At the beginning of this month, Japanese Councilor Muneo Suzuki, who is known for his pro-Russia stance, visited Moscow. His behavior caused an uproar in Japan, given that the Japanese government has urged its citizens to refrain from traveling to Russia amid the Russo-Ukrainian war.
As the first Japanese lawmaker to visit Moscow since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February last year, Suzuki held talks with Russian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Andrey Rudenko and other officials. When interviewed by Russia’s state-owned news agency Sputnik, he said that he was 100 percent sure that Russia would win the war.
Although it was his opinion, Suzuki’s controversial statement could become propaganda for Russia. Japanese online accused him of betraying his country.
On Oct. 10, the Japan Innovation Party (JIP) expelled Suzuki for his unannounced Russia trip.
Suzuki hails from Hokkaido. Throughout his long political career, he has devoted himself to maintaining a friendly relationship with Russia. In April 2000, he visited Russia on behalf of then-Japanese prime minister Keizo Obuchi and met with then-Russian president-elect Vladimir Putin. It is generally believed that Suzuki was the first foreign politician Putin met after he won the election.
Suzuki naively thought that through his personal connections, Russia would be willing to give Japanese citizens permission to fish near the four southernmost Kuril Islands. He also believed that Russia would let Japanese who used to live on the four disputed islands return and pay tribute to their ancestors.
He was wrong.
Moscow and Russian officials responded to his wishes coldly. Snubbed, Suzuki could only return to Japan without achieving anything. Worse, he pushed his own country’s buttons.
According to the Sankei Shimbun, Suzuki’s trip this month should not be accepted because he publicly advocated for Russian aggression, with Moscow’s actions having been deemed a violation of international law.
An editorial in the Yomiuri Shimbun said that even though Suzuki is an opposition lawmaker, his reckless behavior went against the grain of Japan’s diplomatic policy and should not be tolerated.
During his most recent trip, Suzuki went along with Moscow’s official discourse and said that former Japanese prime minister Shinzo “Abe and Putin worked to create good Russia-Japan relations, but unfortunately in the last year, [Japanese] Prime Minister [Fumio] Kishida made things worse.”
Clearly, he broke diplomatic convention and disregarded one of the most important principles: “Politics stops at the water’s edge.”
In other words, when in Moscow, Suzuki revealed political problems at home to Russian officials, who would be able to use the reports to sow seeds of discord and polarization among Japanese politicians.
In this sense, Suzuki’s behavior cannot be considered a mere “different political opinion” in a democratic society. Neither his trip nor his remarks can be justified.
Suzuki has served eight consecutive terms as a lawmaker. He undoubtedly is a powerful leader of Japan’s local factions. His daughter, Takako Suzuki, who has been a Liberal Democratic Party lawmaker for four terms, is also an important figure. Because of his political power, the JIP did not rein him in.
The Yomiuri editorial said that Muneo Suzuki had more than once advocated for appeasing Russia, but his party did nothing to intervene or discipline him.
Possibly, given that he is a well-known politician, the party refrained from taking action against him for fear of harming itself.
As the editorial said, it was precisely because of the cadre in the JIP that Muneo Suzuki was given free rein, allowing him to become increasingly arrogant and opinionated.
He clearly damaged the national interests of Japan and the JIP has finally taken disciplinary action against him.
In Taiwan, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Ma Wen-chun (馬文君) has been accused of leaking classified material about the Indigenous Defense Submarine program to a foreign state.
However, the KMT has repeatedly defended and protected her. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) has not commented on the issue and the party’s “blue fighters” faction continues to list her as a member.
This should have sounded alarm bells. Clearly, Ma and her friends will soon be eliminated by voters.
Chen Yung-chang is a company manager.
Translated by Emma Liu
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS