politics

China calls Japan's new security laws threat to regional peace

54 Comments

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

© 2015 AFP

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

54 Comments
Login to comment

China's Defense Ministry should have kept quiet.

Yes, I know its the same thing so many others have said and gotten applause for it. But as soon as China says it, people become instantly opposed and it doesn't matter if its the truth.

Of course any Chinese government official who wants war should keep talking. And yes those nasty, vile war mongering, war loving types exist in both governments, especially in the so-called "defense" ministries.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Not a suprise at all, think im still in shock that it passed at all! Now we know why silver week came about. So they could push it through while the average Joe is on holiday. Just like the federal reserve act in 1913, pushed through on christmas eve.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China calls Japan's new security laws threat to regional peace

So do I!

-1 ( +10 / -11 )

Oh, what a surprise. Abe's remilitarisation of Japan has given the Chinese government a propaganda tool. Now they can tell the Chinese citizens to beware of an external threat and stop thinking about how China's economy is crumbling.

And the Abe can say "Look! China is threatening us! We need to escalate"

It's almost as if both sides have something to gain by instilling fear in their bewildered populace.

"The consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival."

3 ( +7 / -4 )

war business is on the progress, billions and billion of dollars are being spent on the weapons. war mongers are so powerful, their excuses and propaganda is more powerful than the whole humanity on the earth. They are just adding to the miseries of the humanity. killing, hunger, displacement and countless sufferings are the fate of the human beings because of the war business.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

They almost sound right, but then again you remember that all this is coming from them. Laughable at best.

Nothing to see here...

1 ( +6 / -5 )

China should talk to the US, who is behind this (they are cheerleading the move).

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

China, before you accuse other of being threat, please look yourself into the mirror.

11 ( +16 / -5 )

A bit like the kettle calling the frying pan "grimy arse".

8 ( +12 / -4 )

Oh YES; We should accept this from the same country that is the AGGRESSOR ALL over the South Pacific !

9 ( +14 / -5 )

“not only broke Japan’s promise to the world after World War II, but also betrayed its own people”

100% correct on both fronts. Of course, coming from China, despite it being bang on, will just inspire Abe to say, "See! That stuff we rammed through Friday is necessary because now look what China is saying!"

0 ( +10 / -10 )

China, North Korea ... and even South Korea ... should just keep quiet and try to keep the peace. They don't have to worry about an aggressive Japan ... because if tensions do rise it will not be Japan that is putting the pressure on keeping the peace. Both China and North Korea better keep their threats to mere words because if they want a tussle they now will get one with the new-look wordage behind Japan's military operations.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

edojin: "because if tensions do rise it will not be Japan that is putting the pressure on keeping the peace."

Wrong. Japan has proven time and again to do JUST that. And Abe doing what he did and this coming from China is proof of that.

"Both China and North Korea better keep their threats to mere words because if they want a tussle they now will get one with the new-look wordage behind Japan's military operations."

Wrong again. If they wanted a tussle before Japan would have had every right to defend itself -- that's what the SDF is for: DEFENSE! The new laws are absolutely meaningless if Japan is indeed being honest about the new legislation still being limited to defense, and would only be suddenly significant, as you suggest, if they mean to ATTACK the other nations under the GUISE of defense. In which case they would yet again be violating the constitution, not to mention the newly legislated crap. The only thing that's changed is that Abe has increased the threat against Japan, despite his claims that the legislation is for safety and peace.

-7 ( +7 / -14 )

It is only my personal opinion, but I think Japan would be in the best situation if it took inspiration from the Swiss. Redefine the role of army to become politically independent, not allow foreign military on its land and pledge "eternal neutrality" - declaration not to engage in any military conflicts. All other options will create conflicts which Japan doesn't need.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Rich coming from China. Japan has every right to have a proper military. Next step is to arrest the demographic decline which is also a major security risk.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Isn't it wonderful when politicians can change the constitution by "reinterpreting" it instead of going the constitutionally mandated path. Why revise it when one can just decide it does not mean what it says?

