Kishida to be 1st Japanese leader to attend NATO summit

NATO is for Atlantic, Japan is in Pacific region. Is this has something to do with internal rivalry, where it needs to show who really have more commitment for Japan security and defense for domestic audience?

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2021/12/30/national/politics-diplomacy/abe-kishida-rivalry/

Kishida said he intends to underscore at the meetings that "any unilateral attempt to change status quo by force is impermissible anywhere in the world."

But what if the 'status quo' was originally implemented by coercion and force and maintains a predatory oligarchy in power?

What does he want? A cookie?

Kishida will take his two jets to Spain and stay a day or less and then back to Japan.

All for a meeting whose members have an interest in the security of the geographical area around the Atlantic Ocean!

Where does Kishida think that Japan is located?

What colossal harm is being done to the planet by this blatant disregard for our environment?

In Japan, we are being warned of power cuts in the summer and we are summarily being told to economise.

Another obvious case of blatant hypocrisy again!

‘Don’t do as I do, do as I say !’

"Nothing has been decided," Kishida said, when asked about possibility of the face-to-face meeting. "To restore a healthy relationship, it is important to communicate based on Japan's consistent position."

In other words, nothing will change

I thought Japan was represented by the USA already.

By its membership expansion the NATO can become an alternative regime and world order, assuming some critical functions of the UN.

But what if the 'status quo' was originally implemented by coercion and force and maintains a predatory oligarchy in power?

Ironically, the West is actually more progressive moving forward to try to construct a new global regime while the current Russia and China are stuck to the status quo owing to their privilege such as veto powers at the UNSC.

Kishida said he intends to underscore at the meetings that "any unilateral attempt to change status quo by force is impermissible anywhere in the world."

"Unless it's by any of our friends," he added, sotto voce.

And what does he plan to go for?, to continue playing the lapdog of the US..

Kishi San, where is your dignity??

Pethetic !!..

*Pathetic

what for?

Kishida trying to make Japan more relevant on the world stage, when in fact outside Japan nobody cares.

I understand the geopolitical nature that "security" (not the military industry complex of course) is a global thing in this era. But didn't Putin want a seat at these meetings some time ago? And was ignored? Might have been a different geopolitical landscape in the present...

What does Kishida and Japan have to do with the Atlantic pact,doesn’t he know that his country lies in another ocean?

What a waste of tax payers.

NATO and Libya ....whats that about about "Changing the status quo by force ".

Libya now a failed state.

Kusuda doesn’t understand “change”. The world is no longer run by America. It is now divided in three. American is fast depleting it’s weapons stocks on the command of Zelensky, and at this time is physically unable to fight China without nukes. His, Aso’s and Abe dream to expand Japan to include Josan, China, and the Philippines is like mistaking salt for sugar when you make a cake.

Asia needs its own form of NATO as a counterbalance to China, so maybe he’ll learn something useful.

American is fast depleting it’s weapons stocks on the command of Zelensky, and at this time is physically unable to fight China without nukes

No defender of American hegemony but this is patently wrong as regards American conventional forces

The American bases in Japan and in dozens of other nations attest to this.

NATO is an anachronism. Like all big bureaucracies, it continually seeks tom expand its power and its mandate. With sometimes significant adverse consequences.

Let's start antagonising Asian countries next.....

NATO is for Atlantic,

Is it really? What exactly do you mean by "Atlantic"? Ocean? English-speaking?

Kishida to be 1st Japanese leader to attend NATO summit:

1st Japanese leader to attend?

What has a nation in East Asia got to do with North Atlantic Treaty Organization?

Perhaps it is the chief's instruction..

NATO is a fundamentally anti-Russia Cold War relic and shares some responsibility for the ongoing destruction of Ukraine, which NATO itself helped provoke and is fuelling as a kind of proxy war. Japan has far more to gain from having a positive relationship with Russia than getting further into bed with its enemies.

What has a nation in East Asia got to do with North Atlantic Treaty Organization?

A necessity of defense against regional aggressors.

NATO is a fundamentally anti-Russia Cold War relic and shares some responsibility for the ongoing destruction of Ukraine

No. Putin decided he wanted to expand his borders to NATO, and invaded Ukraine in an attempt to do so. Putin has been provoking WWIII. Why is Putin trying to start WWIII by expanding Russian borders towards NATO?

Japan has far more to gain from having a positive relationship with Russia.

