Support NeoGAF

[ponpo]

Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has called for a new interpretation of the constitution, which could pave the way for the military to fight overseas.

His call came hours after a panel of advisers - picked by Mr Abe - released a report recommending changes to defence laws. Japan's constitution bans acts of war and "the threat or use of force" to settle international disputes.China has criticised the move, accusing Japan of taking "negative actions".

Under Article 9 of its post-war pacifist constitution, Japan is blocked from the use of force to resolve conflicts except in the case of self-defence. But Mr Abe has indicated he wants to re-examine the role of Japan's military to meet the changing security environment in the Asia-Pacific region.

The government has long held the view that under international law, it has the right to collective self-defence - which is the right to use arms in stopping attacks on friendly countries. But it also believes that it cannot exercise that right because the constitution sets a limit on the use of armed strength.

The panel's report on Thursday called for this position to be dropped and argued that Japan should be allowed to engage in collective self-defence, said state news agency Kyodo.

They also suggested a set of conditions be imposed to ensure this power would not be abused.They were making these recommendations in light of challenges posed by China and North Korea, they added. Mr Abe agreed that a review was needed on the current interpretation of the constitution.

"It is necessary to deepen co-operation with other countries so that we can seamlessly... cope with any situation to protect our peaceful lives." But he also pledged that Japan would not again become "a country that wages war", report agencies. The changes, although modest, are extremely controversial, says the BBC's Rupert Wingfield-Hayes in Tokyo, and Mr Abe is certain to face stiff opposition.

The move will likely please the US, with whom Japan has a long-standing security treaty, however. But it drew immediate criticism from Beijing.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hua Chunying said on Thursday that Abe's government was taking "negative actions" that raised concerns about Japan's true motives, according to agencies.

via BBC

And about the report specifically:

A panel of Japanese experts has submitted a report that calls for changing the interpretation of the Constitution to enable Japan to use the right of collective self-defense.

The panel was set up by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. The panel chief, former vice foreign minister Shunji Yanai, handed the report to Abe on Thursday.

The traditional interpretation held by previous governments is that the Constitution does not enable Japan to exercise its right to collective self-defense.
The right would allow it to use force to defend other countries that have close relations with Japan if they come under attack.

The panel report says the security environment surrounding Japan has become ever more severe. It points to North Korea's nuclear and missile development and China's increased maritime activities.

The report says adequate responses can no longer be taken under the current constitutional interpretation to maintain the peace and security of Japan, and to realize regional and global peace and stability. It says the security of Japan today cannot be ensured through only the right of individual self-defense. The report says it should be interpreted that the exercise of the right of collective self-defense is included in "the minimum extent necessary" for self-defense permitted under the Constitution.

The report cites 6 requirements for the use of the right, such as when a foreign country that is in a close relationship with Japan comes under attack and if such a situation has the potential to significantly affect Japan's security. Japan must also obtain an explicit request or consent from the country under attack.

The report gives examples of activities that could be made possible only after the use of collective self-defense is enabled. Among them are defending US vessels and inspecting suspicious ships in case of a contingency near Japan.

Abe will hold a news conference later on Thursday to lay out his government's basic direction for proceeding with the deliberations.

The prime minister is expected to ask the governing coalition of the Liberal Democratic Party and the New Komeito party to speed up discussions on the matter.

via NHK

Saw his press conference on TV earlier. The situations being shown were kind of corny. A random US warship getting attacked by China and Japan unable to help. I don't know if they actually think this is a legitimate / imminent threat or whatever.

Also pretty divisive, obviously. There were some pretty sizable protests in Tokyo a couple of days ago.

Better safe than sorry? ┐(´ー&#65344┌

 

[moojito]

I reckon the politicians should be glad they have an excuse not to have to spend a huge percentage of their country's money on their military and instead use it for things that might actually benefit the people (though I've no idea how much they actually spend on their self defence force, hopefully it would be less than most countries by percentage).

 

[TCRS]

Makes sense I suppose. China is only going to get stronger and this policy is from the post-WWII era when China was no factor.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

They will still be well below the world average for military expenditures as a proportion of GDP if they increase their budgets by 50%. They certainly have some room to grow their armed forces without breaking the bank. China doesn't really have grounds to criticise them here given they're spending twice as much of their rapidly growing economy on military buildups.

 

[anonymous_abc]

They will still be well below the world average for military expenditures as a proportion of GDP if they increase their budgets by 50%. They certainly have some room to grow their armed forces without breaking the bank.

You are quite the fan of increasing military spending and flexing military muscle aren't you.

 

[ponpo]

I reckon the politicians should be glad they have an excuse not to have to spend a huge percentage of their country's money on their military and instead use it for things that might actually benefit the people (though I've no idea how much they actually spend on their self defence force, hopefully it would be less than most countries by percentage).

They will still be well below the world average for military expenditures as a proportion of GDP if they increase their budgets by 50%. They certainly have some room to grow their armed forces without breaking the bank.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

 

[antonz]

China is far likelier to be an aggressor in the near future to the entire region requiring a degree of strength to counter Balance them.While the world loosely follows Ukraine China has moved an Oil rig into Vietnamese Waters to begin extracting oil because China claims its theirs with the rest of the south china sea.

