What Does Abe Want？

　　Japan’s mixed signals and provocations are not conducive to peace

　　A series of provocative remarks by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe recently has attracted the attention of people worldwide. On the one hand， Abe has visibly raised his so-called “proactive contribution to peace” theory； on the other hand， the Japanese leader has spared no efforts advocating fears of the “China threat.” And in the meantime， Japan not only extended thinly veiled military provocations to China， but also sent 14 percent of its troops for military exercises targeting China. As Abe’s China policy is full of increasingly tough rhetoric， it raises a question for everyone： What does Abe really want？

　　Abe’s empire ambitions

　　Abe’s political ambition is an open secret. The hawkish remarks of the Japanese leader are gradually shedding previous disguises， becoming more and more flagrant. In his 2006 best-selling book， Toward a Beautiful Country， published during his first term as prime minister， Abe expounded his ruling ideas of trying to make Japan a “normal country” with the right to collective self-defense and a full-fledged military. After taking office for the second time， Abe reiterated these ideas and called them the cornerstone of his ruling Liberal Democratic Party.

　　Abe is a typical representative of Japan’s right-wing forces. He is even willing to proclaim that he is a spiritual heir of the former Japanese empire. As such， Abe became the handpicked successor of Junichiro Koizumi， who defied the requests of Asian neighbors not to visit the Yasukuni shrine and laid the groundwork for Japan’s gradual emergence from its pacifist shell.

　　As Japan committed itself in the 1980s to becoming a world political power， it has since sought to cast off the restrictions of the postwar system (including the pacifist constitution)， which has become a major political objective among Japanese right-wing politicians. The fundamental reason is that the pacifist constitution imposed by Washington has denied Japan’s right to develop offensive military forces or to launch wars. But in the eyes of the Japanese rightists， lacking the ability to start wars effectively prevents Japan from realizing the international political power it seeks.

　　In the 1990s， Japan joined UN peacekeeping missions in order to shape public opinion in relation to its military. However， participating in these UN peacekeeping operations failed to erase the negative reputation of Japan’s wartime history. Japan thus altered its strategy by drawing support from the U.S.-Japanese alliance in order to boost its status in regional security. At the end of the 20th century， Japan issued a law aiming to interfere with the affairs of surrounding countries alongside the United States， paving the way for a greater military presence in Japan’s expanding political interests in the international arena. But， this underhanded law cannot allow Japan to break away from the constraints of its pacifist constitution.

　　Now， Abe finally found an opportunity to make Japan an international military power. First， the U.S. “pivot to Asia” strategy has further upgraded Japan’s status on the chessboard. The relatively declining influence of the United States also made room for Japan’s aggressive strategy. In addition， Abe used the territorial row escalation triggered by Japan’s island purchasing farce to push the constitutional amendment and strengthen its military forces.

　　In a recent interview with U.S. media， Abe openly stated the reason behind the increased military activities， saying that Japan should play a leading role not only in the economic field， but also in regional security of the Asia-Pacific. Clearly， Abe’s ambition is to gain regional hegemony just as the U.S. influence is declining.

　　’Proactive’ contribution

　　How will Japan play its part as a regional “leader” based on military power？ In September， Abe coined his latest slogan for Japan’s new national security strategy—“proactive contribution to peace”—which he said will be the banner of Japan’s strategy in the 21st century and is to be written into Japan’s new National Defense Program Guidelines.

　　Abe did not give a detailed explanation of his proactive pacifism， merely labeling it as a way to strengthen international coordination. However， from Abe’s overall security strategy， the real implication of this new slogan emerges： On one hand， it exercises the right to collective self-defense in order to be capable of fighting alongside its security ally， the United States； on the other hand， it aims to build a force in East Asia to contain China， by which Japan could expand its right to collective self-defense over the entire area. Abe’s so-called proactive pacifism has thereby put China into the position of an adversary. In a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal， Abe said that one way in which Japan would “contribute” to the world would be countering China in Asia.

　　The key word in Abe’s security initiatives is “proactive.” The word has explicitly expressed Japan’s military-based aggressiveness. The core of the strategy is to seek political and economic interests through a three dimensional approach of “seeking an adversary， forging an alliance and engaging in confrontation.”

　　In fact， Abe has actively sought to imitate the U.S. political system domestically in order to make Japan’s foreign and security systems more compatible with its powerful ally. While Abe clamors over the “China threat” and intends to play a larger role in the international community， he has actively advocated the establishment of a Japanese version of the U.S. National Security Council (NSC). The Japanese NSC would be headed by the prime minister， and include three other ministers—the minister of foreign affairs， defense chief and Chief Cabinet Secretary. The institutional arrangement has brought the prime minister a firm grip on the country’s diplomatic and defense policy machinery， while enhancing the voice of Japan’s military brass in foreign policy. The resulting decision-making apparatus is certain to endow Japan’s foreign policy with more militaristic undertones.

　　In addition， the militarization of Japan’s Self Defense Force (SDF) is also progressing. The establishment of the Ministry of Defense has reinforced the political status of Japan’s military force in the country. Japan has also renovated its armed forces headquarters and completed a systematic transformation and systematic upgrade of the SDF command system. At present， Japan has employed 34，000 of its armed forces to take part in a large-scale drill on and around the uninhabited atoll of Okidaito-jima， simulating the retaking of an island. The purpose of this action is to test the effects of its SDF transformation as well as mobilize the whole military in preparing for war， despite Abe’s claims of using the military for peace purposes.

　　More harm than help

　　Abe’s right-wing practices have intensified risk in that he needs to maintain a tense confrontation between Japan and its “enemy” to achieve his political goals. Abe has thus taken every opportunity to create such an atmosphere， especially over the Diaoyu Islands and other maritime disputes. Abe’s policy is marked by military adventurism. Japan continually interfered with the routine offshore drills of the Chinese Navy by taking dangerous military actions. More recently， Japan has sent war crafts to spy on China’s naval exercise for two days， which could have easily caused miscalculations or even conflict between the two armies.

　　The political foundation of Abe’s adventurism lies in the far right deviation of Japanese politics. After the Cold War， as the United States promoted the U.S.-Japanese military alliance to both a regional and global scale， the Japanese right wing saw an opportunity to gain influence.

　　But the fundamental philosophy of the Japan rightists has been met with resistance from the international community. Though Japan hopes to take advantage of its alliance with the United States to enhance its military might， its role will be limited to that of a pawn of the United States. If Japan wants to force the United States to become involved in its conflict with China， its plans would likely end in disappointment.

　　The Japanese rightists are fighting a losing battle， and their retrograde movement has also weakened their ethical foundation. In an era wherein problems can only be solved through dialogue， there is no place for militarism and hegemony.

关注读览天下微信， 100万篇深度好文， 等你来看……