REARMING BY JAPAN

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27274, 15 February 1954, Page 11

REARMING BY JAPAN

SECURITY PACT WITH UNITED STATES

, . TOKYO. America’s decision to reduce her Far East army divisions is seen by many Japanese as recognition that Japan is no longer a “dead weight” and is now able to play a role in the Asia defence bloc. Japan is pledged, in her actual Security Pact with the United States, to build up forces which can contribute to her own defence. Her new American-style army of 110,000 men is considered equal to at least five American divisions. Japanese military analysts say the new divisions have from 10 to 15 times the fire power of the old Japanese division. Japan is expected to increase her army strength by about 30.000 this year. Theoretically Japan, under the constitution introduced by General Douglas Macarthur, cannot have an army. Whether present forces constituted a breach of the new constitution was made one of the big political issues here last year. Article nine of the constitution states as follows:—“Aspiring sincerely to an internationl peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people, forever, renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation, or the threat or use of force, as a means of settling disputes with other nations. For the above purpose, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the State will not be recognised.” The anti-war constitution to the outsider, seems difficult to reconcile with the army of 110,000 men with its tanks, howitzers, machine guns and recoilless 75’s, and the navy of 9000 men with 18 frigates and 50 smaller patrol' boats.

The Prime Minister, Mr Shigeru Yoshida has, since he first established at America’s insistence a “National Police Reserve” in 1950, strongly rejected charges of a breach of constitution. His most recent statement was: “I won’t amend the Constitution until the country proves itself capable ol arming.”

This was seen as an acknowledgement that Japan must some day have a new Constitution: not a new Constitution to justify an already accomplished rearmament. It was sufficient assurance to coax back into his liberal party most of the group of 32 who last year left the party declaring themselves against unconstitutional and secret rearmament. These breakaways, led by a veteran politician, Mr Ichiro Hatoyama, wanted “open rearmament for defence” and now consider they have as good as got it. One leading columnist summed it up: “The process of invisible rearmament by the hands of Prime Minister Yoshida is now over and the process of visible rearmament is beginning,’’ This writer also reported that a leading Japanese politician visiting the United States was told by a former member of the Occupation Force, in fact the man who drafted Article 9 of the Constitution, that above anything else the Japanese should amend the Constitution.

If any encouragement was needed for open rearmament regardless of the Constitution it was given by the United States Vice-President, Mr Richard Nixon, in his visit to Japan last November. He said: “It wasn’t the Japanese . . . but it was at the insistence of the United States that Japan disarmed . . . I’m going to admit that the United States did make a mistake in 1946.”

A popular cartoon in newspapers here lately has been “Guns before butter.’’ Though the average Japanese has little use for butter he has been told: “You like butter, so you must have guns to get it.”