に行った突然の辞意表明には、驚かされた。2日前には、首相は臨時国会冒頭で所信表明演説を、15日前には内閣改造を行ったばかりだった。

シドニー訪問中の9日には、テロとの戦いを支援するため、インド洋上で海上自衛隊が米国など連合国艦船に対して行っている給油活動を継続するとの決意を表明、目的達成のために職を賭すると言明した。給油活動を行うためのテロ特措法は11月1日に期限切れを迎える。

首相の辞意に関する最大の疑問は、なぜ7月29日の参院選での自民党の惨敗直後に表明をしなかったのかということだ。選挙の結果、民主党が参院で第1党となり、連立与党の自民・公明両党は議席の過半数を失った。

首相は、選挙に先立ち、有権者に対し安倍政権と小沢党首率いる民主党のどちらを選択するのかと問いかけた。自民党の惨敗で、安倍氏は辞任すべきだったが、政治空白を避けるという理由で続投の意思を表明した。

テロ特措法延長については、衆院で3分の2の勢力を持つ連立与党に法案を可決させる方法もあった。法案が参院で否決され、衆院に差し戻されれば、連立与党が再可決して成立させることもできた。

首相は、後継首相が給油活動の継続をすべきとの見解を示したが、誰が首相であっても、民主党が給油活動に反対する限り、政治混乱は避けられない。

辞意表明の理由として、首相は「改革を推進するため内閣を改造したが、国民の支持が得られず、改革は困難となったため、責任を取って局面の打開を図る」と述べた。責任を取るのは参院選惨敗直後にすべきだった。今回の問題は、安倍首相は、政治家として適当な時期に正しい判断ができないことを示している。