私の知り合いで英語翻訳で最高峰にある方にお願いしましたので、英語の勉強にもなるはずです。共産党や安全保障を英語で語る上でも参考になります。関心のある方はどうぞ。日本語はこちらです。
Hello, everyone.
Thank you very much for inviting me to speak at this press conference.
As you all know, I was recently expelled from the Japanese Communist Party because I published a book calling on the party to adopt a system to elect its leader through a direct vote by its members and expressed my intention to run if such an election takes place. I am seeking reinstatement of my membership and preparing to request that my expulsion be reconsidered at the JCP Congress in January next year.
To be honest, I do not understand why foreign media wanted me to speak here, or what they are interested in regarding my problem. My sense is that people’s interest in the Communist Party has dropped as Communist parties in many countries have experienced setbacks or even dissolved themselves after the Cold War was over. What’s going on around me may be seen by people outside as a trivial matter taking place inside the JCP. But I seriously think that the JCP’s role is indispensable for developing a countervailing force against Liberal Democratic Party politics. For this reason, I believe that it is essential for the JCP to remake itself and that a party leadership election through a direct vote by its members is a crucial means of such reform. I want to take this opportunity to talk about why I think the Japanese Communist Party has such a crucial role and about what reforms are needed.
I’m sure that all media people present here know that the JCP many years ago established the position of sovereign independence and rejected orders from the Communist Party of the Soviet Union or any other foreign party. In the 1980s, I was international secretary of the Democratic Youth League of Japan, the youth organization guided by the JCP. At international meetings, in the presence of Soviet representatives, I criticized their country for its role in the arms race and demanded the pullout of Soviet troops from Afghanistan. On such occasions, I faced a fierce criticism from Eastern European and pro-Soviet participants. The JCP instructed me to reject any such criticism. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the JCP did not follow suit thanks to its members taking pride in the party that criticized the hegemony of the Soviet Union more severely than anyone else.
By refusing to uncritically follow the Soviet Union or China, the JCP has explored and established the path for political change on its own in accordance with the actual conditions of Japan. The immediate task the party chose to tackle was one of aiming to build a full-fledged democratic society instead of advancing directly to socialism. This strategy was an importance decision in winning wider popular support and establishing cooperation with other parties.
The JCP now stands at a major crossroads in terms of both political and organization policies. I decided to declare my candidacy for the party leadership because I thought the JCP will be able to be a key player for changing Japanese politics if it successfully reforms itself on two fronts. Let me explain how.
On the political front, at issue is what to do with the Japan-US Security Treaty and the Japan Self-Defense Forces.
The JCP’s Program and Congress resolutions envisage a future for Japan without the Japan-US Security Treaty and the Self-Defense Forces. I agree with this direction. Military alliances are the source of military tensions, as clear from the fact that Russia used NATO’s eastward expansion as the pretext of its invasion of Ukraine. It is imperative to do away with the military alliances everywhere in the world and establish a collective security system led by the United Nations. Communism envisaged by Karl Marx is about society without state power and without military forces. Needless to say, it is ideal to make the Self-Defense Forces unnecessary.
But the question is what to do with the Japan-US Security Treaty and the Self-Defense Forces in a transition period leading to mid-term or long-term stages. That’s exactly trouble for the JCP and I raised this issue in my recent book.
The JCP Congress resolution envisages the path toward a society without military forces in three stages. In the first stage, the Japan-US Security Treaty and the Self-Defense Forces will continue to exist, just as it is supposed by the Party Program. But neither the Party Program nor the Congress resolution gives any further details.
In my book I propose that the JCP should adopt an “exclusively defensive posture without depending on nuclear deterrence.” The JCP criticized this proposal. They say that “Matsutake is calling for the Japan-US Security Treaty to be maintained,” that “he calls for the Self-Defense Forces to be treated as constitutional,” that “the exclusively defensive posture is unconstitutional,” and that “Matsutake’s position is in contravention of the Party Program. This criticism appears to be a cause of my expulsion. But the JCP and I are not far apart on this issue.
For example, the “exclusively defensive posture” is nothing but an approach that allows the Self-Defense Forces to resort to minimum counterattack against aggression. That’s exactly what the JCP decided at its Congress in 2000. What’s more, Chairperson SHII Kazuo on April 7, 2022, stated that “the JCP is in favor of the position that, if the country has faced imminent and unlawful infringement of sovereignty, Japan should use the Self-Defense Forces and all other means available to defend people’s lives and national sovereignty.”
Also, regarding the Japan-US Security Treaty, there is no major difference between the JCP and me.
On October 29, 2015, when Mr. Shii spoke at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan, he was asked by a reporter if the JCP would call for the Security Treaty to be invoked in the event of an emergency in Japan. Mr. Shii’s answer was that the country “should respond by invoking Article Five of the Security Treaty. In his recent book about the JCP Program, he says, I quote, “The Security Treaty cannot be abrogated, and we will not abrogate it without support from a majority of the Japanese people. … So, please be assured,” unquote.
In the same book, Mr. Shii explains how to deal with the Self-Defense Forces under the Japanese Constitution as follows:
He said, and I quote, “If opposition parties establish a coalition government, its constitutional judgment will be that ‘the Self-Defense Forces’ are constitutional,” unquote.
