politics

Allowing nuclear weapons in Japan could defuse N Korean threat: policy makers

60 Comments
By Tim Kelly and Nobuhiro Kubo

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

60 Comments
Login to comment

Perhaps not having nuclear weapons on these shores may be the only deterrent.

11 ( +16 / -5 )

This would signal that the Japanese no longer have confidence in U.S. extended deterrence," said a former senior U.S. military commander who asked not to be identified because he is not authorized to talk to the media.

"That would essentially mean that they no longer have confidence in the alliance."

Please identify this genius. How does Japan, which is protected by the US nuclear umbrella, officially allowing US nuclear assets into it's country result in a "loss of confidence" in the alliance? Seems to me that the exact reverse would be true. Besides, it's unspoken knowledge that we have nuclear assets in Japan. But definitely making it official might rattle China into pressuring NK.

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

The Hawks are using NK as a reason to become once again militaristic, admitadly having ICBMs fly over is a concern but to respond by basing nuclear weapons here, not sure that's a positive response. Chip chip away at Japan's 70 years of passive history and return to the 30s seems more the goal of some.

6 ( +13 / -7 )

It would be even safer to become a part of Russia.

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

@Oss China doesn't need to be pressured. Unlike Japan, China doesn't proliferate nuclear technologies and nuclear materials to a nuclear proliferating nation.

-10 ( +5 / -15 )

Among almost 200 UN members, only 4 of them never signed non-proliferation treaty. India is one of them 4. Yet, the only nuclear damaged Japan exports nuclear technologies and materials to India. Pitiful.

-2 ( +9 / -11 )

No....no.....no....and again NO.

These policy makers, who for the life of me seem to have their heads up their nether regions, should be ignored!

11 ( +13 / -2 )

Japan approved the storage nuclear weapons on its soil back in the 1960s, according to a memo and telegram reported in 2000. The two records — a secret telegram dated March 21, 1968, sent to then U.S. Secretary of State Dean Rusk from then U.S. Ambassador to Japan Alexis Johnson, and a confidential memorandum at the Department of Army dated Aug. 26 of the same year — indicate the two sides’ secret approval on the issue.

The documents were held at the National Archive in Washington, D.C., and the Lyndon Johnson Library in Austin, Texas. The bombs contained no cores, so technically were not nuclear weapons, a sleight of diplomacy and deniability.

The locations were islands beginning with 'C', as inadvertently disclosed on a map. Chichijima in Ogasawara was the location, although a second accord may have extended to Okinawa. †he meeting and agreement in Nov 1969 between Nixon and then Japan PM Eisuke Sato is well documented. Read also about the Regulus missile programme back in the 60s, a forerunner of modern cruise missiles.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

AbeyToday  07:18 am JST

@Oss China doesn't need to be pressured. Unlike Japan, China doesn't proliferate nuclear technologies and nuclear materials to a nuclear proliferating nation.

Too bad that's completely untrue. China gave Pakistan the ability to build nuclear weapons. Pakistan gave it to North Korea. Unlike China, Japan does not have, and therefore has NEVER given nuclear weapons to another country.

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2009/01/02/why-china-helped-countries-like-pakistan-north-korea-build-nuclear-bombs

https://www.forbes.com/sites/anderscorr/2017/07/05/chinese-involvement-in-north-koreas-nuclear-missile-program-from-warheads-to-trucks/#11e41e746f2f

1 ( +9 / -8 )

CrickyToday  07:09 am JST

Chip chip away at Japan's 70 years of passive history and return to the 30s seems more the goal of some.

China and North Korea? It's a real shame cause for 70 years Japan could remain totally pacifist.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

...a senior defense policy maker told Reuters, suggesting nuclear weapons be allowed into Japan.

Unlike many in politics these days, I look to both history and the present to form my opinions. Noting that the Japanese still don't have the ability (nor the will) to keep their authority figures in check and will happily go along with whatever someone from above them tells them to do (no matter how utterly ridiculous and damaging) - it is extremely dangerous for Japan to have access to WMD's!

