Escalating tension with China, violently illustrated by renewed anti-Japanese protests in Shanghai and other Chinese cities last weekend, is increasing pressure on Tokyo to expand its military capabilities and back a deepening strategic alliance with the US reaching from east Asia to the Gulf.
Japan's pacifist postwar Constitution restricts its armed forces to self-defense. About 50,000 US troops in Okinawa and other bases guarantee the country's security in return for a US$5 billion Japanese cash contribution.
But defense analysts say the perceived Chinese threat, a more assertive, nationalistic Japanese mindset and Washington's wish to use Japan as a command post for operations extending to the Middle East are transforming Japan's formerly semi-detached defense posture.
In other words, after 60 years largely spent keeping its head down, Japan appears destined to supplant Australia as Washington's "deputy sheriff" in the Asia-Pacific region and become a pillar of America's 21st century security architecture.
According to Kazuya Sakamoto of Osaka University, Japan and Britain are central to a far-reaching, post-Sept. 11 US review of its overseas force deployments.
"The basic idea is that the US will gradually withdraw from the Eurasian landmass while assigning the two island nations at the east and west of Eurasia, Japan and Britain, even greater importance as strategic bases to ensure stability in Europe and Asia," Sakamoto writes in the current issue of Japan Echo magazine.
An important element in this transformation fell into place last week when Japan agreed in principle to allow the command headquarters of the US army's 1st Corps to transfer from Washington state, on the US Pacific coast, to Camp Zama, near Yokohama, south of Tokyo.
The 1st Corps has responsibility for operations in the Pacific and Indian oceans, extending to the conflict zones and oil fields of the Gulf. The primary focus of its forward deployment is likely to be the defense of Taiwan, regional challenges posed by China's military expansion and the nuclear standoff with North Korea.
But the US has also reportedly proposed that command operations of the 13th Airforce, now on Guam in the Pacific -- a base for long-range bombers and tanker aircraft frequently deployed in the Middle East -- be moved to Yokota airbase in Tokyo.
"The ramifications of this would be that Japan would essentially serve as a frontline US command post for the Asia-Pacific and beyond," said Christopher Hughes of Warwick University in a paper published by the International Institute for Strategic Studies.
The US forward deployments are certain to be viewed with suspicion in China and farther afield -- and face political opposition in Japan.
The US-Japan security treaty states that US bases may only be used "for the purpose of contributing to the security of Japan and the maintenance of international peace and security in the far east." It says nothing, for example, about Iran.
But Hughes said that since Japan had given the US a free hand to use its bases for previous Middle East operations, Tokyo "might have to accept its enhanced role as a fulcrum for US military commands."
Japan's worries about China are the main reason for acquiescing in US plans that effectively shatter any remaining pacifist illusions. But Tokyo is in any case growing more militarily assertive under Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi.
Japan sent non-combat troops to Iraq, while its navy has joined the US-led Proliferation Security Initiative. Military cooperation with Australia, South Korea and Southeast Asian states is developing.
It is acquiring a ballistic missile defense system and new satellite intelligence capabilities. It has pledged to help keep the peace over Taiwan. And there has even been talk of pre-emptive strikes against North Korea and a Japanese nuclear deterrent.
Japan is again becoming a military power with a global role and hopes of a permanent UN Security Council seat.
China's actions may thereby be more easily explained. But further hostility will only exacerbate the slide towards an Asian cold war.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath