China has accused Japan’s “warlord” prime minister, Shinzo Abe, of threatening peace in the region, following the enactment on Tuesday of controversial laws allowing Japanese troops to fight on foreign soil for the first time since the end of the second world war.
The security laws, which were passed last September after chaotic scenes in parliament, reinterpret the country’s pacifist constitution to enable Japan to exercise collective self-defence – or coming to the aid of the US and other allies – in overseas conflicts.
In an online commentary, the state-run Xinhua news agency accused Abe of abandoning Japan’s postwar constitution, which limits the military to a purely defensive role, saying the move would “only serve to endanger the Japanese public’s right to live in peace”.
The legislation, the biggest shift in Japan’s defence posture since its wartime defeat in August 1945, would also “pose a severe challenge to peace in the Asia-Pacific region, which is already vulnerable”, the commentary said.
Abe’s Liberal Democratic party and its coalition partner pushed the laws through parliament, despite mass protests and warnings that Japanese troops could become embroiled in foreign wars.
Abe insists the self-imposed ban on collective self-defence inhibited Japan’s ability to respond to new security threats in the region, including North Korea’s nuclear weapons programme and more assertive Chinese naval activity.
Japan and China are embroiled in a longrunning row over ownership of the Senkaku islands in the East China Sea, while Tokyo has voiced support for the Philippines and other countries in their opposition to Beijing’s construction of bases in disputed areas of the South China Sea.
Tensions between Beijing and Tokyo rose again this week after Japan switched on a radar station in the East China Sea, giving it a permanent intelligence-gathering post close to Taiwan and the Senkakus, known as the Diaoyu in China.
The new base on the island of Yonaguni is at the western extreme of a string of Japanese islands in the East China Sea, 150km (90 miles) south of the Senkaku islands.
Japan’s increasing sense of caution over Chinese military activity is being reflected in a strategic shift away from its northern maritime border with Russia, despite concerns over possible Russian plans to build a naval base on the disputed Kuril islands.
Soviet forces seized the islands from Japan – where they are known as the Northern Territories – towards the end of the second world war. Russia’s refusal to return them has prevented the two countries from concluding a permanent peace treaty.
The Xinhua commentary made oblique reference to the South China Sea, where Japan has no direct territorial claims, and accused Abe of pandering to US interests in the region.
The point of the security laws, it said, was to “ride the coattails of Uncle Sam’s ‘pivot to Asia’ strategy and pave the way for Japan to further meddle in regional affairs – not only territorial disputes with its neighbours, but also issues [in] which Japan is not a stakeholder – with the United States, in a sabre-rattling way”.
It added: “Abe’s elaborate ruse to contribute to regional peace and stability has been exposed and once again unmasked Japan as a troublemaker and a pawn of the United States in interfering in Asia-Pacific region affairs.”
Abe said the security laws were designed to strengthen Japan’s security alliance with the US, where the Obama administration has welcomed the move.
“[We] can now help each other during emergency situations,” Abe told a parliamentary committee on Tuesday. “The bond of the alliance has been strengthened.”
The chief cabinet secretary, Yoshihide Suga, said the laws were “vital to prevent wars and protect people’s lives and livelihoods amid the increasingly severe security environment surrounding our country.
“The government will first preserve the peace through diplomacy and there is no change at all in our policy of proactive diplomacy for that purpose.”
Japanese voters are divided over the laws, however. A poll by the Yomiuri Shimbun newspaper published on Tuesday showed 47% of respondents did not approve of the changes, while 38% supported them. That compared to 58% who opposed the legislation last September, against 31% who approved.
View all comments >
comments
Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.
This discussion is closed for comments.
We’re doing some maintenance right now. You can still read comments, but please come back later to add your own.
Commenting has been disabled for this account (why?)