Home >> East Asia >> Japan

     Email   Print 

Is pacifism limping back in East Asia?

Shamshad Ahmad Khan - 7/16/2008

The North Korean nuclear crisis, a Sino-Taiwanese standoff and resurgence of nationalism in Japan had led the security experts to speculate that the pacifism is passé in the region. But the developments in East Asia -such as destruction of cooling tower of North Korea’s Yongbyong nuclear plant, thaw in Cross straits relations with the opening of skies, resumption of high level talks between the Sino-Taiwan authorities, Sino-Japanese agreement on sharing of energy reserves of East China Sea and port calls of naval ships of both the countries- would indicate that the situation is taking a reverse. These developments will leave greater impact on psyche of peoples of East Asian nations in general and Japanese masses in particular. A change in people’s perception in Japan means a lot for its domestic and international politics. The Japanese public sentiments have acted as dependent variable for Japan’s policy matters and it is evident from the fact that it has acted as a drag against militarization and Constitutional amendment process.
It should be noted that the fear consciousness in the Japanese people and administration following North Korean nuclear and missile tests, rising military might of China and a fear to be drawn in Cross straits military quagmire in the wake of China using its military power to resolve Taiwanese crisis has led Japan to raise its defense preparedness and legislative changes (including debate on Constitutional revision).
The military rivalry especially between China and Japan has drawn flak from ASEAN leaders. Mr Badawi, at a conference “The Future of Asia” held in Tokyo to map out Asian economic integration had blamed both countries for fomenting military rivalry and said that regional solidarity had been “seriously dented” and it was the fault of Japan and China adding that when Tokyo and Beijing pulled in different directions “we will all suffer the consequences”. However, the changing environment with the developments cited above will help allay their concern.
The success of Six party talks, thaw in cross straits relations and economic interdependence between Japan and China will certainly instill sense of security in Japanese people and influence their public opinion which held the key in determining nation’s domestic and international policies. The sense of security among the Japanese masses is also likely to compel the administration to take cautious approach on Constitutional revision and would further slow down the process.
At the international level these developments would prove stumbling blocks for the rising realist tendencies among East Asian nations. It should be reminded that the realism -an ideology proclaimed dead with the end of Cold war- made a stunning comeback on international political scene in the wake of September 11, the US led operations against Taliban in Afghanistan and Iraq war (2003). The hope of constitutional amendment for renouncing “one nation pacifism” in Japan which has faded at the end of the US-USSR confrontations once again became an issue of debate with emergence of Realism. The phenomenon coincided with the rise of nationalism as a powerful ideology in Japan, the rise of China and emergence of a nuclear ambitious North Korea and as a result the entire region plunged into a kind of Security Dilemma. Each state found justifying their defense build up against perceived threats from each other. But these developments in East Asia is likely to turn the tide and pull the region back to pacifism- a doctrine which advocates against all kind of war.
These developments have taken place at a time when the support in Japan has already been falling against constitutional revision. This is the reason behind Fukuda government’s cautious approach on Collective Self defense, despite recommendation from Abe government appointed panel, for a “new interpretation that conforms to the changes in the Security environment”. Now, since the environment the panel is talking about, is certainly taking a reverse would dampen the prospects of the Constitutional reinterpretation for collective self defense.
On the other hand the fate of the referendum bill enacted during Abe regime to conduct a referendum by 2010 for assessing the public sentiments for Constitutional revision also seems hanging in balance amid the fall in public support on this issue. If the support falls further, which is likely to fall amid the ongoing political developments in Korean peninsula and in the cross straits, the Japanese administration would have to shelve the issue.



The fate of pacifism (or militarism) in East Asia will depend on the behavior of states and how certain political developments unfold further. It is yet to be seen that the North Korean behavior (dismantling of cooling tower- the most visible sign of North’s nuclear program) is more than just symbolic. The states involved in the six party talks, however, need to take more steps to assimilate North Korea into diplomatic system rather than pushing it to seclusion. The change in Pakistan’s behavior after its inclusion into international community, following a forced isolation after Musharraf occupied the power indicates to that direction. Its assimilation to the international community will compel it to shun its military attitude.
Apart from North Korea, state behavior of China and the US are the deciding factors for peace in the region. If China proceeds on a policy of coexistence with its neighbors and the US- as it claims-and avoids coercion to resolve Taiwan issue, security competition surrounding China will not be intense. It would be in the interest of China not to dominate the region and not to maximize its power to seek hegemony because seeking hegemony further will lead to confrontations and impede china’s economic growth.

The US, which has pushed Japan to rethink its security policy in the post cold war period, is in the process of an imminent administrative change with the prediction of Democrats assuming the helm of US affairs in the next Presidential elections. Much would depend on what kind of policy the US adopts and would wish Japan to adopt. It is likely that the new administration will use “aggressive diplomacy” rather than aggressive force to settle all outstanding issues. Being so, there will not be pressure on Japan to contribute militarily.
Thus in the present environment chances are there that the pacifism would once again prevail upon realism in the region. It will depend upon whether the pacifist groups in the region capitalize upon this opportunity. But irony is that apart from Japan, pacifist groups in other countries are non-existent or the political set up of their countries do not provide them opportunity to do so.