By Asaho Mizushima (China Daily)
Updated: 2008-01-09 07:33

Around the time of the Persian Gulf War in 1990, the phrase "international contribution" was heard frequently in reference to Japan.

I don't know who coined it first, but I have always felt uncomfortable with the flippant sound of this phrase. I always put quotation marks around it whenever I refer to it.

Once the Persian Gulf War broke out, many people started questioning whether it was right for Japan, which owed much of its affluence to oil from the Middle East, to sit back and do nothing. That criticism led to the view that dispatching its Self-Defense Forces (SDF) overseas constituted an "international contribution".

However, Japan put $13 billion into the war chest to fund multinational forces and for other purposes - how and where the money was used remains a mystery. Yet, later on, the "Gulf trauma" emerged - Japan was accused of "only giving money" and not soldiers.

Demands by the United States for Japan to "give money, dispatch troops and shed blood" soon escalated into calls for Japan to "show the flag" when the anti-terrorism special measures law was being enacted. Another catchphrase, "boots on the ground", was heard when the Iraq special measures law was being deliberated in the Diet, or Japan's parliament.

Now, the government is trying to pass a new anti-terrorism special measures law that would allow the Maritime SDF to resume refueling activities in the Indian Ocean.

But who exactly is this "international society" that would be so appreciative of Japan's activities? While the US and countries that support it may be part of international society, we must not forget the world has many other members.

From the viewpoint of Japan's Constitution, refueling activities that literally "add fuel" to a military action led by the US is something that Japan definitely must not do.

Supplying fuel to warships taking part in the war in Afghanistan is a form of logistical support for combat; it is in effect abetting the killing of Afghan citizens. It is unconstitutional.

Don't forget that behind this "war on terror" is the cozy relationship between the US military and the defense industry, including trading companies that buy and sell defense equipment. People are growing justifiably suspicious of this relationship.

Countries talk about "international contributions", but what they really mean is contributing to national interests through the use of force. Also lurking in this concept are corporate interests in the defense industry in bed with the private interests of politicians, bureaucrats and high-ranking military officials.

Once this point becomes clear, the so-called "justice" of this "war on terror" will be starkly shaken.

Fifteen years ago, I and several colleagues published Kimi wa Sandabado o Shitteiruka-Mohitotsu no Chikyu no Mamorikata (Do you know 'Thunderbirds'? An alternative way to protect the Earth) by the Nippon-Hyoronsha Co. The book talks about seeking nonmilitary ways of international cooperation.

I was younger then, and I drew upon the old British television puppet show series Thunderbirds to create a vision for a nonmilitary international rescue team.

In hindsight, perhaps I was too harsh on peacekeeping operations of the United Nations, because at the time, I had attached importance to criticism of the overseas dispatch of the SDF.

Nevertheless, I believe the international rescue team idea still offers useful possibilities for Japan in terms of international cooperation. In the book, I described the activities of the International Rescue Team of a Japanese Fire Service (IRT-JF), which was created in 1986, and Peace Brigades International, a nongovernmental organization dedicated to settling conflicts.

The IRT-JF's motto is "a loving hand". It goes anywhere in the world where fires and other disasters strike to help people in need, according to the Fire and Disaster Management Agency website.

This altruistic philosophy shares something in common with the fairness, neutrality and "expecting nothing in return" views espoused by the Thunderbirds series.

Japan should completely halt its support for the use of force, including supplying fuel to military vessels taking part in the Afghan War and sending SDF troops to Iraq.

Instead, we should concentrate on creating a standing international rescue organization to promote fair and neutral assistance when major disasters such as earthquakes and cyclones strike, anywhere in the world.

The important thing is to develop and stick with nonmilitary activities in line with the philosophy of the preamble and Article 9 of the country's Constitution.

The direction shown by Article 9 is that Japan should learn from the past and stop all use of force as a national policy. The nation needs the wisdom and ingenuity to hold itself back from resorting to force, to keep a distance from instant solutions like military force, which always result in adverse side effects.

We must instead forge an environment that leads to dialogue and negotiation.

The preamble to the Constitution states: "We desire to occupy an honored place in an international society striving for the preservation of peace." I believe such a path will lead to that goal in the true sense.

Instead of falling victim to ego-driven nationalism, Japan should naturally advance aid in such areas as medicine, education, disaster relief and technical support-areas in which we excel and which will benefit us all.

This idea describes what might be called the new 21st century small nationalism. Former finance minister Masayoshi Takemura described a similar idea in his 1994 book, Chiisakutomo Kirari to Hikaru Kuni (A small but brightly shining country).

The government is shaping a permanent law aimed at allowing the overseas dispatch of the SDF. Some people argue that as long as the UN resolution on security in Afghanistan exists, Japan can help in the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan. These arguments seem to point to a path for Japan to become a "big and obtrusive ordinary country".

Still, Japan can do one thing right now without following such a path. We can support a treaty to ban cluster bombs, which disseminate many bomblets over wide areas and lead to a large number of civilian injuries.

In February last year, the Oslo Process was initiated by Norway to conclude a new treaty this year prohibiting cluster munitions. One proposal would ensure countries that use cluster bombs outside their own territories would also be required to remove unexploded ones.

The requirement would apply to the US in the Afghan War and Israel in the 2006 Lebanon War. More than 130 countries are part of the international conference on the treaty. However, Japan, along with the US, is opposing it.

Former prime minister Keizo Obuchi, after the 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of Anti-Personnel Mines was ratified by Japan in 1998, ensured Japan disposed of 1 million land mines possessed by the SDF by February 2003.

Now, Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda should step up and join the Oslo Process. If Japan provides funds and technology for the initiative and dispatches technical personnel to remove cluster bombs in Afghanistan and elsewhere, our country will no doubt regain the high regard of the world.

The author is a law professor specializing in constitutional studies at Waseda University The Asahi Shimbun

(China Daily 01/09/2008 page9)