Why Japan is debating its military future - Asia Specific podcast, BBC World Service

China is rapidly building up its military and Kurumi. that has put neighbour Japan in a bit of a tricky situation. Yeah, that's right Mariko. Japan's pacifist constitution. has long restricted what the country's military can do. There's a political push for a change now so. Japan can build its military strength. But there's quite a bit of public ambivalence. And changing the constitution wouldn't be easy. And also, diplomatically, it would be a huge deal for Japan's neighbours. like China and South Korea.

So we're asking, will Japan do away with pacifism? As always, I'm Mariko in Singapore. and this is Asia Specific from the BBC World Service. Twice a week we bring you Asia Pacific stories unpacked by those who know them best. Well, I'm really excited to introduce you. to our new Tokyo correspondent, Kurumi Mori. Welcome to Asia Pacific, Kurumi. Great to finally join you.

Also in the Japanese capital is Leo Lewis. He's the Tokyo bureau chief for the Financial Times, who's lived in Japan for some 20 years. He also recently wrote an opinion piece titled. 'Why It's Time to Change Japan's Constitution'. Welcome to the pod, Leo. Hello, everyone. So, Kurumi, let's start by explaining what Japan's constitution is. because it's really, really unique, isn't it? It's practically the only document in the world which bans a country.

from having an active military land, sea or air. And yet Japan does have some kind of a military. And I keep getting asked how that works quite often. So do you want to just explain to our audience how that works? Yeah. So Japan's known as a pacifist nation because of this peace clause, largely. It was adopted in 1947 after World War Two, and it basically commits Japan to renouncing war as a sovereign right.

and not maintain military forces for warfare. So basically, in the Constitution, we have 103 articles. This is article nine, and it's broken up into two parts. The first one says, uh, basically renounces war. So Japan will never go to war. The second one says it won't hold any war potential. So, uh, it states that land, sea and air forces, as well. as other war potential, will not be maintained.

So it is controversial. There are many people on both sides discussing how we should interpret it. and whether it needs to be revised. And Leo, related to this pacifist constitution, which of course was drafted by the Americans who were occupying Japan. after the end of the Second World War. But Japan is also home to, I think, the world's biggest, isn't it US military bases overseas. So can you just connect the dots How that works as well?

Yeah. So the adoption of the pacifist constitution, which by the way, we should say is, has been cherished very much by the Japanese public. for many years. The quid pro quo really was that. the US would guarantee Japan's safety, in what has become an increasingly, uh, sort of dangerous region. And for many years was, you know, sort of a Cold War front as well. So the American military presence has been tolerated.

It's gone through phases where there have been moments of high controversy. and really quite serious public backlash in Japan. But fundamentally, everyone understands that the deal is. that the American forces will be there. as a kind of guarantee of Japan's safety while it keeps that. pacifist constitution and the principles of it more or less intact. Yeah. As you say, those US bases have been controversial,

especially in Okinawa, where the majority of those US bases are there. And have you noticed a change in attitude from the Japanese public, though? You know, having lived there for such a long time. There's certainly a noticeable shift. Certainly a younger generation that sees the, uh, the protection of Japan in terms that it have made. it much more comfortable with the existence of the Self-Defence Forces. Um, certainly, you know, in the early 60s, there was a very famous moment.

where at the beginning of the 1964 Olympics, there was an appearance by military planes. There was a certain kind of, uh, kerfuffle, nationally, because there was this still this discomfort about the military. And over the years that has changed. And more recently, the idea that Japan is. living in this more dangerous region. The Japanese government has described, you know, the most severe security environment since the Second World War.

And I think that's starting to filter in really as a reason. for ordinary Japanese to think, well, actually, look, we do have to have. the means to protect ourselves, whatever the Constitution says. Yeah. Because over the last decade or so. But for as long as I can remember, to be honest, there has always been that debate on whether. or not Japan should change this pacifist constitution. But I guess what's different is that under Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, her ruling party now has a two thirds supermajority in the lower house.

of parliament, which is what's required to change the pacifist constitution. before they hold a national referendum and basically ask the general public. Kurumi, do you want to just explain. what's behind this latest push to change the Constitution? I mean, Leo talked about geopolitics. Obviously, we have the war in Iran and so on as well. Yeah. I mean, I think there are a multitude of factors. But the one thing I'll say is Takaichi isn't the first prime minister. to come in and voice this want for revision for the Constitution.

