politics

Japan, U.S. to boost defense ties with Europe in Indo-Pacific

19 Comments
By Ko Hirano

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

© KYODO

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

19 Comments
Login to comment

LOL, not sure what to think about more of China bad for security, but good for business gestures out of our reliable alliance partners in the EU.

The EU just jumped in head first to allow China full access to infrastructure, technology and energy, in exchange for EU companies access cheap forced labour (without having to enter into a JV). PR with a forked tongue LOL.

Now, look at Russia. Russian people are very upset at deaths and mayhem due to covid and China rushes to Putin offering to buy everything Russia has to offer, coal, gas, oil.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

It might be interesting to see USN, RN and Indian carrier strike groups operating together in the Indian Ocean. Vikramaditya would make an outstanding surrogate for a Chinese carrier during any exercises.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The more international players protecting the use of international waters the better and safer everyone will be in those waters. No matter if you are a small or large "claimant" to parts of the South China sea, all must protect the rule and laws based freedom of travel for all nations vessels at all times in world recognized International waters and air space within the South China sea's. No nation can be allowed to claim ownership of this huge sea that the world relies upon for open and free transit of trade and other vessels.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The more international players protecting the use of international waters the better and safer everyone will be in those waters

Come on, 20 years ago this ^ would have been credible. Not any more.

Currently, China fully controls the SCS, even the US (the rightful owner, because USA conquered the entire western Pacific) tip toes around, and nobody even know whether there's nukes on them CCP made military installations.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Are NATO countries like the U.K., France and Germany aware of the fact that Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution prohibits Japan from being engaged in the act of war as a means to settle international disputes involving Japan?  

Probably, they could demand Japan host an enormous number/area of bases for their militaries to be stationed here just like the U.S.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

It should also be noted that the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty wouldn't allow USFJ to be engaged in military activities other than defending the security of Japan and the Far East.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Currently, China fully controls the SCS,

That is what China wants other's to believe but the islands they made are all a few bunker buster/MOAB's away from irrelevance and would be the first targets of any conflict. They would not last long and cant move out of the way of incoming waves of missiles, some of which they would no doubt shoot down.

Once the Island fortresses are eliminated, China has its bases on the mainland and its navy. For a small or moderate nation that would be enough but against the worlds number one military and a coalition that may include NATO, those defenses are no match for what could be brought to bare.

So international seafaring nations that use trade routes through the SCS have every right to protect those international waters from any nation that claims ownership of those waters in attempts to keep people away.

The more nations willing to protect freedom of travel the better for everyone.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Reading this article can't help but feel the irony in China in 2021 proudly proclaiming that they will seek revenge for their "century of humiliation". Yet their actions are setting themselves up for an encore of 1900.

Beijing steps up attempts to undermine Tokyo's administration of the Senkakus, called Diaoyu in China.

Who cares what China calls them. Media should stop legitimizing their claim by constantly telling readers what China calls them.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

voiceofokinawaToday  04:58 pm JST

Are NATO countries like the U.K., France and Germany aware of the fact that Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution prohibits Japan from being engaged in the act of war as a means to settle international disputes involving Japan?  

Article 9 prohibits Japan from starting any wars to settle disputes. It does not prohibit Japan from supporting allied forces, acting in collective defense or to defend itself if attacked.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

WWIII coming soon whether we like it or not!! You can't fight stupid, because stupid will only get bolder and will push their last button and then all hell will break loose. I pity the stupid fool!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

No more manipulating is necessary.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Currently, China fully controls the SCS

Not really. Some of those Chinese man-made islands are within visual range of islands controlled by Vietnam and the Vietnamese have their own missiles on their islands aimed right at the Chinese. They are not allies. Vietnam also has some newly purchased subs. China doesn't control any of the territory bordering the South China Sea except Hainan Island and a very small part of their extreme southern coast line. It is not credible for you to say China "fully controls the SCS" when it has no control of the great majority of the territory bordering it. Most of the shores bordering the SCS are controlled by adversaries of China. The US isn't lacking in the means to cripple their facilities either, especially now that the US is not bound by the IMF treaty and can pursue IRBMs and long range ground based cruise missiles.

One other thing to consider. China built those islands by dredging up sand and placing it on a living coral reef. The reefs beneath those islands are now dying and as they do they are collapsing downward. Commercial satellite imagery shows there have already been instances of big chunks of these islands flaking off into the ocean, requiring emergency repairs. One has to wonder how long all the big structures built on those islands will remain standing as the ground, actually a living organism, dies and subsides. One big typhoon could wash one of those islands completely away. The US almost lost Wake Island when the tidal surge of a typhoon submerged the entire island for hours. Wake is nothing but rock hard coral so it wasn't washed away. The US was able to rebuild. An island of sand would disappear under the same circumstances.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

WWIII coming soon whether we like it or not!! You can't fight stupid, because stupid will only get bolder and will push their last button and then all hell will break loose. I pity the stupid fool!

