Expanding Role Of Military In Japan

The Japanese constitution, also known as the "Postwar Constitution"or the "Peace Constitution" was enacted on 3 May 1947, is most characteristic and famous for the renunciation of the right to wage war contained in Article 9. In fact, the path that Japan has followed over the last 70 years is nothing short of extraordinary.

Recently , Japan’s parliament voted into law a defence policy shift that could let troops fight overseas for the first time since 1945, a milestone in Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s push to loosen the limits of the pacifist constitution on the military. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe says the shift, the biggest change in Japan’s defence policy since the creation of its post-war military in 1954, is vital to meet new challenges such as from a rising China. But the legislation has triggered massive protests from ordinary citizens and others who say it violates the pacifist constitution and could ensnare Japan in US-led conflicts after 70 years of post-war peace.

Key Features

A key feature of the laws is an end to a long-standing ban on exercising the right of collective self-defence, or defending the United States or another friendly country that comes under attack, in cases where Japan faces a “threat to its survival”. The revisions also expand the scope for logistics support for the militaries of the US and other countries, and for participation in peace-keeping.

Analysis Of Preconditions

The preconditions for collective self defence include : When Japan is attacked, or when a close ally is attacked, and the result threatens Japan's survival and poses a clear danger to people ; When there is no other appropriate means available to repel the attack and ensure Japan's survival and protect its people ; Use of force is restricted to a necessary minimum

These conditions appear restrictive, but since they do not come with any geographical limits, there is significant potential to push the envelope toward a more expansive interpretation. For instance, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) could theoretically be interpreted as posing a threat to the Japanese people’s constitutional right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Some may argue that this would open the door for the SDF to participate in coalition air strikes against ISIL in Syria and Iraq, a scenario that goes well beyond the spirit of the constitution.

Military Actions Allowed

Japan would be able to provide logistical support to South Korea if the North invaded, though Mr Abe has said it would still be against the constitution to send Japanese troops to fight on Korean soil. It would be legal for Japan to shoot down a North Korean missile headed for the US.Military action to keep shipping lanes secure, such as minesweeping, even if in an active conflict zone, might be allowed if the restriction on shipping was severe enough to constitute a threat to Japan's survival.Armed involvement in hostage rescues would also become possible. In January 2013, 10 Japanese hostages were killed at the Amenas gas plant in Algeria.Regional limits on Japanese military support for US and other foreign armed forces would also be eliminated.

Arguments For

Tokyo has faced growing international pressure to expand the role of its military, including deployment, to defend the interests of its key allies, including the United States. America is bound by treaty to defend Japan, an agreement that has been in place since 1960.Japan cannot isolate itself from the global phenomenon of terrorism and must be prepared to use the SDF to safeguard Japanese interests.Japan is assuming a more proactive role in regional security, in part to offset China's growing military might. Beijing remains locked in territorial disputes with multiple Asian neighbors in the East and South China seas.

Arguments Against

Japan plays a unique role as a pacifist nation and that, as a country not directly party to any conflicts; its Middle East policy and humanitarian assistance significantly contribute to regional stability.Seven decades of Japanese postwar pacifism are simply being tossed away without proper public debate or discourse. They worry about the consequences of potentially sending troops into battle without actual combat experience.There is also concern about the potential impact of the legislation on Japan's defense budget, at a time when the nation is struggling with a crippling national deficit and chronic economic stagnation.

After the war, Japan reinvented itself as a peaceful nation by going through a remarkable democratization and by promulgating a new constitution that included the famous Article 9 ‘peace clause’. Japan built an egalitarian society, achieved rapid economic recovery to become the second largest economy in the world in less than 25 years, utilized its wealth to establish itself as a leader in technological innovation, and became one of the world’s leading providers of official development assistance — all the while never firing a single bullet. Japan’s peaceful identity and its contributions to global public goods have been recognized around the world, as evinced by its positive image in global opinion polls. Looking forward, Japan must make clear to the world that it is continuing to face up to its wartime conduct; that it recognizes the pivotal role of US support, which enabled Japan to reinvent itself; and that, based on its proud record over the past 70 years, it will continue to work for the peace and prosperity of the region in the future.

The US has welcomed the shift but China, where bitter memories of Japan's wartime aggression run deep, has repeatedly expressed concern about the legislation.

By: Dr. Vivek Rana