9 ( +13 / -4 )

China, you better start worrying. Now, you have someone in your yard that can push back.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

I think Japan did well. It is the 21st century: it was about the time they took responsibility for peace (or war) keeping around the world, instead of paying money to others in order to do the job and keeping themselves calling the peach-country. Freedom and peace come at a price. China talks a lot and they call this law a threat...? What about their building illegally military bases in waters that do not belong to them, installing oil and gas rigs in other countries national waters or willingly and openly challenging other countries by breaching their boundaries and then complaining when they get shot or their fishermen get detained because busted where they shouldn't be...?

1 ( +6 / -5 )

China celebrates with a huge military parade which included nuclear weapons as well as building military airstrips on man-made islands in the South Pacific, North Korea has lobbed some missiles into the Sea of Japan that might in the future be able to carry Nucs as well and they also said they'd like to hit America's west coast...(and America is worried about Iran who doesn't even have a nuclear bomb yet!) but shrug off what China and N. Korea do... Then both claim Japan is trying cause all this war bull...is ridiculous! Doesn't Japan have the Right to defend itself? although it's the Americans kind of pushing them into it!

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Akula: "Japan has every right to have a proper military."

Except that they don't -- not according to their own Constitution, which Abe and Co. have clearly violated; not to mention ignoring the wishes of the majority of the nation.

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

Well, for starters we can all agree that it is China that's the real ''threat to regional peace''. Let me lay out my own personal opinion. I think that Japan, as a sovereign nation, has every right to protect itself from an ever belligerent China and North Korea. And let's be realistic. Japan ain't gonna revert back to a militaristic past, despite what many claim. The role of the SDF will be to ''assist'' allied countries when under attack. The supreme court still has the right to oppose any unilateral major involvement of the SDF. Frankly, it's time Japan got its balls back. And while I vehemently oppose the drastic steps taken by the Abe administration, as a proud libertarian, I can only question those who state that they don't want their sons to be conscripted to die in foreign wars. In the age of sophisticated weopanry and tactical drones, it's highly unlikely that greenhorns will be press ganged into protecting their country. This isn't 1940. China ought to ask itself whether it was justified in its invasion of Tibet, as well as it's current persecution of the Wigers and persistent aggression towards Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, et al. And this is coming from someone who has a profound love of Chinese people and culture.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

I think that Japan, as a sovereign nation, has every right to protect itself from an ever belligerent China and North Korea. And let's be realistic. Japan ain't gonna revert back to a militaristic past, despite what many claim.

@lozo, this statement is accurate and I agree with you 100%

China calls Japan's new security laws threat to regional peace

I knew they'd come out and say something like this. During China's recent military parade, they showed-off some nice new toys from their arsenal. China's fiscal military spending has been rampant these past few years.

The security laws aren't a threat if the Chinese just mind their own business.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

South Korea called on Japan to remember the need for transparency in implementing its new defense policy “while maintaining the spirit of the pacifist constitution,” its foreign ministry said in a statement cited by the Yonhap news agency.

I like South Korea's response. It's measured and not hysterical. The two most belligerent nations in the region respond in an unlike manner. Oh, what a surprise. China's long term plan to control trade routes and close down the South China sea just hit a complication.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

China can shut it's pie hole. Is Hypocrisy the national sport there? http://www.businessinsider.com/china-developed-multiple-warhead-missiles-2015-5

0 ( +5 / -5 )

This is the peace dividend the government has to offer ......And all the Government of China has to offer other than weaselly words and barefaced hypocrisy......

Highlights of China V-Day 2015 parade ......Never-seen-before weaponry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoC0Xcjko0A

Please play particular attention to DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) a first strike weapon that if deployed will start a chain of events ending in China total destruction....

