By Ankit Panda
Japan’s collective self-defense resolution crystallizes a greater Japanese threat for Beijing.
On this week’s podcast, I was joined by Zach and Clint, our Tokyo-based editor. We discussed the ramifications of Japan’s new resolution of collective self-defense that will allow Tokyo greater latitude in the use of its armed forces under its constitution. Toward the end of the podcast, I asked Zach and Clint to offer their thoughts on whether the Japanese government’s reinterpretation of the constitution would be, on balance, a stabilizing or destabilizing factor in East Asia’s security architecture. We all seemed to agree that the highly symbolic nature of the reinterpretation meant that it would not be highly destabilizing in the short-term; instead, Japan’s neighbors would continue to focus on slights such as prime ministerial visits to the controversial Yasukuni Shrine and the comfort women issue (in South Korea’s case).
It occurred to me after this discussion that this reinterpretation, if anything, could be destabilizing if read through the lenses of balance of threat theory. This theory (made famous by Stephen Walt) expands on the traditional realist notion that states balance against the material capabilities of other states by arguing that states in reality will balance against perceived threats. Japan has always been an impressive country martially, even after its war-renouncing constitution. Its armed forces are roughly as capable as the French armed forces (and that country is a nuclear-armed United Nations Security Council permanent member). Considering the rivalry between China and Japan, and China’s naval modernization, reinterpreting Japan’s constitution to allow for its armed forces to participate in collective self-defense hugely ramps up the perceived threat from Japanese forces in Beijing.
Read the full story at The Diplomat