Lame explanations for SDF dispatch

自衛隊イラク派遣問題

The issue should be discussed further in the Diet even before the next ordinary session opens Jan. 19. The Defense Agency is reportedly planning to send an advance air force contingent by the end of the year. Ground troops are expected to be dispatched to southern Iraq early next year.

Government officials hope Saddam's capture will improve the security situation in Iraq and smooth the way for the deployment of Self-Defense Forces units. That may be optimistic, though, for now at least. In Baghdad, fresh terrorist attacks have occurred, causing many casualties.

During the two-day debate, conducted at an ad hoc committee in both chambers, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi gave a number of reasons for his decision to send troops. First, he said, "As a responsible member of the international community, Japan needs to cooperate in the postwar reconstruction and democratization of Iraq." In principle, that position is hard to dispute.

As for security risks, he said: "We will pay full attention to securing the safety of our troops. There is danger out there because fighting is not yet over completely. Under these circumstances, the SDF is the only organization we can send."

Asked about the legality of a troop dispatch, the prime minister said: "The SDF is not going to war in Iraq. Their dispatch is not against the Constitution because they are not going to use force."

Mr. Koizumi appealed for moral support from the public, quoting a passage from the preamble to the Constitution, which says in part that the Japanese people "desire to occupy an honored place in the international society striving for the preservation of peace." Many feel, however, that the quote was taken out of context.

The public concern is that sending SDF personnel to an area liable to see fighting could contravene the Constitution, which prohibits the use of force abroad. Given the volatile situation in Iraq, however, it is admittedly difficult to draw a clear line between "combat and non-combat zones." Nevertheless the public remains worried about fuzzy distinctions between fighting and non-fighting areas.

For example, the dispatch plan calls for the use of C-130 air transports to deliver relief and other goods from Kuwait to Baghdad International Airport. Asked whether Baghdad is a combat area, the director general of the Defense Agency, Mr. Shigeru Ishiba, said: "It may or may not be the case. It's not appropriate to answer the question." He can be criticized for being evasive, but then it is difficult to give assurances of safety for as long as Iraq remains unstable.

Another touchy question is whether SDF planes will transport foreign troops' weapons and ammunition. At the news conference, Mr. Koizumi ruled out that option, saying Japanese troops are going to support reconstruction and humanitarian activities. During the Diet debate, however, he reversed himself, saying, "How can you tell U.S. soldiers to remove the weapons they are carrying to protect themselves?"

In a similar vein, defense chief Ishiba said, "You can't build a relationship of trust if you have to check their baggage for weapons." Thus the implication is that U.S. weapons and ammunition may be transported unless they are declared. It is possible that SDF transports on a humanitarian mission might be targeted by anti-U.S. insurgents.

Meanwhile, Saddam's capture seems to have opened up a new vista in the Iraqi situation. However, questions will likely linger about the "legitimacy" of the Iraq war. The U.S. doctrine of the pre-emptive strike will remain the subject of controversy even if weapons of mass destruction are discovered.

But these issues should not stand in the way of Iraqi reconstruction. Mr. Koizumi is right to criticize the U.S. policy of awarding contracts only to members of the "coalition of the willing." He should sell U.S. President George W. Bush on the virtue of international cooperation.

The Japan Times Weekly
Dec. 27, 2003
(C) All rights reserved

      問題について、1月19日の通常国会開会前にさらに審査を行うべきだ。防衛庁は、航空自衛隊の先遣隊を年末までに、陸上自衛隊を年明けにイラクへ派遣する意向を示している。

      衆参両院の特別委員会の審査で、小泉首相は自衛隊派遣の理由を「国際社会の責任ある一員として、イラクの戦後復興と民主化に協力する必要がある」と述べた。

      首相はイラクの戦闘が完全に終結しておらず、危険性を認めたうえで、「自衛隊は戦争に行くのではない。武力は行使しないので派遣は憲法違反ではない」と主張した。

      首相はまた、「われらは平和維持に努力する国際社会に名誉ある地位を占めたいと思う」という内容の憲法の前文を引用して国民の理解を求めたが、この部分は前後関係を抜きにして引用されたという感じだ。

      戦闘が起きる可能性のある地域への自衛隊派遣は、海外での武力行使を禁止している憲法に違反する恐れがある。

      石破防衛庁長官は、航空自衛隊のC-130輸送機をクウェートからバグダッドへの救援物資輸送に使う計画に関して、バグダッドが戦闘地域か否かの答えを留保した。

      小泉首相は当初、連合軍の武器弾薬の輸送はしないと明言したが、今回の審査で前言をひるがえし、武装した米兵の輸送を容認する意向を明らかにした。つまり、自衛隊機がゲリラに狙われる可能性もありうる。

      フセインの拘束は、イラク情勢に変化をもたらすにしても、イラク戦争の「正当性」には疑問が残る。もしイラクで大量破壊兵器が発見されても、米国の｢先制攻撃戦略｣については論議が続くだろう。

      しかし、これらの問題でイラク復興が妨げられてはならない。小泉首相が、復興事業契約を「有志連合」諸国に限定する米国の決定を批判したのは正しい。首相はこの問題に関し、ブッシュ米大統領に国際協力の意味について説得すべきだ。