The Liberal Democratic Party of Japan (LDP) held a public debate to select a new prime minister. The candidates shared their views on economic growth, security issues and political reform.
The most striking statement among the candidates was the call by leading candidate Shigeru Ishiba for the establishment of an Asian NATO, starting with Japan’s accession to ANZUS.
In previous press conferences, Ishiba has frequently expressed his desire to create an ‘Asian version of NATO’ and to bring parity to the Japan-US Status of Forces Agreement. Ishiba often referred to the Ukraine issue during the meeting, saying: “Why is deterrence not working in Ukraine? Because there is no official NATO presence there”.
Ishiba served as director-general of the Japan Defence Agency in the cabinet of Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi between 2002 and 2004. He then served for one year as defence minister under Yasuo Fukuda in 2007-2008. A senior figure in the LDP, Ishiba is one of those who believe that Japan should abandon its pacifist constitutional defence strategy.
In a debate with nine other candidates that focused on their economic and development plans, Ishiba said: “Asia’s security structure is gradually changing under the influence of existing relationships and value systems. This requires us to rethink the concepts of international cooperation and self-defence”.
On security policy, Secretary General Toshimitsu Motegi pointed out that the ‘Asian version of NATO’ advocated by former Secretary General Shigeru Ishiba was unrealistic. “It is theoretically possible to start with countries with similar environments,” Ishiba replied, referring to the United States, Australia, and New Zealand.
Motegi then recalled that this was a constitutional process, independent of party agendas, and said: “I think Ishiba will be the founder of the Asian version of NATO. Although the essence of NATO is being proposed, it is a system to protect member states from external aggression. Collective security and the right to self-defence are increasingly dependent on the LDP. This comprehensive study is about the constitution. Yes, Asia is a continent with different value systems. Very different from Europe in particular. For example, our relations and positions with China are on a different level. I wonder if this discourse has matured to support the progressive process in the relationship. On the other hand, will Singapore, Thailand and India be included in this group? I also think that this is unrealistic. What do you think, Mr Shiba, please respond?”
Ishiba argued that the understanding of collective security in Asia affects the relations of countries, which creates uncertainty about how regional security mechanisms will be shaped, and said: “The symbol of collective security is the United Nations. But is it possible to join the United Nations forces and use force? I advocate the Asian version of NATO because it is a different concept from the right of self-defence. We need to clarify everything, including the constitutional debate. I am fully aware of that, but which countries will be involved? This is only because there are various security mechanisms in the Asia-Pacific region, such as Japan and the United States, the US-Korea Security Treaty, the ANZUS Treaty and the Five Eyes Alliance under the United Kingdom. Yes, the earliest way to combine them is to add Japan to AZUS,” he said.
The alliance between Japan and the United States is an important factor in the security dynamics of the Asia-Pacific region. This creates the need to strengthen cooperation with other Asian countries. So much so that Ishiba’s statement that ‘Japan is the symbol of collective security’ shows the effort to establish hegemony in the Asia-Pacific with the US by establishing the epicentre in Japan to surround China and Russia in the region. When Ishiba was secretary general in the Abe cabinet, he argued for the need to pave the way for these constitutional changes.
Ishiba also announced that he would consider revising the Statute of Forces Agreement (SOFA), which governs US military operations in Japan.
The agreement was signed in 1960 when the US-Japan security treaty was revised and remains unchanged.
Many in Japan describe the SOFA as ‘unequal and occupying’, especially when it comes to accidents and crimes involving US military personnel.
Ishiba, as LDP leader and therefore prime minister, emphasised the need for closer military ties between the two countries and said that Japan wanted to establish a base in the US to train its Self-Defence Forces.
He then argued that the SOFA should be at the same level as the agreement that would be reached if such a Japanese military base were established in the United States.
If we are going to revise the SOFA, it should be something that strengthens the alliance and improves the regional security environment,” Ishiba said.
