In an announcement on August 9th, Japan’s Foreign Minister stated that China-Japan relations were “deteriorating” in reaction to the recent incursions by Chinese vessels into waters claimed by Japan. This is but the latest in a string of events - leading some observers to comment that relations between the two Asian powers is at its worst in years. The Cipher Brief spoke with Vice President of the Daniel Morgan Academy Dr. Thomas Cynkin to learn more on how the relationship has soured.
TCB: Given the LDP’s current supermajority, what is the likelihood of Japan amending Article 9 of the constitution?
Thomas Cynkin: Article 9 of the Japanese constitution is the underpinning of Japan’s foreign and security policy. It renounces war as an instrument of policy, and outlaws military forces. That said, since the Constitution came into force in 1947, Japan has incrementally shifted its interpretation of Article 9 in the direction of restoring Japan’s position as a “normal” nation on the global stage, commensurate with its status as a great power. For starters, despite its constitutional ban on military forces, Japan’s “self-defense force” ranks as 8th world-wide in terms of military spending ($41 billion in 2015). Meanwhile, Japan has increasingly desensitized its public to power projection beyond Japanese borders through means such as increasingly robust participation in international peacekeeping operations.
The ruling coalition comprising PM Abe’s Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and its junior partner, Komeito, expanded its majority in the Upper House in the July elections. This immediately prompted speculation that Abe would move to amend Article 9 of the Japanese constitution outright, but that would be a heavy lift. Even though Japan’s constitution was, for all intents and purposes, drafted and imposed by the US occupation in 1947, Japan has never amended it – even once.
The mechanics involved would be daunting. At least two-thirds of the legislators in each house of the Diet would need to support a bill to amend the constitution. Abe’s ruling coalition commands a supermajority in the Lower House, but falls short in the Upper House by over a dozen votes. Nor is there unanimity within Abe’s coalition on amending Article 9. The predominant view within the LDP is supportive, but not unanimous, while within Abe’s Komeito coalition partner feelings run strongly against. Even if Abe managed to get the bill through the Diet by deft political horse trading, a proposed constitutional revision would then need to be approved by a majority of voters in a national referendum. Opinion polls presently show the Japanese public opposes revising Article 9.
What we can expect, therefore, is continued incremental reinterpretation of Article 9, as Abe has been doing, by embracing collective self-defense and loosening restrictions on arms exports, rather than an outright move to amend the Japanese constitution. But we can’t rule out a “hail Mary” pass by Abe, if he decides amending the Constitution would be an important part of his legacy.
TCB: PM Shinzo Abe just appointed a new Defense Minister who is known to be a hawk, how do you foresee this affecting China-Japan relations?
TC: Defense Minister Inada has previously expressed doubts about the legitimacy of the postwar 1946 International Military Tribunal for the Far East, known as the Tokyo Tribunal on war crimes. She has frequently visited the controversial Yasukuni Shrine to Japan’s war dead, which includes war criminals. Additionally, in a 2011 interview, she expressed the view that Japan should consider arming itself with nuclear weapons. That said, since her appointment, she has taken pains to avoid speaking her mind publicly on these issues, and has even walked back her comments on nuclear weapons.
Minister Inada’s appointment signals an aggressive stance by the Abe Administration on national security policy, including, presumably, the Senkaku Island dispute with China. Minister Inada may also play a leading role within the Abe Administration on the issue of reinterpreting Article 9 and “normalizing” Japan’s foreign and security policy. Accordingly, she may become a focal point for Chinese criticism of Japan’s more assertive international posture under Abe. Irrespective, China will find a lot not to like about Minister Inada’s hawkish views.
TCB: Japan recently released its 2016 Defense White Paper which focuses in large part on China. China has labeled the document as overly hostile. Why does China see the document as provocative?
TC: China appears to have been particularly irritated by comments in the White Paper calling out bad Chinese behavior in the South China Sea and East China Sea. In the 484-page document, some 30 pages were devoted to China’s military activities, which seems unremarkable given the proximity of the two countries and the state of their relations.
TCB: 2016 has seen increased fighter jet sorties by both countries over the East China Sea. What is the rationale for each side to conduct such flights?
TC: These flights are a symptom of increasing tensions between the two countries as China escalates its provocative activities in the region and Japan responds more aggressively than might have been the case prior to the Abe Administration.
TCB: Are there any other dynamics in either China or Japan that you think play a role in the bilateral relationship?
TC: China will continue to alarm Japan and other regional neighbors as it increasingly flexes its military muscles in the East China Sea and South China Sea. China’s moves toward naval power projection, including land reclamation and militarization, not to mention aggressive pursuit of territorial claims even in the face of international tribunal decisions, bode ill for China’s relations with Japan.
Meanwhile, with every year that passes, memories in Japan of the Second World War fade and new generations increasingly question why Japan must act with unique international restraint under its constitution. Absent a major initiative toward reconciliation by both countries, of which there are few signs, it seems likely that Sino-Japanese relations are drifting increasingly toward confrontation.