It's been in place for 80 years, and it really speaks, I think, to the Japanese people, the passion. for wanting to keep a pacifist stance and how important that was to them. But the thing is, with all of these factors going on right now. and the tension in the region, as we've all been talking about, I mean, we're talking a lot now. about how China, Japan names is its biggest challenge in the region.

in the white paper that the Defense Ministry publishes every year. Um, it's again, their top kind of, uh, challenge. And the biggest thing that they're pushing for now. is boosting their defence capabilities, um, and trying their best to deter any threatening forces, including China. Um, Leo, as Kurumi says, this debate has been ongoing for many, many decades. But what exactly has Sanae Takaichi said, especially. since becoming a prime minister,

about how she wants to change this constitution. The LDP, which is the party that has ruled Japan for. really most. of the last decade since the Second World War, was founded. on the principle that it needed to revise the Constitution. And one of the things that I was writing in my article was. that it's not just the peace clause that is at stake. It's the idea that Japan should take control of the Constitution.

It's a very precious document. It's the supreme law of the country, and it has never been revised. And so it's a little bit about taking control of. that supreme law for yourself, for the nation of Japan. And so, there are other parts of the Constitution that. could possibly be targets for revision. Um, and, uh, actually at the moment, although most people do suspect that that is the bit that,

uh, Prime Minister Takaichi is most interested in revising, there are other possibilities. And one of those includes the idea. of creating emergency powers for the prime minister. Uh, and that's got a lot of controversy. attached to it as well. So nothing is straightforward. Yeah. The language has been somewhat vague, it hasn't it. And Kurumi, you've recently sat down. with the country's Defence Minister Koizumi. What has he told you?

And also, you know what exactly in your view is Sanae Takaichi wanting to change? You know, the Defence Minister Koizumi understands. just how sensitive this topic is. So when I spoke to him, he was very careful in his wording. Did not give an opinion. I'm speaking not as the defence minister, but as a member of the diet. Post-War Japan has never amended its constitution. Not even once.

In this post-war era, the security environment has changed drastically. In order for Japan to adapt to the times properly and remain peaceful. in the future, we need to reconsider the role of the Self-Defence Forces. We also need to make sure the public clearly understands the status of the Self-Defence Forces. Even in this challenging security landscape, we need to possess unshakable defence capabilities.

I believe we need to change what needs to be changed. So for him, I think it's, he's part of the LDP. LDP is the party that wants to revise the Constitution. So even though we know that it's very likely that he is for the revisions, he didn't say it to me in the interview. And so again, this really speaks to the sensitivity. of this topic and how split the voices are within Japan. Even Sanae Takaichi.

I was trying to find quotes and instances of her literally saying word. for word that she wants to change the Constitution, make the SDF the official military, anything sort of in that kind of vein. And I couldn't find a single thing. Even more recently, I think her tone kind of has calmed down a bit, right? Because she wants everybody to like her. Uh, that only helps her while she's in power as prime minister. So it's really interesting to watch.

It's become, it's very political, as you can imagine. But again, for a lot of Japanese people, it's become part of their identity or it's our country identity. It's not just an article in a constitution. Um, it really has become kind of what Japan stands for. I think that's the other thing I would say is that, there's a lot of inertia. Um, you know, there's a view that. the Constitution has done us perfectly well for all these years.

Um, why change it now? There's a lot of, uh, a lot of feeling when you, when you speak to individual Japanese. about why, why change the Constitution and the whole debate? It's well, you know, what harm is it doing at the moment? We've kind of got what we, we need from it. Why go through the big, uh, the big bother of changing it, getting the general public over the line, just hasn't really been tested. And that was part of, again, part of the argument that I was making is that, you know, there is a, there is an interesting debate that can only really be held.

when you've got everyone firing on all cylinders. and a referendum in front of the general public. You can have these debates in the abstract. That's what's been going on for the last 70-odd years. But once you've got a referendum in front of you, um, you test the public, uh, not only for where its views are, but how the debate actually plays out. I did a mini test for this podcast just asking people around me.

Um, and I think I got some really interesting insights. I can tell you from my personal kind of mini test here in Tokyo. I was asking the taxi driver, I asked my own family, I asked my neighbours, I asked the konbini guys, um, and it's so split. And I was surprised because I thought, uh, maybe because I've been covering the protest. I thought actually more people would be for, you know, keeping it as is. But actually I found that it is probably more split.

It is a really, really heated debate. Some people I think are really emotional about it. I mean, my own mother started crying about it. I was like, mom, why are you getting so emotional? And she just, she just started talking about, you know, people affected by the war and how, you know, it would mean that Japan, you know, can kill people again. And she's like, I don't know. I can never live with that. Um, and so it's just, uh, I think it's a, it's a topic that we should definitely be talking about.

We don't know what the result will be. It's... nobody knows. And it's really difficult to guess. Um, but for me, what was surprising was just how emotional people get. I mean, my mom was an emotional person normally, but even more when we're talking about this topic, I just I'd never talked about it with her before. Um, and so for me, it was really insightful. And, you know, my father has a completely opposite kind of view. He's like, we need to defend the country. You know, if someone's attacks, attacking you, you gotta attack them.

