politics

U.S. to seek close ties with Kishida in dealing with China challenge

39 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

39 Comments
Login to comment

Hopefully Kishida is smart enough to keep Japan out of America's next war.

-12 ( +7 / -19 )

Good that they always quickly confirm good relations when ever either has a leadership change.

No doubt Kishida will want the US to confirm it's commitment to Japanese territorial integrity and the defense of Senkaku's which is normal protocol.

Lets hope they continue to work together for the common good and for continued peace and security for the region and everyone in it.

7 ( +13 / -6 )

Positive signs. Would be nice to see Japan and the U.S. move even closer militarily and diplomatically, even though they are both already the leading forces in QUAD.

Japan and the U.S. need to unite in defending freedoms in the region against the common enemy : China.

10 ( +17 / -7 )

Good that they always quickly confirm good relations when ever either has a leadership change.

Well, that's pretty standard diplomatic protocol & common courtesy amongst allies.

No doubt Kishida will want the US to confirm it's commitment to Japanese territorial integrity and the defense of Senkaku's which is normal protocol.

Not that it's necessary again ...that issue gets " confirmed " and " reconfirmed " a dozen times each year, whenever any Japanese and US officials meet.

-11 ( +2 / -13 )

Kishida already has experience working with the Obama administration including VP Biden. There will be no break in the QUAD position towards the Chinese dictatorship.

6 ( +11 / -5 )

Has anyone copyrighted the China Challenge? That could be a good board game or TV game show

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Hopefully Kishida is smart enough to keep Japan out of America's next war.

The next war could very much come from china and other Asian nations.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

U.S. to seek close ties with Kishida in dealing with China challenge

That's a shocker. I expected a statement where the US would distance itself from Japan.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

The USA is the sole superpower in this planet.

Washingjing should stop refraining " U.S. to seek close ties with Kishida /_____. in dealing with China challenge" song!

"Quad this, AUKUS this!"

My bad ! That makes the 'Land of the Brave' look kinda weak!

Da-kine Mighty America should declare without much ado that President Biden will make sure that China will not be allowed to threaten Japan under the new leadership of PM Kishida or else ...!

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Realpolitik will win the day. China is by far Japan's largest trading parter and growing rapidly ahead of any of Japan's other major trading partners.

The occupation forces will be ejected, one way or another, and Japan will be neutral.

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

The next war could very much come from china and other Asian nations.

> The next war, like every other modern war, will be started by America.

Japan, still occupied and unable or unwilling to break the shackles, will gladly follow her master into the depths of hell. You would think that they would choose peace and prosperity over war mongering and war.

On a positive note, Japan doesn't have an option. Australia on the other hand, what's left of it, does have a choice to choose peace but chooses to side with the terrorist state of the USA anyway.

I certainly hope the coming war is swift and precise.

I am going to brush up on my Mandarin, I think you should too.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Da-kine Mighty America should declare without much ado that President Biden will make sure that China will not be allowed to threaten Japan under the new leadership of PM Kishida or else ...!

Well said my Hawaiian friend.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Peter14Today  06:57 pm JSTWell said my Hawaiian

Cheers, Mate!*

Mahalo!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Peter14Today  06:57 pm JSTWell said my Hawaiian friend.

Cheers, Mate!

Mahalo!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@Steve Anderson

On a positive note, Japan doesn't have an option. Australia on the other hand, what's left of it, does have a choice to choose peace but chooses to side with the terrorist state of the USA anyway

What’s left of Australia? Hey, we’re still here, of course we choose peace but we have an alliance with the US which goes back generations.

Yep, knock yourself out with your Mandarin.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Quote ''U.S.-Japan alliance, which serves as the cornerstone of peace''.

Yet no advance subs for Japan. Only for UK brothers and Australia. AUKUS supposed to be about Asia yet India and Japan not invited. No technology for Japan. Nope. Too advance to give to Asian nations. Only for white English brothers do they share that technology with.

UK received it in the past.

Australia receiving it 2021.

Americans don't trust Japan enough. But we should believe 100% they will be there to defend against everyone..... Except if they are Taliban or North Vietnam.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

It is a pity, Mr kisida is looking for trouble.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

That makes the 'Land of the Brave' look kinda weak!

The US is the only superpower in the world but these statements sound as if the US is not able to stand up to China alone on her own without the help of Japan and other allies.

yet no advance subs for Japan. Only for UK brothers and Australia. AUKUS supposed to be about Asia yet India and Japan not invited. No technology for Japan. Nope. Too advance to give to Asian nations. Only for white English brothers do they share that technology with.

Australia's military is no where near the US or that of the UK. Australia is very happy to be able to rub shoulders with the big boys. Consider it lucky you are not obligated to purchase. Save the money for the pension system.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

US will go barefoot, without China

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Yet no advance subs for Japan. Only for UK brothers and Australia. AUKUS supposed to be about Asia yet India and Japan not invited. No technology for Japan. Nope. Too advance to give to Asian nations. Only for white English brothers do they share that technology with.

As Japan can not join a reciprocal alliance where it would go to war to defend Australia or UK or the US if they are attacked and Japan is not, (read article 9 of the Japanese constitution) they were not able to be invited.

UK received it in the past.

In the 1950's and have developed their own since then.

Australia receiving it 2021.

As part of a technology sharing deal and joint development. Australia is providing almost two decades of scramjet engine research (hypersonic engines), and the newly developed loyal wingman which is an AI fighter drone to be used as a force multiplier.

Americans don't trust Japan enough.

Not true. Japan simply has its hands tied. If Japan wanted to alter it's constitution to allow it to join alliances for mutual defense then Japan could get assistance due the fact it already has a long history of civilian nuclear industry/power, which does not preclude them from getting assistance for nuclear propulsion.

The chances that India are ready to join a military alliance with the US, UK and Australia are slim for the moment. The Indians have nuclear propulsion already after Russia leased a Nuclear Submarine and then India constructed one with more on the way. Three under construction and a further ten planned. A mix of nuclear armed ballistic missile submarines and nuclear attack submarines.

India alone is a formidable military nation that is getting stronger and more capable each year. India has its own nuclear arsenal so does not need protection under the US nuclear umbrella.

Again AUKUS was instigated by Australia for enhancing its defense in the face of a belligerent China that finds it necessary to continually threaten Australia.

I am sure Japan would be welcomed as would India if they were both able to constitutionally and if they requested to join.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The United States will also likely be closely watching whether Kishida, a 64-year-old veteran politician characterized by his critics as lacking charisma....

Kishida has barely had time to sit down. It would be nice to give him a week or two before all the little barbs start.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The USA is the sole superpower in this planet.

That is simply not true. China is every bit a superpower.

Yet no advance subs for Japan.

Japan already has the best conventionally power subs ever made by any nation. If you ask many with hands on naval experience in the Pacific they will tell you Japanese boats are the next best thing to an American SSN. Some of that of course is due to the superb training and tactics used by Japanese crews, but the boats are outstanding.

The US is the only superpower in the world but these statements sound as if the US is not able to stand up to China alone on her own without the help of Japan and other allies.

Again the US is not the only superpower. Find out what the Chinese order of battle looks like today. In most areas their equipment and training are vastly better than the Russians and they have a lot of it. The PLAN in particular is vastly better than anything the Soviets or Russians ever fielded. And, no, without allies in the immediate vicinity of China the US could not successfully defend Japan, Taiwan or South Korea from attack by China. The Chinese have made anything within about 1500 km of their shoreline a very deadly place to operate unless you have the most advanced low observable aircraft and weapons. Twenty years ago the JMSDF could have easily beaten the PLAN. Today that is not true and the PLAN is starting to rival the US Navy in most areas. It has weak areas, but it has been since 1990 that the US and its allies have faced a rival with a navy to match that of the US. Absent allies the Chinese might get the impression they could attack Taiwan or Japan and get away with it.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

As part of a technology sharing deal and joint development. Australia is providing almost two decades of scramjet engine research (hypersonic engines), and the newly developed loyal wingman which is an AI fighter drone to be used as a force multiplier.

The US has its own successful scramjets. Please see the X-51 Waverider as an example. I know scientists who have been working hypersonic air breathing propulsion in the US since the early 1980s but it is buried in layers of secrecy.

https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104467/x-51a-waverider/

Back in the late 1970s this prototype missile hit Mach 5.5, making it hypersonic:

http://designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/asalm.html

The US has been working on this for a very long time, much longer than the Australians have.

The USAF has other systems along the lines of Loyal Wingman that have been tested successfully. The USAF is testing unmanned combat versions of existing low cost target drones to keep costs low and allow them to be expendable in combat, something the Australian version is not. The UTAP-22 is a variant of the BQM-167 target.

https://defbrief.com/2021/05/05/us-air-forces-skyborg-loyal-wingman-program-hits-first-flight-milestone/

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The US has its own successful scramjets. Please see the X-51 Waverider as an example. I know scientists who have been working hypersonic air breathing propulsion in the US since the early 1980s but it is buried in layers of secrecy.

https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104467/x-51a-waverider/

Multiple programs with successful tests give more options for the future development. Do not under estimate the achievements made by the Australian programs.

