How Japan Can Finally Say “No”

Japan Prime Minister Taro Aso speaks to reporters on Sunday following reports of a N. Korean rocket launch.

Japan Prime Minister Taro Aso speaks to reporters on Sunday following reports of a N. Korean rocket launch.

by Collin Spears, Washington, DC Bureau Chief

It is highly unlikely the U.S. and Japan will be able to obtain the cooperation of Russia and China, because both are hesitant to say that the test violates any UN resolutions, due to Pyongyang’s claim of a satellite launch. Despite this, the U.S. should at least make the effort. Second, any Six-Party Talks agreements must contain an agreement by North Korea to set up a joint committee with Japan to reinvestigate the abductions of Japanese citizens in return for Japan lifting its sanctions. The Japanese have the leverage to do so; the only question is if the Japanese leadership has the will.

In 1990, the controversial right-wing Governor of Tokyo, Ishihara Shintaro, published “The Japan That Can Say No: Why Japan Will Be First Among Equals”. Although Ishihara’s book stoked long simmering nationalist fires, nearly 20 years later, many Japanese are still speculating if or when Japan can “say no” to the United States, the target of Ishihara’s book. As since the end of World War II (WWII), Japan has continued to work closely with the United States on global security issues. Still, there has been a growing concern in Japan that America has not been attentive in addressing Japanese security concerns, especially regarding North Korea. This situation may be the tipping point in U.S. – Japanese relations where Tokyo truly becomes an independent actor for the first time in 60 years.

Many in the Japanese government have long wanted to take a harder line with North Korea. Some hardliners have even suggested a full remilitarization of Japan, including nuclear capability. Although the majority of the population is still anti-nuclear and support keeping the military (SDF) as a defense force, the percentage of those who do is declining yearly. This also reflects the growing number of Japanese who no longer feel burdened with the legacy of World War II Japanese Imperialism or the necessity of an American security umbrella.

In Asia, Japan’s military funding is only second to China’s. It is also highly regarded internationally, especially for its naval capabilities. Currently, the SDF has about 240,000 uniformed troops. Due to constitutional restrictions, written in by America after WWII, the Japanese military has been limited to defensive capability only. Force projection technologies, such as aircraft carriers, are prohibited.

Since the first Gulf War, America has been encouraging the Japanese to push the definition of “defense”, not to promote an independent Japanese foreign policy, more so to offset American personnel and financial costs that come with mounting operations. There is more to the contemporary relationship than the multi-billion dollar ballistic missile shield being put in place to prevent a potential strike by North Korea (or China). , Lately, the United States and Japans’ military joint training has focused on coordinated attacks; a skill that would be needed for the Japanese to contribute to missions similar to what the U.S. has undertaken in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In the last few years, Japan has sent its navy to the Red Sea to fight pirates as part of a multinational force, to monitor North Korean missile activity, and to aid the refueling of ships in the Indian Ocean. Japan also sent ground troops to Iraq to provide humanitarian aid. This change is partially a result of Japan having been criticized for “checkbook diplomacy” due to not committing troops to Desert Storm. This is a point of contention, as the Japanese government feels the war would not have been possible without the significant sums of cash it spent to finance it. Japan has also given the second largest amount of wartime assistance to Iraq between 2004 and 2006 and a similarly large amount to Afghanistan between 2002 and 2006.

North Korea

Sometime between April 4 – 8, 2009, the North Korean government has announced that it will launch, what it claims to be, the experimental communications satellite Kwangmyongsong-2 on an Unha-2 rocket. This is likely just a cover for a Taepodong-2 ballistic missile, with the ability to strike anywhere in the Japanese archipelago, is scheduled to fly over Japanese airspace. This will be North Korea’s first long-range missile test since its two failed attempts in 2006 and 1998. North Korea’s 1998 missile test prompted the UN Security Council to express concerns in an informal press statement. The 2006 tests resulted in the Security Council adopting a resolution to prohibit North Korea from conducting testing.

