Japan's next step to be closely watched: defense ministry
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe Thursday pushed security bills through the lower house amid domestic protests, a move that would end Japan's 70 years of pacifism and allow Japanese troops to fight abroad for the first time since World War II.
Analysts believe the security bills could bring profound and irreversible changes to Asia's political dynamic, driving countries like China and South Korea to adjust their defense and diplomatic strategies toward Japan.
"The security situation surrounding Japan is increasingly severe," Abe told reporters after the vote, in an apparent reference to the rise of China.
"These bills are necessary to protect Japanese people's lives and prevent a war before it breaks out," Abe said.
Thursday's passage means the enactment in essence.
According to Japanese law, if the upper house vetoes the bills or fails to vote on them within 60 days, the bills can still be enacted if two-thirds of seats in the lower chamber approve their enactment.
Abe's Liberal Democratic Party and its small partner Komeito Party control 326 out of 475 seats, or 69 percent, in the lower chamber.
At least 20,000 people took part in a rally outside parliament building to protest against the bills on Thursday.
"The Japanese government in the past promised to the world that it would never wage violence against any other countries. Today's passage of the bills has coerced Japan to participate in US-led wars, putting Japan in danger," Sakamoto Gishi, a student at Nihon University, told the Global Times on Thursday.
The new security bills aim to allow the Japanese military to go into battle to protect its allies - also known as "collective self-defense" - even if there is no direct threat to Japan or its people.
"The bills are a fundamental shift of Japan's security policies," Hu Lingyuan, a professor with the Center for Japanese Studies at Fudan University in Shanghai, told the Global Times.
"Emancipated by the bills and instigated by the U.S., Japan will become belligerent in international conflicts," Jiang Lifeng, former head of the Institute of Japanese Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times.
The Japanese government can even bring its people to the forefront regardless of domestic concerns over the causalities when compelled by the U.S., Jiang noted.
Backlash
The bills have also triggered a backlash from Japan's two neighboring countries on Thursday.
"The passage of the bills ... is an unprecedented move from Japan since the end of World War II, which may lead to a major change in the country's military and security policies," said China's foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying on Thursday.
She called on Japan to respect the major security concerns of Japan's neighbors and not to do anything that could damage China's sovereignty and security interests, or harm regional security and stability.
"China can and is resolutely determined to safeguard its sovereignty and security interests. The next step taken by Japan will be closely watched," China's Ministry of National Defense said in a statement sent to the Global Times on Thursday.
Separately, South Korea's foreign ministry stated that the country will never tolerate Japan's military move without Seoul's prior consent if it affects the security of the Korean Peninsula or hurts its national interests, the Yonhap News Agency reported on Thursday.
Experts pointed out that the remarks of China's foreign and defense ministries were strongly-worded, issuing warnings before taking real actions.
Renouncing the right to collective self-defense under Japan's pacifist constitution was the foundation of establishing diplomatic ties with neighboring countries after World War II, the Xinhua News Agency said in a commentary on Thursday, adding that Abe has now realized his dream of switching Japan back into war mode.
"Now that the [pacifism] foundation does not exist any longer, China will have to reconsider the future direction of bilateral ties," Hu said, adding that the passage signals a possible souring of bilateral relations.
