The American Spectator

Print Email

Text Size

Another Perspective

(Page 2 of 2)

Tokyo's growing assertiveness has not gone without controversy, even in the U.S. American officials once talked about the U.S. military presence as a "cap in the bottle" to contain Japanese nationalism. Analysts ranging from the Clinton administration to the neoconservative Project for the New American Century have opposed transferring military responsibilities to Tokyo. Eugene Matthews, then of the Council on Foreign Relations, warned of "the rise of a militarized, assertive, and nuclear-armed Japan, which would be a nightmare for the country's neighbors."

Yet such fears are short-sighted. Japan is not about to embark upon another imperialist rampage throughout East Asia. Nor does the U.S. possess sufficient resources to fulfill its manifold security responsibilities around the globe as well as underwrite the ever-lengthening line of international welfare queens whose primary goal is to clamber onto the American military dole.

OF COURSE, THE POTENTIAL THREATS PERCEIVED by Tokyo also animate some American officials to support a continued U.S. presence. Opines Lt. Gen. Bruce Wright, the American commander in Japan: "You just have to take a look around the region to see why it is so important. The size of the militaries, and in fact the growing military capabilities in this region, certainly gets my attention."

But these growing militaries are precisely the reason Washington should step back and allow its friends to take on primary responsibility for regional security. Japan possesses a sizable modern military, with substantial anti-submarine and mine-clearing capabilities, for instance. Its defense outlays, which could be increased greatly, already place it among the top spenders and enable it to build a military capable of deterring China, in particular.

The Republic of Korea, and especially a united Korea, also could become a much more substantial player. Australia already has taken on significant regional responsibilities. A rapidly growing India is likely to become a more important, and likely positive, force in regional security developments.

Of course, it is up to these countries to choose their own defense policies. Japan faces the unique challenge of dealing with Article 9 of its constitution, which formally bars the maintenance of "land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential." But all of them should be made to understand that the U.S. will no longer make it easy for them to avoid taking on responsibility for protecting their own interests.

The end of Tokyo's participation in the Iraq coalition will have no practical impact. But Japan's withdrawal provides the Bush administration with an opportunity to refashion the bilateral alliance. Notes Chris Preble of the Cato Institute: "A new strategic relationship should provide a more durable and credible foundation for addressing the most pressing security challenges facing both countries in East Asia and beyond." America and the free world more generally will benefit of Japan takes on a larger foreign policy role.

topics:
Foreign Policy, Trade, Books, Constitution, Military, Iraq, North Korea