China has slammed the passage of two controversial bills by Japan, which would, for the first time after World War-II, allow Tokyo send troops overseas even without an imminent threat to Japanese territory or citizens.
In response to the two bills which were passed by the lower house of the Japanese Diet on Thursday, Chinese State Councilor Yang Jiechi voiced his “stern concern” over the move, the state-run Xinhua news agency is reporting. “(This move) cannot but raise concern and questions from neighbouring countries and the rest of the international community on whether Japan will abolish its pacifist posture,” Mr. Yang said.
Opponents say that the twin-legislation could draw Tokyo into U.S.-led conflicts around the globe, and could violate Article Nine of the countries pacifist post-war constitution.
China has been alarmed as tensions between Japan and China have been growing in the Pacific. Japan is also Washington’s top ally in the enforcement of President Barack Obama’s “Asia Pivot”— a doctrine that has led the United States to deploy nearly 60 per cent of its forces under the Pacific Command, with China as its focal point.
While marked restraint seemed to have couched Mr. Yang’s protest, a commentary by Xinhua, dispensed with the niceties of diplomatic parlance, calling the decision a return to Japan’s militarist past. “Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Thursday realised his dream of abandoning postwar order and switching his country back into war mode,” the write-up observed. It then compared the decision to the “historically bloodied ‘samurai sword of Japan’ (which) could once again be wielded by its troops in every corner of the world”.
“It is a tragedy for Japan as the first victims of Abe's blade are the country's democratic system and the principle of the rule of law, which have been established in the war-torn country since the end of WWII at a cost of millions of innocent souls.”
The blistering commentary particular focused on East Asia, which had borne the brunt of Japan’s wartime militarism pointing out that that the passage of the bills was a “tragedy” for the regional countries that were once “ruthlessly trampled by Japan's wartime barbarities will once again witness the rise of Japan's militarism at a time when their wounds have not yet fully healed and bitter memories remain to haunt”. It also focused on Japan’s rearmament programme by pointing out that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe had “renovated Japan's long-restricted arsenal, polished the nation's arms, and developed next-generation weapons hardware such as the Izumo aircraft carrier”.
The New York Times had earlier reported that, “ Some of Japan’s biggest companies, best known for motorcycles, washing machines and laptop computers, are pitching a new line of global products: military hardware.” The daily added that after a 50-year ban imposed by the Japanese government, “Mitsubishi, Kawasaki, Hitachi, Toshiba and other military contractors in this semi-pacifist country are cautiously but unmistakably telling the world they are open for business”.
Inside Japan, an estimated 20,000 protesters had gathered on Thursday near parliament, organisers say. The previous day nearly 100,000 were out on the streets, rejecting any deviation from the status quo.
The Associated Press adds:
The new U.S. commander of the Pacific Fleet assured allies Friday that American forces are well—equipped and ready to respond to any contingency in the South China Sea, where long—seething territorial disputes have set off widespread uncertainties.
Adm. Scott Swift, who assumed command of the Pacific Fleet in May, said the Navy may deploy more than the four littoral combat ships it has committed to the region. Swift also disclosed that he was “very interested” in expanding annual combat exercises the U.S. Navy holds with each of several allies into a multi—nation drill, possibly including Japan.
Asked how many resources the U.S. military was ready to devote to the South China Sea, Swift told a small group of journalists in Manila that he understood the concerns of America’s allies.
But he stressed that the U.S. doesn’t take sides but would press ahead with operations to ensure freedom of navigation in disputed waters and elsewhere. “The United States has been very clear that it does not support the use of coercion and force,” he said.
