Up for review, Japan military still haunted by World War II
Up for review, Japan military still haunted by World War II
By Eugene Moosa
TOKYO (Reuter): A futile debate stemming from World War II still haunts Japan's military at a time when it must evolve into a realistic force of the post-Cold War era, an influential military analyst says.
Kensuke Ebata, a military writer and commentator, said a 1990 remark by Toshiki Kaifu, who was then prime minister, captured Japan's mentality on defense matters:
"We will not send the Self-Defense Forces (military) to dangerous places," Kaifu told parliament during his vain attempt to send Japanese support troops to Saudi Arabia just before the 1991 Gulf War.
Last month, Prime Minister Morihiro Hosokawa launched a review of the 1976 National Defense Program Outline, a document that spelled out the strength and role of the military, the Self- Defense Forces, in the Cold War era.
By July, Hosokawa's panel of academics, industrialists and retired generals is expected to recommend a new Program Outline to streamline the military and clarify other roles, such as UN peacekeeping and overseas disaster relief.
Hosokawa asked the panel to take into account geopolitical changes since the end of the Cold War, along with new economic realities and rapid advances in science and technology.
Few experts, certainly not Ebata, believe the panel will address the most important question: how to combat the lingering "military allergy" of most Japanese, overcome their habit of slipping into simplistic "defense-offense" arguments and draw them into a realistic debate on security issues.
"Japan's military has been plagued by this meaningless debate on 'defense' and 'offense' or how not to become involved in actual fighting, anywhere," Ebata said.
"But the outside world knows there is no such thing as safe wars or pure defense," he said in a recent interview.
The 1976 Program Outline called for a force capable of repelling a "limited" invasion -- 180,000 army troops, 60 destroyers and 16 submarines for the navy and 13 combat squadrons in the air force. The targets have been met.
Japan, it said, must solidify its alliance with the United States, meaning Tokyo would depend on U.S. forces for protection in exchange for bases on Japanese soil.
All that is changing with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the U.S. "drawdown" of its overseas forces, and louder calls for Tokyo to share the burden of global peacekeeping.
The 1976 Outline meant the government could spend lavishly on defense, so long as frontline strength was kept within the ceiling. In effect, spending doubled by the late 1980s and by Western standards, which include military pensions, Japan's military outlays now rank second in the world.
Ebata said one problem with the Outline was the setting of frontline target figures, which denies flexibility and so has been abused by the military to escape public debate.
The air force has increased the complement of aircraft per squadron, from 18 to 24, to give it more fighters but remain within Outline strength. The navy retires submarines after 18 years in service, or about half the life span of an average ship in other navies, so as not to violate the paper ceiling.
"No other navy does things like that," said Ebata. "And aircraft per squadron -- that's the wrong way around. They have been reduced in other countries."
The military goes out of its way to shield its business from public view, partly because there is no law protecting state secrets but mainly to avoid debate.
The defense-offense argument dates back to the 1950-1953 Korean War when Tokyo twisted constitutional logic to establish a full-blown military at Washington's behest.
Japan's 1947 "peace" constitution bans possession of "sea, land, and air forces" and prohibits the state from settling international disputes with military force.
The government argued the constitution did not deny the right to self-defense. Thus the modern Japanese military got its name, but also its illogical public mission.
Fighter planes were stripped of "offensive" devices such as bomb sights and ports for in-flight refueling. There is no thought of what to do if they had to attack an invading army.
More importantly, the constitutional debate has forced the government to shun "offensive" military alliances. Such reluctance could affect Japan's possible participation in future UN-sanctioned "peacemaking" operations.
Japan, with Germany, seeks a permanent UN Security Council seat. Opponents criticize Tokyo's inability to take part in such military operations as the Gulf War.
Ebata has just completed a detailed, two-volume study of the security situation around Japan, identifying a dozen key areas where a shooting war could flare up.
North Korea's reported nuclear missile program is a direct threat to Japan's homeland, while possible conflicts in the Middle East or over the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea could sever its vital oil supply route.
Ebata displays an unusually realistic approach in Japan. Only a decade ago, "military analyst" in Japan meant either a right- wing proponent of remilitarization or a leftist critic opposed to any attempt to modernize the forces or strengthen military ties with the United States.
-30-