politics

Blinken reaffirms U.S. commitment to defend South Korea and Japan

45 Comments

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

© Thomson Reuters 2022.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

45 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Defend SK and Japan from ?

-16 ( +10 / -26 )

Right? Just say it. If it is Russia, I am sure they would say so...

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

@kurisupisu

Defend SK and Japan from ?

Korea from Korea and Japan from Japan.

-21 ( +5 / -26 )

It's not like he could say anything else.

7 ( +11 / -4 )

Who put him in charge

-10 ( +5 / -15 )

Why does there need to be reaffirmation from the USA ?

Is the commitment in question?

Both South Korea and Japan are both talking of acquiring nuclear deterrence capabilities.

It would appear that there's a few countries in Asia-Pacific region that are not fully comfortable with the USA as their protector.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

Someone needs to protect Japan from itself! It’s foreign policy is a complete jumble of reversed policies and appeasement. Now, it actively wants to participate in the Sakhalin project with Uncle Putin. Make your mind up and stop changing your mind Japan.

1 ( +9 / -8 )

After what happened in Afghanistan, I have a hard time believing this guy and administration.

-1 ( +17 / -18 )

The US under the 46th President have lost credibility and cannot be trusted. Korea and Japan should hav an alternative in a worse case scenario.

-11 ( +8 / -19 )

"Defend" is a euphemism not to say that they are only looking for the pretext not to lose their declining hegemony in the world only because China will be the next great world economic power.

After what happened in Afghanistan, I have a hard time believing this guy and administration.

Not only Afghanistan, the US has aaaaalways betrayed those who serve it well when they cease to be interested, when the ship sinks they are the first to flee..

-6 ( +11 / -17 )

Should South Korea ask the U.S. if they will come to their aid should a contingency ever occur on the Korean Peninsula? Similarly, should Japan ask the U.S. if they will defend Japan should there occur a contingency between China and Japan over an outlying territory?

Japan and South Korea are under the sphere of U.S. influence; in case of Japan, with so many swaths of land occupied for U.S. bases.

Will a hegemony sit on a fence while doing nothing when its sphere of influence is threatened?

Should South Korea and Japan be thankful to the U.S. for its reaffirmation of commitment to defend them? Must Japan guarantee the U.S. a secure and everlasting military presence, especially in Okinawa, out of appreciation?

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

After what happened in Afghanistan,

Ia the above in reference to the deal with the Taliban that Biden's predecessor and Pompeo dumped on the country as Trump slithered away back to his US Taliban base while hiding top secret documents?

0 ( +9 / -9 )

I suppose this commitment can be taken in the same light as Obama committed to defending the SCS, ie as long as China doesn't fire weapons, it can take what it wants, build on it, put military bases on it....

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Must Japan guarantee the U.S. a secure and everlasting military presence, especially in Okinawa, out of appreciation?

Out of appreciation? No. Out of well informed mutual self interest? Yes.

5 ( +10 / -5 )

After what happened in Afghanistan

I concur.

-6 ( +6 / -12 )

Yes, we also need military aid in the dozens like you send Ukraine. Send more weapons and guns and ships. Get your congress to approve a bigger military budget. It isnt enough. We need to spend our money on roads and education but you need to defend us.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

The U.S. has always come to the aid of it's allies paid heavy costs and never failed, the big Q/ is WHO will come to the aid of the U.S. in times of distress or war??? NO ONE.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

kurisupisuToday  06:28 am JST

Defend SK and Japan from ?

Ethiopia. Who do you think?

5 ( +9 / -4 )

MarkToday  09:27 am JST

The U.S. has always come to the aid of it's allies paid heavy costs and never failed, the big Q/ is WHO will come to the aid of the U.S. in times of distress or war??? NO ONE.

NATO was in Afghanistan from 2001-2015. As the most powerful military power in the world, the US has not needed any countries to come to it's aid, so your question is rather pointless. Today the US has allies in Europe and Asia which share democratic values, in contrast to our adversaries who do not.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Not only Afghanistan, the US has aaaaalways betrayed those who serve it well when they cease to be interested, when the ship sinks they are the first to flee..

