WORLD VIEW
Brahma Chellaney
WHY JAPAN SHOULD REARM???
TOKYO- Japan’s political
resurgence is one of this century’s most consequential developments in Asia.
But it has received relatively little attention, because observes have
preferred to focus on the country’s prolonged economic woes. Those woes are
real, but Japan’s ongoing national-security reforms and participation in the
new 12-country Trans-Pacific Partnership have place it firmly on the path to
reinventing itself as a more secure, competitive, and internationally engaged
country.
Japan has historically punched
above its weight in world affairs. In the second half of the 19th
century , Japan became Asia’s first modern economic success story. It went on
the defeat Manchu-ruled China and Czarist Russia in two separate wars, making
it Asia’s first modern global military power. Even after its crushing World War
II defeat and occupation by the United States, Japan managed major economic
success, becoming by the 1980’s a global industrial powerhouse, the likes of
which Asia had never seen.
The media tend to depict Japan’s
current economic troubles in almost funeral terms. But. While it is true that
the economy has stagnated for more than two decades, real per capita income has
increased faster than in the United States and the United Kingdom so far this
century. Moreover, the unemployment has long been among the lowest of the
wealthy economies, income in equality is the lowest in Asia, and life
expectancy is the longest in the world.
In fact, it is Japan’s security,
not in economy, that merits the most concern today-and Japan knows it. After
decades of contentedly relying on America for protection, it is being shaken
out of its complacency by fast-changing security and power dynamics in Asia,
especially the rise of increasingly muscular and revisionist China vying for
regional hegemony.
Chinese military spending now
equals the combined defense expenditure of France, Japan, and United Kingdom;
just a decade ago, pacifist Japan outspent China on defense. And China has not
hesitated to display its growing might. In the strategically vital South China
Sea, it has built artificial islands and military outposts, and it has captured
the disputed Scarborough Shoal from the Philippines.
In the East China Sea, it has
unilaterally declared an air-defense identification zone covering territories
that it claims but does not control.
With US President Barrack Obama
hesitating to impose costs on china for these aggressive moves, Japan’s leaders
are taking matters into their own hands. Recognizing the inadequacy of Japan’s
existing national-security policies and laws to protect the country in this new
context, the government has established a national-security council and moved
to “normalize” its security posture. By easing Japan’s longstanding, self-imposed
ban or arms exports, boosting defense spending, and asserting its right to
exercise “collective self-defense,” the government has opened the path for
Japan to collaborate more actively with friendly countries and to pursue
broader overseas peacekeeping missions.
To be sure, Japan’s
security-enhancing efforts have so far been limited in scope, and do not open
the way for it to become a militaristic power, restrictions on deployment of
offensive weapons, for example, remain in place.
Nonetheless, the government’s
moves have proved divisive in a country where pacifism is embedded in the
constitution and widely supported by the population. A recent survey by the Pew
Research Center found that only 23 percent of Japanese want their country to
play a more active role in Asia security. Another survey last year revealed
that only 15.3 percent of Japanese- the lowest proportion in the world-were
willing to defend their country, compared to 75 percent of Chinese.
But the reality is that ensuring
long-term peace in Asia demands a stronger defense posture for Japan. Indeed,
reforms that enable Japan to defend itself better, including by building
mutually beneficial regional partnerships, would enhance its capacity to
forestall the emergence of a destabilizing power imbalance in East Asia.
It is now up to Japan’s
government to win over its own citizens, by highlighting the difference between
pacifism and passivity. Japan would not encourage or support aggression; it
would simply take a more proactive role in securing peace at the regional and
global levels.
A more confident and secure Japan
would certainly serve the interests of America, which could then depend on its
close ally to take more responsibility for both its own security and regional
peace. Americans increasingly seem to recognize this, with 47 percent of
respondents in the Pew survey backing a more active role for Japan in Asian’s
security.
But questions remain about
precisely how self-sufficient Japan would have to be carry out this “proactive
pacifism”-a term popularized by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe-consistently and
effectively. Would Japan need to became a truly independent military power,
with formidable deterrent capabilities like those of Britain or France?
The short answer is yes. While
Japan should not abandon its security treaty with America, it can and should
rearm, with an exclusive focus on defense.
Of course, unlike Britain and
France, Japan does not have the option to possess nuclear weapons. But it can
build robust conventional capabilities, including information systems to cope
with the risk of cyber warfare. Beyond bolstering Japanese security and
regional stability, such an effort would likely boost Japan’s GDP and yield
major profits for US defense firms.
As a status quo power, Japan does
not need to match Chinese military might; Defense is, after all, easier than
offense. still the rise of militarily independent, Japan would constitute a
game-changing-and highly beneficial-development for Asia and the rest of the
world.
Project
Syndicate
Brahma Chellaney is a professor of strategic studies at the New
Delhi-based Center for Policy-research and a fellow at the Robert Bosch Academy
in Berlin.
No comments:
Post a Comment