North Korea’s test is not happenstance; it is a purposeful ploy to escalate tensions. The North wants to solidify its status as a nuclear power by demonstrating its ability to launch ballistic missiles capable of transporting a nuclear warhead. Kim Jong Il also wants to play China and Russia off against the new Obama Administration, Japan, and South Korea to gain negotiating leverage at any renewed 6-party talks. The missile site at Tongchangri is outfitted to launch both intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) and satellites. It can also test launch missiles without them flying over Japanese airspace.

The cash strapped Kim Regime also has incurred a current account deficit for 50 years, in earlier decades, the Soviet Union primarily funded these deficits, but since its collapse, China and South Korea have become its major sources of subsistence, along with U.S. currency counterfeiting, weapons sales, drug trafficking, and remittances from Japanese born Koreans (Zainichi). Kim needs these cash infusions to secure the loyalty of the military and party members. Cash flows have dried up due to sanctions and the loss of Libya and Pakistan as weapons buyers after 9-11. A Japanese newspaper, Sankei Shimbun, reported that 15 Iranian arrived in North Korea recently to observe the latest missile test; it is likely they are potential buyers.


The Japanese government’s response to this has been typically subdued. Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso has said that a launch by North Korea would be a violation of United Nations resolution 1718. At the most recent G20 meeting in London, he also called for a new UN resolution against North Korea. There will also be an extension of Japanese sanctions against North Korea, which include a ban on North Korean ships entering Japanese ports and importation of all North Korean goods, as well as a crack down on bank transfers from the Zainichi community. Tokyo has also refused to join the other six-party members in providing fuel oil to North Korea under the “denuclearization-for-aid deal”, citing a lack of progress on the “abduction issue”. This long-standing dispute has been a major obstacle to normalizing between Japan and North Korea.

The SDF responded to the proposed missile launch by stating that it might shoot down a rocket flying over Japanese airspace. Japan’s warships are equipped with Aegis combat systems, which enable them to track and shoot down missiles, but the SDF quickly backtracked, stating it will only launch interceptors if debris from a failed Korean missile appears likely to hit Japanese territory.

One of Tokyo’s greatest concerns, is that the U.S. will move to a de facto acceptance of North Korea’s nuclear status, which will be an unacceptable position that will sour U.S. – Japanese relations, as well as global nonproliferation efforts. This would be the point at which Japan may not only remilitarize but also nuclearize.

The U.S.

In 1994, the United States and North Korea signed a framework where the North Koreans were supposed to shut down their nuclear facilities and accept weapons inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency in return for normalized relations with the United States and large sums in aid and fuel from Japan, South Korea and the U.S. 15 years later, the U.S. is still trying to get North Korea to adhere to this agreement.

Recently, the Japanese made the Obama administration fully aware that Japan disagreed with the Bush Administration removing North Korea from the terrorism list and how this has complicated negotiations. Likewise, the Japanese have been informed that the U.S. gives priority to the nuclear proliferation issue over the Japanese abduction issue. Despite this, Secretary Clinton visited with abductees families in Tokyo on her last visit. This signaled that the U.S. understood Japanese concerns, but not much else.

It is widely believed in Japan that the Bush Administration engaged China at the expense of Japan, especially when Bush visited China before Japan during his last trip to the Pacific Rim. The Obama Administration, cognoscente of this, sent Secretary of State Clinton to Asia on her first trip aboard. Stopping first in Japan was seen as a reaffirmation of the U.S.-Japan. This act was supposedly confirmed by the subsequent visit of Prime Minister Taro Aso to the United States, but many Japanese complained that the visit received little of the usual fan fair, citing this as a show of disrespect to Japan.

A Possible Future

North Korea has repeatedly violated Japanese airspace; purposefully imports illegal drugs into Japan; admitted to abducting Japanese citizens from Japanese soil; and has made a barrage of threats. It would be a provocation deserving an immediate and severe military response if any nation behaved this way toward the U.S. Japan is right not to be content to follow America’s lead. Japan can say, “No”! In the short term, Tokyo should make it clear that the SDF will shoot down any future North Korean missile that violate Japanese airspace, because it is a violation of previous UN resolutions and a threat to their citizens. Japan should not ask permission to protect its citizens and the territorial integrity of its nation, America; Russia; and China certainly would not.