Back in the late 1970s this prototype missile hit Mach 5.5, making it hypersonic:

http://designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/asalm.html

The US has been working on this for a very long time, much longer than the Australians have.

This does not mean it has been more successful in its outcomes.

The USAF has other systems along the lines of Loyal Wingman that have been tested successfully.

This again does not mean it is better than the loyal wingman that has attracted so much US attention.

The AUKUS deal is to share both technology and research now and in the future in a number of area's. I was mentioning what Australia can offer now that very much interests both the US and the UK. They are not the only area's that will be shared and developed in co-operation.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

NATO beating the drums of war again.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

NATO beating the drums of war again

How so? It was not mentioned in the article and though Japan is a NATO partner, it is not a member.

The US and Japan discussing bilateral relations is as much beating the drums of war as China and North Korea discussing their ties being them beating the drums of war.

Some people see war all around themselves. Relax, the world is not yet at that point. With people actively working together to keep peace, like Japan and the US we might all be lucky enough to keep the peace we currently enjoy.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

NATO beating the drums of war again.

Hmmm, which nation is threatening to invade Taiwan and telling their military to prepare for war? Not NATO.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Bumbling Biden

Is this your guys’ new nickname? Sleepy didn’t work, trying to claim he’s senile hasn’t worked, I wonder if this one will stick for you guys. Keep your fingers crossed!

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Yubaru (Sep. 30  01:43 pm JST),

Of course, the most pressing issue facing Japan now is Covid 19 and the economy it’s affecting. The problem must be dealt with in no time and solved.  

Firefighters' immediate obligation is to extinguish the fire in front of them. Likewise, politicians' immediate obligation is to solve the issue at hand.

However, is it wrong for firefighters to consider the cause of the fire and measures to prevent the future recurrence of it? Is it wrong for politicians to debate the current and future status of the nation? Don’t you think these are as important as, or even more important than, the issue at hand?

Do you think this excessive U.S. military presence, a.k.a. pseudo-occupation, must go on forever? What's your say about why Futenma's replacement must built in Henoko by all means?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I am asking about your strategic reason.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I am asking about your strategic reason.

Look at a map. The strategic location of Okinawa is painfully obvious. There is a side of me that almost wishes US forces would abandon Okinawa altogether and tell China to take it. See how much nice the Chinese are. I'm sure their jets and helicopters are so much quieter and their soldiers never, ever under any circumstances get drunk or horny. Nope, the the Chinese will consult with the locals on every single matter. Maybe the US should just move its forces to Taiwan.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

However, is it wrong for firefighters to consider the cause of the fire and measures to prevent the future recurrence of it? Is it wrong for politicians to debate the current and future status of the nation? Don’t you think these are as important as, or even more important than, the issue at hand?

When I lived in Anaheim the fire fighters had detailed plans for every apartment building with the locations of all the utility shut offs, gate codes and the layout of all apartments. The city lost a whole block of apartments, both sides of the street back in the 1970s on a hot windy day. The fire jumped from building to building. Now they take fire protection very seriously and roll up to 20 trucks for a major structure fire.

Likewise the US learned some hard lessons on 7 December 1941 and again on 11 September 2001. There is no desire to ever get caught out like that again so the US takes precautions in terms of forward defense and forward anti terrorism. Fight the sobs on their soil and not in the US. No apologies for being prepared. We know what happens when you aren't. The US looked weak in 1941 compared to Japan, especially comparing the USN to the IJN and that perceived weakness was an invitation to war. Nobody wants to repeat that.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Desert Tortoise (Oct. 1 10:01 am JST),

What kind of strategic role will the Marines' new base in Henoko play? That's the point at issue. As I said repeatedly on other threads before, the most active elements of the Okinawa-based Marines will relocate to Guam, leaving only support (logistics) and command units behind in Okinawa. 

All Marine facilities in Okinawa are for the training of troops, who come to Okinawa on a regular basis just for training -- landing, parachuting, jungle warfare and flight training.

Desert Tortoise (Oct. 1 10:06 am JST),

So you want to say the Marines stationed in Okinawa are like firefighters always prepared for contingencies? But I keep saying the Marines' strategy is an absolute shambles to convince us reasonably enough.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The USA is the sole superpower in this planet.

That is simply not true. China is every bit a superpower.

China is not a superpower. Needless to say, this is a matter of opinion. There's too much casual use of that word. Let me tell you what a superpower is. A superpower has two attributes. Number one, it has the capacity to wreak vast nuclear destruction anywhere in the world, at anytime. It has the capacity to detect and destroy before targets are reached. There are only two countries now capable of doing that: the bear and the eagle but not the panda. China does not have that capability.

