Japan unlikely to follow U.S. on defense

By Henry Hilton

When it comes to defense spending, Japan appears to be on strike. While all other states in northeast Asia have been churning out bigger and bigger military budgets, Japan remains stuck with approximately the same ratio of defense expenditure to GDP as a decade ago.

Yet, the recent comments by U.S. Ambassador Thomas Schieffer that Tokyo isn’t doing enough at a time when “the Japanese people are increasingly apprehensive about military threats emanating from adversaries or potential adversaries” is unlikely to elicit much support from the man in the street.

While many in Japan view the alliance with the United States in a favorable light, there remain plenty of roadblocks to prevent any substantial increase in military budgeting over the next decade. It will take more than careful persuasion from the United States’ man in Tokyo to change the current outlook, though few would dissent from his view that both nations’ procurement policies could be enhanced in order than they might hope to get a better bang for each buck spent.

At the top levels of government, the era of good feeling that coinicided with Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi’s personal ties to President George W Bush is unlikely to be matched in the near future. With the ruling Liberal Democratic Party’s coalition government set for more squabbling over possible successors to Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda, there will be every incentive to worry increasingly about domestic problems and to leave security issues on the backburner.

The Bush administration can claim with reason that “the U.S.-Japan alliance has been the linchpin of both our foreign policies in the Pacific,” but it will be hard to urge Tokyo to spend more for three reasons. First, the public remains anxious over continuing economic weaknesses at home. Secondly, the massive and deserved publicity over U.S. service personnel misbehavior off base can hardly be ignored by politicians. And thirdly, the dangers that Washington identifies within the region may not be fully shared by Japan.

Certainly, no one doubts that “Asia is a region in transition” and that “a new order is emerging,” but Japan appears relatively unconcerned over regional developments with the important exception of events in North Korea. And even here there may be some good news shortly. This could lead on from Pyongyang’s disclosure of its nuclear details to an eventual agreement between the U.S. and North Korea that would further reduce tension on all sides. Of course, Japan’s own major differences with North Korea would still have to be resolved but any declaration of North Korea’s nuclear program would have the potential to dramatically change the overall regional temperature.

On a more distant horizon, other events could follow. Any eventual accord between the United States and North Korea would almost certainly lead to the question of what happens next for the American military in northeast Asia. These issues in turn can only prompt basic reconsiderations of the security foundations to the entire U.S.-Japan “special relationship.”

Latest 15 of 27 Total Comments Show All

OssanULTRA at 12:29 AM JST - 29th May

"I'm so sick of South Korea and Japan bashing the US for helping then defend themselves"

I think you are confusing the resistance on the part of the local population, and I mean "local" to the US bases and ports, with the positions of the South Korean and Japanese governments. If they don't want us there all they have to do is say so. Subic Bay is proof.
VoXman at 01:33 AM JST - 29th May

............And so this is the reason why your Japanese gov doesn't vote the US Mil out of Japan. See kids. It all comes full circle when you have faith and read on!

apecNetworks

The US hasn't been focused on the Aussies since Macarthur left there to reclaim the Philipines.

Netrek:

2 different things. Korea and Japan. Ok first, Korea gov needs the US there, the locals hate want the US out. Japan Gov wants the US in for the long haul, the locals just want the US Mil to stop victimizing their people. Apathetic about Mil staying.

And to our Philipine reporter: The PI Pres, wants the US back for Economic reasons, the PI Senate says No. The People? Been saying US please come back for decades. The locals always wanted us there, its the non-representative congress the PI has that voted the US out.. bring back Marcos!!! Just kidding.
VoXman at 01:40 AM JST - 29th May

That as long as Japan depends on the United States for it's security it is "forced" to share the dangers in the region as identified by the United States.

I love this one. Its as though, if the US just left all the regional geo-political problems Japan has would just dry up. Yes, friends the US came and wouldn't no matter how much we 2-3 guys said so..

If the US leaves all will be well with Japan and no one would even complain about a little whaling once a year.

