Opinion
Last updated at: (Beijing Time) Thursday, July 03, 2003
Is Japan Advancing Toward a 'Normal Country'?
At the turn of the 2003 spring the Diet of Japan passed the "emergency legislation on war contingencies" three bills, successfully launched a spy satellite in an effort to build an independent military intelligence system, at the same time step up the development of an anti-ballistic missile system. These are the continuation of a series of big events in Japan's changes in national direction. How should these changes be understood after all?
The "three bills", which expand the autonomy of Japan's self-defense forces to participate in military actions outside the country, and other military advances show that Japan is now not far away from its objective set 10 years ago for becoming a "normal country". With the bills Japan is a more "normal" country, a world power not only in economic strength (which ranks world second), but also in military might.
Different from gaining international status through brilliant economic achievement in past years, today's Japan inclines more and more to seek a bigger presence and function on the international stage through using armed forces (although the use of forces today is no longer that of the past), which has been proven by a host of examples, especially by events happened after "September 11, 2001". The "peace constitution", pacifism, once a source of pride of most Japanese people after WWII, seems to become a thing of the past very soon.
The contingency bills are Japan's redefinition to its "national interests", which sends a signal to its nationals, who have lived for more than half a century in peace, especially to the nation's youth: please prepare yourselves again for fight and sacrifice for your country. Given this, Japan is no longer a traditional "pacifist" country.
Viewed from Japan's domestic politics, the general public has not yet been prepared to dedicate themselves to such a "normal country" using armed forces, (as their older generation did during the first half of the 20th century), because the definition is but ideas in the head of the political elite holding sway of the nation.
National interest as understood by Japan's general public, who has a deep-seated concept of democracy and a broad field of international vision, differs from that comprehended by the political elite. If the elite's ideas cannot win recognition, approval and support from the masses, their political plan will be thwarted and ideology fail to mobilize the society.
Japan's political forces which advocate the reuse of armed forces are well aware of the importance of this point, and the objective of a "normal country" can hardly be achieved under a democratic system if they fail to win public support. However, the global politics after the Cold War, especially the US superpower position, the radical changes in the political pattern in East Asia, and the rising new nationalism in Japanese people have helped exponents of "normal country" who advocate abolishment of pacifism and development of military strength go their way unimpeded.
As the only superpower dominating the world, the United States has been continuously strengthening its "presence" in East Asia, with its military presence in the region mainly depending on Japan. Pinning great hope on Japan's strategic position and function, the United States encourages the nation to play a bigger role in East Asian security, which provides a basic environment in international politics for Japan's changing its national aims by relying on US military strength.
The rise of China has changed the international pattern of East Asia. Japan is greatly disturbed by the rise of China, thus making it hard for the "China threat" theory to quit the "market". It can be said that one of the causes of the emergence of Japan's new nationalism is China's rise, which can be balanced only by military force, as some Japanese politicians firmly believed. Despite the rather hot economic ties between China and Japan, (which have their own problems, such as trade disputes), many problems related to political and security ties between the two countries have arisen, which are to be controlled by "cold" air.
The situation has been made worse by the deterioration of the DPRK nuclear issue, which led many Japanese in the virtual space to keenly feel "security threat" from a neighbor possessing nuclear weapons and missile attacking capability and to readily believe in right-wing theories of striking DPRK first "to save themselves".
Whether Japan should rearm and to what degree of rearmament eventually depend on the choice of its general public. Japan's democratic system, which took root after WWII, is hardly shakable, yet it is now facing tests from right-wing forces advocating defense of national interests through military means. If rearmament is supported by the domestic democratic system, the Japanese nation's use of armed forces on a democratic basis (responsible to Japan's voters) would be more legitimate than that on the basis of the Mikado and bushido (responsible to the Mikado and warrior) during WWII.
Presently, Japan's political forces are trying to "democratize" their ideas and plans of defending the national interests by armed forces, and have achieved a victory by passing the contingency bills by an overwhelming majority in the Diet. It implies that the nation has deviated more from the "peace constitution" and great changes have taken place in its national direction.
By PD Online Staff Member Li Heng
Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved