ASIA-SECURITY: Region Jittery As Japan Assumes Greater Clout

By Suvendrini Kakuchi Reprint | | Print |

Suvendrini Kakuchi

TOKYO, Jul 29 1997 (IPS) - Nearly two months after the U.S. and Japan finalised guidelines setting out a bigger role for Tokyo in Asian security, there remain not a few jitters about the accord among countries in the region.

China in particular sees itself as being the target of the agreement, which was released in early June and described as an updating of 1978 defense cooperation guidelines between the U.S. and Japan. The guidelines are to be signed in the fall.

Since June, Japanese and U.S. officials have been briefing governments around the world, especially those in Asia that may be wary of the thought of a greater defence role for Tokyo.

The new guidelines also come at a time when the U.S. has been following a policy that calls for reduced military presence in Asia — a situation that allows Japan, its closest ally, to step up its role in regional security.

So far U.S. officials say much of the reaction to the revitalised alliance has been positive, but China has been a clear exception — and has not kept its views secret.

But even countries like Indonesia, Thailand sought clarification on the scope, nature and intent of the security arrangement at security talks at the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) Sunday in Malaysia.

After the meeting among 21 members in the Asia-Pacific that included the U.S. and Japan, Thai Foreign Minister Prachuab Chaiyasan said most see the U.S.-Japan alliance as crucial to regional stability. “But I reiterated that transparency is essential,” he said.

Voicing opposition to the accord, Chinese Foreign Minister Qian Qichen told the ARF meeting: “Today, security should be based neither on military build-up nor on military alliance. But rather, it should be grounded in mutual trust and common interests.”

Asian senior officials said Japan’s explanations did not seem “convincing enough” for China and Indonesia, whose Foreign Minister Ali Alatas wanted to know what conflicts in the region would require Japan’s involvement under the U.S.-Japan accord.

Earlier this month, Japanese officials visiting Beijing tried to reassure Communist Party leaders that the updated security arrangments were meant to apply to the Korean peninsula and not to contain any ‘China threat’.

The review of the 1978 arrangements has “at its background changes in the Korean peninsula”, said Koichi Kato, secretary general of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party in Japan.

The new guidelines are aimed not only at defending Japan in case of an attack, as in the old version, but toward dealing with conflicts in the region surrounding Japan and especially in the light of tension on the Korean peninsula.

They provide that the U.S. can rely on Japan for a broad range of logistical and non-combatant support in “situations in areas surrounding Japan” – a description that has generated much debate and the subject of Alatas’ queries to Japan at the ARF.

Qian also asked Japanese officials during the ARF meeting whether “areas surrounding Japan” covered Taiwan, which China considers a renegade province.

Analysts say this phrase that allows Japan to help respond to a military conflict on the Korean peninsula — a touchy subject since Japan’s constitution bars military activities except in pure self-defence. Some believe the new terms of the alliance are incompatible with the Japanese constitution.

But American analysts say the 1978 Japan-U.S. security alliance had become outdated and contained no contingency plan for Japan to contribute to a response in the event war breaks out in the Korean peninsula.

Under the new guidelines, Japan would have a greater role in minesweeping and providing logistics support for U.S. troops during crises, including giving real-time intelligence data to American forces in offshore operations.

Japan would also make available the use of its civilian facilities, hold joint training and undertake cooperation on the isue of refugees.

“For the moment the pressing need is a stronger force against North Korea,” Naoki Usui, a specialist on Japanese security. He added the June agreement is based on an understanding of the need for a stronger alliance between two of the world’s economic powers toward a safer Asia.

The Korean peninsula remains a flashpoint of tension, divided by the South and the North that technically remain on war footing decades after the Korean War. Talks are underway for the two to reach an armistice.

Japanese officials say Tokyo’s concerns include how to rescue citizens inside South Korea in the event of an attack by the North, and how to respond to the deployment of North Korean missiles targetted against Japan.

Japanese Foreign Minister Yukihiko Ikeda likewise assures that the security guidelines with the U.S. will remain within the framework of Japan’s pacifist constitution, which prohibits the country’s involvement in international conflicts.

Still, China is far from convinced about the U.S.-Japan guidelines and is campaigning against it. China’s own ties with the U.S., while friendly, remain sensitive. Its ties with Japan are tinged with a degree of mistrust rooted in historical rivalry between the two.

Soon after the U.S.-Japan accord was announced, China’s official Xinhua news agency said the review of the 1978 U.S-Japan security alliance reflected the aim of “expanding the scope to cover the whole of the Asia-Pacific region”.

Even at home in Japan, there are doubts about the wisdom of stepping up security arrangements with the U.S.

Defense agency chief Fumio Kyuma told Richard Armitage, a former U.S. assistant secretary, that his agency will continue to cooperate with Washington in studying a bilateral Theatre Missile Defense (TMD) system.

The U.S. is promoting the TMD programme, aimed at producing a high-altitude defense missile that can intercept the Rodong missile that North Korea is said to be developing.

But the ‘Mainichi Shimbun’ daily says that apart from the huge expenses involved, Japan would do better by focusing on pursuing peaceful dialogue with North Korea. This is a better way for pacifist Japan to conduct its defence policies, it argued.

Likewise, the paper said Tokyo has to yet to figure out how to deal with growing sentiment in Okinawa, Japan’s southernmost island, against further hosting U.S. bases on a large scale. The U.S. keeps 100,000 troops in Japan, the largest American forces stationed in a foreign country.

The domestic debate over the Japan-U.S. security relationship illustrates the underyling nervousness, both at home and in Asia, that accompanies any step by Japan that holds the slightest hint of an expanded role in regional security.