Riffing on Tommy Lee Jones’s ads, the piece highlights the latter half of Nikkei’s “Wind Vane,” which catalogs cross-party distrust of PM Naoto Kan—from DPJ rebels to bureaucrats and business leaders—dissects his “fate/destiny” rhetoric as mere survival talk, and concludes that changing leaders is unavoidable if reconstruction is to proceed.

From the May 1, 2011 Nikkei “Kazamidori” column, this article details the harsh criticism of then-Prime Minister Naoto Kan from inside and outside the political world following the Great East Japan Earthquake. It conveys the growing “anti-Kan” sentiment within his own party, as well as the rising distrust from opposition parties and bureaucrats, pointing to the Prime Minister’s lack of leadership as a cause for the stalled reconstruction efforts.

In this good-for-nothing world… A parody of Tommy Lee Jones’s commercial.
2011-05-01
The genuine self-reflection on the “good-for-nothing” theories we have come up with has not yet taken place, but the latter half of this morning’s “Kazamidori” column on page 2 of the Nikkei newspaper had something decent written in it.
Is this pitiful state our destiny?
… (Preamble omitted)
However, due to the clumsiness of internal party coordination, criticism that “a few people are arbitrarily changing policy” is gaining momentum. A mid-ranking anti-executive Diet member does not hide their expectation for the prime minister’s resignation, stating, “the magma of dissatisfaction is accumulating.”
Within the Liberal Democratic Party, an “anti-Kan” mode to bring down the government is strengthening. Why is Prime Minister Kan no good? A former cabinet minister said, “Opposition within the Democratic Party is also extremely large, he is completely unable to handle bureaucrats, and he cannot build a relationship of trust with opposition parties.”
A senior member of the House of Councillors LDP gave a scathing review, saying, “He lacks decisiveness. He wavers all over the place. He can’t shake off his opposition party-like performance.” A policy affairs executive also said, “Prime Minister Kan had lost his governing power before the earthquake. For the LDP to cooperate, the DPJ should be more humble and change its leader.”
The political atmosphere has completely returned to what it was before “3/11,” when Prime Minister Kan was cornered.
One can dismiss the demands for the prime minister’s resignation from anti-Kan factions within the DPJ and opposition parties like the LDP as mere political strategies. Naturally, there are also voices within the DPJ defending the prime minister. It is also clear that this is not the time for political infighting.
However, what seems serious is that we often hear opinions from not only politicians and active bureaucrats but also retired bureaucrats and businesspeople who are knowledgeable about the Prime Minister’s Office’s internal affairs, saying, “He’s only thinking about his own survival” and “Reconstruction will not move forward unless Prime Minister Kan is replaced.” In this phase where the entire country must advance with earthquake reconstruction, the sheer number of bad reviews for Prime Minister Kan is extraordinary.
In the previous House of Representatives Budget Committee meeting, former Defense Agency Director-General Fukushiro Nukaga of the LDP criticized him, saying, “You stated that being in the position of prime minister at the time of the earthquake and nuclear accident was ‘destiny.’ Many citizens are fed up with your presumptuous attitude.” The prime minister had to explain that he meant he felt “an even greater sense of responsibility.”
The prime minister speaks of words like “destiny” and “fate,” but they are being interpreted as him trying to use them for his own survival, which is strengthening public animosity.
Another thing that bothers me is that while the great earthquake was beyond human knowledge, the prime minister who calls his current position “destiny” does not convey his own will on how to rebuild this country.
If the pitiful state of politics is “destiny,” then voters cannot be saved. The majority of the blame for bringing about this situation must, after all, be borne by Prime Minister Kan.
(Editorial writer: Mutsumi Nishida)