“War as a sovereign right of a nation is abolished”, said Takeo Fukuda in 1977. Fukuda doctrine was based on a pacifist constitution aimed at discouraging Japan to become a military power again and to focus on the economy. Japan ranks among the top 10 peaceful countries in the world that once was an aggressive and imperial power. Japan’s post-war history, undoubtedly, indicates its peaceful behavior after adopting a pacifist constitution based on MacArthur’s principles of eliminating the ability to wage war and establishing a parliamentary system which helped Japan to be what it is today.
As the regional security environment began to deteriorate with the rise of China’s assertive assertiveness, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and North Korea’s belligerency, Japan is compelled to amend its constitution (Article-9) the oldest unamended constitution in the world. Due to neighboring aggression, Japan eventually swallowed a bitter pill and Fumio Kishida’s cabinet approved a new National Security Strategy on December 16 which seems to be more rightly for defense and not offense. Pursuing the national interest, and protecting its sovereignty and independence, Japan decided to double its military spending from 1% to nearly 2% of its GDP. It will make japan the third largest military spender by 2027 with $315 billion. It will be focused on acquiring counterstrike capabilities i.e. long-range ballistic missiles able to counterattack China, North Korea, or even Russia if needed.
Though it did not happen at once, Shinzo Abe has long tried to reinterpret the US-drafted constitution which he could not succeed in to beef up the military and mitigate threats. There is no denying that the policy for strengthening the military was influenced by public opinion at large. In 2016 when people were in the streets, polling suggested that nearly half of the people support reviewing Article 9 of the ‘no war’ clause whereas many opposed it.
China the existential threat:
The driving force behind the revision of strategy is a series of existential threats from China’s power-centered approach towards the South and East China Sea. Needless to say, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the dispute with Japan’s northern areas, and North Korea’s challenge to Japan’s sovereignty have exacerbated the situation further. China’s assertive behavior can be labeled as a ‘Cabbage tactic’-a strategy that aims at grabbing not land but also the waters and islands. An area that belongs to another state is first claimed by the Chinese authorities in order to make it disputed then using force to unify it with the mainland.
Apart from the South China Sea dispute, China claims its sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands (a group of 200 islands) which are administered by Japan since the Sino-Japanese war in 1894, the heart of the East China Sea dispute. Japan first discovered the islands which were ‘Terra nullius’ (an uninhabited area and nobody’s land) and yet are under its control. China’s claim is historical that once it would belong to the Qing dynasty. In fact, a United Nations survey in 1966 unveiled the presence of natural resources which include billions of barrels of oil and natural gas out there in the sea which gave China an upper hand in reiterating its claims and blaming Japan has an appetite for resources and so there is a dispute. On one hand, arguably, China was one of the first nations to ratify the UN Convention for the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in 1982 while violating the Laws of the Sea on the other hand.
China has long been breaching the Laws of the Sea in the South and East China Sea making artificial islands, restricting coastal states from using airspace, fishing, and exploration of natural resources, and succeeded in maintaining its influence. According to the UN Convention for the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) a coastal state, from the baseline, can claim 200 nautical miles of Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) towards the high sea for exploration purposes and not military activities. In contrast, China’s claims appear as the right of archipelagic states while it’s, undeniably, a continental state. Beijing demands EEZ in the East China Sea while Japan responds that there is even less than 250 nm room in the sea.
North Korea’s long missile testing history, the recent one in October which flew over Japan into the Pacific challenging its airspace sovereignty. Japan is conceiving high perceptions of threat and insecurity from Pyongyang and so reinforcing its military muscle. The pursuit of nuclear and Intermediate-range (missiles) is posing a pressing threat to Japan that it cannot overlook. DPRK expressed discontentment over Japan’s new NSS which aims at acquiring preemptive attack and counterstrike capabilities. North Korea routinely condemns Japan’s colonial period which inflicted misfortune and suffering on the Koreans.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February last year shook the world and more importantly the NATO alliance refreshing traditional warfare trends. It did not bring, although, much success to Russia but destruction for the world. Tokyo would feel it differently than the rest of the world in terms of perceiving threats to national security, independence, and sovereignty. Russia has warned Japan and pledged many a time that militarization will leave it with no option except to take countermeasures to eliminate military threats.
Japan’s NSS 2022, unlike the previous ones, declared China as an unprecedented “strategic challenge”. Japan aims to possess counterstrike capabilities to target the nations who keep wary eyes over it. The risk of war is likely (mainly with China) because Tokyo is surrounded by authoritarian regimes that have reservations with Japan’s significant ally, the US. If China attacks Taiwan, it will involve the top three largest economies. China aims at challenging the status quo of not Indo-pacific only but the global US hegemony which as a result is struggling.
America’s Quad members are of vital importance to it in order to maintain the rules-based order. However, Japan, India, and Australia have shared an interest in upholding US-led order at least in the Indo-pacific region warding off threats, implementing their FOIP strategy, and containing China’s rise, a global challenge. Pentagon has backed the decision of Japanese military build-up as well. It is so because the US has animosity with Japan’s aggressive neighbors except for Seoul. Japan has for so long been surviving under the US nuclear umbrella but now the rivalry seems to be inevitable and it will take a hard-line stance possibly for deterrence or preventive attacks and maintain the lost balance of power despite neighboring countries’ unwelcoming gesture.
