Japan's Compliant
Use of Armed Force in Iraq Must be Investigated (Okinawa Times, Japan)
"There is
a persistent opinion that since forces of our ally the United States were involved,
there was little choice but to support the war. At first glance, this may sound
like a logical and reasonable explanation, but ideas like this conceal real danger.
That would mean that Japan follows whatever the U.S. does and requests, implying
a cessation of independent thought. ... This is a way of thinking that is too
warped for words."
Former Japan Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi with former U.S. President George W. Bush: Did Koizumi violate Japan's constitution by improperly using Japan's Self-Defense Force in America's pre-emptive war in Iraq?
On March 20, 2003, when American and British forces launched
air strikes against the regime of Saddam Hussein, the Iraq War began. The main
reason for the preemptive attack was that Iraq's alleged possession of weapons
of mass destruction posed a threat to their security.
But in October 2004, a team of U.S. investigators made it
clear that there were no weapons of mass destruction. The rationale for
starting the war was lost.
In May 2007, the Diet's Iraq Reconstruction Aid Special
Committee, deliberating over a proposed revision of the Iraq Special Measures
Bill allowing for the deployment of Air Self-Defense Forces to Iraq for an additional
two years, attached a Supplementary Resolution that contained six clauses. As a condition for approving the proposal, one
of them was to "reexamine the government’s decision to support the Iraq
War."
Talking to reporters, Junichiro Koizumi, prime minister at the time, commented, “in keeping with the Supplementary
Resolution, we will of course examine this question very carefully.
The Iraq War began exactly ten years ago, and it has been six
years since the Supplementary Resolution was passed, yet we still haven't seen
any progress.
Last December, under Democratic Party administration, the Foreign
Ministry issued a report entitled “Japan’s Response to the Use of Armed Force
Against Iraq.” However, it consisted of only “brief points” summarized into a mere
four A4-sized pages. It was a slapdash job that can barely be called a report. The Abe Administration is reluctant to embrace such an examination.
A soldier from Japan's Self-Defense Force greets an boy in Samawa
City, south of Baghdad, in 2005. Did Japan's government violate
its
post-war constitution by participating in the U.S. occupation?
As a democratic body, Japan's government is obliged to examine
and disclose what its decision-making process supporting the war consisted
of. The government mustn't treat the Supplementary Resolution so off-handedly.
Approximately 4,500 U.S. troops died in the Iraq War. Iraq's
civilian death toll is estimated to be between 120,000 and 130,000. Suicide
attacks and bombings continue to threaten lives, and public security remains
unstable.
The United States, Britain and The Netherlands conducted prompt
and thorough investigations. President Obama virtually admitted that the U.S. assessment
regarding weapons of mass destruction was a mistake, and ended the Iraq War.
The Dutch inquiry ruled that the preemptive military strike
by U.S. and British forces was not based on any U.N. resolution and violated
international law.
Prime Minister Koizumi expressed his immediate “support”
when the war began, and deployed Self-Defense Forces for logistical support and
humanitarian reconstruction. His reasoning was that the “Self-Defense Forces
would only operate in a non-combat areas.”
Posted By Worldmeets.US
There are many questions to be answered about why Koizumi so
impetuously supported the United States by deploying Self-Defense Forces to
Iraq. As it relates to complicity to make war, and even as a violation of the
Constitution’s ban on the use of armed force, it is vital that the government
establish an independent inquiry and thoroughly investigate Japan’s decision to
involve itself in the Iraq War.
Within the government, there is a persistent opinion that
since forces of our ally the United States were involved, there was little
choice but to support the war. At first glance, this may sound like a logical
and reasonable explanation, but ideas like this conceal real danger.
That would mean that Japan follows whatever the U.S. does
and requests, implying a cessation of independent thought.
Japan security policy, which naturally accepts the cessation
of thought and holds that “we cannot oppose to the U.S. military” and that “military
bases should be in Okinawa,” is a way of thinking that is too warped for words.