Japan needs a strong military and needs to be encouraged to develop such.

Most experts agree Chinas proclaimed Military spending is much less than the actual spending as well

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

http://i.imgur.com/nYXbDTH.png[IMG][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/UwCAEqM.png[IMG]

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/RR3ARZf.png[IMG][/QUOTE]


I don't follow. Japan is at 1%, the world average is more like 2-3%.

 

[May16]

They certainly have some room to grow their armed forces without breaking the bank.

They just raised the national sales tax by 3% and are going to raise it 2% more next year because they had no choice. Doesn't sound like the government is swimming in pools of money. Expenditures don't have to be "breaking the bank" to be kind of unnecessary. I can buy a lot of stupid things I don't need without breaking the bank, but that doesn't make those things good ideas.

 

[ponpo]

I don't follow. Japan is at 1%, the world average is more like 2-3%.

Wasn't disagreeing, just showing some figures for those curious.

 

[slit]

China just doesn't want to be kept in check. Dealing with the U.S. is bad enough but a militarily strong Japan lessens their grip even futher. I understand China's worries especially considering what Japan did to them during WWII, but their attempted bullying is the cause so they have nobody to blame but themselves.

 

[Coriolanus]

China just doesn't want to be kept in check. Dealing with the U.S. is bad enough but a militarily strong Japan lessens their grip even futher. I understand China's worries especially considering what Japan did to them during WWII, but their attempted bullying is the cause so they have nobody to blame but themselves.

It's not that simple. Also, nukes.

Plus, when it comes to global powers, no one wants to be kept in check. US supporting Japan is their way of preventing China from keeping them in check.

 

[slit]

It's not that simple. Also, nukes.

Plus, when it comes to global powers, no one wants to be kept in check. US supporting Japan is their way of preventing China from keeping them in check.

Also, nukes? What does that mean?

China cannot keep the U.S. in check, while they are a growing military power they are a long ways off from the technological advantage the U.S. military enjoys. This is Japan's way of saying think twice before you mess with the us. They don't want China to think the U.S. is their only option for protection.

 

[Kenshin001]

If the shit hit the fan I don't think the Constitution would prevent Japan throwing its lot in with whichever country were being attacked. Namely the US. The thing is I don't think it would be used for collective self defence, it'd be used either in assisting the US to protect Japan's interests or to allow Japan's military to participate in whatever misadventure the US gets embroiled in next. The former I can understand, the latter would be reckless, unpopular and stupid.

 

[dapperbandit]

To me it just seems like Abe is using the cold threat of China as a vehicle to throw off the post-war constraints put on Japan. He and his lot already have some interesting ideas about the morality of Japan's conduct in the war.

The sabre rattling between Japan and China, in my eyes, suits Abe's purposes. That's how I perceive it anyway.

 

[Dyno]

This is the expected outcome when a rival starts laying claim to islands and re-drawing it's 'coastal' waters. Why would any country want it's hands tied while a nearby aggressor becomes more bold? Those laws are the product of another era. The situation is obviously different now.

Japan currently spends 40+ million on self defense and has for a while. It's military is more advanced than China right now but with China spending 120+ million a year it's bound to catch up. Japan wants to maintain whatever advantage it can.

Japan has been in a ressession for about 20 years. It's suffered a horrible crisis of identity what with the tsunami and Fukishima. Abe's increasing nationalism is an attempt to improve the pride of the Japanese. Young people - who have been cronically unemployed - may find new life in a revitalized armed forces, either to serve as soldiers or work on new armaments. At least that's how the thinking goes.

War in general is a bad idea and an expensive policy to follow. The only course of action that's worse is to do nothing and then get buried by your enemies.

 

[Coriolanus]

Also, nukes? What does that mean?

China cannot keep the U.S. in check, while they are a growing military power they are a long ways off from the technological advantage the U.S. military enjoys. This is Japan's way of saying think twice before you mess with the us. They don't want China to think the U.S. is their only option for protection.

I mean that the idea that these countries will clash directly is nonsense. If they do, the world burns. This is all posturing and pandering to your base.

And like I said (but now ith more explicit wording), this is a way of PREVENTING China from BECOMING a country that WILL BE ABLE to keep the US in check.

 

[Abounder]

To me it just seems like Abe is using the cold threat of China as a vehicle to throw off the post-war constraints put on Japan. He and his lot already have some interesting ideas about the morality of Japan's conduct in the war.

The sabre rattling between Japan and China, in my eyes, suits Abe's purposes. That's how I perceive it anyway.

Yea Abe could be using this to suit his own agenda. Japan has conflicts with more than just China when it comes to land disputes: South Korea, Russia, and other regional neighbors all don't like Japan.

I also see this as a way to boost Japan's economy by throwing more money into defense industries and maybe exporting them.

