---

The basic Consideration for Japanese Security Strategy

---

by Akiji YOSHIDA
Senior Member of Research Committee, DRC

Introduction

The recently discussions about Japanese security issues have been very current, but mostly partial opinions. For example, these are right of collective self defense relating to the situations in areas surrounding Japan, the cancellation of five principle in the PKF law, the effectiveness of the missile defense system (TMD) and so on. Also, there are many metaphysics emphasized the aspects of the non-military affairs such as "comprehensive security", "cooperative security", "global security" and "human security".

However, the three viewpoints are lacked in these discussions. These viewpoints are the military situations of the Asian Pacific area influenced directly to the Japanese security, Japanese national interests in detail, and the roles expected to the military power. These are basic consideration when settling on the national security strategy.

1. The Military Situation in Asian Pacific Area

(1) Remarkable Expansion of the Armed Forces

Table-1~Table-3 are the change trend of the main states’ armed forces in recent 10~20 years in Europe and Asian Pacific area.

After the cold war era, the conventional forces in Europe have been reduced substantially more than 30% by Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty. Also, the U.S., the U.K., France and Russia are cutting down 30% or more the nuclear vehicles of transporting.

On the other hand, the armed forces in the Asian Pacific area have been substantially reinforced. The People’s Republic of China (PRC), India and Pakistan have some nuclear weapons and North Korea is doubted in the possession of nuclear weapons.

In the last 10 years, many nations in Asia Pacific area have increased the military expenditure for each person as showed in the table 3. Especially, the PRC overwhelms other nations such as that of 626%. This 6 times value compared that of 10 years ago shows apparently that the PRC makes efforts in accelerating modernization of the armed forces. Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan and Japan continue in order of the rate of increase. We can classify the following four patterns in the aims of each armed force’s expansion in the Asian Pacific area.

The 1st is the pattern that changes into the external defense force from the domestic public order force like the ASEAN almost nations. Indonesia, Thai, Malaysia, Vietnam, Philippines and Singapore come under this pattern. These nations are trying to modernize their old-fashioned equipment, and the main reason is not to defend the threat of a neighboring nation but to response the hegemony of PRC in this area.

The 2nd pattern is to try to strengthen by maintaining the balance of the military power against an opposed nation. These nations are South Korea and North Korea, India and Pakistan and Taiwan against PRC. At present, these three areas are the potential confrontation area that attracts a great deal of attention in the world and each armed force is in the state of preparedness for war.

The 3rd is to keep peace and security in the area surrounding the own nation and the self-defense like the armed forces in the West. Japan is an only nation having this aim in Asia.

The 4th is that a nation strengthens the military power to have hegemony in Asia Pacific area. PRC is the most ambitious nation in this respect, so the nations of Asia view with suspicion the PRC armed forces. The military expenditure of PRC is about 3 times than the officially announced value, this means that it is the next largest in the world following the U.S. Within these 10 years, PRC reduced about 500,000 numbers of total numbers of soldiers, but the equipment, especially the navy and Air Force are being rapidly modernized. Within recent one year, they have increased eight submarines and 444 fighters and succeeded in the launching test of long-range ballistic missile.

(2) Asia in the Balance of Power System

The ideal of a national security is to keep the security by the collective security, which has been specified in the United Nations Charter. However, this system doesn't have the possibility that it is realized for some time. Therefore, all nations in the world must depend on the military power of each own security in the future. Specifically, nations in the Asian Pacific area are involved in the expansion of armaments. In short, the dynamics related to a national security in the Asian Pacific area is balance of power system. By the way, Japan’s national security program outline explains that Japan doesn't make the blank of the military power in the northeastern Asia area. However, it is nothing but an excuse, this expression shows ironically that the balance of power dominates the stability in this area. A lot of international politics scholars in Japan criticize the balance of power theory being a classical realism, but all nations in the present Asian Pacific area are conscious of the balance of power.

(3) The Unstable Factors and Crises for Japan

There are many military unstable factors around Japan. These are: the military confrontation on the Korea peninsula, the doubt of North Korea’s nuclear weapon development, PRC’s expansion of military power, a crisis in Taiwan strait, the military rebuild up and the declaration of nuclear weapon first use in Russia, the international tensions between India and Pakistan, the problem of possession related Spratly islands, the territory problem concerned the northern four islands, Senkaku and Takeshima island, transfer and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction(WMD), political unstable situations like Indonesia and so on.

There are following three cases that these unstable factors change suddenly into Japan’s vital security issues.

The first case is the direct crisis to the Japanese territory, sovereignty and people. Those crises include, for example, airborne and seaborne invasion to a remote island or a local area, illegal sneaking attack by a guerrilla troop, air or missile attack, psychological warfare in peacetime, hacker attack on the important infrastructures, NBC threat by terrorism and so on.  These situations should be anxious to occur suddenly in tomorrow.

