SPEAKING
FREELY Japan beats chest in midlife
crisis By Brett Daniel Shehadey
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times
Online feature that allows guest writers to have
their say. Please
click hereif you are interested in
contributing.
The median age in
Japan is currently 45 years old. By 2030, the
average person in Japan will be in their 50s, and
it appears that most of the population is
experiencing a nation's midlife crisis already.
For the past decade or so, Japan has increasingly
longed to remember a time of great economic and
military success.
Around 80% of Japanese
citizens were born after World War II. They grew
up under a pacifist constitution and paternal
US-Japan relationship. So when the world hears
comments from the new prime minister, Shinzo Abe,
stressing in his election that, "This
will be a fight to win back
Japan. We will make the economy strong again" -
one should pay close attention.
Japan is
in a bad way: the government has changed seven
times since 2006; there have been four recessions
since 2000, a record deficit sits at US$78
billion, nationalization of islands, calls to
amend the constitution's pacifist clauses,
provocations, threats, expansion, and
international economic and military commitments.
The people may not be chanting it loudly in the
streets but the new government's campaign is:
"Fukoku Kyohei" - enrich the nation;
strengthen the army - the slogan of Imperial Japan
during the World War II era.
Radical
statements and positions by politicians can be
reminiscent of the days of Fascism. Taro Aso, a
recent prime minister and now deputy prime
minister, told the elderly that they should "hurry
up and die" in order to ease the burden of Japan.
Aso was referring to the present and
future strain on the social security systems and
the weakened recessive economy. Although Aso
apologized for his comments, he is a true
nationalist and claimed that if he himself (72
years old) was on his death bed he would not
"waste the nations resources" by lying in a
hospital and being a drain on the state.
Not only does this comment show disdain
for the elderly or possibly any who cannot
contribute to the healthy resurgence of the nation
of Japan but it also hints at the practice of
seppuku (ritual suicide) as a national
obligation for any who are not fit enough to
contribute.
The out-going "soft"
nationalist prime minister, Yoshihiko Noda, warned
against Japanese a developing ultra-nationalism.
In an interview with the Financial Times, he said,
This kind of [ultranationalist]
atmosphere or mood is emerging... and it's
possible that tough talk could captivate the
public, but that would be the most dangerous
thing for the nation.
It was Yoshihiko
Noda who "nationalized" the privately owned
Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands - disputed territory of
Japan, China and Taiwan. However, the Governor of
Tokyo, Shintaro Ishihara, an ultra-nationalist)
wanted to purchase them first. It may have been a
war to ease the diplomatic blow between Japan and
China, as to which leader gained ground. But to
China, both Noda and Ishihara are nationalists
anyway. The race to purchase was a response of
domestic building nationalist fervor between
Ishihara's popular rise and Noda's popular
decline.
The prudent warnings for calm are
wildly ludicrous, which calls to mind just who the
jingoists are that Noda was warning about. More
important is the warning against hard nationalism
as the most serious threat to Japan. The
reinvention of Japan is a curious international
event but an important one that should not be so
lightly dismissed by the international community.
Japanese nationalists exacerbate the
regional tensions with the political Yasukuni
Shrine visits - an affront to China and South
Korea. Japanese leaders support the fallen, which
include convicted Class A War Criminals (those
that led a conspiracy to commit war and other
human rights atrocities). Their refusal to
acknowledge war crimes such as slaughter and rape,
the revised education system, the demand to
"restore" Japan while at the same time forget the
human rights abuses and war; and the race to fight
over territories that Japan was too passive to
previously annex are all negative, recessive,
traits of a beautiful culture.
The
pacifist Japanese Constitution was designed ensure
that Japan ceases all imperial military activities
and ambitions. It is a well written liberal
document, not just an imposition by Americans
after World War II but with the input and
collaboration of Japanese preference. The Japanese
Constitution has benefited Japan domestically and
their relations with their neighbors.
Unfortunately, Japan has come a long way
from Article 9:
Aspiring sincerely to an
international peace based on justice and order,
the Japanese people forever renounce war as a
sovereign right of the nation and the threat or
use of force as means of settling international
disputes. 2) In order to accomplish the aim of
the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air
forces, as well as other war potential, will
never be maintained. The right of belligerency
of the state will not be recognized.
The new Diet (Japanese parliament)
seeks to alter this restriction - a proposal by
incoming nationalists that may be completely
unnecessary. Reuters reports that almost 90% of
the Diet is in favor of the Constitutional
amendment while only some 50% of the Japanese
population is on board - a nearly 10% increase in
three years.
Technically, Japan has been
in breach of Article 9 since the Cold War. Japan
is not supposed to be capable of making war. The
use of force and threat is illegal and not meant
to be a national preference, let alone a political
rallying cry in public elections. This clause has
become meaningless.
Japan already has
military (called the "Japanese Self-Defense
Forces") of 225,000 strong. Shinzo Abe previously
raised the defense minister position to that of a
cabinet level pose. The Japanese navy (called the
Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force) stands
"maintained" and commonly cited as the second- to
third-most advanced navy in the world - a maritime
force that rivals the much larger People's
Liberation Navy (PLN) of China.
Japan is
now preparing the call to arms and increasing the
budget; it already has the sixth-largest defense
expenditure of any nation. It has for some time
been building its forces up in spite of the
constitution under the banner of "self-defense"
forces already. With a military base in Djibouti,
sending troops to participate in observer roles to
Iraq, Afghanistan and other international joint
military operations - it is ripe for larger
deployment and force projection.
