« Possible solution | Main | Diamond's view »
August 07, 2005
Anniversary celebrations
This weekend marked the 60th anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing. As if to remind us how far Japan has come since then, and to highlight the uncertainties of its future, the past week has brought a bevy of important developments. Collectively, they serve as a reminder of who and what will dominate the next 60 years of Japanese foreign policy.
First, the New York Times had a nice overview piece of recent tensions between Japan and China. I read it almost as a reminder that relations between the two countries remain very uneasy, despite the relative calm since the Chinese protests last spring. Couple interesting tidbits in the piece. The first:
A right-wing vandal seemed to capture a growing sentiment last week when he tried to scrape off the word "mistake" from a peace memorial in Hiroshima that said of Japan's war efforts: "Let all the souls here rest in peace, as we will never repeat this mistake."
This phrase on the Hiroshima cenotaph has been a point of controversy and ambiguity for some time. Does the "we" refer to Japan, the United States, or humanity in general? Is the "mistake" the U.S. dropping of the atomic bomb, the Japanese initiation of the Pacific War, or violent conflict itself? Obviously, this particular vandal interpreted the inscription as a slight so general as to indict Japan for its wartime transgressions. On the 60th anniversary of the atomic bombing, such vandalism is indicative of a very real sentiment on Japanese society.
And then there's this:
In Tokyo, 291 teachers have been reprimanded in the last year and many may face dismissal for refusing to stand before the rising-sun flag at school enrollment and graduation ceremonies and sing Japan's national anthem, "Kimigayo," or "His Majesty's Reign," considered symbols of Japanese imperialism by most Asians and some Japanese. Those signals of respect used to be optional, or shunned because of their associations with Japan's past militarism.
In some ways, it's a story like this that is the most disconcerting. Politicians will do what politicians will do; they have their own constituencies, their own agendas, and their own ways of doing things that often do not accurately or proportionally represent popular sentiment. But to be reprimanded for not participating in an optional show of respect to the national anthem smacks of a deeper and narrower cultural bias.
Also this week, the Japanese Defense Agency released a report on China's military build-up:
"Beijing is shifting from using its air and sea forces for defensive purposes to unifying its defensive and offensive capabilities," the report observed.
The report said Japan should carefully study whether the objectives in China's military modernization do not exceed the scope needed for its defense.
Putting aside the subtle irony of whether it is the place of one country to determine the defense needs of another, it appears that the Japanese report follows in the same vein as the Pentagon's report a few weeks ago. It sounds a cautious note about China's increasing military expenditure and capabilities, but isn't excessively alarmist.
The Chinese, of course, chose to read the report in the most offensive light:
Japan publicly plays up the so-called "China's threat" in its official documents. It is completely groundless and extremely irresponsible. Instead of helping build mutual security trust, it will only misguide the public and lead to mutual misgivings and emotional antagonism, thus undermining China-Japan relations. We hope the Japanese side to make more efforts in the benefit of stronger mutual trust and friendship between our two sides by proceeding from the overall picture of the long-term development of our relations, rather than doing the opposite.
Nothing surprising there. As with their reaction to the Pentagon's report, the Chinese have an obligation to protest its findings, an obligation that provides only limited insight into China's actual military policy. If they're upset about the Japanese report, though, they're sure to be even more upset by this:
The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has called for the creation of a fully fledged army for self-defense in its draft of proposed revisions to the Constitution.
The LDP's constitutional revision committee has been discussing how to revise the pacifist Constitution, with the focus being on how to review Article 9 that renounces Japan's right to wage war and maintain armed forces.
The timing here is almost too exquisite to be accidental. Japan's "peace constitution" is the greatest legacy of the country's suffering (and culpability) during the Pacific War. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki -- 60 years ago this week -- were the horrific culmination of that war. I can't imagine how the LDP thought the timing of these discussions would in any way benefit their attempt to modify Article 9, so perhaps it really was accidental. But along with "China's rise," it is the evolution of Article 9 that will define the East Asian security environment in the long-term.
I'm somewhat torn regarding Article 9. On one hand, it really is a profound repudiation of force as a means to settle inter-state disputes. Coming from a country with a history as violent as Japan's gives it even greater moral weight. On the other hand, the Self-Defense Forces are already some of the most capable "militaries" in the world, yet their capabilities are hampered by politics and by the force structure that such politics dictate. Japan still has serious problems in reconciling its collective memory of the Pacific War with historical reality, and any talk of reforming Article 9 should be paired equally with (if not exceeded by) a genuine dialogue with other East Asian states on wartime reconciliation. But Japan is a leading member of the capitalist, democratic world, and It should take full responsibility for the obligations that its strength and position grant it. Accordingly, Article 9 should be re-examined, on a constant basis, with the intention of ultimately modifying it as public opinion will allow. Sixty years on, such a process represents nothing less than the culmination of Japan's post-war re-entry into the community of nations.
Again, China isn't amused. In response to the LDP's deliberations, as well as to the supposedly brazen differences between the Diet's 60th anniversary resolution and its 50th anniversary one, Xinhua boils it all down to one sentence:
Without a guilty conscience, Japan is attempting to turn itself into a regional military bully.
Exaggeration of fact, yes. Exaggeration of sentiment? Not at all.
Posted by Daniel Widome at 05:03 PM to Asia
