A Look at the Influence of Japanese Security Measures in Global Affairs

With the number of geopolitical moves going on in East Asia recently, Japan is looking to shore up its national security. As a G7 member and leading economy, Japan has some degree of responsibility regarding the assistance of allied countries in maintaining global order. However, the Chinese and Korean governments remain skeptical, as the history of imperialism still harbors images of pain and conflict. Can Japan re-emerge from the sins of the past and take a broader step in the burden sharing nature of global engagements?

Japan has been at the forefront of a fair number of international disputes involving allied states. The involvement of the country during the Persian Gulf War is an example of this, as Japan initially sought to negotiate with Iraq to suspend Kuwaiti war campaigns. When this appeal to Iraqi leadership didn’t yield the desired results, Japan took part in issuing economic sanctions by placing an embargo on Iraqi and Kuwaiti oil, as well as adhered to UN Resolution 661, a decree that sought to prohibit all import and exports from the countries in conflict. Such actions showed the world that Tokyo was willing to put themselves in the midst of international issues, hoping to contribute to finding remedies to global ills.

During the height of the War in Afghanistan, Japan helped the United States and coalition forces by implementing a series of campaigns to ensure security and stabilize the area. This initiative comprised of legislative duties, where Japan dispatched legal teams to help Afghan leaders draft constitutional guidelines, improving security issues through various governmental programs, and aided in infrastructural redevelopment projects. Due to the efforts of Japan and other coalition forces during the height of the Afghan conflict, much of the heavy fighting lessened, allowing the withdrawal of U.S. and NATO forces. Outside of a few support groups, most of the security protocols fell under the responsibility of Afghan forces, and Japan played a significant role in helping to achieve those objectives.

Other global projects include the resupplying of allied vessels in the Indian Ocean to support the war effort in Afghanistan, as well as the patrolling of waters of the Gulf of Aden for anti-piracy measures. Since 2001, Japan played an integral part in assisting coalition forces in the Afghanistan campaign, providing cargo and fuel to counterinsurgency groups fighting in the country. To support this cause, Tokyo enacted the Anti-Terrorism Special Measures Law to aid the coalition in thwarting radical groups in the area. Similar burden-sharing activities apply to the patrolling of waters in the Middle East under the statute of the Combined Task Force 151, which is an initiative designed to prevent piracy off the coast of Somalia and Yemen. In order to fully engage in counter-piracy missions, Tokyo had to amend the Japanese anti-piracy law to help in the escorting of foreign vessels. Overall, Japan has to gradually reexamine legislation to adapt to modern geopolitics.

In 2012, Tokyo aided in armistice campaigns through the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS), providing strong levels of support through civil engineering projects. The Ground Self-Defense Force (GSDF) of Japan can only operate in areas where there is a ceasefire. As fighting in South Sudan erupted again in 2015, it left Tokyo in a conundrum. How can the country safeguard UN peacekeeping sites, without any forms of self-defense to do so? Last year, Japan drafted a series of legislative clauses that allow the state to exercise more tactics and strategies necessary to ensure the safety of allied assets. According to one of the clauses, the SDF is authorized to use deadly force to rescue any Japanese nationals in peril. Furthermore, under certain conditions, this clause also applies to foreign individuals who are within a group of Japanese citizens. These sets of ideas are significant since the current constitution forbids the country from engaging in any armed affairs outside of self-defense imperatives. Despite that fact, the argument among the Abe administration is that the current realm of the international security changed, and adhering to old clauses can potentially put Japan at a higher risk.

Despite having a substantial foothold in South Sudan, Tokyo eventually drafted legislation to start withdrawing GSDF personnel from the area, with the last of the troops departing for home in early 2017. Even though political doctrine allowing the use of force to protect the interests of Tokyo and its allies is in place, the geopolitical move ensured that the GSDF suffered no casualties from the reemerging conflict in the area. Within the past two years, the fighting in and around the city of Juba intensified, leaving thousands dead. This situation is a potential problem for the Abe administration since the GSDF forces concentrate in that area. Hence, the withdrawal statutes implemented in late last year, with the remaining troops reaching Japanese shores by the end of May 2017. This particular move cools the detractors who see Japan involving itself more in international peacekeeping operations (PKO) as a violation of constitutional platitudes. However, with the implementation of doctrine authorizing Tokyo to send troops into UN designated zones, the Abe administration continues to stretch the limits and definitions of Article 9.

When observing the present agendas of the Abe administration, it’s evident that Japan wants to become a larger participant in global affairs, showcasing their ability to assist allied states in an effective manner. Initially assigned a defense force after WWII, the current geopolitical climate allows Japan to flex more of its muscles concerning the provision of support to allied states. Through burden sharing in security as well as engaging in PKO around the world, Japan demonstrates how to remain a key player in the international sphere. Still, Tokyo advisors understand that it is too early to make any drastic leaps since some states in East Asia still look towards Japan with skepticism. From a realist standpoint, Japan seeks to maximize defensive imperatives by incorporating a formidable presence in international conflicts, as well as fulfill the role that the country is willing and able to participate in global affairs. Hence the focus on UNMISS campaign, where even though Japanese troops have pulled out of the conflict zones, the government still supplies economic and humanitarian aid to South Sudan and other areas in the Middle East-North Africa region. This initiative shows that Japan seeks to assert influence on an international scale, demonstrating that Tokyo is ready to provide support to allied powers. Admittedly, the Abe administration also seeks a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, so participating in PKO draws out ire among critics stating that Japan is quietly looking to take advantage of such conflict scenarios, and then withdrawing whenever the situations escalate. Still, Japan operates within the allowed boundaries of geopolitical framework, so whether these initiatives work in favor of Tokyo remains to be seen.

Overall, Japan is playing a larger role within the international community. The motivation to engage in overseas disputes and provide humanitarian aid shows that Tokyo is ready and able to hold a more influential position in global affairs. At the same time, critics of Japan see these actions as nothing more than geopolitical positioning, looking to take advantage of the current disorganized realm of East Asia. Japan can achieve its realist imperative while avoiding uncertainty if it:

• continues PKO and burden-sharing initiatives within the confines of Article 9 statutes;
• maintains amicable relations with allied states;
• continues to negotiate with other nations in East Asia to help mitigate security disputes and remain mindful of geopolitical implications; and,
• keeps internal disputes at bay by disassociating with groups that seek an alternate view of history that counters the global narrative.

While detractors will continue to find fault in Japanese geopolitics, avoiding major mishaps allows Tokyo to negotiate with a full deck. Ultimately, Japan wants to take more responsibility in operating with partnered states, allowing the SDF and other governmental organizations to function independently from allied powers while gaining more of a prominent role in international affairs. Participating in PKO and showing a willingness to mediate world conflicts is a step in the right direction.