Soon after the Islamic State’s brutal murder in January of the Japanese hostages Haruna Yukawa and Kenji Goto, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe called for the nation’s “biggest reform” of its military posture since the end of World War II. Abe wants Japan to become a “normal” nation again, with the capacity to defend its interests and citizens wherever they are threatened. However, how should his government go about it?
Even for a Japanese public that still generally supports their nation’s post-war pacifism, the hostage crisis was unsettling, not least because it highlighted Japan’s military impotence. Unlike Jordan, which was able to consider a rescue mission for its own hostage and launch a powerful military response after he was killed, Japan’s constitution left it no options for rescue or retaliation.
Article 9 of Japan’s constitution, which was adopted in 1947 under US occupation, prohibits the nation from maintaining armed forces or using force to settle international conflicts. Though interpretations of Article 9 have liberalized over the years, and Japan now maintains a very capable self-defense force, constitutional constraints continue to impair Japan’s military capabilities and posture considerably.
Illustration: Yusha
To be sure, Japan’s treaty alliance with the US provides for its security. However, the risks that Japan faces — including an increasingly assertive China, a nuclear North Korea and an Islamic State that has threatened to murder Japanese citizens abroad — have raised legitimate questions about whether the nation needs greater latitude to defend itself.
This could be achieved in several ways. For example, Japan could simply continue to increase the defense budget, reinterpret the existing constitution and strengthen collective security; the capacity of Japanese special forces could be expanded; or Article 9 could be repealed altogether by a vote in both houses of the Diet, followed by a national referendum. Regardless of the specific route taken, Japan deserves to be able to protect its territory and population, just like any other nation.
However, any boost in its military capabilities will meet strong opposition, particularly from China, South Korea and North Korea, which continue to insist that Japan’s alliance with the US provides it with all the security it needs. In addition, they argue that Japan has yet to fully come to terms with its colonial and wartime record.
Japan has indeed benefited enormously from US protection. However, there can be no guarantee that the US will continue to defend Japan’s interests indefinitely, particularly in any clash with China. Questions, justified or not, about the US’ ability to retain its dominant position in Asia’s security architecture in the medium to long term — together with the rise of isolationist sentiment within the US — have spurred its regional allies and partners, including stalwart friends like Australia, to hedge their strategic bets. It is only logical that Japan would share such concerns.
Likewise, though Japan’s behavior before and during WWII was undeniably atrocious, its record since 1945 — including championing the UN and other multilateral institutions and providing guidance and assistance to developing nations — has been exemplary.
It strains credulity to argue, as China and North Korea have, that a normalized Japan would threaten regional stability any more than China’s massive military buildup and territorial aggression, or North Korea’s bellicosity and nuclear weapons, already do. In fact, it is far more likely that a normalized Japan would enhance regional security by playing an important role in the balance-of-power system that China is steadily advancing with its unilateral behavior.
Nonetheless, if Japan chooses to move toward military normalization, it must demonstrate more convincingly that it has come to terms with its history — or risk seeing that effort undermined unnecessarily.
Although Japan has made significant efforts to atone for its past — by issuing repeated apologies, for example, and providing development assistance — revisionism and insensitivity by some of its leaders lately have revived historical tensions with its neighbors. That should stop.
For starters, Japan’s leaders should either forswear visits to Tokyo’s controversial Yasukuni Shrine, or find a creative way to have the souls of the 14 Class A war criminals that it honors moved elsewhere. Likewise, instead of refuting claims about the extent of the use of “comfort women” during the war, the Japanese government should build a monument in central Tokyo — possibly even on the Imperial Palace grounds — commemorating the comfort women who were forced to provide sexual services to the Japanese Imperial Army. The authorities could even establish an annual conference to bring together world leaders to find ways to help protect women in conflict zones.
Finally, rather than protesting the way Japan’s World War II activities are described in US textbooks or squabbling over the number of people murdered during the Nanjing massacre, Japan should seek to help its own citizens understand and process their nation’s wartime record.
Other nations, particularly China, might have strong domestic political motives for their anti-Japanese propaganda, but Japan’s more sensitive treatment of its history could at least stop adding fuel to the fire.
Japan’s achievements since the end of World War II — including its enormous contribution to global peace and security — count for a lot. However, unless Japan makes more sensitive treatment of its history a cornerstone of its effort to change its military posture, the past could well become an impediment to a more secure future.
Jamie Metzl is a senior fellow of the Atlantic Council and served on the US National Security Council and in the US Department of State under former US president Bill Clinton.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
US president-elect Donald Trump continues to make nominations for his Cabinet and US agencies, with most of his picks being staunchly against Beijing. For US ambassador to China, Trump has tapped former US senator David Perdue. This appointment makes it crystal clear that Trump has no intention of letting China continue to steal from the US while infiltrating it in a surreptitious quasi-war, harming world peace and stability. Originally earning a name for himself in the business world, Perdue made his start with Chinese supply chains as a manager for several US firms. He later served as the CEO of Reebok and
Chinese Ministry of National Defense spokesman Wu Qian (吳謙) announced at a news conference that General Miao Hua (苗華) — director of the Political Work Department of the Central Military Commission — has been suspended from his duties pending an investigation of serious disciplinary breaches. Miao’s role within the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) affects not only its loyalty to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), but also ideological control. This reflects the PLA’s complex internal power struggles, as well as its long-existing structural problems. Since its establishment, the PLA has emphasized that “the party commands the gun,” and that the military is
US president-elect Donald Trump in an interview with NBC News on Monday said he would “never say” if the US is committed to defending Taiwan against China. Trump said he would “prefer” that China does not attempt to invade Taiwan, and that he has a “very good relationship” with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Before committing US troops to defending Taiwan he would “have to negotiate things,” he said. This is a departure from the stance of incumbent US President Joe Biden, who on several occasions expressed resolutely that he would commit US troops in the event of a conflict in
Since the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration, the Ma Ying-jeou Foundation has taken Taiwanese students to visit China and invited Chinese students to Taiwan. Ma calls those activities “cross-strait exchanges,” yet the trips completely avoid topics prohibited by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), such as democracy, freedom and human rights — all of which are universal values. During the foundation’s most recent Chinese student tour group, a Fudan University student used terms such as “China, Taipei” and “the motherland” when discussing Taiwan’s recent baseball victory. The group’s visit to Zhongshan Girls’ High School also received prominent coverage in
RSS