The second case is that crisis situation spread to Japan from the surrounding areas, the Korea peninsula, Taiwan strait, Spratly islands and Indian Ocean. In this cases, the following situations are estimated: SLOC passage cutting-off for a considerable long period, capture of the Japanese flag ships by a pirate, a sudden increase of illegal immigrants, the occurrence of a great deal of refugees, an injury to the Japanese residents, non-combatant evacuation and so on.

The third case is that the crisis situation occurs in case the JSDF support U.S. armed forces in the rear area based on Guidelines for Japan-U.S. Defense Corporation. According to the Japanese government opinion, the rear area is not a battle area, so any crisis does not exist in the rear area. But if saying military practical sense, such case can be hardly assumed. All support activities in wartime to the friendly armed forces from the partner nation are the hostile activities for an opponent nation. Therefore, they may attack naturally the rear area equally to the combat area.

In short, Japan is surrounded by the various unstable factors, when the military of balance in northeast Asia collapse, many military crises may occur suddenly in Japan.

2. National Interests and Military Power

(1) What Are National Interests?

Hans J. Morgenthau, a famous international politic scholar, stated that national interests were �@the subsistence of a nation, �Athe economic profit and �Bthe belief and prestige as a nation.

U.S. national interests written in "the national security strategy in the 21st century (1998)" are generally same content as the theory of Hans J. Morgenthau. The following are the selection from this document.

The first includes vital interests----those of broad, overriding importance to the survival, safety and vitality of our nation. Among these are the physical security of our territory and that of our allies, the safety of our citizens, our economic well-being and the protection of our critical infrastructures. We will do what we must to defend these interests, including----when necessary----using our military might unilaterally and decisively.

The second category includes situations in which important national interests are at stake. These interests do not affect our national survival, but they do affect our national well-being and the character of the world in which we live. In such cases, we will use our resources to advance these interests insofar as the costs and risks are commensurate with the interests at stake. Our efforts to halt the flow of refugees from Haiti and restore democracy in that state, our participation in NATO operations in Bosnia and our efforts to protect the global environment are relevant examples.

The third category is humanitarian and other interests. In some circumstances our nation may act because our values demand it. Examples include responding to natural and manmade disasters or violations of human rights, supporting democratization and civil control of the military, assisting humanitarian demining, and promoting sustainable development.

Also, the threats to U.S. Interests are supposed in this document as follows:
�@Regional or State-Centered Threats: A number of states still have the capabilities and the desire to threaten our vital interests through coercion or aggression. They continue to threaten the sovereignty of their neighbors and international access to resources.
�ATransnational threats: Terrorism, international crime, drug trafficking, illicit arms trafficking, uncontrolled refugee migrations and environmental damage threaten U.S. interests, citizens and the U.S. homeland itself.
�BSpread of dangerous technologies: Weapons of mass destruction pose the greatest potential threat to global stability and security. Proliferation of advanced weapons and technologies threatens to provide rogue states, terrorists and international crime organizations the means to inflict terrible damage on the United States, its allies and U.S. citizens and troops abroad.
�CForeign intelligence collection: The threat from foreign intelligence services is more diverse, complex and difficult to counter than ever before. This threat is a mix of traditional and non-traditional intelligence adversaries that have targeted American military, diplomatic, technological and commercial secrets.
�DFailed states: We can expect that, despite international prevention efforts, some states will be unable to provide basic governance, services and opportunities for their populations, potentially generating internal conflict, humanitarian crises or regional instability.

Russian national interests are also expressed in the president directive "The concept of Russian federation security(2000.1.10)”. These are the protection of Russian sovereignty and territory, the maintenance of political, economical and social stability and the development of international cooperation and so on. In these interests, the independence of Russia, the protection of Russian sovereignty and territory, the prevention of military invasion to Russia and the allies and keeping the conditions to develop Russia are to achieve by the military power.

On the other hand, in Japan, the national interests are only described, "to secure the safety and prosperity of the nation and people" in "The diplomatic blue book 2000". We cannot find out any more Japanese national interests in other official documents.

(2) National Interests and Military Power

The U.S. uses the armed forces without hesitation to protect the vital national interests, and uses the armed forces selectively to protect the important national interests.

Recently, a high official being in charge of the national security in Washington stated the following comments. The internationalism diplomacy in the U.S. must be based on the determined national interests. Through we pursuit the national interests, we can protect the peace, freedom and market economy in the world. Our one of the political objectives in Asia are to make the stable environment that North Korea and the PRC abandon to use their armed forces toward to the other countries. After all, the U.S. places the armed forces as the main strength to accomplish their national interests.

