George Packard, "US-Japan Security Treaty at 50," Foreign Affairs

Abstract: An essay on the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the U.S. and Japan, or the
U.S.-Japan Security Treaty that was signed on January 19, 1960 is presented. It discusses its national
security benefits for Japan and its economic benefits for the U.S. The author suggests that the
election of the Democratic Party of Japan in August 2009 has threatened the stability of the treaty.

- 1960 historic treaty signed by Japanese Prime Minister Nobusuke Kishi and U.S. Sec of State
Christian Herter

o The treaty committed the U.S. to help defend Japan if Japan came under attack and
it provided bases and ports for U.S. armed forces in Japan

- ARG: one might think that the agreement has a good future because of the success it has had in
keeping Japan safe and the U.S. strong in East Asia, but that would be WRONG.

o The election of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) after 54 years of rule by the
Liberal Democratic Party has raised questions about whether the treaty’s benefits
still outweigh its costs  

In the beginning:

- Japan though that they were getting a bargain deal because they would get low cost security from
the U.S. and get access to the U.S. market (for its products); all w/o the need to build a big
military and Japan could recover economically

o U.S. could project its power into western Pacific; by having troops & bases

o Unhappy for the Japanese because the agreement allowed foreign troops on its soil
(which it had never accepted before in Japan’s history); over 260, 000 U.S. troops at
bases across the country  

- Under Article 9 of Japan’s 1947 Constitution, which U.S. Gen Douglas MacArthur’s had forced
on the country; Japan would use the article as an excuse to stay out of the U.S.’s future wars
and as a way to resist the U.S.’s urgings for Japan to build up its military

o The U.S. had agreed to come to the aid of Japan if they got attacked, but Japan did not
have to do the same  (“NO RECIPROCAL OBLIGATION”)

- U.S. troops living on bases in Japan had brought crime and caused accidents

- There was a revised treaty which said that the U.S. government committed to defend Japan if it
was attacked and to consult Japan in advance of major changes in the deployment of troops,
equipment use, or use of bases in Japan.

- Even with revised treaty, many Japanese still protested over their disapproval of the U.S.-Japanese
alliance
 - Nixon dealt 3 blows to Japan (“Nixon shocks“); shattered the image of the U.S. as Japan‘s
protector:

o After pressuring Tokyo for years to support Taiwanese government (w/o prior notice) he
sent his national security adviser Henry Kissinger to Beijing to discuss
rapprochement (reestablishing of cordial relations) with China

o Without warning Nixon took the U.S. dollar off gold standard, causing yen to increase in
value and hurting Japan’s export-led economy

o Nixon imposed a 10% tax on imports from Japan; citing the U.S. Trading w/ the
Enemy Act of 1917

- By the end of 1980s there was a weariness towards Japan

- Toshiba selling classified technology to Soviets

- U.S. had forced agreement on Japan that would limit Japanese computer chips being imported to
U.S.

- 1989 Gallup poll had 57% of respondents seeing Japan as a greater threat than the Soviet Union

- Clinton to power in ‘93, and was influenced by the notion that Japan was the enemy

- 1996 report by Joseph Nye brought a joint statement that kept 100k U.S. troops in East Asia and
reaffirmed U.S. resolve to defend Japan.

- After N Korea tested a ballistic missile over Japan in 1998, Tokyo agreed to cooperate with
Washington and share technology on anti-ballistic missile defense  

Costs and benefits:

- Both sides have found benefits outweigh the costs 

- Benefit for Japan was that it would be protected by U.S. (falling under U.S. nuclear umbrella),
which allowed Japan to focus on economic growth, w/o need to acquire nuclear weapons (defense
budget was almost always less than 1% of GDP)

- Treaty also allowed for Japan to access U.S. market

- U.S. benefits: treaty’s long term benefits included “unsinkable aircraft carrier” to carry out its
strategy in East Asia 

- Over years Japan has taken some steps to not be free riding on U.S. for its security

- Japan has gradually overcome its reluctance to send troops abroad (sent to Cambodia, the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestinian territories and Rwanda)
- Japan now has the 7th largest military in the world

- Nuclear weapons remain a sensitive issue

- Since 1960 Japan has insisted that no U.S. nuclear weapon could be based on its territory

o Prime Minister Sato’s 3 principles vs. nuclear weapons:

 Tokyo would not manufacture, possess, or introduce such weapons into Japan

o But it is U.S. government policy to neither confirm nor deny presence of nuclear weapons
anywhere at any time

o There may be however, an argument that allows the U.S. ships and planes to carry
nuclear weapons while in transit through Japanese ports and airports without violating
3rd principle

- Japan’s new prime minister (Yukio Hatoyama) on the Liberal Democratic Party

o Hatoyama appears to want to reduce U.S. footprint in Japan

o He wanted the peacetime presence of U.S. troops should be eliminated

o U.S. presence is a “continuing aggravation to local residents”

- THE U.S. SHOULD BE AWARE THAT JAPANESE VOTERS WOULD DETERMINE

THE FUTURE COURSE OF THE ALLIANCE.

- Above all, U.S. negotiators should start with the premise that the security treaty with Japan,
important as it is, is only part of a larger partnership between two of the world's greatest
democracies and economies.  (Washington stands to gain far more by working with Tokyo on the
environment, health issues, human rights, the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons, and
counterterrorism).

- If the U.S. reduces troops and bases in Japan, Japan should make much larger
contributions to mutual security and global peace.