Is Japan still pacifist? What would a change mean for the region and world?

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida (File image )

After adopting a controversial defence doctrine that has raised serious concerns in the region, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has decided to travel to the West to explain what forced Tokyo to shift from its decades-old pacifism.

Kishida is on a weeklong trip to France, Italy, Britain, Canada, and the US. While the ostensible reason is to discuss the forthcoming G-Seven summit in Hiroshima in May, a major focus of his talks is on the deteriorating security situation in the region and Japan’s new defence doctrine.

Kishida will meet US President Joe Biden on January 13, on his first visit to Washington since becoming prime minister in October 2021.

In a significant shift, Japan adopted the new defence doctrine on December 16 that allows it to shed its post-war constraints on the military and acquire counterattack capabilities to target potential threats. It also intends to strengthen operational coordination with the US.

The reason for the fundamental shift stems from developments that led to a deterioration in the security environment of the region. While Russia’s invasion of Ukraine alarmed countries in the Indo-Pacific, the worsening of US-China relations over Taiwan and North Korea’s constant nuclear and missile threats have only added to the concerns.

Kishida broke a longstanding taboo by raising Japan’s defence budget to 2 percent of gross domestic product. For years, Japan had limited its defence budget to 1 percent of GDP. The increase puts Japan at par with NATO’s defence spending.

In the next five years, Japan is estimated to spend over $315 billion to acquire weapons and defence capabilities.

The National Security Strategy said Japan faces “the most severe and complex” security environment since the end of World War II because of attempts to unilaterally change the status quo by force. Japan fears that what happened to Ukraine can happen to Taiwan, and given its proximity to the Okinawa archipelago, Japan would be involved in the conflict.

Taro Aso, former deputy prime minister and a right-wing leader, asked, “If Japan is attacked, who will defend it?”

While the counterattack capability acts as a powerful deterrent for Japan, it also raises questions about its defence posture. Critics see it as a total dilution of Article 9 of the Japanese constitution that led the country to renounce war.

The Kishida administration has argued that the counterattack capability will remain within constitutional safeguards if three conditions are met—one, an armed attack has occurred or is imminent; two, there is no other way to halt an attack, and three, that the use of force is limited.

The Japanese prime minister argued that the world is at a “historical crossroads” that requires Japan to act urgently, although he stressed that Japan is a peaceful nation and its path will remain unchanged.

Nevertheless, the shift in its defence doctrine is likely to pose tough geostrategic choices for it. Even as a close ally of the US, Japan’s constitutional pacifism prevented it from taking direct part in America’s war in Korea and Vietnam. In Iraq, it played only a humanitarian role.

Until recently, Japan was guided by the Yoshida Doctrine—named after Shigeru Yoshida, its first prime minister, following the 1945 defeat. It led the country to concentrate on reconstruction and economic development while the US took care of its security in return for substantial compensation.

Whether it will be able to remain aloof during future US campaigns has now become a question for Japan. Predictably, many of its allies welcomed the change in its defence strategy. But critics and sceptics said Japan’s new posture could intensify tension and increase distrust in the region.

“Japan’s national interests do not necessarily coincide with those of the United States,” Asahi, a daily newspaper, commented in an editorial.

Critics said if Japan wants to counter China’s hegemony, it must handle Beijing carefully. They said a conflict would cause more damage to Japan than the US, and Tokyo should not concentrate on strengthening ties only with those who have strained relations with Beijing.

Japan has so far balanced its ties with the US and China. But growing tension in Sino-American relations narrows the scope for Japan to remain neutral.

Kishida’s Liberal Democratic Party wanted to describe China as a “threat” in the NSS document. But the government changed it to “the greatest challenge that Japan has faced” after objections from junior coalition partner, Komeito.

According to observers, the new defence doctrine has two aspects—acquiring more credible deterrence and denial capabilities and expanding Japan’s role within its alliance with the US-led defence posture in the Indo-Pacific.

China and Russia reacted strongly to the changed defence posture. China said it “provokes regional tension and confrontation” and asked Japan to refrain from using the “China threat” to indulge in its own military expansion.

Russia said Tokyo has now embarked on an “unprecedented build-up” of its own military power, which includes the acquisition of attack capability.

Kishida’s trip and engagement with western leaders will firmly commit Japan to strengthen the US-led security arrangement in the Indo-Pacific, widely seen as a strategy to counter China. How it affects future relations with China and Russia and impacts the stability of the region would be known only in the coming days.

But the evolving situation could also pose hard choices for a number of other countries in the region that want to maintain their strategic independence.