For a new era of Japan-U.S. relations without military alliance -- Akahata editorial, September 8, 2001

Fifty years have passed since the conclusion of the "Security Treaty between Japan and the United States of America."

The treaty was signed at a petty officers conference hall in San Francisco on September 8, 1951, and revised in 1960. The Japan-U.S. military alliance is touted as the "cornerstone of peace and stability in the Asia Pacific region" (Joint Statement by President Bush and Prime Minister Koizumi on June 30, 2001).

On this occasion, we should re-examine a most fundamental question: Should Japan, which constitutionally renounced forever the use or threat to use force, continue with the military alliance in the 21st century?

Raison d'etre of military alliance

The United States imposed the security treaty on Japan while the latter was under U.S. military occupation, the aim being to continue the U.S. military presence in Japan and to get Japan to cooperate with U.S. forces in the Asia Pacific region through rearmament.

Under the treaty, Japan was used by U.S. forces as an attack and supply base in U.S. wars in Asia, notably the Korean War and the Vietnam War. Today, those U.S. bases in Japan are used by U.S. military aircraft for taking action against Iraq.

Some say that thanks to the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, Japan has been able to defend peace since the end of World War II. But the hard fact is that Japan has not waged war with foreign countries because public pressure in defense of the Constitution's peace provisions has prevented the government from going to war.

Paul Hester, commander of the U.S. Forces in Japan, has said that a report on mutual cooperation planning under the Guidelines for Japan-U.S. Defense Cooperation will be submitted to a bilateral defense meeting, known as the "two plus two" in New York later in September, including a building mechanism to provide logistic support to U.S. forces in emergencies in areas surrounding Japan.

This indicates that the dangerous aspect of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty is going to be realized. That is Japan's participation in U.S. wars even without first being attacked.

The Japan-U.S. Security Treaty is supposedly a military alliance for common defense against attacks from third countries.

"Soviet threats," which were used as the reason for the military alliance against attacks from a third country, are gone.

Against this backdrop, a new argument has arisen to justify the security treaty, calling for a bond based on the common values of democracy and the market economy (Nihon Keizai Shinbun, September 5).

Why then is a military alliance necessary? The one between Japan and the United States cannot be justified by just another slogan like "democracy and the market economy."

Bound by the military alliance which has lost its raison d'etre, Japan is unable even to decide on its own future course.

The United States is being criticized everywhere in the world for overriding internationally accepted rules for the sake of its own national interests, by carrying out interventionist wars which disregard the U.N. Charter, clinging to the missile defense program, and undermining the Kyoto Protocol on climate change. The Japanese government has never criticized the United States for any of these acts.

The majority of the Asian nations are not bound by military alliances.

In East Asia, all regional countries are participating in the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), which indicates that the current in favor of peace is growing stronger.

To stick to a military alliance intended to use military force for intimidation and intervention represents a reverse current, which must by no means be justified, even on the pretext of "stability in the Asia Pacific region."
And in the 21st century?

There is no reason for Japan having to continue with the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty.

Without the treaty, the United States will find it very difficult to carry out military interventions on a global scale. The abrogation of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty will greatly contribute to world peace.

Also, the abrogation will pave the way for a new era in which Japan-U.S. relations are built on an equal footing, not based on antagonisms like in prewar days or on Japan's subordination to the United States. (end)