Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida is set to dissolve the House of Representatives on Oct. 14 for an Oct. 31 vote, with the campaign period officially kickstarting Oct. 19.

       At stake in the poll -- the first general election in four years -- is how Japan will patch up the social divide that has deepened under the longtime administrations of former prime ministers Yoshihide Suga and Shinzo Abe, and how it will rebuild its democracy that was undermined under the previous regimes. The ruling and opposition parties' visions for the nation will be put to the test.

       In his inaugural press conference, Prime Minister Kishida said, "I want people to judge whether they can leave it up to me." However, what will be tested by the popular verdict is not just the "future" of the new administration.

       Japan has seen two successive administrations coming to a standstill, with former Prime Minister Suga resigning just a year after he succeeded Abe, who abruptly stepped down citing health reasons in 2020. Kishida suddenly rose to the premiership amid such turmoil. In the coming election, voters will also give their verdict on how politics over the past years has played out up to this political juncture.

       Japanese society has undergone a drastic transformation over the nine years under the Suga and Abe administrations. The biggest point of contention in the upcoming general election will be how the country is going to overcome the societal divide and economic disparities that have widened during that period.

       Prime Minister Kishida has advocated "respectful and generous politics," whereas Yukio Edano, head of the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDP), has also highlighted "generosity and diversity." One is tempted to wonder why these leaders of the governing party and the main opposition party share similar slogans. Behind this apparently lies their shared awareness that the political tactics employed by the Suga and Abe administrations were riddled with problems in that they disregarded careful explanations to the public.

       Abe's coalition government, backed by an overwhelming majority in the Diet won through elections, pushed ahead with policy measures that had met a persistent public backlash. An epitome of this was that it rammed through a package of national security bills that paved the way for Japan to exercise the right to collective self-defense in a limited manner.

       The Abe administration shunned opposing or critical opinions, and neglected efforts to build a consensus. It fueled confrontation by constantly discriminating between allies and foes in a bid to cement its political power base, aggravating a divide as a result.

       The Abe regime also used its authority as a means to maintain its own administration, instead of exercising it for the sake of achieving policy measures sought by the public.

       As a consequence of tightening control on bureaucrats through the Abe administration's authority over personnel affairs, it became common for public officials in the Kasumigaseki bureaucratic center to curry favor with the administration. The adverse effects of such trends came into sharp relief in the Ministry of Finance's tampering of official documents relating to the heavily discounted sale of state land to nationalist school operator Moritomo Gakuen.

       In its coronavirus response, the Abe administration drew the public's ire over its distribution of pairs of cloth masks to households nationwide, a measure decided upon from the top down. The case shed light upon issues with the Abe government's dogmatic decision-making process.

       Abe's successor Suga deepened the social divide even further, instead of bridging it.

       Soon after taking office, Suga refused to appoint six scholars as new members to the Science Council of Japan despite nominations by the prominent academic body. While it was obvious that Suga intended to cast out academics who were not in line with his policies by exercising his authority, he declined to provide a coherent explanation about the reason behind his appointment refusal until the end.

       Suga also forged ahead with the Tokyo Olympics without making clear the significance of holding the event despite the rapid resurgence of COVID-19 infections. While the public's understanding and cooperation is essential to respond to crises, the Suga administration continued to turn its back on dialogue with the people.

       Prime Minister Kishida has, since during his campaign for the Liberal Democratic Party presidential election, repeatedly voiced his concerns about Japan's democracy being "in peril." If he is to transform the divide in society into cooperation, he must face up to the negative legacies left by the previous administrations and change the country's political course.

       First and foremost, Kishida must engage in efforts to rectify the economic gap. Financial assistance to nonregular workers and low-income earners -- whose livelihoods were directly affected by the pandemic -- must be stepped up immediately. Budgets for supporting families with small children also need to be boosted.

       Also imperative are efforts to improve the social security system to make it sustainable even in a depopulating society, as well as to eliminate economic disparities between urban and rural areas.

       It is also essential to review the Abenomics policy mix promoted by the Abe and Suga administrations, which prioritized economic growth and efficiency. The government-touted "trickle down" effect under Abenomics, in which wealth was supposed to gradually spread from the affluent to others, never happened.

       Kishida has set out a goal of turning around neoliberal policies. Stressing that a favorable cycle of growth and distribution is necessary, he has claimed that he will bolster distribution functions to expand the middle class.

       Meanwhile, CDP leader Edano has also put up a slogan stating, "There will be no growth without distribution. Economic policies that make everyone happy." Both Edano and Kishida share a common direction in that they believe that Abenomics policies need to put on review.

       The ruling and opposition parties have a responsibility to present voters with the differences in their positions in a clear, easy-to-understand manner to achieve a political transformation, specifying where the problems lay in the Suga and Abe administrations and what those parties aspire to change.

       After the general election comes the House of Councillors race next summer. These two major elections provide a golden opportunity for voters to discern the prowess of the ruling and opposition parties in delivering their campaign promises based on a long-term perspective.

       Font Size S M L Print Timeline 0