The parliamentary democracy it helped to create laid the foundations for Japan to emerge as a modern economic superpower. Though this has done much to reassure Japan's neighbours, who suffered terribly under past Japanese militarism, the future role of Japan's forces will depend on how the constitution is reinterpreted or changed. Some argue that under the present interpretation even the SDF is illegal. Yet a 1959 Supreme Court ruling refused to find the SDF unconstitutional because it contributes to the self-defence of the country. Other guidelines put in place since Japan signed a joint security treaty with the United States in 1960 prescribe how both countries should respond to defend Japan from an attack.
Defence remains the cornerstone of the policy.
As a result, Japan has no bombers, long-range missiles, aircraft carriers or other means of projecting power beyond its own territory. Under the treaty, Japan relies on the American air force, navy and marine units to which it plays host to protect Japanese interests in the surrounding region. Precise legal conditions to allow Japanese SDF units to provide certain types of support to American forces in times of emergency were spelt out in a set of operational guidelines in 1978. Two years ago, the Americans began to encourage the Japanese to do more for stability in the region. But such calculated ambiguity fools no one.