1 ( +1 / -0 )

At this point I feel sorry for China because they actually think these comments make them look smart. Poor China, there, there, have some biscuits and watch your morning cartoons and leave the intelligent 'adult' conversations to... well, the adults.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Wc626: "I knew they'd come out and say something like this."

Of COURSE they would! That's like saying, "I KNEW you would say something when I spit on you!". It's a given that when you betray your own people, break your own promises, and commit further provocation that some people are going to say something.

Ossan: "China can shut it's pie hole. Is Hypocrisy the national sport there?"

Where does China's Constitution say that it renounces all war? Was Japan enslaved, repressed, and raped by China so that they might worry about its leaders taking the nation down the same path once again?

hatsoff: "I like South Korea's response. It's measured and not hysterical. The two most belligerent nations in the region respond in an unlike manner."

Agreed about SK's response, and about China and Japan being Asia's most belligerent nations.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

China calls Japan's new security laws threat to regional peace

China is right!

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

Japan was a threat during second world war but now wants only peace with its neighbors. China is wrong about present day Japan and their aggressive maneuvers in South China sea proves they accusing Japan of what they are actually doing themselves.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Let's be honest here! I'm no fan of the recent security legislation, but I'll play the devil's advocate because China has been vying to be the new poster child of truculent dog and pony show theatrics in the region. If anything, Chinese expansionism is probably an even greater threat to regional security.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

smithinjapan: "Agreed about SK's response, and about China and Japan being Asia's most belligerent nations." So you don't consider North Korea as one of the belligerent nations in Asia?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The interpretation of 'collective self-defense' is in principle vague and ambiguous, enough for 127 eminent scholars to state that the bills are constitutionally unlawful. Three Professors of Waseda and Keio, Japan’s most prestigious universities and considered the foremost authority on Japan constitution all testified that the legislation violates Article 9. Chief Cabinet Secretary Suga Yoshihide statements are a insult to the electorate, misguided and false.

On the other side of the coin is the Government of China militarization in the South China Sea adding insult to injury, a wholly provocative act that just makes matter worse.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Please play particular attention to DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) a first strike weapon that if deployed will start a chain of events ending in China total destruction....

itsonlyrocknroll, ur right. That missile ain't no joke. That missile seems like something out of a Tom Clancy story.

If they deployed that at US ships in Yokosuka, it would be a disaster. The missle almost render US aircraft carriers, on the high seas, like floating ash trays. With a lil help from russia's radar jamming technology, the US fleet better get it's act together.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

RENUNCIATION OF WAR

Article 9. Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.

In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Hi Wc626, the US navy/command will have just fifteen minutes to judge whether the yield is conventional or not, in that time a 'use it or lose it' scenario comes into effect, the target package is descending at mach 10, there is the temptation to launch a counter strike on multiple Chinese mainland targets.

Okinawa would become a primary strategic target. Abe san collective self defense would be meaningless. Japan needs to leverage its commitment to it pacifist constitution for all it is worth, to pressure the Governments of China and US to demilitarize, including the destruction of all their ballistic weaponry.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

"China has accused Japan of threatening regional peace after Tokyo passed laws clearing Japanese troops to fight abroad for the first time since World War II, saying that its rival should learn “profound lessons from history”.

"its rival"

This is the crux of the problem right here. China and Japan should be partners, not rivals, by now.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Japan has nothing to fear from China. Force projection is something only the US can now do. Assaulting by ship or by air one of those far flung islands is next to impossible. It's not like the Falklands where England was on the opposite side of the world - Japan is close enough to barely need mid-air tanking support to defend any islands in the vicinity.

Enemy ships? Japan has plenty of ASMs to use. Planes? Japan can easily defend against any air assault force the Chinese would choose to send.

There is no valid reason to make this change except to be drawn into another US funded escapade. It's much better for the US if they can send other countries' militaries to fight and die - as long as it's not US body bags coming back, they don't care.

China is well within it's right to complain about this change. This change does pose the most significant threat to the stability of Asia since China started their vitriolic charge against the South China Sea.