During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama stated that he expected North Korea to live up to the terms previously agreed on or harsh actions would be taken in addition to current sanctions. Japan should hold Obama to this promise by pressuring America on the abduction issue. Any 6-Party Talks must begin with an agreement by North Korea to set up a joint committee with Japan to reinvestigate the abductions of Japanese citizens in return for Japan possibly lifting its sanctions.

Japan has the influence to do this because United States needs Japan more than ever. The U.S. needs Japan to contribute to its Chinese triangulation strategy in the Pacific and IndianOceans. Secondly, Japan can hurt the U.S. by giving, even superficial, weight to China’s wish for a true international reserve currency to replace the dollar. Thirdly, Japan can threaten to reduce the American military presence, especially in Okinawa, and force Americans to pay for their bases. Fourthly, Japan can threaten to stop buying U.S. debt at a time with the U.S. needs the liquidity to stimulate its failing economy. Fifthly, Japan can threaten to sale protected military technologies that it produces to China and the Russians. Lastly, Japan could threaten to go nuclear if it feels the U.S. is not adequately promoting its national security interests in regard to North Korea.

To strengthen their position, the Japanese should do more to establish an independent military personality. First, they should modify their constitution to allow for an offensive military. Then they could commit more troops to UN Peacekeeping operations. They should form a closer relationship with China by halting their objections to greater Chinese participation in various international financial groupings. They could leverage this relationship to become a broker between Washington and Beijing, as well as to guarantee ascension to the U.N. Security Council.

In Asia, Japan could become a regional leader, but this will not happen until it resolves outstanding historical issues with its neighbors. Japan should publically call for the formation of an international historical reconciliation council of Western, East and Southeast Asian historians to make an authoritative report on Japan’s role in WWII and all existing territorial disputes. Japan should adopt the conclusion of the resulting report as its official history and accept full responsibility any past wrongs. If Japan does these things they will effectively be able to normalize themselves as a great power, but will the Japanese people have the resolve to exploit these opportunity and finally say, “No”?


Amstad, Evan. “Korean Launch Could Spur Arms Sales” Wall Street Journal Online.

Editor. “DPRK missile threat grows / ‘Satellite’ launch could provide conclusive test data” Daily Yomiuri Online.

Editor. “SDF must protect us against N. Korea missile” Daily Yomiuri.

Ishihara, Shintaro (1990). The Japan That Can Say No: Why Japan Will Be First Amount Equals

Ito, Masami and Hongo, Jun. “MISSILE THREAT: Aside from U.N., Japan has few options against launch” The Japan Times Online.

Klingner, Bruce. “North Korea’s Missile Gambit” The Heritage Foundation Online.

Harden, Blaine. “N. Korea Threats Grow As Launch Draws Near” The Washington Post Online.

Katsumata, Hidemichi and Takita, Kyoko. “Can missile, debris be destroyed? / Altitude, speed, direction of N. Korean rocket could complicate interception” Daily Yomuuri Online

Klingner, Bruce. “North Korea’s Missile Gambit” The Heritage Foundation Online.

Klingner, Bruce. “Obama Will Be Challenged by North Korea” The Heritage Foundation Online.

Klingner, Bruce and Lohman, Walter. “Securing U.S. Objectives in North Korea: A Memo to President-elect Obama” The Heritage Foundation Online.

Kyodo. “Obama won’t neglect North abductee issue” The Japan Times Online.

O’Hanlon, Michael. “CLINTON’S VISIT TO JAPAN / Change in U.S. focus evident / Influence of East Asia on world affairs more important than ever” Daily Yomuiri.

O’Sullivan, John. “Success in North Korea Will Fail in the Long Run” Hudson Institution Online.

Robinson,Eric L. “DPRK missile site to be completed in spring”

Talmadge, Eric. “Japanese military assumes more global role” Yahoo! News.

Toloraya,Georgy. “Continuity and Change in Korea: Challenges for Regional Policy and U.S.-Russia Relations”
Brookings Online.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s