2. Literature and Argument
2.1 The Causation for Changing the Defense Policy
The constitution has long been a controversial issue in Japan. This issue involves in not only international society, also relates to domestic power struggle. For the international aspect, the United States and neighboring countries still deeply influence the direction of Japan’s defense policy. Scholars and politicians have brought about numerous opinions on this issue. Thus, this chapter is going to have a brief view on available literature, and look for further explanation for it.
2.1 The Causation for Changing the Defense Policy
Traced back to the end of World War II, the Japanese constitution itself is a negotiation between the U.S. occupation and Japanese government, the main purpose of the constitution is to eliminate Japan’s possibility to launch a war. Because of this purpose, two governments added the concept of Pacifism into Article 9. The definition of Article 9 clearly clarifies that Japan is not allowed to have any military forces under any circumstance. Judging from the clause, the existence of the SDF itself is a paradox. Scholar argues that the legitimization of the SDF deployment was supported by the UN Charter.35 In other words, the existence of the SDF did not violate Article 9. On the other hand, the cost of maintaining hegemonic influence around the world has caused the United States suffers from the economic restraint.
Resulting from reason above, the United States gradually supports Japan for its constitutional revision. If Japan is able to defend itself independently, the self-fund policy might reduce America’s economic burden.36 Also, with the rise of China, Foot argues that, the U.S comes up with the great power management strategy cooperating with Japan to balance Beijing’s growing power.37 In general, the U.S attitude toward Japan’s defense policy is highly related to the stability of East Asia region.
35. Hughes, Christopher W. “Why Japan Could Revise Its Constitution and What It Would Mean for Japanese Security Policy.” Orbis 50, no. 4 (2006): 725-44. doi: 10.1016/j.orbis.2006.07.011.
36. Panton, Michael A. “Politics, Practice and Pacifism: Revising Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution.”
37. Foot, Rosemary. “Power Transitions and Great Power Management: Three Decades of China–
Japan–US Relations.” The Pacific Review 30, no. 6 (2017): 829-42.
doi:10.1080/09512748.2017.1303535.
‧
debating for the constitutional reinterpretation for decades. Constitutional reinterpretation has its limit, due to the constraint of the procedure and the public opinion. The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) is one of the representative parties, which tried to revise the constitution. After the Gulf War, their policy focuses on stretching the constitution to enable the SDF deployment.38 Basically, the LDP put the emphasis on the legal binding of the SDF. However, the opposition politicians, the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), stated that the SDF deployment in the Gulf War and other combat operations were based on the concept of “international security” or“collective security”. To maintain the international stability and cooperate with international society, Japan can take part in any UN-centered multilateral military activity without violating Article 9.39 Resulting from this explanation, there is no need to revise the constitution. Ever since then, the debate between the parties still cannot reach the conclusion. In spite of the oppositions, the LDP has offered a set of policies to switch the explanation of Article 9 in 2014. Prime Minister Abe and his cabinet allowed the forbidden “collective self-defense”, and gave a new explanation to the constitution in 2014.40 The reinterpretation provoked a public outcry. Despite the fact that Shinzo Abe did not gain support from the public and the oppositions, it can be asserted that Japan’s defense policy has been changed.
Most of the Japanese considered their country as a peaceful country; they have embraced the concept of renouncing war and not having a military for decades.
Moreover, they believed in the U.S Coast Guard.41 There were several cases to prove that the Japanese public was reluctant to create any opportunity to trigger a war. One of the famous cases might be the nuclear weapon. Despite having the capability to
38. Hughes, Christopher W. “Why Japan Could Revise Its Constitution and What It Would Mean for Japanese Security Policy.”
39. Ibid.
40. R., Shiratori. “The Change of Japan’s Country Constructive Model after WWII and Taiwan’s Security Policy.” (白鳥, 令. “第二次大戦後日本における国家形成モデルの変遷と 台湾の安全保 障政策.”) Speech, International Seminar: Japan’s New Defense Policy and East Asia., (2015.) 41. Traphagan, John W. “How Japan Sees Its Military?” The Diplomat. (August 17, 2012.) (Accessed February 14, 2018.) https://thediplomat.com/2012/08/how-japan-sees-its-military/.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
possess nuclear missiles, Japanese public could not tolerate government’s intention to design and deliver nuclear weapons.42
Scholar like Midford stated that Japanese public opinion began to change toward a
“defensive realist” defense policy due to the change of international security environment.43 Other scholars also focus on the territorial dispute in Northeast Asia;
they believed that the conflicts in Northeast Asia increased the Japanese public’s awareness of changing defense policy.44 More precisely, the public concerns are related to the threat from neighboring countries. In other words, they begin to doubt whether the so-called protection from the U.S will still function? In this chapter, I will go through the details about why the public believes changing is better for Japan, and two more reasons in my perspective that might also alter the public’s attitude toward the revision of Article 9.
42. Kingston, Jeff. “Does the Nuclear Option Make Sense for Japan?” The Japan Times. (February 25, 2017.) (Accessed February 14, 2018.)
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2017/02/25/commentary/nuclear-option-make-sense-japan/#.WltV1pP1UWo.
43. Midford, Paul. Rethinking Japanese Public Opinion and Security: From Pacifism to Realism?
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2011.
44. Hornung, Jeffrey W. “Japan Chair Platform: Increasing Security Awareness among the Japanese Public.” The New Southbound Policy | Center for Strategic and International Studies. (December 13, 2012.) (Accessed February 14, 2018.) https://www.csis.org/analysis/japan-chair-platform-increasing-security-awareness-among-japanese-public.