Look man! Just buy our cars and stop trying to make us take responsiblity for our own actions... Oh also! Can we have a seat on the UN security counsel... please?
Seiharinokaze at 02:38 AM JST - 29th May

OsssanULTRA

VoXman said it right by pointing out your argument in a different light. "As long as Japan depends on the U.S. for its security, it is FORCED to share the dangers in the region as identified by the U.S." Being forced to share something without being serious about it has been the politics of this country.
apecNetworks at 08:31 AM JST - 29th May

To Seiharinokaze:

So you admit and just watch how Yoshida Doctrine continues? How do you think about Mr. Ohta Nobumasa?

As far as Japanese Foreign Policy is concerned, the Fukuda Doctrine is the NATURAL progression from the Yoshida Doctrine. After WWII, there was in Japan a GREAT force behind all policies implemented at that time, and it has continued up to today. I understand what has occurred, and help it along when necessary. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Mr. Ohta Nobumasa:

I have no problem w/ what he said:

A senior Japanese official, introducing the report, said that a strike against foreign bases from which missiles were aimed at Japan would not be a violation of Article 9 of Japan's postwar "peace constitution" forbidding the country from waging war overseas.

"We can exercise our right to defense against enemy facilities once it's confirmed that the enemy has embarked on an action to attack us," said Nobumasa Ohta of the Defense Agency. "Striking back is not unconstitutional."

Asked if such remarks might be seen as a warning for North Korea, Mr. Ohta replied, "Theoretically."

Analysts saw the defense report — and Mr. Ohta's comments — as underlining a basic shift in official Japanese thinking toward defense.

http://www.iht.com/articles/1999/07/29/japan.1.t.php

Cold War has ended, Japan is "influential" in the world, but does need to upgrade the SDF capabilities to counter dangers in the region. The ability to retaliate against a danger is a strong deterrent in military affairs. I disagreed w/ the nuclear option presented, but could see the need for a 4th/5th Generation fighter to back up what Mr. Ohta Nobumasa said. W/out the nuclear option b/c of Article 9, a fighter plane that can go in and strike w/ minimal threats fits in well in the Japanese political landscape.

The US doesn't know this, but the ghost of SCAP is still around. There was a "Master Plan", and, w/ luck, it may be realized.

Ciao.
Seiharinokaze at 08:40 PM JST - 29th May

apecNetworks

The US doesn't know this, but the ghost of SCAP is still around. There was a "Master Plan", and, w/ luck, it may be realized.

Thanks for your reply. But doesn't the U.S. know it? It's overdue in the Master Plan?

Though I do not necessarily agree with the nuclear option, I rather tend to share what Mr. Ohta thinks about this country. He says Japan is a dependency on the U.S. rather than her ally. Dumping the basics of diplomacy and security to the U.S. is the root cause for dereliction and corruption of the bureaucracy and politicians of this country. However I doubt if letting Japan be serious about herself is also in the Master Plan.
apecNetworks at 08:26 AM JST - 30th May

To Seiharinokaze:

But doesn't the U.S. know it? It's overdue in the Master Plan?

The "Master Plan" was cobbled together sometime around 1952. Prefer to keep this info in very general terms. The operative phrase is, "there WAS a Master Plan". How it evolved lacked the authority and resources of the US Govt. after Gen. MacArthur was relieved of command. There are people aware that "something" is amiss in the Asia-Pacific, but can't discern it. I know they know from the movie, "Tomorrow Never Dies", b/c when Bond talks to Elliot Carver in Vietnam Hdqtrs., the comment about SAC was directed to me, and me only. Also, from that discussion, they were more or less telling me the situation is "insane". They are not happy. Thus, I have to watch what I say.

In reply to your question, US knows of its existence, but can't dismantle it b/c most participants are not visible. They have tried.

However I doubt if letting Japan be serious about herself is also in the Master Plan.

Actually, the US has changed so much since the 1950's, the Master Plan is in direct opposition to US Foreign Policy, and considerable neutralization is occurring. There are people high up in the Japanese Govt. who are perplexed at how odd things are happening. It is this "odd situation" that is allowing Japan to find some space to manuever. In a way, the US is going up against Gen. MacArthur/Gen. Eisenhower and they were definately Commanders.
Crucades at 11:33 PM JST - 30th May

Apec what the hell are you talking about?
jimenezsnyder at 06:15 AM JST - 31st May

Japan will make a better ally once her military is restored and her national will is completely independent.

