|
 |
 |
TOKYO — Missile defense will be be a contentious U.S.-Japan issue
for the future, much in the way automotive, agricultural and semiconductors
have been in past years.
This conclusion has emerged from a series of seminars, panels and reports
which have surfaced on both sides of the Pacific in recent weeks.
Typical of the blunt language used in the various venues was the comment
of Michihiko Kunahiro, former Japanese ambassador to China:
"At the end of the day, who will push the button?"
He said Japan might be a asked by the U.S. to invest heavily in joint
missile defense technology but "In whose interests? There is the bottom line
question of control."
The public has the right to know about the negotiations and actual work,
he said at a Tokyo seminar hosted by the Institute for International Policy
Studies.
"So far the government, through the Self-Defense Forces has have released
only one report o the subject."
This particular Tokyo seminar featured Michael D. Swaine, Research
Director, Center for Asia-Pacific Policy, The RAND Corporation. He gave an
overview on Ballistic Missile Defense in Northeast Asia : The Case of
Japan"
He admitted that "a lot of questions remain even on the basics of
cooperation," after months of his study at the Japanese think tank and at
RAND. He also said that he could see heated discussion over the missile
issue between Washington and Tokyo in he future.
Toshiyuki Shikata, retired military officer who has studied at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said "TMD (Theater Missile Defense)
is a 5-10 year program, perhaps longer. What if we invest and by that time
there is no North Korea? Then we are facing our missiles at who? China?"
He emphasized that Japan might still be insecure after several years of
work. "Such commitment raises big diplomatic questions also."
There were other voices about the nature of the threat.
"It is hard to stimulate meaningful debate on the missile issue since
the threat seems to be diminished, at least from North Korea," said Toshiro
Ozawa, acting director The Japan Institute of International Affairs.
"We were under US umbrella during Cold War when big powers threatened.
Now a moderating North Korea is hard for the Japanese public to get excited
about."
He said there s bound to be contention since "our TMD is different from
Washington's NMD (National Missile Defense."
As for regional complications, a "white paper" issued by China's State
Council Oct.16 expressed "profound concern" at U.S. and Japanese research on
a TMD system to protect against ballistic missiles.
Japan was portrayed as a willing partner in U.S. efforts to thwart
China, strengthening an alliance that Beijing said went far beyond Japanese
defense needs.
Meanwhile, a report issued in Washington Oct.11 called for broader
U.S.-Japan cooperation in missile defense.
The report said that 1996 moves to update security ties, were
inconclusive. "As a result, the two sides soon returned to bickering and
poor policy coordination."
Richard Armitage, an assistant secretary of defense in the
administration of President Ronald Reagan and an adviser to candidate
George W.Bush, and Richard Nye Jr., assistant defense secretary in the Bill
Clinton administration, wrote the report.
Nye was the author of the Pentagon policy to set the number of U.S.
forces in Asia at 100,000 but the new report says "the U.S.troop commitment
shouldn't be based on any "artificial" number, but should reflect changes
in the security environment."
Between the lines is seen the need to emphasize across-the-board U.S,
relations with Japan more than with China.
Edward Neilan (eneilan@crisscross.com) is a veteran journalist, based in Tokyo, who covers East Asia and writes weekly for World Tribune.com.