Japan Denies US Ambassador's Claim of SDF Deployment 'Promise', Sparking Diplomatic Controversy

A statement by the US Ambassador to the UN, made after the Japan-US summit, claiming that the Japanese Prime Minister had “promised” support from the Self-Defense Forces (SDF), has sparked widespread controversy. In response, Chief Cabinet Secretary Kihara explicitly denied any such agreement, stating there was “no factual basis for a specific promise,” highlighting a clear divergence in understanding between Japan and the United States.

The controversy originated from the US Ambassador’s assertion that the Japanese Prime Minister had “promised” SDF support for ensuring safe navigation in the Strait of Hormuz amidst the Middle East situation. This statement garnered significant attention on Japanese social media, with “US Ambassador to UN” becoming a trending topic.

However, Chief Cabinet Secretary Kihara vehemently denied to multiple media outlets that the Prime Minister had promised the dispatch of the SDF. The prevailing view is that the Prime Minister’s remark during the meeting, “We will do what we can within the scope of the law,” might have been “over-interpreted” by the US side. Some critics suggest that the Prime Minister’s mention of “constitutional constraints” might not have been correctly conveyed to the US, or that the Ambassador’s assertion is “on the level of malicious misinformation.”

In the past, former President Trump reportedly mentioned that “Japan would provide support” while also referring to the “constraints of Article 9.” The consistency of the current US Ambassador’s statement with these past remarks is also being questioned.

On social media, many voices express doubts about the Prime Minister’s statements, with comments like “Unless something unclear was said, such a misunderstanding couldn’t happen,” and strong concerns such as “pro-US subservience” or “secret agreement.” While some express relief, saying, “It’s a relief that the Prime Minister’s office issued a denial,” others demand further accountability from the government, stating, “Interrogation in the Diet is essential.”

This situation has the potential to reignite national debate regarding Japan’s diplomatic stance, constitutional interpretation, and its role in the international community. The government is urged to provide a transparent explanation for this divergence in understanding between Japan and the US as soon as possible.

The Context

To help non-Japanese readers understand this article, here is some background information:

• Self-Defense Forces (SDF): Japan's military, established after World War II. Due to Article 9 of the Constitution, its mandate is strictly limited to self-defense, and its operations abroad, especially those involving the use of force, are highly restricted and politically sensitive.
• Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution: This clause renounces war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes. It also states that “land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained.” While the SDF exists, its interpretation and scope of activities are a constant source of debate in Japan.
• Strait of Hormuz: A critical strategic waterway connecting the Persian Gulf to the open ocean, through which a significant portion of the world’s oil supply passes. Ensuring its safe navigation is a major international concern, especially given tensions in the Middle East.
• Chief Cabinet Secretary (官房長官, Kanbō-chōkan): A key ministerial position in the Japanese government, serving as the government’s chief spokesperson, coordinator of policies, and head of the Cabinet Secretariat. When the Chief Cabinet Secretary makes a statement, it represents the official position of the government.