In 2003,
Japan warned North Korea that they could launch a
preemptive attack if it had intelligence of a
missile assault against it. Under Shinzo Abe, in
2005, the US and Japan jointly installed a missile
defense system. Japan is racing to buy and build
more advance weapons technology like drones and
stealth.
Replacing the previous pacifism
with a stronger sense of militant nationalism,
Japan is redefining itself internally through
anti-China protests and right-wing leadership
gains. Troubling signs of regional power
projection, alliance building, and military
expansion are consequential Japanese norms.
Japan's is the world's third-largest
economy in the world - soon to be overtaken by
India and already disgraced in a war of commerce
against the Chinese. The need for a quick economic
boost suddenly becomes overwhelmingly tempting.
Aside from promised monetary and fiscal reform,
the direct seizure and exploitation of nearby
resource is a dangerous but lucrative objective.
It is not at all out of the memories of
the Chinese, the Russians or the South Koreans
that the last time Japan needed to roll out of its
islands and compete in the world, it resorted to
conquest for steel and oil. A similar nature to
build more advanced military technology is already
underway much as the Koreans and Chinese witnessed
their cruel invasion of Manchuria and the Japanese
possession of the Pacific in the last
Sino-Japanese War.
The recent diplomatic
gesture by Japan sending an envoy to China could
be seen as too little too late. China wants its
islands back. Japan refuses to even acknowledge
their claim and thinks the issue might somehow
subside. Meanwhile it wants territory from
Russia's Kuril Islands and South Korea's Dokdo
Islands.
Japan most likely is responding
through national pride but they may have much more
to lose through maritime trade routes and the
stronger geopolitical posture that is intended to
deflect Chinese expansionist tendencies.
Cooperation has always been a difficult
possibility but this behavior speaks of a
socio-political crisis brewing within Japan.
Before the last heated summer, the China
and Japan had an understanding not to use or
threaten to use force on account of said disputed
territories. Placing a Japanese flag on the
disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu in a rushed purchase of
private lands was hardly a diplomatic gesture to
the Chinese but quit the opposite. The package
comes with threats and a commitment to defend the
Islands from Chinese fishing boats and treat it as
normal Japanese territory.
The zero-sum
land grabbing has a long history. Each party
involved has secured its de facto status through
military and diplomacy in spite of the other's
intentions of laying claim - stemmed from
increasing nationalism of all players: Russia,
China, South Korean, Taiwan and Japan. These
bitter divisions between South Korean and Japanese
can also be a challenge for the US, which in this
case will remain neutral between allies.
A
good question is: does the state of Japan see a
future US as unwilling and or unable to assist
them or are they strictly resorting to something
deeper with the rise to nationalist aggression?
Certainly, the national anger is not spared for
Americans either, where thousands of Japanese
protest against the US military presence and the
population is divided politically through
independence or alliance. Abe favors the US-Japan
alliance to maximize gains; however, by increasing
Japanese regional assertion, he is keeping Japan's
future for the Japanese.
Japan may turn
out not to be the pacifist Pacific partner the US
or the world has come to know and love. They may
be suffering from a midlife crisis and therefore
see themselves as nobody's Pacific hub. Western
instigation in the background may have the
unintended consequences of potentially starting a
Third Sino-Japanese War.
Who will be the
one to shape the Pacific region in their image?
This is a race of political influence primarily
between China and the Japanese, with the USA
playing an uncertain third wheel.
The
economic ties are not as important as national
pride. A trading partnership with China is the
most critical for Japan's economy. Japan does not
care. They have shown recent willingness to
embrace neo-realism and risk good commercial
relations for quick geopolitical gains. Currency
adjustments could start a currency war, some warn
- Japan does not care. Their response: people all
over the world should stop saying things like
that.
Japan's leadership has not tried to
defend or even promote its most recent change in
strategy. Instead, Japan's method of public
affairs responds to all critiques with something
like: these decisions should not be criticized.
They then proceed to point out the defensive
nature of any offensive actions they have just
taken.
China is much to blame for what is
happening. The Communist Chinese Party is parading
nationalism in their own country to appease their
base. They are demanding territories that were
once in their possession over 100 years ago but
had fallen into possession by other players.
But the facts are facts. Japan should be
held accountable by its own increasingly
belligerent or provocative actions. China did not
nationalize the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands. It
harassed the territorial waters and caught an
unexpected shark. Japan nationalized the islands
as a result of the growing unease to reassert its
claim. An arms race has been triggered by the
Japanese strategy of aggressive risk. China and
Japan scramble well over 100 fighter jet sorties a
year. Japan continues to step up the balancing
into provocations, now by threatening to fire at
trespassers on their territory.
The fact
that Japan is engaged in war games, coalition
building, arms purchasing from the US and
establishing a containment bloc against China, all
stem from its "new" character. The midlife
national longing to be great and powerful once
again compels them to take risks in provoking
China to do the same. If it is not just adventure,
it is pension security. Old Japanese men want to
secure their fortunes and their children's
fortunes by investing in what they believe to be
their natural national marine resources - chiefly
seafood and oil. Middle-aged Japanese are
encouraged of the words of the old, who tell of
times that were "better".
Could Japan
cooperate with China and the others? Yes, but
cooperation will not yield the greatest amount of
resources or domestic political opportunity. It
will never give Japanese old men honor before
their people. It is not the character of the
present midlife crisis, where cooperation equals
appeasement.
Brett Daniel
Shehadey is an analyst and writer. His work
has appeared in The National Interest and Eurasia
Review. He holds an MA in Strategic Intelligence
from AMU and a BA in political Science from
UCLA.
Speaking Freely is an Asia
Times Online feature that allows guest writers to
have their say. Please
click hereif you are interested in
contributing.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
