Search

Recent scholarship analyzing Japanese defense policy has been sensationalistic. Challenging the constructivist argument that an antimilitarism norm has constrained Japanese militarization, realists have called attention to Japan's technologically advanced military, procurement of sophisticated weaponry, increased public support for the Japan Self-Defense Force, and a strategy of buck-passing as evidence of "normalization," "militarization," and the emergence of a "great power." However, is this really the case? Has Japan embarked on a new aggressive path, negating decades of pacifism? In this paper, I propose a cross-paradigmatic approach for analyzing Japan's military strength by combining constructivist, liberal, and realist arguments. First, this paper provides a systematic comparison of militaries in East Asia to measure relative power. In context of a rapidly militarizing East Asia and the emergence of new threats, Japan's military policy has been moderate modernization, not militarization. Second, this paper offers a typology of constraints on the Japanese military. Social, technical, normative, and political factors limit Japanese power projection capabilities in the present, and will become more debilitating in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the defense policy of the Japanese government. It explains the progress in security policies in Japan as a result of changes in the security environment caused by the emergence of new threats. It cites the revision of the arms export control policy by a Japanese cabinet secretary on December 10, 2004. The author offers an overview on the movement of constitutional amendment in Japan's legislative bodies.

New situations in the Korean Peninsular call for a substantial change for Japan’s security policy which still has large constraints in defense activities. Strong reaction has emerged in general public against North Korean nuclear program and kidnapping of Japanese citizens. In the age of rapid progress in technologies and of shrinking of time and geographical distance, the Japanese defense policy should be transformed so as to be able to act with less constrains. Furthermore, Japan must change the notion on the military forces. The situation eventually calls for the revision of the Article 9 of the current constitution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the Gulf War South Korea and Japan had to solve a dilemma that they faced. As important allies of the United Stated in Asia they were expected to assist the US in the War in Iraq. Their dilemma was should they assist the United States and accepts its request to send military troops to Iraq and by doing so they will support their ally. Or should they limit their commitment to the alliance with the US only to Asia and not to support the US in the War in Iraq. By doing so, they might reflect on the alliance with the US and they would undermine the alliance and might even expect some kind of retaliation from the US.The security alliance with the US is an important element in the defense policies of both Japan and South Korea. Without the alliance, both states would have to change their defense policies and they might need to increase their defense budget. In the Japanese case, the modification to its defense policy would be even greater then the one that South Korea would have to do.The alliance with the US carries a ?price tag?. In previous years that included the support of the US against the communist block and financial support as well. The first Gulf War (1990-1991) summand both states with the question if they should assist the US in the war against Iraq. Japan decided not to send any forces to assist the US in the war in Iraq due to constitution limitations on using forces outside the Japanese territory. Later on Japan send few sweeping mines ships to the area after the war ended. Japan was criticized by the US and other states for not participating in the war. Japan paid 13 billion $ for the war and later was accused for trying to buy her part in by using a "checkbook diplomacy". Korea's very limited involvement in the first Gulf war was not criticized, as Japan was.This paper analyzes the decisions of Japan and South Korea to send their forces to Iraq in the second Gulf War. Both allies were asked by the US to support her in the war in Iraq. The US forces are stationed in both states for the purpose of defending them against any attack from hostile states such as North Korea for example. The US expected that both allies will cooperate and supports its mission in Iraq. Both allies had to make the decision if the alliance with the US is limited only to the East Asian region or the alliance includes other areas outside the East Asian parameter. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The debate on antimilitarist norms in Japanese security policy has focused on whether they have prevented Japan from acquiring military capabilities. In fact, the norms have been counterproductive when their advocates overreached. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]