Smoke rises over Iran’s capital, Tehran, after the United States and Israel launched a large-scale military operation on February 28. Photo taken on March 1 (©Getty/Kyodo).
このページを で読む
As United States and Israeli strikes on Iran continue, Japan could face a difficult decision if Washington asks its treaty ally for support: whether to dispatch the Self-Defense Forces (SDF). Sending forces to the Strait of Hormuz, now effectively under blockade, or providing logistical support would be difficult unless Japan itself faced an immediate threat, such as a cutoff in energy supplies. Another hurdle is how the US and Israeli attacks would be assessed under international law.
Deployment Depends on Japan's Security Legislation
If Japan were to dispatch the SDF in response to a US request, the legal basis would likely come under Japan's security legislation in one of two forms. One would be a defense operation in a "survival-threatening situation," which allows Japan to exercise the right of collective self-defense. The other would be an "important influence situation," under which the SDF can provide rear-area support to US forces and others.
Tokyo has previously cited minesweeping in the Strait of Hormuz as one example of a survival-threatening situation. The rationale is that a blockade of the strait, which carries 80% of Japan-bound tanker traffic, would have a devastating effect on economic activity. Still, Japan's public and private oil reserves amount to about 250 days' supply. This has led some within the ruling Liberal Democratic Party's defense camp to argue that such a scenario would not immediately threaten Japan's survival.
Conditions for Support Aren't in Place
After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the US, the Japanese government enacted a special anti-terrorism law. Based on this law, it dispatched Maritime Self-Defense Force supply ships and other vessels to the Indian Ocean to refuel the multinational force. That precedent suggests Japan could also provide rear-area support in the current crisis, if the government were to designate it an "important influence situation."
For now, however, the government says the current situation does not meet that threshold. In particular, it does not view the crisis as one that, if left unaddressed, could lead to a direct armed attack on Japan. "We do not judge that the conditions apply," Chief Cabinet Secretary Minoru Kihara said. Some government officials say that could change if oil and other supplies were to run short.
Legal Basis for US Strikes Remains Unclear
It is also unclear whether the US and Israeli attacks qualify under international law as an exercise of self-defense permitted by the UN Charter. For Japan to provide support, the actions of the US and Israel must comply with international law. Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has taken an ambiguous stance, saying that "at this stage, a legal assessment cannot be made."
More than 40 Japan-linked vessels remain stranded in the Persian Gulf. Under Japan's Self-Defense Forces Law, the government could issue a maritime-security order and send Maritime Self-Defense Force ships to escort them. But such operations are intended solely to maintain public order.
"What is unfolding is combat between states," a Ministry of Defense official said. "Self-defense by police officers in the course of maintaining public order is entirely different from a defense deployment based on the exercise of national self-defense." In other words, using a maritime-security operation in such a scenario could risk stretching the law beyond its intended purpose.
RELATED:
- Iran, Trump, and the Strategic Challenge Facing East Asia
- The Iran Crisis Can Benefit from Japan's Maritime Minesweepers
Author: Taisuke Nanjo, The Sankei Shimbun
このページを で読む