China won't back down - the Chinese Politburo is probably more afraid of their own populace deposing them, than external threats. "Red Storm Rising" by Tom Clancy shows the exact political conditions needed by an aggressor (replace Russia with China in this book, and West Germany with Japan), and by pushing through this unnecessary change, the Chinese government has yet another justification for uniting against an external threat then they did before.

Why bother giving them fuel? A pacifist Japan can't be a threat by it's very nature. A Japan with a "re-interpreted" constitution can give their government a justification, real or fabricated that the populace will believe.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Many people agree that Japan needs the military have more flexibility to deal with China and others. However, the Japanese public doesn't trust Abe's motives for expanding the military. They don't trust Abe or the government's ruling coalition. More importantly, the government's method of adopting the new laws are clearly illegal and a clear violation of the Japanese Constitution. That's not even open to debate. The government should have amended the Constitution by proper vote and a public referendum. Without amending the Constitution, the new security laws are invalid.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The threat has to be taken seriously. The Government of Japan SDF is no threat to China in any shape or form, the same cannot be said of the Government of china, that has developed first strike capabilities. It would require a complete repeal of article 9, and wholesale rearmament including a nuclear weapons capability to counter China layered 'defense' Strategy....

China's Layered Deterrence Strategy .......

https://www.stratfor.com/image/chinas-layered-deterrence-strategy

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wow China has nuclear weapons and a billion man army, North Korea has nuclear weapons and out dated work ward two submarines and other military hardware, South Korea has a military and most of the post here probably are from another country crying foul about Japane leadership wanting to protect Japan. Why is it that some posters here are always sayin the US is behind Japan military build up? Every country should be able to defend their country just as EVERY MAN SHOULD BE ABLE TO DEFEND HIS FAMILY WHEN BEING ATTACKED FROM SOME UNKNOWN assailant. Do you run or do you fight to your death from reading the post here most would run. Some would call the police but the attackers are gone. Some would rather talk to the assailant sometimes or most times it's better to be prepared. Japan can't wait for the U.S. To fight their battles many of the posters here are saying Japan would go off and fight the U.S. Started battles how do you think Americans feel fighting Japan battles. Japan has problems with their neighbors not the US but should Japan get attacked I'm sure most of you foreigners will high tail it back to your countries while Japan and its people are attacked and be out of harms way or let me ask this would you take up arms to help defend Japan? I doubt it! The only reason China and North Korea has not attacked Japan is because of The US bases there. Many people are marching and saying they want the U.S. Bases gone BELIEVE IT OR NOT AMERICANS DONT WANT TO BE IN JAPAN and should the bases go so will the same people marching for the bases to go because China will take them without firing one single shot.The mind set of the people in Japan is we want peace yes you can have your peace only after China conquer you. Instead of arming up the people prefer to MOUTH UP try doing that and see where your lives will end.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

american_bengoshi

True about the procedures BUT will the opposing minority party accept a move for a referendum in which requires 2/3 of both houses to go through?

I posted endlessly that that is not a possibility and the minority parties really do not care as long as they can knock down the LDP a few notch. Many of the citizens that are opposing say the same that they are not against the spirit of the law but the lack of procedure and agrees that a public referendum should take place. So why is not bipartisan motion?

Basically with the present JSDF equipment, it's pretty hard not to get involved with all the data links between the two militaries and this is one of the reason why Abe is pushing this law. Under the present constitution JSDF can't even rely the data they have collected or let a helicopter land on JMSDF ships during a conflict.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Hi tokyomusing, In all honesty I not sure the Commander US 7th Fleet is in a awful hurry to 'pack up shop and close the shutters'....

The U.S. 7th Fleet is the largest U.S. numbered fleet, at any given time, with 80-100 ships and submarines, 150-200 aircraft and 40,000-50,000 Navy and Marine Corps personnel assigned to the fleet.

