World leaders and dignitaries will converge on Tokyo today for another round of state funeral-turned-global-forums, but tributes to the late prime minister Shinzo Abe are expected to be overshadowed by protests.
The funeral comes three months after Japan’s longest-serving PM was shot dead by a man who accused him of fostering links with the controversial Unification Church (allegations that turned out to be true).
Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s decision to part with convention and honour Abe with a fully taxpayer-funded affair seemed somewhat fitting at a time of collective shock and grief, but as that wore off and revelations about the Liberal Democracy Party (LDP)’s links to the church came to light, the funeral became a political flashpoint.
Not only did it dredge up the divisive politics of the late PM, but it called into question the Kishida’s integrity, whose popularity has since plummeted to record lows.
Public policy manager for Japanese government relations advisory firm GR Group Kate Stevenson said people in Japan believed Kishida’s reign would herald a “golden era” of political stability, but that’s now “up in the air”.
The dip is “linked” but “not limited” to the state funeral. A recent Asahi Shimbun poll found that of those opposed to the funeral, 67% disapproved of cabinet and 58% said “because it uses the national budget”.
A further 20% of the no-funeral camp didn’t agree with Abe’s policies or legacy, and 19% blamed revelations about his relationship with the church. Two-thirds of those who did support a state funeral cited Abe’s political legacy, 17% put it down to his stature as their longest-serving PM, and only 13% said it was the circumstances surrounding his death that warranted it.
Diplomatic opportunity or debacle?
So why was Abe awarded a state funeral?
Stevenson put it plainly: “If Abe had not been shot during an election campaign, he would not get a state funeral.”
Freelance political writer Jio Kamata said it doubled as a diplomatic opportunity for Kishida: “One reason is to use it as an opportunity to host world leaders and boost Japan’s position on the world stage. The other reason is to appease the conservative elements of his party.”
While big names including the Indian PM Narendra Modi, Singapore’s PM Lee Hsien Loong, Australia’s Anthony Albanese (and his entourage of former Liberal PMs – John Howard, Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull), as well as US Vice-President Kamala Harris are all attending, other heads of state are not.
“When Kishida made his decision to host the event, there were reports that the French president, ex-German chancellor, and former US President Barack Obama would all come. But now none of them are,” Kamata said. “The opposition are saying that they’re not coming because the state funeral has become unpopular in Japan and world leaders don’t want to be associated with this event.”
Independent politician Ryuichi Yoneyama tweeted that a decade of Abe’s administration had put Japan in a global position where dignitaries did not want to attend.
Opposition member Hideya Sugio also tweeted, noting no G7 leaders would be attending.
Albanese was confident he filled the gap telling reporters: “It’s a good sign of respect that you have three former prime ministers and the current guy, me, all heading up there this morning.”
Custom and convention
Japanese custom dictates that a funeral follows a few days after death. There was a private funeral for Abe in Tokyo on July 12, four days after he was fatally shot. For the state funeral, a special organising committee was established, the venue was chosen, and the date locked in, with government officials forced to work around existing bookings for the Nippon Budokan and traffic concerns. The funeral is projected to cost $18 million.
Who’s at fault?
Some Japanese blame Abe’s political past, others blame Kishida’s present politics.
Abe was (and continues to be) a contentious character. Globally he was renowned as a statesman; domestically he was a divisive social conservative. His plan to break with Japan’s post-World War II pacifist constitution and transform the country’s self-defence force into a full-fledged military, combined with his refusal to accept responsibility for Japan’s sexual servitude of South Korean women during the war were two points of contention.
For recently retired professor of international relations at the National Defence Academy of Japan Teruhiko Fukushima, it ultimately comes down to timing.
“His funeral is dividing the national opinion because Mr Abe’s death is too close to his time as prime minister,” he said. Compare this to Japan’s postwar PM Shigeru Yoshida, the last person to receive a state funeral in 1967, who “died long after he was prime minister”.
When Fukushima was at school, children watched Yoshida’s funeral on the classroom TV and the teacher explained his significance.
“I doubt such a thing would be done this time for Mr Abe,” he said.
But Kamata claims Kishida’s lack of consultation and communication is weighing down public opinion more than Abe’s political legacy.
“Kishida did not provide the Japanese people with a rationale that made sense for a state funeral,” he said citing overwhelming support for Abe’s eight-year term in office following his resignation.
Senior politicians — particularly in the conservative faction of the LDP that Abe was part of — have done their part to add fuel to the fire. Toshihiro Nikai said that people opposed to the funeral should “be quiet, put their hands together and let it pass”.
Today Tokyo will be at a standstill. The government has closed off airspace and mobilised a 2500-strong security sentinel (on top of the standard police presence) in preparation for planned protests. Thousands are expected to attend. Such a turnout would be significant — protest is not common in Japan.
Tokyo resident Mitsue Mito said it is not Japanese nature: “Unfortunately, no one around me is taking protest action. Including me. The only protest we can at least make is elections. I think these are the conservative and defensive weaknesses of the Japanese people.”
