Opinion A historic shift

The Shinzo Abe administration has reinterpreted Article 9 of Japan’s post-World War II constitution to approve a major shift in defence policy. Once the decision clears parliament, Japan will no longer be restricted to the use of force only in self-defence. But by choosing to not revise the constitution, Abe has avoided a public referendum — risky, given Japan’s entrenched pacifism and the protests in Tokyo. Instead, what was “self-defence” is now “collective self-defence”, allowing Japan to assist its allies against a common enemy, but only if its own security is threatened. This could translate as, for instance, military support for US forces under attack near Japan. Or, deploying Japanese forces to protect energy supplies and the sea lines of communication.

Japan’s neighbours, especially China, with whom Tokyo is embroiled in a serious territorial dispute, as well as South Korea, which had suffered Japanese aggression, are opposing the move. Beijing went so far as to call it a “re-militarisation” that will adversely affect peace. In fact, one reason Abe has insisted on changing Japan’s defence policy is China’s assertive maritime posture and apprehensions about Beijing’s “non-peaceful” rise. The US, which had imposed the pacifist constitution on Japan, has welcomed the move as it expands Tokyo’s capacity for military cooperation with Washington. Australia and the Philippines too support a more militarily pro-active Japan.

Advertisement

Abe’s government has clarified that Japan will not take part in multilateral wars, as in Iraq. The shift, nevertheless, allows Tokyo to cooperate with any country it has “close ties” with. In one view, Abe’s move is to merely make Japan a more “normal” sovereign state. Japan is still debating its post-war identity, but even a pacifist Japan has maintained a 250,000-strong, well-equipped military. This change alters little on the ground for now, but could bring more transparency to what Tokyo does.