Japan A Return to Arms?

By BARRY HILLENBRAND TOKYO

At first glance, the legislation under discussion in the Diet last week seemed innocuous enough. The bill before the house called for the creation of a "United Nations Peace Cooperation Corps" that could be sent overseas in response to resolutions by the world organization. That notion appeared unexceptionable, since Japan has long been a strong advocate of the U.N.; yet the bill generated a furious debate. The reason: the proposed law would allow the Prime Minister to dispatch units of the armed forces to foreign soil for the first time since 1945.

No issues in Japan are as controversial, or as emotional, as those affecting the military. The country's "peace constitution" specifically renounces not only warfare but also the "use of force as a means of settling international disputes." Opinion polls show that there is enduring support for this constitutional proscription. Thus any attempt to tamper with so broad a consensus was bound to cause trouble.

In response, Prime Minister Toshiki Kaifu and his colleagues in the ruling Liberal Democratic Party rushed to soothe the country's concern. Ignoring catcalls and jeers from the opposition benches, Kaifu explained that the bill was merely a device by which Japan could "cooperate with the peace-promotion activities sanctioned by a U.N. resolution." The corps, he said, would "not use force or the threat of force," and he denied that he was trying to circumvent the constitution.

The opposition was far from convinced. Takako Doi, leader of the Japan Socialist Party, the largest opposition group, called the legislation the "greatest threat to the constitution since the war." Student organizations staged peace demonstrations. Even some members of Kaifu's own party suggested that if the legislation failed, the Prime Minister and his Cabinet should resign and an election should be called as a referendum on the issue. Said Yozo Yokota, a law professor at International Christian University: "This is a historic turning point in Japanese politics and diplomacy."

Kaifu was forced into the imbroglio by the crisis in the Persian Gulf. After 1 1/2 months of indecisive debate, the government belatedly offered $4 billion in cash to support the frontline states and the multinational forces arrayed against Iraq. Yet many Japanese realized that simply handing out money was an insufficient gesture at a time when other nations were sending soldiers to risk their lives in the Saudi desert. In a newspaper interview, former Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone, showing his occasional affinity for tasteless similes, declared, "If we were to try to settle everything with money, we would be viewed like the Merchant of Venice."

Kaifu, himself a dove on the issue, was influenced not only by those who felt Japan should take a firmer position in support of U.S. foreign policy but also by those who believe the country's armed forces should be strengthened for the national good. At a time when university graduates can expect multiple job offers, recruiting for the military is a serious problem. Last March, 59 cadets -- a record number -- in the 424-member graduating class of the National Defense Academy refused to enter the services after completing their education.

Some experts estimate that the Ground Self-Defense Force, as the army is known, is at least 12% below its authorized strength of 180,000 because it cannot find enough recruits. Even critics of the military show some sympathy. Says Masao Kunihiro, a Socialist Diet member who opposes the use of Japanese troops abroad: "It's a pity that the S.D.F. has been treated so shabbily by the public."

But opposition to the legislation is very strong. The controversy currently dominates newspaper columns and television news shows. Many Japanese fear that to allow the military to operate abroad, even under U.N. auspices, would set a dangerous precedent. Says Kunihiro: "Personally, it scares me that ((the corps)) should become a permanent fixture. If the 'right' to send troops aboard were firmly established, the government could later claim legal grounds if it wanted to extend operations in some unsavory situation."

Even diplomats who generally favor a more influential role for Japan in world affairs are concerned. They are worried that the specter of Japanese troops operating outside the country might stir resentment abroad, especially in Asia, where the memory of Japanese conquest and occupation in World War II has yet to fade and resentment of Japanese wealth is widespread.

For the time being, the bill is given only slightly better than a 50-50 chance of passage. The L.D.P. has a solid majority in the Lower House, but the opposition holds a razor-thin advantage in the upper chamber. Kaifu and his colleagues are trying to convince doubters that the bill provides safeguards against abuse, though politicians are weary and the public is skeptical. The choice is difficult. If Japan decides not to send troops, it risks being accused by its allies of hiding behind the constitution to avoid global responsibilities. If it does dispatch soldiers, it could provoke dark visions from the past and apprehensions for the future.

CHART: NOT AVAILABLE

CREDIT: NO CREDIT

CAPTION: Japan's Self-Defense Forces