For many years, America kept Japan under her umbrella mostly out of fear, having learned to respect Japan's potential to project force. Post-WWII, US protection made rearming "unnecessary" for Japan. But we are all quickly reaching the point where it is no longer viable to conduct policy based on historical fears.

Although Japan is not nuclear, many in the US know that Japan could probably become nuclear very quickly with very little trouble. Meanwhile, the US finds herself facing an increasingly multi-polar world. Every knows that a powerful and capable ally is better than a demoralized one that acts only out of a sense of obligation. It's also true that in today's world, being perceived as a "puppet" of the US increases that nation's vulnerability to global terrorism. If Japan cannot stand strong, US regional interests will be profoundly jeopardized.

Many in Washington fear this new paradigm shift. But the fact is that the US can no longer afford to manage the world. Persisting in unipolar thinking is only edging us toward unnecessary crisis. If the "Master Plan" involves "risking" Japanese ascendency, thereby safeguarding the survival of our grandchildren, then I'm all for it.
mtt at 11:47 AM JST - 1st June

I don't see the US having any set plan regarding Japan or Asia nowadays.

They will want to wait and see how all those different forces will work themselves out and form a new Asia. Even then, what the US or any country ultimately want for an ally or a neighbor is a stable democracy. And how Japan deals with China and Russia on her own should be a great interest to the US foreign policy makers more than being a good poodle.

If Japan can act mature and responsible promoting peace in Asia, I'm sure the US is more than willing to grant a lot more trust and independence. And I hope Japan will become a valuable ally in this manner.
Seiharinokaze at 07:49 PM JST - 1st June

Is Japan's perspective on her security at in this region always the same as that of the US? Dangers that Washington identifies about Iran, for example, can really be fully shared by Japan? In a sense, doesn't Japanese leadership share some sympathy for American military leaders?

http://www.slate.com/id/2176122/
mtt at 05:18 AM JST - 2nd June

As Japan works to promote closer ties with China and Russia, the funding and the scale of the US forces within Japan should be reduced proportionally. As for Iran and other Isramic nations, Japan does not have any of religious, political,cultural or historical problems with them as the US, Israel or Eourope do, it will be foolish for Japan to take sides. The treaty Japan has with the US is not an oath or a code of gangsters and the world doesn't need to split into two over every issue.

The US should welcome and promote a helthy and independent Japan, if it really cares about peace and prosperity in Asia rather than hegemony, or Japanese public may stop supporting US as their leader and a close ally.
apecNetworks at 03:32 PM JST - 2nd June

This would be considered "radical" today, but I would implement it if it could be implemented.

Yet, the recent comments by U.S. Ambassador Thomas Schieffer that Tokyo isn’t doing enough at a time when “the Japanese people are increasingly apprehensive about military threats emanating from adversaries or potential adversaries”.

The Japanese SDF buy over market rates for the carrier, Kitty Hawk, and keep it stationed as Yokosuka w/ MSDF spending several years refurbishing it - lots of jobs for university graduates. Let Gov. Ishihara name it and he might promote to his backers. Then, the ASDF go and start bidding on the several "blueprints" in somebodies garbage can of a rejected 4th/5th Generation fighter, preferably that comes w/ a prototype - bidding premium bucks. Now, integrate that plane w/ the refurbishing carrier and Japan has new capabilities - no task force, just the carrier. Anyone complains, just tell them that if this isn't done, it would be done by the US. I would go for that.
KenjiYamamoto at 04:35 AM JST - 3rd June

mr. schieffer and his number one country wants to create fear and further their own military occupation of a country in a region far away from the us. shore up defenses? yes, but in the long run, the asians will combine.
KenjiYamamoto at 04:36 AM JST - 3rd June

schieffer wants to create fear in order to divide the region. who exactly is one to fear but mr. schieffer?