BY AARON BENEDEK
Japan's constitution "renounces the use of force to settle international disputes". Nevertheless, on November 25, three Japanese warships — a supply ship carrying 130 troops, a minesweeper and a destroyer — were deployed to support US-led operations against Afghanistan and other future targets.
This deployment marks the first time since World War II that the Japanese military has been ordered to engage in operations abroad where combat is taking place. As such, the move is widely seen as a turning point in Japan's military and foreign policy.
The deployment is in line with the new Anti-Terrorism Special Measures Law drafted by the cabinet of Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and passed by both houses of parliament on October 29.
The law authorises Japan's Self Defence Forces (SDF) to provide non-combat support to the US-led coalition, including the transport of weapons and ammunition and the carrying and "if necessary" use of weapons.
Japan's military involvement in the US-led war stands in sharp contradiction to its 1946 constitution. Article 9 of the constitution stipulates "the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation".
The very existence of Japan's SDF is dubious, given that Article 9 also states "land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained".
Peace constitution
Ironically, Japan's "peace constitution" was actually imposed by the same foreign power that now most aggressively seeks to undermine it — the United States.
At the time, Article 9 aimed to assuage Asian concerns that, on US insistence, Japan would retain the same emperor who led the country through fascism and a brutal occupation of east Asia.
Despite mass opposition to war in Japan after World War II, Japan's leaders have long sought ways to revise or circumvent Article 9. As communist and nationalist movements grew in Asia, the US also sought to roll back Japan's constitution.
The US set up Japan's military in 1950 under the name of the National Police Reserve, renamed the Self Defence Forces in 1954. A stated primary objective of this vast coercive power was to repress subversion and the growing communist movement within Japan.
A military alliance between Japan and the US was reached in the early 1950s amidst huge public opposition and despite its effective undermining of the constitutional renouncement of war. US bases, scattered throughout Japan, were used to launch major bombing assaults during the Korean and Vietnam wars and were later used in US attacks on Iraq.
However, Japan's military was always limited to subsidiary non-combat support for the US.
A major factor in re-orienting Japan's military was US president Ronald Reagan's 1981 communique to then Japanese Prime Minister Zenko Suzuki, that Japan should "increase its defence capabilities". Japan quickly moved to strengthen its military capacity and take on a greater share of financing US military bases around the country.
As the size and sophistication of Japan's military grew, the US became increasingly dissatisfied with Japan's "passive" support.
In June 2001 the Rand Corporation, a major US Army-established think-tank, encouraged the US government to "support efforts in Japan to revise its constitution [and] expand its horizon beyond territorial defence".
The US, and to a lesser extent Australia, have long argued for Japan to assume a military role commensurate with its status as the world's second biggest economy.
They, along with the Koizumi government, seek to "normalise" Japan's military, to allow Japan to be a normal imperialist power able to use its military forces around the globe and to hold a seat on the UN Security Council.
However, despite US pressure and a concerted campaign by Japan's conservative political parties, bureaucrats and media, revision of Article 9 has been politically impossible. Mass opposition to revision has been strong, with only 3% supporting revision of Article 9 in a September 2001 Asahi poll.
After September 11
The September 11 terrorist attacks gave the Japanese government the political space to speed up the "coming out" process of Japan's military.
On September 15, Japan's rulers were galvanised by US deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage's blunt advice to make sure the Rising Sun flag is visible in the coming war.
Japan's media gave overwhelming support for the US-led war on Afghanistan and immediately attacked Japanese pacificism. Japan's Yomiuri newspaper ran an editorial concerning the legal restrictions on Japan's military, entitled "Change the law, get on the bus".
Prime Minister Koizumi argued that "whether or not [Japan] can share the sorrow and anger of the American people" depended on Japan's active involvement in all US military assaults.
At a White House meeting on September 25, Koizumi gave unqualified support for the US-led war and offered the US Japan's SDF and unlimited financial aid.
Japan's government then moved quickly to "normalise" its military. On October 29, in addition to the Anti-Terrorism Special Measures Law, two further bills were passed allowing Japanese troops to defend US bases in Japan and naval vessels to fire on suspected intruders.
On November 12, Japan's ruling coalition agreed to submit a bill to parliament which amends the Peacekeeping Operations Co-operations Law. The bill seeks to lift restrictions on Japan's participation in United Nations peacekeeping operations and relax restrictions on the use of arms by Japan's SDF.
On November 16, the Koizumi cabinet approved a "basic plan" for Japan's SDF to give logistical support to US military operations, offering transport and supplies, repair and maintenance and medical services. Japan's SDF will also be available for search and rescue missions and relief for refugees.
On December 4, two parliamentary working groups were set up to construct a "basic law" to undermine Article 9. The same day Japanese warships supplied fuel to their US counterparts in the Indian Ocean and Japan's Air SDF was used to transport undisclosed supplies to forces stationed at the US base in Guam.
Japanese warships, constitutionally bound to renounce the "threat or use of force as a means of settling disputes", will operate from the Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea to the Persian Gulf and the Pacific Ocean.
Proponents of military reform and the US-led war are pacifying public and Asian trade partner concerns by stressing a "humanitarian role" and "non-combat role" for the SDF. Well before September 11, opposition to the international deployment of the SDF was being slowly worn down by using it solely for unarmed disaster and reconstruction work.
Yet critics have long argued that humanitarian efforts could be performed better by a trained disaster response unit rather than a military whose only basis for existence is the defence of Japanese land from attack.
Others question why the Japanese government's humanitarianism doesn't extend to accepting refugees. Only 22 refugees were accepted by Japan in the year 2000 and no significant increase has been offered.
Government officials stressed there was a distinction between front-line and "rear-guard" or "logistical" support for the US-led strikes.
One SDF major commented on this issue, "The government's interpretation of logistical support is that we are not at war. This is wrong. Any forces that are engaged in logistical support will be identified as the enemy and will be the target of enemy attack. This is common sense."
Until September, Japan's military was limited to national defence and UN-sponsored international aid, provided without weapons. Now Japan's military is engaged in armed involvement in foreign military assaults under the leadership of the US.
Washington and Tokyo argue ad nauseum that this is "collective self-defence". No doubt the Afghan people have a different name for it.
From Green Left Weekly, December 12, 2001.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.