Most pathetic statement I have heard throughout this whole NK debacle. I hope the world is still wise to Japan.

-3 ( +7 / -10 )

AgentXToday  08:01 am JST

...a senior defense policy maker told Reuters, suggesting nuclear weapons be allowed into Japan.

Unlike many in politics these days, I look to both history and the present to form my opinions. Noting that the Japanese still don't have the ability (nor the will) to keep their authority figures in check and will happily go along with whatever someone from above them tells them to do (no matter how utterly ridiculous and damaging) - it is extremely dangerous for Japan to have access to WMD's!

Most pathetic statement I have heard throughout this whole NK debacle. I hope the world is still wise to Japan.

Read the article, it's about U.S. nuclear assets being placed in Japan.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

 although a second accord may have extended to Okinawa.

There was a time, on a couple of bases here, that had increased, round-the-clock security, by military men carrying loaded weapons, far removed from any armories, and in underground bunkers.

It was rumored, and strongly believed as well, that those locations had nukes.

No one stands guard on those bunkers anymore.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Not applicable at all! As the only nation which have suffered from a nuclear bomb, it is a deep rooted responsibility to not acquire nuclear arms at any cost.

The memories of the "hibakusha" are deeply etched into the soil and fundament of Japan as a nation! To remove and undermine these memories and their legacy is just not right!:(

3 ( +7 / -4 )

He asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the issue.

And that makes it credible? Here I'll try, a government source revealed Kim has a penchant for anime but refused disclosure due to sensitivities lol smh

Point is, scandal riddled abe and his ilk have failed the economy,with next quarter growth expected to be less than 0.2% kishida still wants that tax hike tho lol

And like all despots before him, once you run out of bread and circus, find yourself a boogeyman and ramp up the fear factor.

Hang onto your hats!!

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Oathkeepers.

Its a form of ultimate self respect and to others to never break a vow regardless of all odds. For keeping it this long and through centuries, I highly respect Japan for doing so. Actually quite amazing, anyone else would have faltered by now.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

September 2012

0 ( +0 / -0 )

With policy makers, security experts, and a former defence minister, all clearly away with the fairies. All actions stated would undermine The Japan-U.S. Security Treaty.  

But doing so would force Japan to renege on its non-proliferation commitments and could severely damage Washington's alliances and position of strength in Asia......

Former Japanese defence minister Shigeru Ishiba, is on record , although to be fair, his comment in connection to a possible response of an Alien invasion, or an unprovoked attack from Godzilla, were spoken in Jest. But just to jog everyone memories, yes?.............

Responding to a question, Defense Minister Shigeru Ishiba told reporters on Thursday that he was studying whether the nation’s pacifist Constitution would limit a military response to an attack by space aliens.

“There are no grounds to deny that there are unidentified flying objects and some life-forms that control them,” Mr. Ishiba said, smiling at first, but then launching into a straight-faced explanation. “If Godzilla attacked, that would probably be a natural disaster relief operation,” making military action legally permissible, he said.

But the legal grounds for mobilizing militarily against a U.F.O. would be less clear unless the aliens attacked first, he said.

Japanese Minister O.K.’s Fighting Godzilla......

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/21/world/asia/22japan-briefs.html

4 ( +4 / -0 )

There's no country NK hates more than Japan. It would worsen the problem.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

The U.S. has Trident submarines with Nuclear warheads all around the Sea of Japan and quite close to China, Russia and North Korea already. Giving SK and Japan Nuclear Weapons... or at least placing them in both countries will tick off both Russia and China but its not like the don't already know the U.S. has nukes nearby if needed. The difference would be if the U.S. gave both countries control of said nukes... that would scare them pretty quickly. I've said it before... both China and Russia allowed NK to get Nuclear weapons... for the longest time the U.S. tried to prevent it and even signed agreements with NK to try to stop them but NK broke those agreements.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

some defense policy makers in Tokyo say it may be time to reconsider non-nuclear pledges and invite U.S. nuclear weapons on to its soil.

