The Japanese government is again trying to send the Self-Defense Force (SDF) overseas on an unprecedented scale by piecemeal means through hastily enacting the "Special Law for Assisting Iraqi Reconstruction". I must point out that Japan is losing track of its basic diplomatic principle and continues to drift about in response to U.S. pressures.

           First, the bill has two purposes—to help the Iraqi people and provide support to occupying powers in postwar Iraq. But these two objectives are different in nature.

           In order to justify SDF support for U.S. and British occupation forces, the legitimacy of the war against Iraq needs to be established. By launching a pre-emptive strike on Iraq, however, the U.S. ignored the U.N. Security Council and violated international law, and it has yet to prove Iraq hid weapons of mass destruction. Under such circumstances, how can anyone say the war was justified?

           It is true the United States has engaged in numerous ugly wars, particularly against the indigenous Americans, Latin American countries and Vietnam. At the same time, it has also continued to inspire people worldwide with the universal concepts of "equal human rights and freedom" advocated in the Declaration of Independence and "peace through international cooperation" enunciated by President Woodrow Wilson.

           Japan's Constitution is a product of these principles and became the point of departure for post-World War II Japan as it made a fresh start as a member of international society.

           But the Bush administration disregarded the rule of international law and took it for granted that the world is unequal, with the strong ruling the weak. As a result, the United States has abandoned the universal principles which were an important component of its "soft power".

           Confronting this problematic situation new in the post-World War II period, Japan is standing at a crucial crossroads. Will Japan continue to support the United States despite its behavior which runs counter to a just world peace, or will it firmly abide by the diplomatic principle in accordance with its Constitution?

           Secondly, a number of conservatives say that, since Japan is for the first time facing the North Korean threat squarely, it needs a realism that does not question the legitimacy of the U.S.-led war against Iraq. This is a problem which calls for a careful multi-faceted examination, but one thing is clear: It is questionable whether supporting the United States, which openly resorted to a pre-emptive strike as an option, is a brand of realism that meets Japan's security needs in regard to the crisis on the Korean peninsula.

           Rather, Japan should learn from the realism espoused by South Korea which is staking its very existence on resolving its conflict with North Korea by non-military means.

           Thirdly, some people have called on Japan to collaborate with the U.S. occupation forces in Iraq because the United Nations' security functions have proven inadequate. It is true that the Japanese have tended to idealize the United Nations and, as a converse reaction, many people have become disillusioned with the organization, realizing it is not effective as they thought.

           But it is a matter of course for the United Nations' security functions to be limited, given that the world body has no coercive power or economic and financial resources of its own.

           The United Nations has an important role to play in legitimizing the policies and actions of member states from the viewpoint of the international community. Although we cannot say the United Nations is always right, policies that fail to be recognized and endorsed by the world organization lack legitimacy, as was the case with the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

           Now, the UN Security Council is not "calling on" member states to support the occupying powers, but rather to promptly provide food, medical supplies and resources for economic reconstruction to help the Iraqi people get back on their feet.

           Japan should make the most of its experience and know-how in this area. Stabilizing the Iraqi people's livelihood paves the way to establishing human rights and democracy in Iraq. This was also the initial experience of postwar Japan, and it meets the United States' stated aim of building a democratic Iraq by "liberating the people from dictatorship".

           So long as the personnel have the competence to meet these needs, it does not matter whether Japan sends the SDF, civilians or non-governmental organizations to Iraq. It must be noted, however, that in recent years South Korean and Chinese leaders have emphasized the importance of "looking to the future" in dealing with Japan. We must not forget that this is another way of saying that Japan has yet to fulfill its historical responsibility for its invasion and domination of its Asian neighbors.

           Highest priority, therefore, should be given not to the dispatch of troops overseas, as intended by the Koizumi cabinet, but to directly meeting the human needs of the Iraqi people.

(Asahi Shimbun, 21 June 2003; The International Herald Tribune/Asahi, 2 July 2003)