The neutralist policy of the Japan Socialist Party
Abstract
The Japanese socialist movement since Uorld Var II has
been largely dominated by leaders schooled in the embryo
socialist organisations of the 1920's, and the effect on
their thinking of prewar experiences has been very strong.
Some - mainly the left wing of the movement - resolutely
opposed the militarist trend of Japanese government in the
1930's. Others, who preferred to compromise with militarism,
were discredited after the war, thus leaving the way open
for the ascendency of the left wing. It was a left wing
faction which took the initiative in introducing neutralism
to the Japan Socialist Party (JSP) in the early 1950's.
This faction was distinct from the other factions by its
consistent opposition to Japanese militarism, but shared
with them a 'nationalist' sense of the international
significance of Japan. This was indeed inherent in its own
form of Marxist ideology which placed Japan in the category
of an advanced capitalist nation. Despite the wave of pacifism following the defeat and
implementation of the 'Pacifist Clause' of the Constitution,
the JSP did not put forward a policy of neutrality in foreign
affairs until the end of 1949. The introduction of such a
policy was a reaction to the advent of the Cold War and was
also probably connected with a shift to the left in the
leadership of the Party. When the Korean War broke out in
1950, the JSP expressed cautious support for the United
Nations action, but this issue and the concurrent question
of rearmament caused a widening gulf between left and right
wings of the Party, which split into two separate parties in
October 1951. The Left Socialist Party (LSP) advocated
'third force' neutralism, which took on an increasingly
anti-American and pro-Asian colouring after Japan regained
independence in 1952. The Party was, however, able to resist
the temptations of a pro-Communist 'peace forces' argument
which gained temporary dominance in the trade unions in 1953»
It was able to do so because of the appeal of its own non-
Communist brand of Marxism, because of the discrediting of
the Japan Communist Party (JCP), and because of relative
factional harmony between its leaders. The Right Socialist
Party (RSP), rejected the 'third force' neutralism of the
LSP, chiefly owing to its own strong fear of communism, but
it developed an analogous theory on the basis of worldwide 'democratic-socialism’. The RSP was less successful than
was the LSP in maintaining its cohesion and unity, both
because of the somewhat equivocal nature of its foreign
policy and because of longstanding factional and ideological
differences between its left and right wings, which were
brought into the open with the relaxation of international
tension following the death of Stalin.
Negotiations for unification of the two socialist
parties took place in 1954 and 1955. Despite favourable
conditions in both the international and domestic scenes
for unification, the negotiations proved very difficult,
especially in their foreign policy aspects. The idea of
a four-power treaty of guarantee for the security of a
neutral Japan was introduced, largely as a device to
facilitate agreement between the two sides. Success was
achieved by the initiative of the moderate factions of each
party but only because circumstances at the time happened to
permit the conciliation of the extreme factions on each
side. Although the term 'neutralism' was not used in the
unified platform, the Right conceded to the Left the
substance of its foreign policy. In 1959, however, the
term was reintroduced, and the content of JSP foreign policy
became more anti-American. This was in part associated with
an increased sensitivity to the dangers of nuclear war, in part to domestic and foreign developments, and in part to
a drift of Party leadership to the left since 1955. This
caused the extreme right wing of the Party, together with
some right wing moderates, to break away and found a new
party in 1959.
After the failure of the campaign to prevent revision
of the Japan - United States Security Treaty in 1960, a
more moderate neutralism was introduced, but the Party,
experiencing radical changes in the character of its
leadership, failed to maintain this moderation with
consistency over the next three years.
Neutralism has often been distinguished from neutrality
by its 'positive1 nature. What really distinguishes it,
however, is the existence of the Cold War and the poessession
of nuclear weapons by a very few super-powers with which
small nations cannot hope to compete. Increasing
international pluralism and the spread of nuclear weapons
could make it possible for Japan to develop an independent
'neutralist' foreign policy backed up by her own nuclear
strike force. It could be argued that the nationalism
which is an integral part of Japanese left wing
neutralism might tempt some neutralists to advocate such
a course. Their pacifism and distrust of the concept of
nuclear deterrence, however, made this development unlikely.