SNEAKY DEVIL: Article 9 and Japan’s missile defence dilemma.

At present, Japan’s missile defence strategy against North Korea is focussed on ensuring a successful interception of the No-Dong medium-range ballistic missile. In fact, it may be the only North Korean missile Japan’s Self-Defence Force can intercept under domestic law. The reason for this lies in the Japanese Constitution. Written in the aftermath of World War II, Article 9 stipulates that “Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.” In this sense, the Japanese Self-Defence Force is only allowed to defend against a foreign attack. This means that Japan can only intercept missiles that are due to land in its territory. Any other missile cannot be intercepted as it would constitute a “use of force as means of settling international disputes” that do not explicitly involve Japan. That is why Japan’s missile defences are based upon interception of the No-Dong.

After understanding these legal constraints upon the Japanese Self-Defence Force, it becomes clear why North Korea’s latest missile test was so provocative. The Hwasong-12 has an optimal firing range of around 4,500 kilometres which means that North Korea will probably never fire the missile at Japan. It would be much more likely for North Korea to try and fire it over Japan en route to another destination. This is where the test of the Hwasong-12 comes in to play. By firing the missile over Japan, North Korea calculated that Japan’s elaborate missile defences would sit idle and increase the chances of a successful test. According to the Yonhap News Agency, the Hwasong-12 flew 550 kilometres above Japanese territory which meant it navigated 450 kilometres above the upper threshold of Japan’s airspace. Japan could not legally intercept the missile and North Korea likely gleaned a lot of useful data. In short, the aforementioned missile test was a rational calculation from Pyongyang.

Li’l Kim is shooting his missiles through a loophole in Japan’s Article 9. So perhaps Japan needs to have a very public debate, aimed squarely at Beijing, about altering or abolishing it.