Japanese troops must not be on Korean soil

One of the last things Koreans, South or North, want to see would be Japanese soldiers stalking their land ― again.

So the remark by Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan last week that hinted at Self-Defense Forces’ dispatch to the Korean Peninsula came as a great shock. Kan was quoted as saying Tokyo plans to hold talks with Seoul on sending SDF to rescue Japanese expatriates in the event of a crisis here.

A Japanese Cabinet spokesman tried to contain the repercussions Monday, saying he didn’t know about such a plan nor discussed it. We, too, hope the Japanese leader’s comment would end up as a passing controversy. Things will not calm down so easily, however, if his remarks prove to be a ``premeditated gaffe,” as many Koreans suspect.

Even if the Japanese leader’s speech was aimed at pleasing ultra-rightist voters, it can hardly avoid criticism for being rash, dangerous and brazen-faced ― totally inappropriate in a word.

Kan was rash, as he made such utterances even before he sounded out the intention of his Korean counterparts. The remark is also dangerous, as it could exaggerate ― actually aggravate ― tension on the peninsula. Most of all, the comment was brazen-faced because the SDF’s activities here might not be limited to the rescue of the Japanese nationals, and it came at none other time than the centenary of Japan’s forced annexation of Korea.

What most Koreans see behind Kan’s statement is the specter of Japan’s rearmament under the pretext of yet-to-be realized threats from China and North Korea. Tokyo’s defense budget of $51.4 billion last year was the world’s fourth largest, following the United States, France and Britain. The 155,000-strong SDF, all consists of officers, can turn into 1.5 million-strong armed forces in no time. Scientists agree it has always been a matter of time before Tokyo becomes a nuclear power if it wants.

Prime Minister Kan’s idea invited criticism from most Japanese media as violating the country’s Peace Constitution. Some conservative newspapers, however, welcomed it, even calling for Tokyo to move beyond the rescue mission to a more positive military cooperation with Seoul.

No less worrisome is the response of the Seoul government. Cheong Wa Dae of course brushed aside Kan’s plan as ``unrealistic,” adding it has neither heard about such a proposal nor held discussions. Yet the attitudes of some other officials are less clear, leaving an impression they could discuss the matter if Tokyo formally requests it. The ambiguity overlaps with the recent visit to Korea and Japan by U.S. Adm. Mike Mullen, who called for a tighter trilateral military cooperation between Washington, Seoul and Tokyo.

Sixty years ago, the Korean Peninsula went on the verge of becoming the fuse igniting World War III. Whether the Korean people want it or not, global powers may clash in this region once again, Koreans must never present their land ― again ― as the theater for the seekers of global hegemony.