In 1995 the then premier of China, Li Peng, was quoted as telling Paul Keating, his Australian counterpart, that Japan “would vanish into thin air in 30 years.” Li’s alleged remarks were revealed in Japan on May 9, 1997 in a report to the general meeting of the Administrative Reform Promotion Headquarters of the then ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) by Yoshifumi Muto, Director-General of the Management and Coordination Agency. Muto claimed he heard about Peng’s remarks from Keating during his meeting with the latter on his visit to Sydney.

　　　At the time, Li’s alleged comments were generally taken in Japan to insinuate that Japan was bound to buckle under future diplomatic and military pressures from a growing China; sixteen years later, today’s Japan is sadly headed towards a weakened state. I cannot help reach this conclusion in view of what looks to me like persistent efforts by the government and private sectors together to attract foreign capital, notably Chinese, to sell off precious land, mountains and forests across the archipelago.

　　　In my home prefecture of Niigata, momentum has been building to sell a prime 177,500 square-foot downtown property to the Chinese government. A grade school building once stood there. Niigata Mayor Akira Shinoda, who is at the helm of the proposed sale, appears far from sympathetic with a campaign begun by alarmed citizens to obtain signatures in a desperate effort to oppose the transaction. Meanwhile, in the Aichi prefectural capital of Nagoya City, the Japanese government is making a move to sell its class-A property adjacent to the famed Nagoya Castle. Here again, the prospective buyer is the Chinese government. The purported reason for the transaction is un-patriotic and ridiculous, to say the least: the Japanese government needs the funds to finance a construction projected involving the housing for its employees.

　　　In January this year, the Tokyo Foundation – a private think tank devoted to analyzing issues for the nation’s future – published a report entitled “Towards A Reform of Japan’s Land System Matching the Global Era.” The report presents the results of its probe into the reality of land purchases by foreigners in Japan as well as an analysis of workable countermeasures. Included in this report is a case study of Mitsugo Island – a 4.1 acre (177,600 square feet), unmanned island in the Inland Sea, which the national government had once offered for sale. In inviting tenders, the government did not set forth a “nationality” clause imposing restrictions on the nationality of the tenders, demonstrating a readiness to sell the property in question to whomever would come up with the highest bid – Chinese, Korean, or whomever else for that matter.

　　　Whatever happened to this island? It was eventually purchased by a  loading and unloading company operating on an adjacent island. Its president  was later quoted as saying that he made the purchase because he was alarmed by the posture laid bare by the Japanese government during the bidding, showing a perilous lack of understanding about the critical importance of national defense. He declared he bought the island in order to help avoid an as-yet-unrecognized national crisis that he feared could befall Japan if such an island was to be obtained by foreigners.

The Madness of Selling Off National Land

　　　In Hokkaido, where much land has already been purchased by Chinese interests, there have been reports of cases in which local agricultural cooperatives have acted as the go-between for land sales to foreigners. What raison d’etre do these cooperatives really have if participating in the sale of national land to foreigners has become their primary line of business?

　　　Needless to say, a state comprises the land, as well as the people who live on it. The land constitutes the basis of a state’s being. But the government, central and local, as well as agricultural cooperatives are trying to sell the land regardless of who the buyers may be, without questioning the nationalities of the prospective buyers or restricting its use following purchase. Such a posture would be tantamount to showing Premier Li’s sardonic prediction of 1995 to be coming true.

　　　Ms. Sanae Takaichi, an LDP member of the House of Representatives who set up the “Diet Members’ Study Group to Protect Japan’s Watershed Forests,” deplores what she describes as the “total defenselessness” of Japan’s land management in terms of national security, and calls it unparalleled in the world. “From a variety of reports available daily, one can easily come to grips with the imminent situation surrounding land sales. About 40% of the Japanese landmass comprises privately owned mountains and forests, of which a further 40% have no rightfully registered owners. A survey of land registries was begun in 1951, but 51% of the nation’s land mass still remains unchecked. Across the Japanese archipelago, there is a wide expanse of mountains and forests with unknown ownership and obscure boundaries. These areas also constitute abundant water resources. So, in a sense, it is quite natural for some nations to want to obtain them badly.”

