Recent changes in Japan’s security policies have been interpreted by the media as representing a scrapping of the country’s pacifist restrictions, leading it toward becoming a “normal” nation and acquiring a more assertive military. The changes are significant, but they do not represent a fundamental shift. Instead, they represent a pragmatic evolution in response to Japan’s increasingly dangerous neighborhood.

Japan’s Security Policies a Pragmatic Response to Changing Asia

By , , Briefing

Recent changes in Japan’s security policies have been interpreted by the media as representing a scrapping of the country’s pacifist restrictions, leading it toward becoming a “normal” nation and acquiring a more assertive military. These changes include permitting the right to exercise collective self-defense, creating a National Security Council, relaxing a ban on exporting defense-related equipment and procuring new military assets. The changes are significant, but they do not represent a fundamental shift. Instead, they represent a pragmatic evolution in response to Japan’s increasingly dangerous neighborhood.

Consider first Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s effort to reinterpret Japan’s constitution. At issue is Japan’s right to exercise collective self-defense. Under Article 51 of the U.N. Charter, Japan has that right, but Tokyo has consistently interpreted its constitution as not allowing the country to exercise it. Abe wants to reinterpret the constitution so that Japan can do so. The debate is ongoing, but since the prime minister has the authority to make this change, it will likely occur soon. Critics have erroneously attacked Abe’s plan as enabling Japanese forces to fight overseas, but this is not what Abe is seeking. Rather, Abe is pursuing the authority to respond in limited situations that include aiding U.S. forces under attack in open waters, shooting down missiles heading to the U.S., aiding foreign troops under attack during U.N.-sanctioned peacekeeping operations and providing rear-area support in such U.N. missions. In all of these cases, Japan would remain legally confined to reacting instead of acting. Importantly, the reinterpretation does not permit Japan to assume a more active military role in regional security. ...

To read the rest, sign up to try World Politics Review

Individual
Free Trial

  • TWO WEEKS FREE.
  • Cancel any time.
  • After two weeks, just $18 monthly or $118/year.
subscribe

Institutional
Subscriptions

Request a free trial for your office or school. Everyone at a given site can get access through our institutional subscriptions.

request trial

Login

Already a member? Click the button below to login.

login