No, the Kremlin is the enemy of the planet. They cheated at the Olympics, they stole the islands from Japan, they trolled the internet, and now they are murdering Ukrainian citizens in their homes. The Kremlin are poison, and only people as stupid as those at Jonestown would throw their lot in with Russia.

Japan would love all the protection of NATO, but not any of the responsibility. EG boots on the ground, jets in the air, ship out at sea to protect each other collectively. Japan couldn't even get its act together over sending troops to Iraq, and wanted the British to come to their aid, if attacked but couldn't decide if they'd come to the British soldiers aid if reversed.

"...But NATO is in the Atlantic...what does Japan have to do with it...."

OK kiddies, NATO is not limited to the Atlantic. Unless you think Afghanistan is in Europe.

"For nearly 20 years, NATO Allies and partner countries had military forces deployed to Afghanistan under a United Nations (UN) Security Council mandate. "

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_8189.htm

"NATO and Japan have been engaged in dialogue and cooperation since initial contacts in the early 1990s"

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_50336.htm

What we are witnesssing is the polarization of Democracies versus Autocracies. And with Russia and China on the same side, regional separation no longer exists.

 Japan couldn't even get its act together over sending troops to Iraq, and wanted the British to come to their aid, if attacked but couldn't decide if they'd come to the British soldiers aid if reversed.

I remember that!

With Japanese TV going on and on about how kakkoi and manly the SDF soldiers were. Then they got to Iraq and were pretty much regulated to construction work guarded by the British and OZ soldiers.

Abe234Today  01:22 pm JST

Japan would love all the protection of NATO, but not any of the responsibility. EG boots on the ground, jets in the air, ship out at sea to protect each other collectively. Japan couldn't even get its act together over sending troops to Iraq, and wanted the British to come to their aid, if attacked but couldn't decide if they'd come to the British soldiers aid if reversed.

Japan's use of the JSDF is contrained by Article 9 of their Constitution. Every overseas deployment gets hotly debated in Parliament, compromised and restrained to "non-combat" roles. Anyone who lives in Japan would know this.

Fortunately there is a movement, started under PM Abe to revise Article 9 to give the JSDF recognition and more freedom and leeway in deployment, which today after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, is as urgently needed as Finland and Sweden's application to join NATO. Japan has moved towards collective defense and JSDF can come to the aid of US Forces under attack. Without question this will eventually progress to include other allied nations like Australia, UK and organizations like NATO.

Your attempt to hold Japan responsible for not taking on a combat role in Iraq is ridiculous because Article 9 was forced on Japan after WWII by the Allied victors, which included Britain.

A necessity of defense against regional aggressors.

Isn’t the term ‘mission creep’?

Does he have a visa, Covid insurance, tour group and downloaded all the Apps?

NATO is inviting its Asia-Pacific partner countries such as Japan, South Korea and Australia to attend the summit.

OK　NATO。Kick out UNunited nations. Such a waste

NATO and Libya ....whats that about about "Changing the status quo by force "

The intervention in Libya was conducted under a UN Resolution to use force to stop the Gadaffi regime from committing crimes against humanity. This came after previous UN sanctions and a UN sponsored no-fly zone failed to stop the barbarities.

@OssanAmerica, the US invoked Article 5 of the NATO Charter where an attack on one is an attack on all after 9-11. That was the justification for NATO to fight in Afghanistan. But there was more than NATO involved as Sweden also sent an infantry battalion to fight there under NATO command.

What does he want? A cookie?

Basic team building. Mutual familiarity with NATO leaders. Interoperability with NATO forces using NATO standard methods. NATO familiarity with the region, the bases, the operating environment (especially underwater conditions that matter for submarine and anti-submarine warfare) and the nature of Chinese forces and their tactics. Under the circumstances it seems like a reasonable thing to do.

The "freedom" and "leeway" to do what, to be deployed where, when, under which conditions, by whom and for what purpose (and benefits for Japan) exactly?

You will find that out when China decides to deny use of the South China Sea to nations who do not do as Beijing tells them to do. It is fear that China really will try to close the SCS to other nations and the amount of European commerce that transits the SCS that has NATO and the EU deploying ships and aircraft to the Pacific. No they would not do it alone but as part of a larger coalition of Pacific powers who are currently outside of NATO. In some future scenarios interoperability, mutual familiarity and direct knowledge of the operating environment by NATO member armed forces may prove to be essential to protecting the maritime rights of nations who do not necessarily border the Pacific. Europe very much has an interest in maritime affairs outside of European waters, as does the US.