The nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida, on June 12 was the third deadly attack in the US since May last year carried out by gunmen who pledged allegiance to ISIS .

　　　　　The culprit in the shooting, which left 49 citizens dead and dozens more injured, was an American-born son of immigrant parents from the Middle East. Having repeatedly described as “an ugly lie” the assertion that the West is at war with Islam, President Obama maintained that “homegrown violent extremism” instead of “radical Islam” was behind the Orlando incident.

　　　　　Last November 13, Obama declared that ISIS had been contained. Immediately afterwards, however, the murderous Paris assault by Islamic terrorists took place, prompting The Wall Street Journal to criticize Obama’s sorry lack of proper perception of the situation in an editorial entitled “Wake Up, Mr. President.”

　　　　　As the Paris case showed, Obama likely may be wishing once again to turn a blind eye to the Islamic terrorism aspect of the latest assault, characterizing it as an incident triggered mainly by the hate of homosexuals on the part of the assailant, Omar Mateen (29). Obama apparently views the Orlando incident, which took place at a nightclub frequented by the LGBT community, as merely a matter of accepting or rejecting the diverse values of others.

　　　　　Such a viewpoint may be necessary up to a point. However, one cannot possibly get to the bottom of these incidents without scrutinizing their links to ISIS.

　　　　　Presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump immediately attacked Obama for turning his eyes away from the threat of terrorism from Muslims born and raised in the US, accusing the president of being weak-kneed.

　　　　　Needless to say, excluding Muslims from America will solve nothing. A policy to keep Muslims out, most of whom are gentle people, by simply lumping them altogether will turn the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims against the US overnight. And yet, Trump will try to make the most of the latest incident in order to bounce back from his waning popularity. The integrity of American voters is now being put to a test.

　　　　　Can they overcome the tragedy of Orlando and think and act rationally?

Rise of Right-wing Forces

　　　　　The same question is being posed to European nations as well, as Donald Trump’s cry of “my country first” spreads across the ocean.

　　　　　The Orlando incident can be expected to have a considerable influence on the British referendum slated for June 23, which will determine whether or not the UK will leave the European Union. Over the past year, an estimated 330,000 emigrants and refugees have poured into Britain from within and without the EU. Members of various ethnic groups will continue to pour in as long as Britain remains a member of the EU, which guarantees the free flow of people, goods, and capital. Motivating those Britons advocating “Brexit”―Britain’s withdrawal from the EU―is a predominant feeling that their nation will not be able to sustain a further influx of people from the outside.

　　　　　Losing jobs to the incoming immigrants and refugees, Britons are simultaneously burdened with all kinds of benefit payments on their behalf, including medical, welfare, housing, and education expenses.There is also the danger of other terrorists slipping in with other immigrants, or home-grown terrorists emerging as in the case of Orlando. Many Britons are beginning to think Britain can solve those problems by leaving the EU, allowing them to exclude immigrants and refugees.

　　　　　Like Britain, a host of European nations, including Austria, France, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden, are questioning the EU’s functions, beginning to show signs of taking thier own independent paths. The rise of right-wing forces guiding public opinion powerfully in this direction is in line with the Trump way of thinking―the European version of his “America First.”

　　　　　At this juncture, where nations heading towards isolationism are shaking the basic framework of the international community, Japan’s immediate task is to figure out how to safeguard its national interests against the Chinese threat. Realistically, it would be impossible for Japan to defend itself without America’s military commitment. In today’s international community, only the US, China, and Russia are believed to be capable of defending themselves strictly on their own.

　　　　　Trump appears quite capable of forsaking Japan as America’s vital Pacific ally if he comes into office next February. But we Japanese are not qualified to criticize him, because Japan is probably the most isolationist nation among major developed nations, as Professor Tadae Takubo recently pointed out on my weekly Internet “Genron” TV talk show. (Prof. Takubo serves the Japan Institute for National Fundamentals, a privately financed Tokyo think tank which I head, as Deputy Director.) He noted:

　　　　　“Everybody calls Trump isolationist. In the US, the word ‘isolationism’ is uncomplimentary. In all fields except the economy, don’t you think Japan has completely isolated itself from the rest of the world for decades? The extent of Japan’s isolationism in the international community should surprise impress even Mr. Trump―he of the incesant ‘my country first’ chant.”

　　　　　Although gradual changes have been made in Japan, the Japanese government has been reluctant to deploy the Japan Self Defense Forces (JSDF) overseas, clinging to a constitutional interpretation that they cannot be used the way military forces ordinarily would be, and by so doing, confining Japan within a very thick shell of isolationism. Japan is far more isolationist than the US, or any of the European nations for that matter. In today’s rapidly changing world, I’m convinced that Japan will not be able to adequately defend itself unless it breaks out of this shell of isolationism.

Third Shock Wave from the US

　　　　　Takubo continued:

　　　　　“Looking back over Japan’s modern history, one realizes that it is unquestionably the US that has prompted Japan to undergo its greatest changes since the mid-1850s. In 1853, Commodore Matthew Perry forced open Japanese ports, which led to the Meiji Reform―the restoration in 1868 of imperial rule which dramatically changed the polity of the nation. Later, Japan waged a war against Perry’s mother country, suffering a devastating defeat in 1945, with the ‘peace constitution’ imposed by the Americans. In the seven years of occupation　that followed, Japan again was forced to implement many changes.

　　　　　“And now, a third shock wave is reaching Japanese shores across the Pacific from the US. How will Japan react if Trump assumes the presidency and says the US will abrogate the US-Japan Security Treaty? It may be easy to brush aside such a hypothesis as too extreme, but a nation has the responsibility to be prepared for the worst possible contingencies. It is obvious that we will be totally helpless unless we rid ourselves of our current constitution, which prevents Japan from safeguarding its own security as a sovereign nation.”

　　　　　At the same time Japan is faced with the evolving situation overseas, it is also witnessing new waves of anti-US base campaigns in Okinawa triggered by the recent murder of a young Okinawan woman, allegedly by an American civilian employee. Activists have escalated their campaigns beyond their initial opposition to a planned transfer of the Futenma Marine Air Station into a movement aimed at opposing all US bases in Okinawa.

　　　　　The hideous crime allegedly committed by the civilian employee is unpardonable; unquestionably, he should be tried, and if found guilty, severely punished under Japanese law. However, it is wrong for the activists to utilize the incident as a ploy to demand that all US bases in Okinawa be eliminated.

　　　　　“How do those who are opposed to a revision of the constitution―or even Article 9 alone―intend to defend Japan without US forces coming to our aid?” asked Takubo. “Would those anti-US base activists seriously propose unarmed neutrality for Japan? And, how would they act if the US really decided to pull its forces out of Japan?”

　　　　　I strongly urge the reader to take to heart Prof. Takubo’s point that Japan really is the very nation that has tirelessly practiced “my nation first” and that it is not qualified to criticize Trump for his seemingly anti-Japanese remarks. In point of fact, we must thank him for posing a most pertinent question―a blessing in disguise hopefully leading us to our own awakening.

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” column no. 709 in the June 23, 2016 edition of The Weekly Shincho)