In failing to gain confidence among the public, Prime Minister Naoto Kan and his administration have "passed the buck" and uttered meaningless phrases when problems arise in the nuclear crisis, critics say.
In failing to gain confidence among the public, Prime Minister Naoto Kan and his administration have "passed the buck" and uttered meaningless phrases when problems arise in the nuclear crisis, critics say.
They say the prime minister's common tactic is to blame experts and his aides for blunders related to the March 11 Great East Japan Earthquake that triggered the serious accident at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.
Shoji Azuma, professor of social linguistics at Ritsumeikan University who published a book on Japanese prime ministers' language ability, said shirking responsibility has become a trademark of Kan.
Azuma referred to Kan's remarks made after the government upgraded the severity rating of the nuclear accident to the maximum 7 on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES), on par with the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster.
In a news conference on April 12, Kan emphasized the upgrading was based on "experts' judgment" after they assessed the spread of radioactive materials.
"It is essential for a leader to appear that he has a handle on the situation, but he leaves (important matters) solely to experts," Azuma said. "He has backed out, although it had been a good opportunity for him to urge the public to fight together."
Kan also reportedly told Kenichi Matsumoto, special adviser to the Cabinet, in mid-April that "surrounding areas of the Fukushima No. 1 plant would be uninhabitable for 10 or 20 years."
After reports of that remark caused an uproar among the public, Kan dismissed those reports during a Diet session.
"I have never made such remarks," he said.
Matsumoto himself said it wasn't Kan who had made that comment. But Matsumoto once said that Kan made those remarks.
The confusion over the information fueled concerns among crisis management specialists about the Kan administration's damage-control abilities.
"Trying to avert (responsibility) by pointing a finger at experts and his aides is the Kan administration's typical response," said Atsuyuki Sassa, a specialist in crisis management and former director general of the Cabinet Security Affairs Office.
Sassa said it is the prime minister's responsibility to provide a full explanation to the public--even if the challenge is enormous.
Kan is not the only one in the administration criticized for the government's handling of the disaster.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano has held news conferences almost daily since the nuclear crisis started, but he often simply resorts to "it is regrettable" or "we will take heed sincerely" when reporters point out that the administration is slow in bringing the nuclear situation under control.
Azuma said although Edano sounds polite, such set phrases do not invoke trust or compassion.
"Even if he sounds smooth, his remarks would not resonate with people unless he speaks for their suffering and distress in their daily lives," Azuma said.
Masaki Taniguchi, professor of Japanese politics at the University of Tokyo, said political leaders should discuss their beliefs and philosophy all the more since the country is still in crisis.
"What are needed now are words of the Japanese prime minister, not an individual," he said. "The prime minister's office should be equipped with a publicity strategy in which its entire staff devises what the prime minister should say in public."