Kan maybe not so unrealistic

PM Kan has been reported to suggest that the SDF would go to Korea in case of war. This has been judged to be unrealistic by some in the ROK. It certainly might cause problems for an untested force that has never participated* in exercises with the US/Korea forces (not ground combat anyway), and with no known (at least not widely known) planning for such actions with South Korea or the US. Then one would have to wonder just what the SDF could do that the ROK could not do about 10 zillion times better in a war in Korea. And how would the SDF know where the abducted Japanese are in North Korea? Would it be involved in the war only to protect Japanese? "Oh, a nearby ROK unit is is isolated, outnumbered, and needs immediate assistance. Sorry, we are only here for self-defense and that means Japanese citizens. Gomen ne. Gambatte!"

Of course there just might be some small possibility of a slight objection to Japanese military forces in Korea by the Koreans and Chinese even though they could be reassured by explaining that the SDF is not really a military as Japan is prohibited from having a military by its constitution.

So I thought, but then Martin Fackler wrote this article for the New York Times: Japan to Shift its Military Toward Threats from China

... Japan’s new Democratic Party government has been pulling closer to Washington, spurred by a bruising diplomatic clash three months ago with China over the disputed islands and fears about North Korea’s nuclear program.

.... Washington has proposed forging stronger three-way military ties that would also include its other key regional ally, South Korea...

...During a visit to the region last week, Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, urged Japan to join American military exercises with South Korea. In a meeting with Japan’s defense minister, Toshimi Kitazawa, Admiral Mullen said the two nations needed to support South Korea after North Korea’s deadly shelling last month of a South Korean island...

Fackler also vaguely notes that the ROK vice minister of defense visited Tokyo last week to discuss "increased bilateral cooperation" with his Japanese counterpart.

*Or if it did, it was kept very much under wraps, so much so that most US military never knew it. In other words, nearly impossible.

Nearly anything to piss the right in Japan

is fine with me.

Japan will withdraw the troops it had based in the Middle East in support of the US-led coalition.

Government officials said that some 200 air force troops would be brought home from Kuwait by the end of the year.

They have been deployed to fly goods and personnel into Iraq since Japan withdrew its ground forces from the country two years ago.

Japan's pacifist constitution blocks military operations, but humanitarian troops served for two years.

The pacifist constitution which bars a military, allows humanitarian operations by non-military SFD military personnel. I understand. (Oh wait, the SDF isn't really a military.)

This does not mean that the increasingly close (at the expense of other US allies in the region) military relationship between the US and Japan will cool down a bit. One can only hope though.

Council on Foreign Relations article

on the basic background of Japan's military post WW2. Includes a brief description of Article 9 and remilitarization. There is nothing especially new or deep in the article, but it does give an idea of the bare basics.

....much of what is perceived internationally as Japanese "nationalism" or "militarism" might simply be political posturing. "The political class may talk in nationalistic terms, and the world press will pick up on it," he says. "But the basic point is, the population is much more moderate. The military policy, the public is really not excited about it." From CFR.org

I think this is true to some extent, but one wonders if the elites continue their posturing and continue to get their way, how long will the public remain "moderate"? I could not prove it, but my experience in talking to people over the last year or two is that they tend to be buying and repeating a lot of what Abe, Fujiwara, and others are pushing. But as the article notes, as long as the US is providing a military for Japan, most Japanese will be happy to rely on it, while complaining about the bases---in other words, have it both ways. And the US will be happy to stay forever. Once we establish a military base somewhere, we will never leave.