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
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS