The Center of Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is a think-tank comprised of high-ranking former US policymakers. Its recommendations are highly influential, having been used in the past as part of the basis of US government policy. Their report, entitled, "The US-Japan Alliance: Anchoring Stability in Asia", co-authored by former deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage, called for Japan to take a much more proactive role in Asia.
The paper encouraged a loosening of Japan's constitutional prohibition on "collective self-defense", and pointed out the "irony" of the US-imposed Japanese constitution preventing Japan from taking a more militarily assertive role alongside the US in Asia. More specifically, the report called for Japan to increase surveillance capabilities in the disputed South China Sea and prepare to send minesweepers to the Persian Gulf. [1]
The main motivation for the US to push for a more active Japanese security role in the region is to counter China's rise. The CSIS report did make mention of North Korea, but the "challenges" posed by China's increasing clout were a central theme of the paper. As the US pivots towards Asia, Japan is seen as a strong and indispensable ally.
However, enhancing the projection of US power into Asia with an increasingly militarized Japanese alliance poses serious risks. Foremost, the tragic history of Japanese imperialism and ongoing disputes over the portrayal of Japan's imperial war crimes in the Japanese education system and political arena cause incredible friction between Japan and America's other East Asian allies.
The CSIS report on US-Japan relations specifically called for a tripartite alliance between the US, Japan, and South Korea aimed at containing North Korea and limiting China's ambitions:
"Washington, Tokyo, and Seoul should pool their diplomatic capital to jointly deter North Korean pursuit of nuclear weapons and help shape a regional environment best suited to respond to China's rise". [2]
In order to accomplish this end, the CSIS encouraged the Japanese government "to confront the historical issues that continue to complicate relations" with South Korea.
Herein lies the fundamental flaw in America's reliance on an assertive Japan for America's strategic pivot towards Asia. The Japanese nationalists who would be eager to assume a proactive regional stance are the very same political actors who are loath to face the unpleasant facts of Japan's colonial history (much less apologize for them).
Additionally, any moves to promote an active stance by Japan's military will cause a nationalist backlash in countries throughout the region. In East Asia, historical nationalism can trump geopolitics, and the wounds of the past run deep.
As concerned as South Korea, Vietnam, and the Philippines may be by China's new assertiveness, these countries by no means would openly welcome a forceful Japanese stance in the region. The ongoing stand-off between South Korea and Japan over the Liancourt Rocks puts the United States in the awkward position of having its two most important regional allies face off against each other.
Open American backing for Tokyo to expand its military role in the region could completely alienate the younger generation South Korean nationalists, many of whom already bristle at the ongoing US military presence in the Korean Peninsula.
The US simply can't reliably be a strategic partner to the people and governments of South Korea, the Philippines, and Vietnam while pushing for what will be seen as Japanese neo-militarism. The Chinese government will be sure to take advantage of regional anti-Japanese sentiment in the event of an American-backed Japanese projection of power.
Furthermore, no single issue can inspire Chinese nationalism like perceived Japanese aggression. The landing of several Chinese activists on the disputed Senkaku (Diaoyu) Islands last week caused a stir of emotions in China. The protestors received a hero's welcome in Hong Kong after they were arrested and deported by the Japanese government.
Even more tellingly, after Japanese activists reached the disputed islands on Sunday, spontaneous and emotional protests erupted in several major Chinese cities within hours. Anger was vented against Japanese automobiles, restaurants, and retail outlets. Protestors in Shanghai denounced "Japanese imperialism". [3]
Nothing could inspire a lasting sense of distrust, anger, and anti-American sentiment in China faster than US backing for a more assertive Japan.
Finally, US pressure to increase Japan's overseas ambitions may cause sharp divisions in Japan itself. Fissures between pacifists and nationalists are emerging from Japan's ongoing economic and political deadlock. Tokyo's nationalist Mayor Shintaro Ishihara, who touched off the current round of the East China Sea dispute with an offer in April to "buy" the disputed islands, condemned the Japanese government for releasing the Chinese maritime activists, saying "It is a distinct criminal case ... We can't call Japan a real law-governed country if it sends them back as mere illegal aliens." [4]
At the same time, reports are emerging that Japan's ambassador to China, who warned of a "grave crisis" between the two nations over the dispute, is to be replaced because of government anger over his conciliatory line.
The CSIS's warnings of a "time of drift" in US-Japan relations is indicative of the major shifts in regional power. South Korea and Japan may be strategically wary of China's rise, but the major political forces in these two nations are by no means eager to jump into a united anti-China bandwagon.
South Korean President Lee must have been well aware of Japan's deepening maritime dispute with China when he purposefully upped tensions with Japan himself by visiting the Dokdo Islands. For the time being, there is a de facto joint South Korean - Chinese effort to put pressure on Japan's territorial claims.
Additionally, both South Korea and Japan have a deeper trade relationship with China than either country does with the United States. It is perhaps largely for this reason that the CSIS warns of a "drift" between the US and Japan - while the US seeks to deputize the Japanese government into keeping China is check, Japan is tugged by economic realities beyond any government's control into China's orbit.
A final lesson to take away from the ongoing maritime disputes between Japan and her neighbors is that a more democratic China will in all likelihood be a more aggressive China. It is important to note that the protest boat sent to "defend the Diaoyu Islands" was sent from Hong Kong, not mainland China. If political reform in the Middle Kingdom eventually leads to China becoming more democratic, then Chinese politicians will need to be quickly responsive to populist, nationalist voices.
China's current leadership can play the long game and wait for China's economic situation to continue improving. However, the temptation to project China's increasing power may prove too great for a democratic government to resist if a crisis emerged.
The democratically elected leaders of Japan and South Korea currently engage in nationalist posturing in order to get votes, and neither of these countries has the manpower, money, and worldwide ambitions of the world's most populous country.
What is more, nationalist political maneuvers are usually based on old historical animosities. The West and concerned regional powers should take careful note: if and when China's political system becomes more democratic, expect it to be even more regionally assertive.