Maybe Abe san felt obliged to make an attempt to show willing, but in all essence he needn't have bothered.

http://www.c7f.navy.mil/forces.htm

1 ( +1 / -0 )

China has their own problems with pro-democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong and obvious economic woes of their own. Their response is quite typical and will be yesterdays news in short order. If Japan's passing of a bill is a threat to China than what do you call the US 7th Fleet already there? It's not as if Japan could match that in short order, it will take a great number of years.

For those that didn't read the news, Japan slammed China in July for the South China Seas base construction... http://www.ibtimes.com/south-china-sea-war-japan-slams-beijing-constructing-military-base-fiery-cross-reef-2017077 So, of course China is going to comment.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

If this is not one of the worst cases of the pot calling the kettle black. Gods am I getting sick of China.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

>BertieWooSep. 20, 2015 - 08:56PM JST >China calls Japan's new security laws threat to regional peace >China is right!

Nope. Japan's new security laws are a threat only to China's military and territorial expansion aspirations.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Who was it said "The price of peace is eternal vigilance"? That of necessity includes the ability to defend oneself, otherwise the vigilance is pointless. And that's just what Japan is doing, and, in view of China's aggressive territorial expansion in the region, justifiably so. So China should just suck it up and take a long hard look at how its actions are seen by others.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

How about China enacts an Article 9 in their constitution as well. Either case, Japan should not forsake it.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

This time China is right. And as I predicted, the laws have been like a red flag to a bull

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Not sure what's funnier, the Chinese dictatorship's utterly predictable hypocritical comments or the comments supporting the totalitarian regime that is seen as a threat by all of Asia.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Where does China's Constitution say that it renounces all war?

It doesn't. That's why such security measures are needed. When the usual parties, namely China, NK, and SK, complain while the rest of the world applauds, it's a sure sign that this security bill was right for Japan.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Communist Chinese leaders have to blame themselves for Japan increasing Militarization because Communist China intimidation was went too far and hostile toward Japanese businesses and Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A word can be spoken to end, or prevent a "war", let us remember Vasili Arkhipov, whom prevented the oncoming of a nuclear war, by arguing a moment's just "waiting for Moscow's orders", even though three officers (of a majority) decided to hastily and unanimously authorize a nuclear launch...

Japan should be now "diplomatic" more than ever, but this current Administration is too fear-mongering upon itself and towards it's citizens and beyond towards it's neighbours. It's egoistic shadow is still lingering there, fueled by it's heritages. What we should really be focusing on is preventing the escalations. The administration should've done it's best at that, too... but it's quite bleakly unfortunate that they choose to propose and article in which the weapon industries get a massive profit off, and so on. Are we not supposed to focus on the internal affairs of the country? Japan, at it's current state is absolutely not in a sustainable condition and it obviously wants to eat a bigger cake than it could.

There really isn't a point, having Japan "defend" itself from China, either. It surely may defend itself towards it's homeland, from any foreign type of hostile presence, but the fact that remains, this is actually a issue of tensions ,rivaling between the US and China, and Japan should not be included in it. For a country that has a huger advantage over Japan, (just look at the whole stats), it should be said that war would just lead to suffering. No matter what would people say "Japan needs to defend itself", etc... there is no point. absolutely no beneficial point, and we know this ourselves, beyond our social, identity conditioning.

In essence, it's great to see where and what this statement would lead to (from China)... and perhaps more so on South Korea.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why didn't anyone stand up to China when they invaded and occupied Tibet? Yet they start to get belligerent when an unpopulated island is disputed. No use threatening them with the SDF but for the sake of Tibet the whole world should boycott Chinese products. Switch to other more worthy Asian countries like Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Patrick

Why didn't anyone stand up to China when they invaded and occupied Tibet?

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Tibet was guilty of harbouring a lack of oil, gold or diamonds. Unpardonable in the eyes of the first world.

1 ( +1 / -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