He also said, and I quote, “Even if a (JCP-led) Democratic Coalition Government is established, it will treat the Self-Defense Forces as constitutional as long as they exist during the transition period,” unquote.
There is probably one difference between Mr. Shii and me. He says the Japan-US Security Treaty would be invoked and the Self-Defense Forces used if Japan is attacked during the first stage. But the JCP’s basic policy says that the Security Treaty would be abrogated, and the Self-Defense Forces dissolved in that stage. I’m saying that his explanation cannot convince the people. I argue that if he thinks that the Security Treaty and the Self-Defense Forces are available, the JCP should establish a policy accordingly. I’m calling for “exclusively defensive posture without depending on nuclear deterrence.” I’m just trying to bring the JCP out of a mess.
There is a cause for the JCP’s confusion. The party is carrying out activities based on the Program revised in 2004 and 2020. But negative effects of the 1961 Program still persist.
The 1961 Program is a product of the Cold War era. It said that US imperialism violates Japan’s independence and sovereignty and is pursuing a war policy around the world using Japan as a stepping-stone. It also defined the Soviet Union-led socialist camp as pacifists. This view inevitably leads to the conclusion that the party’s immediate central task is to abrogate the Japan-US Security Treaty.
However, in real politics after World War Two, the Soviet Union as well as the United States started war and oppressed peoples around the world. I said earlier, the JCP firmly criticized the Soviet Union’s errors. But the end of the Cold War compelled the JCP to fundamentally review its programmatic position.
The present JCP Program still defines the United States as imperialism. But unlike the old one, it also says, I quote,“It should be noted that … an attempt to solve international disputes through diplomatic negotiations has shown itself in U.S. reaction to international issues,” unquote.It characterizes the collapse of the Soviet Union as “the downfall of the historical and colossal evil of Soviet hegemonism.” Apparently with China and some other countries in mind, it also criticizes “great-power chauvinism and hegemonism.”
Major changes have taken place in the world since the end of World War Two. The first stage, in which the Security Treaty and the Self-Defense Forces exist, is expected to last very long. Given the fact that the JCP Program has been revised in line with the changes taking place in the world, the party should stop calling for the abrogation of the Security Treaty and the dissolution of the Self-Defense Forces as the basic policy for the first stage.It should put forward a new policy in conformity with the changes taking place in the world situation. Even as we are prepared for a Taiwan contingency, we must avoid allowing the Japan-US Security Treaty to turn Japan into battlefield. But we also must take a hard look at the fact that China, a country of self-proclaimed Communism, holds fast to policy of using military force to liberate Taiwan. The primary task is for the JCP to persuade China to give up such policy.
If the JCP changes in this direction, it will earn public trust and provide common ground for working with other opposition parties to share a government.
The JCP is called upon to make far-reaching reforms of organization policy. You may have been surprised to know that I do not criticize democratic centralism in my book. I just want to see the JCP introduce an election system for a party leader through a direct vote by the party members, the aim being to help overcome the problems facing the party. The JCP has adopted democratic centralism for historical reasons. The Russian Revolution was the source of the emergence of Communist parties around the world. In addition to this historical fact, the JCP had to undergo splits over a long period of time in connection with a suppression by the occupation forces after World War Two.
But, if the JCP is to become closer to the public, it is necessary to fundamentally review the way party organization works. If foreign media journalists visit party branches, which are basic units at workplaces or local communities, they will see party members with individuality and freedom. At the branch, which I belonged to, members were free to discuss anything.In a meeting after the party’s election losses, some said, “Shii’s leadership is too long; he should be advised to step down.” In branch discussions on policies on diplomacy, defense, economics, social security and other issues, party members can express differing opinions within the framework of the Party Program. The fact is that the party has more than 2,000 local assembly members, who exert their individuality while maintaining close ties with residents. But the Party Constitution says party members must not publicly discuss internal problems. This rule keeps the party’s diversity invisible. The party is often considered as a monolithic organization that does not tolerate dissenting opinions, distancing itself from the public. A direct vote for party leadership will allow party members to discuss differences in policy and help overcome the present shortcomings.
The Party Center says that a direct vote by party members would encourage moves to win majority and give rise to factions or splinter groups. There may emerge groups made up of people who share similar policy ideas but that may not cause any problems if those groups accept the election results. On the contrary, active debate during the election can bring vigor to party activities. Communist Party members will not go into factional activities even if a leadership election is held. I want the Party Center to trust party members.
The party would suspend the application of democratic centralism during the party leader election campaign period. If the direct vote by party members proves to have a positive impact on the party, it might be carried on. If the party concludes that such an election has rather negative impacts on party activity, it can go back to the existing system through hands-on experience. In reforming the 100-year-old system, it is essential to allow party members to decide.
My appeal was not heard by the Party Center. While most party members are supportive of the position of the Party Center, there are people who have empathy with my opinion.Some people have told me they would quit the party. I ask them to stay in the party and become delegates to the Party Congress in January next year.
If my expulsion is reconsidered and overturned in the next Party Congress in January, the JCP will be able to take first steps toward major party reforms. Even though there may be a very low possibility that it will happen, I will do all I can to open the slightest possibility.
Thank you for your attention.