ed Japan on warpath

Abe out to kill Pacifist constitution

Few appear to be listening to the echoes of “Tenno Heika Banzai” (Long live the emperor!), the battle cry of the imperial Japanese soldiers charging with bayonets fixed on their rifles during their expansion period, starting with their invasion of the Korean Peninsula and the conquest of Manchuria, before the attack on Pearl Harbor.

At the stroke of midnight on March 29, Tokyo’s Security Law went into effect ― restoring the right of the vanquished nation of World War II to wage war ― the result of a long-held dream by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, whose grandfather served in the imperial war cabinet led by Gen. Hideki Tojo.

The law allows Japan to engage in military operations for other than self-defense and militarily assist other nations. Abe has made no secret of his wish to repeal Clause 9 of the post-war pacifist Constitution, which bars Japan from military actions for purposes other than self-defense.

With the Upper House elections in July, Abe wants to strengthen the majority held by his Liberation Democratic Party-led ruling coalition to push for the revision, ending another chapter in his effort to make his nation “normal” again.

Now, about 59 countries have extended their welcome to Japan but, of course, Korea and Japan, two of the victim countries of WWII, know better. Korea expresses caution and has asked Tokyo to bear its past misdeeds.

Abe tried to suppress the domestic opposition by telling the nation that backtracking from getting rid of Clause 9 would harm the U.S.-Japan alliance. Despite popular protests, the polls showed that the Japanese are becoming more inclined to accept Abe’s remilitarization efforts.

Historically, a militarily strong Japan has always been a problem, threatening to throw the region into flux and posing more challenges to Korea.

On a broad scale, there is an increasing possibility for a China-Japan standoff. Already, the two often go toe-to-toe over the group of islands called Senkaku in Japanese and Daioyu in Chinese. This territorial dispute can only spread to a potentially major flashpoint of the South China Sea, the sea lane that China is trying to dominate against the United States’ objections. Bear in mind that these regions were very much under imperial Japan’s control in the pre-war era.

Making the equation more complicated is the tendency of the U.S. to take an isolationist policy, as is well illustrated by Donald Trump, the current leading Republican presidential candidate, who claims that Korea does not pay its fair share for its defense, indicating his willingness to withdraw U.S. troops.

No doubt, if the U.S. role of stabilizing the regional balance of power is weakened, it is certain that Japan will fill the void left behind, opening the way for it to resurrect itself as a military power. The rest of the story is too familiar and scary to think about.

Already, Japan has outspent Korea in defense by one third, much of the budget focused on modernization, unlike Korea’s maintenance-driven expenditures. Considering Japan’s overall budget is three times that of Korea’s, Japan could put itself on a fast track to remilitarize.

The new law catches Korea off guard in unexpected quarters. For instance, Seoul went mum when Japan argued that it had no obligation to ask for Korea’s permission should its forces enter North Korea’s territory in the event of war.

Also, Korea now faces a greater chance of getting relegated to a third junior partner in an emerging three-way alliance likely to be anchored by Washington and Tokyo. The result is that Korea will have a reduced say in dealing with the North’s nuclear challenge and determining the course of action after its resolution.

Considering Abe’s effort to throw the entire nation of Japan into a collective case of amnesia about the atrocities their ancestors committed, the worst-case scenario should not be taken lightly.