I love it when people talk about Afghanistan with out ever stepping foot in Afghanistan. Especially when they talk in absolutes.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

kurisupisuToday 06:28 am JST

Defend SK and Japan from ?

From anyone that might attack them. Perhaps North Korea, maybe China or Russia. It wont matter, if they are attacked America has pledged to defend them.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

After what happened in Afghanistan, I have a hard time believing this guy and administration.

I too would argue that Biden should have abrogated the agreement negotiated with the Taliban by Trump and his Sec State Pompeo.

I would say that it’s strange that you conveniently left that part out except it isn’t strange at all. It’s totally in keeping with Silly B’s slavish devotion to a cult of Trump.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

MarkToday 09:27 am JST

The U.S. has always come to the aid of it's allies

Except for WWI and WWII when it sat out the first few years of both conflicts.

paid heavy costs and never failed, the big Q/ is WHO will come to the aid of the U.S. in times of distress or war??? NO ONE.

Wrong again, I can assure you Australia and the UK just to name two, will always have the back of America. While the US world leadership (or hegemony as China calls it) took a big hit under Trump, it is recovering under Biden. The US has alliances and if the US is attacked the alliances back the US. When 9/11 happened the Australian Prime Minister who was in the US at the time, immediately activated the ANZAC alliance fulfilling Australia's commitment to come the the aid of America. NATO would also assist the US if attacked. The US is not alone and it is hard to conceive of it being on it's own if attacked with all the many alliances it has.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

America has always been there to defend less we forget the good America always does for the world. It's easy to bash upward. I don't see any other country coming to the aid of other countries except for America. Funny how after the fact, many people around the world bash America after we have helped them It's like when I lend friends money. After they get the money, they run away or talk bad about me. Should America stop defending you all?

3 ( +7 / -4 )

@voiceofokinawaToday

Should South Korea ask the U.S. if they will come to their aid should a contingency ever occur on the Korean Peninsula?

The US intervention is automatic because of North Korean nuclear warheads and ICBMs that can reach Washington DC. OPLAM 5015, the automatic invasion into North Korea when certain conditions are met, exists because of that.

Similarly, should Japan ask the U.S. if they will defend Japan should there occur a contingency between China and Japan over an outlying territory?

Japan can only ask US intervention if it went to war over the Diaoyu Islands. The US won't intervene if Japan decided to wage war against Russia and Korea over the Kurils and the Liancourt Rocks.

Must Japan guarantee the U.S. a secure and everlasting military presence, especially in Okinawa, out of appreciation?

Well, only the Okinawan voters can kick US troops out by declaring independence from Japan. Should Okinawa declare independence, China will gladly provide military aid to watch US military's departure.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

So they start a war in our countries and smash them up, and then sell us expensive weapons after, like they did when Russia invaded Georgia in 2008. They also lost a 20 year war in Afghanistan where many people are illiterate and live in stone and villages. Can we really trust them? I would rather trust our neighbor China.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

@Rodney

then sell us expensive weapons after

It depends on how well a country is prepared; look at Korea, they are being swept away in a tsunami of arms export orders as the result of Ukraine war, while unprepared Japan sold nothing.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/07/28/asia-pacific/south-korea-weapons-exports-2/

Massive arms deals highlight South Korea’s growing defense industry

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

opposite is true...

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

So they start a war in our countries and smash them up, and then sell us expensive weapons after, like they did when Russia invaded Georgia in 2008. They also lost a 20 year war in Afghanistan where many people are illiterate and live in stone and villages. Can we really trust them? I would rather trust our neighbor China

How is Russia doing in the Ukraine?

I think Russia had an adventure in Afghanistan as well if my history book is right.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I don't see any other country coming to the aid of other countries except for America.