The second attribute of a superpower is the capacity to project decisively conventional military power anywhere in the world and intervene as the US is doing time after time after time whether the world agrees with that or not. China does not have that capability.

Now China undoubtedly has invested and developed military capabilities in the last twenty years or so. I'm not arguing against that. China has taken notice of the overwhelming use of American conventional military power in the first Gulf War in 1991, as you noted in the comment section I recall on Desert Storm. China has witnessed Desert Shield, Desert Storm, Desert Sabre, Desert Strike, Desert Fox, Desert Falcon. Moreover, the US has some 800 military bases around the world. China has almost none. China is not a superpower.

The U.S. and its allies flew more than 116,000 combat air sorties and dropped 88,500 tons of bombs over a six-week period that preceded the ground campaign. The air bombardment was so successful that the ground campaign was over in 100 hours. Think of all the Muslims the US has killed, but the US now is somehow very concerned about the Muslims in rehabilitation programs in Xinjiang? But I digress. China does not have that capability. Not saying that it wishes to have so.

China has developed its Navy to protect its interests, that is to protect the shipping lanes in the Indian Ocean and in the South China Seas. It is not "invading the South China Seas" as often charged. How do you invade the SCS? How do you invade the Indian or the Pacific Ocean? You don't. You station your forces to protect your tankers from being pirated if and when the US, the lone superpower in the world, decides to impose sanctions.

A naval blockade is essentially an act of war. The Korean War was over in 1953. The US embargo banning trade against China did not end until 1971, which shows that even in times of peace and not during war, the lone superpower in the world can ban trade and impose sanctions.

Likewise the US learned some hard lessons on 7 December 1941 and again on 11 September 2001. There is no desire to ever get caught out like that again so the US takes precautions in terms of forward defense and forward anti terrorism. 

Likewise China learned some hard lesson from the US two decade plus sanctions against China. There is no desire to ever get caught out like that again. So China takes precautions in terms of forward defense in the South China Seas.

China has the military power to defend the waters near its territory, but it does not have the capacity to project military power anywhere in the world at will. It is not a superpower.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China is not a superpower. Needless to say, this is a matter of opinion. There's too much casual use of that word. Let me tell you what a superpower is. A superpower has two attributes. Number one, it has the capacity to wreak vast nuclear destruction anywhere in the world, at anytime. It has the capacity to detect and destroy before targets are reached. There are only two countries now capable of doing that: the bear and the eagle but not the panda. China does not have that capability.

China has aircraft carriers and is building CATOBAR nuclear powered aircraft carriers equipped with stealthy jets and a very E-2 looking AWACS. It has LDHs, LPDs and advanced air defense destroyers with arguably the best systems outside of Aegis and SM3/SM6. They have large multiproduct replenishment ships that give those ships the ability to deploy globally so you are incorrect to say China has no ability to project power abroad. Indeed it does. It has hundreds of ICBMs and is building silos for hundreds more. It has a new strategic bomber in development. China has overseas bases in Djibouti and Cambodia. Their man made island bases likewise qualify as overseas bases since none are on Chinese territory (under international law if a reef is submerged at high tide it is international waters and always will be, regardless of anything coming out of Beijing).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China is also building a base in Afghanistan not far from the border of China.

https://eurasianet.org/china-denies-plans-to-build-military-base-on-afghan-tajik-border

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China also has a base in Tajikistan.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/in-central-asias-forbidding-highlands-a-quiet-newcomer-chinese-troops/2019/02/18/78d4a8d0-1e62-11e9-a759-2b8541bbbe20_story.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China also has a manufacturing economy the Soviets never in anyone's wildest imagination had. Even at the height of the USSR, consumer goods and food were scarce, cars took about 7 years from order to delivery and most of the USSR was an undeveloped third world country. China has the economy Russia never came close to matching and that economic prowess added to China's military capabilities most assuredly make them a superpower. They would be a much tougher foe in a war than the Soviets. I faced the Soviets on active duty and know.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

They are wise to do so with the many bases the US has in Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Guam and so on. They’d be foolish to not be able to defend themselves against the US.

China learned some hard lessons from the US 21 year sanctions against China. There is no desire to ever get caught out like that again. China will build more bases to ensure the US will not have we control in the Pacific.

It is one thing to possess estimated capabilities. It is another to have a history of successfully being a superpower, right or wrong. Military budget and actual experience in exerting power worldwide are different. Only the US has done so. Having capabilities on paper of becoming a superpower and being a superpower are completely two different things.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites