May 30, 2014
The Abe government is fanning the flames of public fear of neighboring countries with the aim of creating an atmosphere where people feel the necessity of Japan’s use of the collective self-defense right. However, seeing the existing situation in a calm manner, no one can deny that the government move is unreasonable.
The media has frequently reported that Chinese ships and airplanes entered waters and airspace near the Japan-controlled Senkaku Islands. This problem, however, should be solved by strengthening the policing of the Japanese maritime authorities and through bilateral dialogue.
In a meeting of the ruling Liberal Democratic and Komei parties regarding Japan’s use of the collective self-defense right, the government gave 15 examples regarding the exercise of the right. Of the 15 examples, seven were provided in relation to North Korea, such as an emergency situation on the Korean Peninsula and a ballistic missile attack against the U.S. mainland.
Critics are seeing the seven examples as unrealistic judging from North Korea’s missile delivery capability and economic conditions. In addition, surrounding countries, including Japan, have consented to solve North Korea-related issues, including nuclear and missile development programs and abduction of foreign citizens, through the Six-Party Talks and other diplomatic channels.
The right to collective self-defense means the right enabling Japan to join military actions of a nation with which Japan has close relationships. In one example, when Japan’s ally, the U.S., asks for help in security problems with China, Japan can use the right. It is claimed at present that this situation could never happen.
While casting a cautious eye on each other, Washington and Beijing are hoping to build a new constructive relationship as major powers. Military authorities in the two countries have set up a hotline to maintain communications to prevent military conflicts.
In the United States, some military experts are taking a questioning stance toward Tokyo’s move to lift the ban on the use of the collective self-defense right out of concern that the U.S. could be involved in its ally’s disputes with China.
Once a conflict occurs in Northeast Asia where nations with a large population carry out extensive economic activities, it will bring about immeasurable impacts on the global economy. Japan should take a lead in negotiations with other countries in line with the spirit of the pacifist Constitution, not make a military threat on them by changing the constitutional interpretation.
The media has frequently reported that Chinese ships and airplanes entered waters and airspace near the Japan-controlled Senkaku Islands. This problem, however, should be solved by strengthening the policing of the Japanese maritime authorities and through bilateral dialogue.
In a meeting of the ruling Liberal Democratic and Komei parties regarding Japan’s use of the collective self-defense right, the government gave 15 examples regarding the exercise of the right. Of the 15 examples, seven were provided in relation to North Korea, such as an emergency situation on the Korean Peninsula and a ballistic missile attack against the U.S. mainland.
Critics are seeing the seven examples as unrealistic judging from North Korea’s missile delivery capability and economic conditions. In addition, surrounding countries, including Japan, have consented to solve North Korea-related issues, including nuclear and missile development programs and abduction of foreign citizens, through the Six-Party Talks and other diplomatic channels.
The right to collective self-defense means the right enabling Japan to join military actions of a nation with which Japan has close relationships. In one example, when Japan’s ally, the U.S., asks for help in security problems with China, Japan can use the right. It is claimed at present that this situation could never happen.
While casting a cautious eye on each other, Washington and Beijing are hoping to build a new constructive relationship as major powers. Military authorities in the two countries have set up a hotline to maintain communications to prevent military conflicts.
In the United States, some military experts are taking a questioning stance toward Tokyo’s move to lift the ban on the use of the collective self-defense right out of concern that the U.S. could be involved in its ally’s disputes with China.
Once a conflict occurs in Northeast Asia where nations with a large population carry out extensive economic activities, it will bring about immeasurable impacts on the global economy. Japan should take a lead in negotiations with other countries in line with the spirit of the pacifist Constitution, not make a military threat on them by changing the constitutional interpretation.