Russia has priority over the non-military means such as politics, diplomacy, economy and others to prevent a war or a conflict. On the other hand, Russia maintains the armed forces enough including the biggest nuclear weapons for the national defense. The Russian armed forces play a major role to prevent the invasion toward Russia and the allies.

However, Japan national security policy is more different than that of the West as mentioned above. For instance, “Challenge 20001:Japan diplomatic issues toward 21st” released by MOFA describes that "globalization" grows the un-reversible big flow and the interdependent relations among every nation becomes stronger in the world. Accordingly, Japan must plan, propose and act as “a global player”, and has to accomplish our national interests as a result. Furthermore, this paper emphasizes that the national powers supporting diplomacy are not the military power, but the “general power”, namely “technical power“ and “concept planning power”, and the Official Development Aid (ODA) is very important to realize the diplomatic objectives.

However, in the West, they say that the "globalization" exists but cannot guarantee the world order, and the global community is illusion. Almost nations in the world are now making all-out efforts how to protect their national interests.

3. Three Pillars of National Security

(1) The Basic Factors of Deterrence

The discussions about the deterrence in Japan are very different from the recognition of the West at the following three points. The 1st is that the deterrence must be basically constructed by one’s own armed forces and be complemented by the allied forces. However, the three pillars of national security are described by the next order in "The diplomatic blue book 2000", namely  �@Japan-U.S. security system, �Aappropriate maintenance of the self-defense forces and �Bthe diplomatic effort to make sure of the peace and security of international society. I think this order is liable to cause misunderstanding.

The 2nd is that the basic defensive strength mentioned in the Japan’s national security program outline is not essentially equivalent to deterrence. Because, the outline emphasizes that the basic defensive strength exists not to make a military blank in the surrounding area of Japan. This explanation is only rhetoric. Originally, the deterrence must be determined military power to secure and protect the national interests.

The 3rd is that the software equipments such as command and control, communications, information are very important to deal with the crisis situation. However, the Japan defense expenditure is still putting emphasis on the expensive hardware equipments such as ships, airplanes, main battle tanks and so on.

(2) The Essence of Alliance

Some university professor commented as follows in the interview of Asahi(2001.6.5) concerned the right of collective self-defense.
Ques1: How do you think that Japan cannot use the right of collective self-defense to the situation in the surrounding area of Japan?  Does the U.S. have doubts about the Japan-U.S. alliance?
Ans1: The purpose of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty is only the cooperation defense of Japan. Therefore, the U.S. irritation is selfish.
Ques2: Is the Japan-U.S. cooperation the deterrence? 
Ans2: It is opposite. Japan suffers strong counterattack as an enemy and may be drawn into the war.
Ques3: Is the PRC stimulated if Japan approves the right of collective self-defense?
Ans3: That’s right. In the case, Japan will grow up a terrible threat for the PRC.

The essence of military alliance is hidden under these three comments.
�@Originally, the alliance must be mutually useful on the major premise. It is the common sense in the international politics.
�ARunning some risks are unavoidable in the convenience of the alliance. Therefore, if a nation judges that the risk is bigger than the convenience, the cancellation of the alliance is chosen. If it is opposite, the alliance is kept. In this meaning, the alliance is very fragile.
�BTarget nations’ anxiety to the alliance proves that the alliance acts effectively.

(3) Keeping Reassurance to Foreign Nations

Reassurance is the diplomacy effort that foreign nations do not worry to our military power.　Japan diplomatic effort related the reassurance is achieved in the considerable degree by the international contribution such as CSBM, ODA and PKO.

However, the human international contribution is very poor. Some chief of the European institute in Germany has given the candid advice about Japan PKO operation as follows. The PKO cooperation law in Japan is to restrict the liberty of the activity participation. It is equal to make some obstruction to the PKO operation.

Conclusion

In Japan, the basic recognition concerned the national security was left as distorted the fact for many years. Recently, many issues are gradually discussed without taboo in the in the political world and the presses. I expect that they look straight at the military situations in Asia, roles of military power and the meaning of an alliance.

The Quotation and the Reference
1. The 2nd chapter of the diplomatic blue book 2000
2. The MOFA "The problem of the Japanese diplomacy in the 21th century"
3. The diplomatic forum and the special volume in 1999 "The security in the 21th century"
4. The international university global communication center, Prof.Yamauchi "The security of Japan and the United Nations"
5. Russian president directive NO24, "The Concept of the Russian Federation Security" Jan. 2000
6. The White House "A National Security Strategy for a New Century" Oct 1998
7. INNS Special Report "The United States and Japan: Advancing Toward a Mature Partnership" Oct 2000

---