Um, and, you know, maybe that's the way to go. Yeah. I really appreciate you doing that mini survey, Kurumi. For listeners and viewers who might not be familiar with. the term she used, konbini, we're talking about convenience stores, aren't we? Like 7-Eleven, Family Mart. And you spoke to taxi drivers. That's like the perfect gauge of how the public think. But I do have this burning question because from my understanding, those opposing the revision of the pacifist constitution.

They're also the ones who aren't very happy that those US. bases are in Japan. And as we've been talking about it, as especially China rapidly increases. and expands its military, you do wonder, how is Japan supposed to protect itself, defend itself if it sticks to its pacifist constitution. and would want to get rid of US bases? What do you think, guys? There's a lot of question,

for example, around, um, the reliability. of the US at this point in time. And so, uh, you know, the, for many, many years that just didn't seem to be an issue whatsoever that, uh, the, the kind of pacifist debate, the, the should we do, should we think about the Constitution was, was played out in an environment where there was simply no question, uh, that the US, uh, support was there, that the alliance was absolute, uh, and that the US would step in under any circumstances to defend Japan.

And so, you know, the last, let's say, 18 months, although this was certainly a feature of the first Trump presidency, um, has given a certain sector of the Japanese public reason to wonder. just how committed the US is to the defence of Japan. And, you know, I think that the wise heads say it is committed. There's no, there's no difference. Um, it's absolutely committed,

in the way that it certainly claims to be, uh, but there's just enough doubt in some minds now. about whether, you know, whether. a continued Trump presidency continues to offer that guarantee. with quite the certainty that it always had, uh, before. And I think that's, that's now filtering into the public discourse on this, in the way that you didn't see two or three years ago.

Yeah. Because President Trump, he has publicly said. he doesn't think that America should be paying so much money to defend Japan, hasn't he? And, you know, regardless of the official statement. from the White House and so on, if Japan was to ditch pacifism, I mean, that would be a huge thing for Japan's neighbours, China most notably, but also South Korea and other South East Asian countries. that Japan invaded during the Second World War.

How would China, in your view, react to this kind of revision, Kurumi? I mean, China's already been reacting, right? I mean, we saw, um, China react. to anything that Japan has been doing recently. They call it remilitarisation or new militarism. It's kind of the the these are kind of the words that they've been using. Um, now that they're seeing Japan build up its defences. And, uh, Minister Koizumi spoke at the Shangri-La Dialogue. when he really kind of tried to point out the difference.

between the Chinese military currently and what Japan is doing. Japan, he says, is trying to kind of become more normal. Um, and it's been kind of lagging and, and really slow to manufacture, uh, defence capabilities. And so now he feels like they're just playing catch up. Uh, anything that's done to change it is going to be, um, you know, it's going to be fuel for, for, kind of, Chinese anger. And I think, you know, it's interesting watching the way that they have, uh,

that, that Beijing has responded to the, the premiership of Takaichi, um, that they have, uh, they have given her a lot of attention. in terms of the criticism, uh, that's come out of Beijing. And I sort of take that really as evidence. that they find her quite formidable, in a way. that perhaps they haven't necessarily seen some of her predecessors. It almost feels like a crystal ball question,

but what do you think will happen next? I mean, you know, could they try to revise the Constitution a tiny bit, test the system of holding a national referendum? What do you think will happen next? Let's start with you, Kurumi. I think we're pretty far from that still. Um, right now, the stance that Japan is taking is. that they are bolstering their defence. Um, I think Koizumi said to me too,

he said, it's our country. We need to protect it. And I think that's the message, right? I mean, it sounds actually it sounds quite simple, but for a country like Japan, it's his way of saying, you know, boosting defence capabilities is now quite a top priority for them. One way or another, what we're going to see is. a much more rapid, um, decision making process granted to. the military, Ministry of Defence, and to, uh, the, you know,

the political setup, because I think that there is now. an acknowledgement that Japan needs to move faster, if not spending more. and legitimising the military through the Constitution, it just needs to be quicker. at preparing itself for that threat. And, you know, next time I get asked about the pacifist constitution. and why Japan has a military, but can't really, you know, go to a war, I think I'm going to send them the link of this episode. Thank you so much for explaining such a complicated topic to our viewers and listeners.

Kurumi and Leo. You've been watching Asia Specific. from the BBC World Service with me, Mariko Oi in Singapore. If you have any questions or thoughts on what we covered in this episode. or any other stories from the region, please leave us a comment below. You can also get in touch with us on email: AsiaSpecific@bbc.co.uk. and click like and subscribe so you never miss an episode. See you next time.