Mr. Ehrhardt,

With all due respect, there is always fundamental change waiting at the corner in Japan (grin), including from the Harajuku youth dressed up in characters--once interpreted as the proof that change will come with the next generation in some popular magazine. I think we know the kind.

That being said--and in spite of my past Japanese thesis supervisor who warned me against writing about Japanese politics in public forums--the NYTimes has an article this morning that asks the right questions about the relationship between business and regulators in Japan.
The NYTimes says about the Fukushima #1 reactor that was being reviewed by a METI committee that approved a 10-year life-extension one month before the earthquake, that:
"The regulatory committee reviewing extensions pointed to stress cracks in the backup diesel-powered generators at Reactor No. 1 at the Daiichi plant, according to a summary of its deliberations that was posted on the Web site of Japan's nuclear regulatory agency after each meeting." "Regulators said that "maintenance management was inadequate" and that the "quality of inspection was insufficient." Less than two weeks later, the earthquake and tsunami set off the crisis at the power station."

I can't prove that the article is right, but think they hit the mark overall. And thanks to Prof. Kohno for his advice, as always.

Benoit Leduc