No thanks. You might as well paint a target sign on the country. What a terrible, terrible idea.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Did anyone ever think that it is possible that Japan is a peaceful and safe country because it doesn't have a military created to fight a war and weapons of mass destruction? Perhaps every country should follow Japan instead of Japan following every other country. But nooooo, that could never happen because weapons/war is a money maker for the rich.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

some defense policy makers in Tokyo say it may be time to reconsider non-nuclear pledges and invite U.S. nuclear weapons on to its soil.

Name and shame please, these policy makers need the boot ASAP. We DONT need Nukes in Japan. And im sure more than 2 million other people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki will do anything to prevent that from happening.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

NK would not launch a direct attack under current circumstances, as they would be invaded by SK, the USA, and China. It would simply be the end of the regime.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

If Japan started to develop its own nuclear weapons, would North Korea be justified in making a pre-emptive attack on Japan, or are pre-emptive strike only justifiable when performed by or approved of by the US?

Escalation is not the answer.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Allowing nuclear weapons in Japan could defuse N Korean threat: policy makers

Allowing opposing folks access to more matches in a warehouse that's already filled to the brim with gasoline doesn't seem like the right answer.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Absolutely not, that is for Japan to acquire and pile up nuclear weapons, as it will only add to proliferation of nuclear weapons in the region in particular and in the world at large! In fact, it will be detrimental to world peace rather than serving as deterrent! North Korean (NK) leadership, for now at least, is somewhat childish and unpredictable but with appropriate efforts by all concerned countries the NK leadership could be persuaded to come to negotiating table and agree to an arrangement somewhat on the lines that the US had struck with Iran!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

LagunaToday 08:25 am JSTThere's no country NK hates more than Japan. It would worsen the problem.

No that's not true at all. Japan is third fiddle to the US then South Korea. Japan hardly appears in their anti-imperialist propaganda.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

70 years, Japan has been so peaceful. But that mirage is disappearing. Abe and his govt repeatedly offend neighbors, repeatedly worship war criminals. When you turn on TV, when you see Abe, you will see troubles and disputes. Japan exports weapons to areas full of potential of wars. 70 years, Japanese earned respect by apologizing her role in the wars. But Abe said no more. He said future generations don't need to apologize any longer. Abe goes further than that, he wants to change the peace constitution. Now, his buddies spoke out that Abe would like to say, a nuclear Japan. Would a nuke armed Japan be safer than the past 70 years ? Only fools would think so.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

@Abey...You seems to be particularly interested in India. Didnt mentioned other 3 countries ? And also didn't mentioned China supplies nuclear tech and material to a country, which was hosting the biggest terrorist of ladt decade atleast. While Singature to NPT is a matter of seprate discussion, please state full facts.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Yes, escalation is always the right answer.  Why not arm SK with nukes?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

It would be the wingers' wet dream, but would do nothing to stop North Korea. It would also be lucrative for construction and arms dealers.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

I don't believe for a minute that Japan doesn't have all the components and parts ready to be put together in less than an hour.

You have to be pretty naive to think otherwise.

Japan has a stockpile of 9% of the world's plutonium supply. Only four countries have more.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

It would be the wingers' wet dream, but would do nothing to stop North Korea.

No, this administration doesn't make faulty and empty hollow Red Line promises. Capitulation is the lefts mantra.

It would also be lucrative for construction and arms dealers.

It would also send a message, you punch me in the face, I'll punch you 10 times harder.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

I would 100% support allowing American nuclear armed Second Strike submarines into Japanese naval bases. That would guarantee that any enemy that nuked Japan would ultimately be made extinct. That is the highest form of deterrence. China could not object to such a defensive move

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

If NK nuked Japan, do any of you really think the U.S. would nuke NK? I doubt it. When push comes to shove, the only one who can protect you is you.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Extremely bad idea. China is already at Japan's throat over every little improvement to their defences and every increase in the defence budget. This would be a step too far.