When it comes to a potential war: Japan has more than enough modern jets to stay in the fight but I suppose it is better to be safe than sorry. I wonder how stable that region is because any of the major economies there could burst and they could all blame/blast eachother for it

 

[slit]

I mean that the idea that these countries will clash directly is nonsense. If they do, the world burns. This is all posturing and pandering to your base.

And like I said (but now ith more explicit wording), this is a way of PREVENTING China from BECOMING a country that WILL BE ABLE to keep the US in check.

So what's your point? I never said that wasn't true.

As far as the U.S. having ulterior motives, yeah they have ulterior motives, again I was pointing out China's, I was not stating that nobody else had any.

 

[nubbe]

Japan need to be a strong proxy for a invasion on China

 

[Dyno]

I mean that the idea that these countries will clash directly is nonsense. If they do, the world burns. This is all posturing and pandering to your base.

China and Japan clashing in open water is not at all far-fetched. China and South Korea have already started to wack their ships at each other, Viet Nam is getting in on it too.

Obviously no one thought or was prepared for Russia to start annexxing parts of Ukraine but now here we are and it looks like no one can do much about it.

And like I said (but now ith more explicit wording), this is a way of PREVENTING China from BECOMING a country that WILL BE ABLE to keep the US in check.

Yes this is true but recent history has shown that America prefers to assemble a glittering host of allies rather than go it alone, even in countries like Libya where the U.S. could easily take care of all the business. It adds ligitimacy to their goals. America would not complain if it could rely on a beefed up Japan in the region.

 

[hirokazu]

As much as I don't like Abe, that doesn't seem like an unreasonable change.

 

[Mobius 1]

Do not forget that Japan has an open dispute with Russia and Putin isn't playing friendly neighborhood russian these days.

 

[Madness]

It's a given. China has been long antagonizing Japan, further exacerbated by the recent identification zone enacted. They are going to basically make Japan become more militaristic and restart intense military development nearly 7 decades after they forever renounced the right to declare war or maintain a military for anything besides self-defense.

China is in a very poor military location. Encircled by countries that it is antagonistic towards, no forward operating bases, no functioning geosynchronous satellite navigation etc.

The only advantage China has on Japan is nuclear weapons, otherwise I'd say the Japanese navy is far more credible. Most of their "helicopter" carriers are basically small aircraft carriers. Any hint at threatening Japan with nukes, and you'd have Japan be able to make 1000 warheads within a year or two. They are perhaps the world's leading nuclear/uranium power, and the only country to have ever been nuked in war, they take that seriously.

Even just increasing their military budget to match the levels of other major nations, they would essentially be the third largest military budget nation in the world, almost at $100 billion. As for the future, it's hard to predict. China will be the economic power and is becoming a strong military power, but they are extremely vulnerable with their cities and military being more exposed than people realize.

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

I reckon the politicians should be glad they have an excuse not to have to spend a huge percentage of their country's money on their military and instead use it for things that might actually benefit the people (though I've no idea how much they actually spend on their self defence force, hopefully it would be less than most countries by percentage).

Japan spends exactly 1% of their GDP on Military, the US and Russia spend over 4%, China is slowly creeping up to 3%. If Japan Spends just 2% of their GDP the defense budget will explode. As it stands they are going on a buying spree with just 1% of their GDP going to defense spending, increasing it to 2% (100-120 billion) will allow them build atleast a couple of Aircraft carriers, more Subs, Destroyers, F-35's (possibly B variants) and also put enough money to develop the F-3 (ATD-X Shinshin). As it stands Japan can take China on alone, but that is not going to remiain so in maybe a decade down the line. They need to rearm, and not just that, they also need to do something about their plummeting birth rate and population.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Until nukes get taken off the table all of this military build up is rather pointless dick waving.

 

[Upsidedown Fuji]

Abe's reasons given during the conference were flimsy. While I do understand the threat from unlawfully expanding Chinese water borders by the Philippines, Vietnam, and Japan, I still think Abe's intentions aren't as benevolent as he'd like to think.

Personally, I think Japan's unique pacifist constitution was one of the few modern progressive things that sets Japan apart from the rest of the world. Their pacifist constitution has afforded them over 60 years of peaceful prosperity without any loss of life in entanglements in coalition forces and border skirmishes. Not having to spend money on defense, at least at the world average has benefited the government's fiscal bottom line, freeing up money to be spent towards public functions.

I think with recent tensions between China, both Koreas, and to a lesser extent, the rest of SE Asia, it's still too early for Japan to have a real military. The wounds of war still haven't healed so to speak.. This will cause further tensions in the region which will hurt trade, especially with their biggest trade partner China ironically. It's very complicated.

Plus, with Japan in a 20 year recession paired with an irreversible decline in birthrate and a society of seniors, where we'll they have enough people to keep a much larger military going? I foresee plenty of money mismanagement and a wet behind the ears Japanese military gungho to please their allies get stuck in another middle East war or worse yet some kind of scuffle with China or Russia.

 

[TheBryanJZX90]

I understand that to its neighbors this would be a massive change in the status quo, and not a desirable one, but conceptually I never really understood why modern Japan kept pacifism in it's constitution.