　　　It was Hideki Hirano and Yoshinori Yasuda, co-authors of “Japan’s Deprived Forests” (Shincho-sha; 2010), who described the unregistered expanse of land across Japan as “remaining untouched since the days (1582-91) of Japan’s first land survey ordered by Toyotomi Hideyoshi (a medieval feudal lord credited with being one of the unifiers of Japan during its Age of Civil Wars.)” Being an island nation seldom assailed by foreign powers, Japan historically has lacked the sense of having to brace itself to protect its domain from attacks by outside forces. However, Japanese mountains and forests with unknown ownership, coupled with the rich water resources they embrace, have become among the most attractive investment objects for international capital. This is all the more reason for Japan to enact stringent laws to protect its land and property as well as work out a system that strictly outlaws the abuse of the land after it is acquired by foreign capital. Notes Representative Takaishi:

　　　“I am pretty sure we are the only nation in the world with as much as half its mountains and forests not having been subject to a land registration survey. This is unheard of in any other country. For instance, land registration has already been 100% completed in South Korea. The 21^st century is the century of water wars, so to speak. Water resources, which are critically important to nurture the people and sustain agriculture, spread across Japan without anyone claiming their proprietary rights. Plots of land, mountains and forests which appear to have long become worthless to Japanese are indeed greatly coveted objects when it comes to water and timber resources. The vast expanse of Japanese mountains and forests will be rather easily obtainable by foreigners if they manage to put their fingers on the weakness of the laws concerning owernship of national land by foreigners. Now is a great opportunity for foreign entities to obtain the abundant water and forestry resources of this nation.”

　　　The rights land owners enjoy in Japan constitute another attraction for foreign interests wanting to own land here. Politics and administration can seldom intervene when it comes to the actual post-sale use of the land. In this game, the winner takes it all in Japan.

　　　Here lies one of the reasons why so many citizens of Niigata City are concerned about the projected sale of a prime piece of property to the Chinese government, which wants to build a consulate-general there. The reality of the matter is the Japanese government and Niigata City will be totally powerless once the land is sold; the Chinese may utilize the spacious property right in the heart of the city for whatever purpose they please.

Appalling Show of Negligence

　　　Realistically, however, how can Japan cope with this projected sale of land, mountains, and forests to foreigners? It has been pointed out for a number of years that land purchases by foreigners should be restricted. However, to simply try and shut out foreign capital from the domestic market would be difficult in view of the rules of international commerce. Perhaps the most realistic step, which would also represent a reasonable means of getting along with the international community, would be to emulate land use restrictions currently implemented by other nations. It is the norm in the international community to impose national security, environmental, and other restrictions on land use. Japan should follow suit by all means.

　　　Taking note of the benefits of such measures, LDP members of the Diet including Takaichi presented legislation revising the present Forest Law to the Diet last November. The bill proposes to make it mandatory for owners of private mountains and forests to register them with the local authorities, while entitling heads of local governments to order a suspension of deforestation or commencement of forestation whenever they deem such action necessary in order to maintain the public interest functions of these properties. As for the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, as well as the governors of the 47 prefectures in Japan, the bill proposes to equip them with proper executive authority to designate forest reserves as a step to serve public needs such as nurturing and securing water resources and preventing mudslides.

　　　The LDP has already submitted a bill restricting water intake in vital catchment areas across the nation, while working on a bill which restricts the sale of plots of land, including unmanned islands, that are vital to Japan’s national defense.

　　　But what about the DPJ, which must really call the shots as the incumbent government party? Kenji Tamura, Deputy Chairman of the “Project Team to Probe Foreign Acquisition of Land & Property in Japan,” has conducted a series of weekly hearings by experts, and expressed hope that his party will be able to put together a revision of the Forest Law within this month which will reflect the ruling party’s principles. However, Yasuo Ichikawa, chairman of the project team, has a different view. He explains:

　　　“Frankly, we have only recently reached the stage where we are beginning to see the points at issue and problems pertaining to the present law. But we have yet to agree on whether transactions involving mountains and forests should be reported beforehand or afterwards – or whether the use of the land that has been sold off should be regulated. We must first try to smooth the horizontal liaison between various ministries and agencies involved, and should take it from there. The only thing I can say about the future of the revision bill at this juncture is, we will do our utmost.”

　　　What an appalling show of negligence! Millions of people across Japan are gravely concerned about the further loss of Japan’s precious land and property, because they believe it is very much their business. It certainly is. If Premier Naoto Kan is sincere in his often-repeated “desire (and commitment) to make politics work for the people,” then he should definitely take the leadership to enact the Forest Law revision beyond party lines – even if his party should end up by “swallowing whole” the proposal by the LDP, his party’s major opposition. (End)

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” column No. 451 in the March 10 issue of The Weekly Shincho.)