The way to deal with North Korea is to put China in a position where they have no choice but to cut off their supplies to North Korea. They provide the country with something like 92% of its oil. China is supposed to be keeping North Korea in check, and it isn't. So, maybe it's time to impose sanctions on China instead. Economic sanctions, freezing assets, cutting off business ties. These sorts of things that would severely damage China's economy. Push China into a corner, leave them with one choice: Choke North Korea's supplies, or suffer economic turmoil. This is possibly the only way to deal with North Korea without resorting to violence, although sanctions take time to work. Heaping sanctions upon sanctions on North Korea isn't working though. Given a choice between keeping nuclear weapons and forcing its people to suffer, NK will choose the nukes every time. They need to be put in a position where keeping the nukes just isn't possible in the slightest.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

bass4funk: "No, this administration doesn't make faulty and empty hollow Red Line promises. Capitulation is the lefts mantra."

Leave it to bass4funk to turn this into an American political debate. "The wingers" exist in Japan, too, and there is no "left" compared to the split in the US. It is a wet-dream for Abe, and others IN JAPAN who have expressed the desire to change the Constitution and modernize the military IN JAPAN, including having nuclear weapons on Japanese soil. That you automatically start bringing in US "liberals" and what not shows how intent you are on deflection and ignoring the facts.

"It would also send a message, you punch me in the face, I'll punch you 10 times harder."

No, it does not, and clearly HAS not, sent that message at all. Tell me, how did NK reply to the "fire and fury" that Trump has had to walk back on? Can you even admit Trump walked his rhetoric back? NO, you can't! But I'll answer it for you. It achieved nothing except that the US is at a complete loss as to what to do, and Trump has had to say, "All options are on the table". Now he, Abe, and even Moon to an extent have to go around begging CHina, Russia, the UN, and everyone else to increase sanctions and pressure because so far what the have done has led to only an INCREASE in the activities they have desired to suppress.

Ergo, NK doesn't care one wit if you slap them back with twice, three times, or a million times the power that they hit you -- the point is they hit you, and they won. If it comes to war they KNOW they will be annihilated; what does it matter if it's "a little" or "a lot"? The tough don't doesn't work, bud, from you or from your moron of a leader, or from the morons in Japan that somehow think having nuclear weapons here would change NK's actions one wit. All they would do is line the pockets of companies here and in the US, and would satisfy the dreams of old men who want to return to a "beautiful Japan". NK wouldn't bat an eye-lid, and it'd be the exact same problem.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Allowing nuclear weapons in Japan could defuse N Korean threat: policy makers

No, that'll just make Japan potentially be a target of preemptive strikes by a country that insists that Japan wants to be a militaristic empire again.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Allowing nuclear weapons in Japan could defuse N Korean threat: policy makers

That sounds very similar to America's solution to the high rate of gun violence. That is to say, more guns!!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Allowing nuclear weapons in Japan could defuse N Korean threat: policy makers

As stated by many others, if Japan has nuclear weapons it would only make them a target for the DPRK. The only solution to the DPRK problem is to let South Korea invade the north and cut the head off the snake. If any other country gets involved it will only provoke China.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I know a little gossip. USA has nukes in Japan. But a friend of mine visited a Japanese base and was shown Japanese nukes. I can't say where, and you can either believe me or not, but I think if I was a warmonger, I would have several bases. Don't forget the 3000 tons of weapon grade plutonium at Tokai NPP.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Thanks "smith" the American aversion to compassion expressed as the "Left" or "socialist" tagged is part of the problem. Sure bomb them but with Internet let the people learn that you can own more than 1 pen. You can have reliable lighting, power, food, there is no need at all for hatred or self destruction.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I am all about stopping the NK threats and rhetoric, but I fail to see how adding more nukes to the region helps anyone out.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I know a little gossip. USA has nukes in Japan. But a friend of mine visited a Japanese base and was shown Japanese nukes.