Then you are not looking very hard. New Zealand and Australia have never started wars yet they have helped other nations many times, including helping America every time it has asked. And there are others who have answered the call for help.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

So they start a war in our countries and smash them up, and then sell us expensive weapons after, like they did when Russia invaded Georgia in 2008. They also lost a 20 year war in Afghanistan where many people are illiterate and live in stone and villages. Can we really trust them? I would rather trust our neighbor China.

America fights in the wars it starts. That is obvious and well documented.

The US has many of the best weapons available so it is no surprise when people look to arm their own forces they look to buy the best they can acquire.

America did not lose the war in Afghanistan. A coalition won the war very easily. The coalition then occupied Afghanistan and walked away when they had nothing left to accomplish but did so without setting the Afghan forces up to sustain itself. A huge oversight in hindsight.

You wish to put your trust in a nation that can lock you up forever with no legal recourse? That restricts you from speaking your mind for change? That locks up those who openly criticize their policies and leaders? Trust in China at your own peril. The US is normally a much better choice when it is working as one nation. That reliability is somewhat diluted when there is more infighting than cooperation, but even on a bad day it is miles ahead of China. China is never ever ever to be trusted while it is ruled by the CCP. If you trust in it so much I suggest you move there and live your life under CCP rules and penalties.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Peter14,as American lots of these American , politician are cowards to do what American ,has to do hold up their own principles,why American citizens has to force our leaders,to uphold ,their principal, American through legal coercion, through our courts

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Reaffirmed commitment to south korea and Japan to ensure their occupation and strategic military hegemony ?

If multiple conflicts happen at the same time in Europe and the Indo-Pacific /Asia-Pacific /Oceania will the USA military be effectively able to provide the security protection they have committed to ?

Is the USA military spread so thin around the world the shield is becoming tarnished and in danger of flaking off ?

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

The United States has proven capable of fighting and winning a two front war. Since WWII ended US military strategy has continuously been to reinforce that fundamental concept. Today the US has a wide range of like minded democratic allies in Europe and the Indo-Pacific that expands that capability.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Ossan,name on true Asian democracy

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Ossan

I said multiple conflicts as in more than a two front war.

I think it's a reasonable question to consider whether the USA could effectively provide the security it has committed to many nations and regions all at the same time.

Times have changed and it's well known that the USA is in fact playing catch-up with China's agenda in the Pacific and Russia's agenda in the arctic.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

You can tell when this guy lies. He moves his mouth.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Sooner or later the government of Japan will have to contemplate/consider a totally Independent nuclear deterrent.

A open and honest public debate will need to be had.

U.S. Forces Japan

https://www.usfj.mil/About-USFJ/

These are US forward bases whose primary focus is preventing a first strike strike capability to the US mainland.

Would Japan be able to unilaterally call/order US troops and maritime forces in the event of an incursion by either the government of China or Russian to stand post along side Japan forces to protect japan strategic island assets.

As the region has experienced with the manner in which the Government of China aggressive military exercises, and use of ballistic missiles against Taiwan, the attempts to threaten Japan access to vital global sea lanes there are no guarantees.

The US forces Japan mission and policy is a tad ambiguous, empathizing a US unilateral decision making process over and above a bilateral conclusion.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It's that ambiguous USA stance that concerns me.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

A multiple nuclear missile strike lunched from North Korea would hit there J targets within 10 minutes.

Now the only means of preventing such a horror story is if the government of Japan had the means to retaliate not only against North Korea but also against its sponsors.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

J-haters need to stop with his "if Japan goes to war" nonsense. The fisrt paragraph of article 9 in their constitution prohibits them from using military force to settle territorial disputes. An admirable step for keeping peace, but used soleley to their advantage by Japan's neighbors. The only way that Japan can "go to war" is if another country starts one against them.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

I would be more interested in what he has to say about US involvement in propping up dangerous cults behind the scenes of Japanese politics. I'm sure we all wonder what US "commitments" apply there.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The ol' ”pay us to protect you (this is our turf)” approach to hegemonic control

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Push come to shove, American could care less about defending anybody, Politician ultimate has to answer to the American people

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites