In the 1940s, Imperial Japan dreamed of creating a pan-Asian union under its leadership, the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.
Tokyo wanted countries in the region to cooperate and ensure economic self-sufficiency and end European and American dominance and influence from the Communist Soviet Union.
The plan failed. At first, Japan succeeded in invading China, Korea, some Pacific islands, and Southeast Asia. It was also pushing towards Australia and India.
However, the Americans and their allies stopped the advance and brought the Japanese to their knees when the US dropped two atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
It was a humbling experience. Tokyo had learned from it, embracing Washington’s regional dominance and cooperating with its neighbors to protect its security and national interests.
But times are changing. Japan wants to flex its muscles once more. It could do so quickly.
It is the world’s third largest economy. It may call its military force self-defense forces, but its capabilities could match or be second only to China in the region.
It has started developing and building missiles for export to allied countries.
An F-35 stealth aircraft can now land and take off on Japan’s two helicopter carriers, matching China’s two aircraft carriers.
The US welcomed this development, but for some countries in the region, it could bring back the horrors of Japanese atrocities during World War II.
Japan’s new prime minister, Shigeru Ishiba, was unfazed by criticism of rearming the country, especially from China.
Ishiba, who assumed office last month, proposed reviving the pan-Asian union under a new security architecture that includes the United States, Europe, India, and Australia.
Ishiba gave two reasons for the creation of an Asian security architecture similar to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
First, China’s growing influence in the region, and second, America’s decline, which means other countries should step up.
Ishiba said the United States cannot do it alone. Its military forces have been spread thin around the world. It has been putting off fires in various parts of the world — the Middle East, Eastern Europe, Africa, and the Korean peninsula.
The US needed help from NATO allies to support Ukraine and defend Israel from Islamist militant forces backed by Iran.
In the South China Sea, the United States needed the support of European powers, India, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand to confront China, which has the world’s largest Navy and Coast Guard fleet.
Together with its militia vessels, China has started to box out and push away the US and its allies from the South China Sea.
Germany and France would be deploying frigates in Asian waters while the United Kingdom would send next year one of its carrier strike forces, the HMS Prince of Wales.
Japan and South Korea had actually started interacting with NATO, hoping to expand the alliance in the Indo-Pacific region.
Ishida’s Asian NATO proposal is dangerous. It could lead to a heightened tension between China and Japan and its NATO-like structure.
The 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) looked up to Japan as a trading and economic partner, not as a military ally.
Asean wanted more Official Development Assistance (ODA) funds for agriculture, health, education, and infrastructure rather than the Official Security Assistance (OSA).
In Eastern Europe, US and NATO support did not manage to avoid a large-scale conflict.
There were concerns the US and NATO support to Indo-Pacific countries could also provoke another crisis.
Ishiba’s Asian NATO could further increase the militarization of the region, sparking an arms race.
There were already indications of increased defense-related spending among Southeast Asian states, Japan, South Korea, and China.
Countries in the region have started to upgrade deterrence capabilities and also stepped up cooperation through training and exercises.
The late Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe started Tokyo’s militarization, but Ishiba went further with his Asian NATO.
His approach to providing regional security is, in fact, a waiver of Japan’s pacifist Constitution, a serious concern for some countries in the region.
0 Comments