Yeah that seems legit, they let you "friend" just waltz into a base and see the "nukes"

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Only way to defuse North Korea warmongering is to send a lots of Japan made AV dvd to North Korea Army. Cheaper than nuclear.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

USA, China, Israel, DPRK, France, India, British have Nuclear weapons, Japan should have nuclear weapons to, if not then nobody should've them.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

But a friend of mine visited a Japanese base and was shown Japanese nukes. I can't say where, and you can either believe me or not,

This is the perfect definition of "Alternative Facts" Could you pass around whatever you and your friend are smoking?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Allowing nuclear weapons in Japan could defuse N Korean threat: policy makers

Doubt it. If so, the fact japan's n1 allies do have nuclear weapons would have been enough to defuse NK threat long time ago. It clearly hasn't. 

Although i completely understand that a nation directly under threat may feel the need to acquire/strengthen their weapons and/or nuclear arsenal I just think that, in this case, it would be counter productive and would actually isolate Japan, especially in East Asia.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

It's simple, if China is happy with allowing NK to get nukes, then SK and Japan should get their own to defend themselves. China wouldn't object seeing as they are happy to allow NK to acquire nukes and threaten the region. If China wants to avoid SK and Japan acquiring nukes to protect themselves, China should be taking a far more active role on NK rather than leave it to the US to sort out. That should be incentive enough for China.

Another positive, China wouldn't mess around with SK and Japan again so the region would be able to continue on with its peaceful economic growth so rudely interrupted by China and NK.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Driving out the devil by Beelzebub.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

dcog9065Today  01:44 pm JST

It's simple, if China is happy with allowing NK to get nukes, ...

North Korea is an independent and sovereign country .

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@Bass

It would also send a message, you punch me in the face, I'll punch you 10 times harder.

Ah, you have taken on the role previously occupied by Mr Kissinger? Such lovely diplomatic prose.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

My friend was invited in as he is a boss of a big Japanese company. I swore to him not to say the location, but I'm sure some of you military guys know where.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

I'm not sure what folks mean by the NK 'rhetoric' , but we must not allow that? By definition, rhetoric doesn't need an answer. Let it be.

Now, these policy makers, on the other hand, need to be named and removed immediately before they cause more harm than what they're doing by seeding doubt.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Didn't you watch Shin Godizilla. You give US power like that then they decide best plan is to nuke Tokyo. Hehe

Don't forget Dumb arse Trump is President.

In response to the person who thinks we should just let KJU be. You do realise he is developing weapons to fire at people he doesn't like right? He is under no obligation to act reasonably. Only people who suffer are others. Just reminding you we are not dealing with a typical person.

Instead of having economically minded policitians negotiating with kju there should really be a UN pychiatrist with negotiating skills dealing with him.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Instead of having economically minded policitians negotiating with kju there should really be a UN pychiatrist with negotiating skills dealing with him.

"Now, Mr Kim... when did you start having these paranoid delusions? Were there... parent issues?"

1 ( +1 / -0 )

So what, I wonder, do all of the military geniuses on this thread think has kept the peace over the last six decades or so? Rice Crispies? Good teeth...? No, the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction should any conventional war go nuclear, as it undoubtedly would once one of the warring parties had its back firmly against the wall. Say it loud and say it proud - THANK CHRIST FOR THE BOMB!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

That's very funny Thunderbird2 but I intended skilled notiatiating rather than a therapy. Just thought they would have more insight into the mind of someone who has been brought up as a god. With grand delusions of himself and what he may demand of others.

I don't think any of the leaders, have any idea how to reason with someone like that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan's Military capability is quite strong at present, even without the Nuclear deterrent. So why pour more oil onto the fire ?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

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