The goal is to prevent WWIII. A nation prevents an adversary from attacking them and starting a war by possessing sufficient military power to convince your adversary their chance of winning a war is not assured and the credible threat to use that military if sufficiently threatened. Failing to provide for enough military power to deter your adversaries from attacking you almost guarantees you will be attacked. It is an invitation to war.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Once the Island fortresses are eliminated, China has its bases on the mainland and its navy. For a small or moderate nation that would be enough but against the worlds number one military and a coalition that may include NATO, those defenses are no match for what could be brought to bare.

You don't know too much about the quality of the Chinese military today. You are living in a twenty year old time warp. Even without those SCS islands coming within 1000 kilometers of China with any kind of air or naval force will be a meat grinder. In the last ten years their forces have modernized massively and are close to the quality of NATO forces. They also train hard. I don't think you will find too many western military leaders who relish a war with China, preferring to deter such a war instead. In twenty or thirty years China's demographics will weaken it considerably and the dragon won't look so fierce. In addition Chairman Xi's attacks on Jack Ma and Hong Kong are going to give a lot of investors reason to look elsewhere, and reasons for a lot of wealthy Chinese to look for the exits. China could end up like the old USSR.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

You don't know too much about the quality of the Chinese military today. You are living in a twenty year old time warp. Even without those SCS islands coming within 1000 kilometers of China with any kind of air or naval force will be a meat grinder.

Incorrect. I am fully aware that China may well hold an advantage in the area of missiles of intermediate range and in numbers. However China has borders and neighbors who are natural enemies. They also have missiles. A coalition of nations against China, that includes the US, Japan, India and South Korea and possibly some NATO countries will more than even the odds. Bases in Vietnam, Japan, South Korea, India are all in range of Chinese bases and cities. While avoiding war is the goal of all sensible leaders, if it happens, as it inevitably does from time to time, China will fight better than many expect but are by no means guaranteed to win or even fight to a draw.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

OssanAmerica.

Japan under the Toshiki Kaifu administration didn't send SDF troops to Iraq at the time of the First Gulf War because of Article 9 of the Constitution but instead it made a donation to U.S. coffers in the amount of $1 billion. 

That donation even violated the war-renouncing constitution, for Article 9 of which clearly states: "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."

Wasn't the Gulf War an attempt to settle an international dispute by the use of force? Japan's monetary contribution was full cooperation with the party that was engaged in the war to settle an international dispute, so that it was clearly in violation of the constitution.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

It's all talk and empty gesture but none of willful action. If Japan and the EU were resolute against China, then the EU would not give a favorable trade deal with China or Japanese business elites would not expand their businesses in China. IT IS POINTLESS!

Currently, China fully controls the SCS, even the US (the rightful owner, because USA conquered the entire western Pacific) tip toes around, and nobody even know whether there's nukes on them CCP made military installations.

Nope. Vietnam had the most installations and artificial islands in the SCS.

https://amti.csis.org/island-tracker/vietnam/

Vietnamese fishing fleets have been intruding China waters (around Hainan Island) as well.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3065131/hundreds-vietnamese-fishing-boats-intrude-chinese-waters-think

http://www.scspi.org/en/dtfx/1583312993

Aside from China, Vietnam is also second as the world's illegal overfishing maritime power.

https://e.vnexpress.net/news/news/vietnam-to-investigate-illegal-fishing-as-eu-yellow-card-remains-3942030.html

Vietnam also antagonizes other claimants in the SCS as well. However, they are exceptionally cordial to China in a way that every incident between China-Vietnam is always resolved in a peaceful way. This is why I suspect that China and Vietnam colluded to dominate the whole SCS for themselves.

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3108079/its-not-just-south-china-sea-vietnamese-vessels-indonesian

If Scarborough Shoal was taken by China, then why Vietnam had a presence there? Collusion.

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/what-vietnam-s-fishing-flotilla-doing-scarborough-shoal

This is why the US has been conducting freedom of navigation missions in the SCS. Vietnam has been on the list with China as the primary antagonists.

https://news.usni.org/2020/12/25/uss-john-s-mccain-conducts-second-fonop-this-week-this-time-off-vietnamese-islands

Con Dao Island has been solidly been under Vietnamese control as hard as Hainan island in China. The US does not recognize it belongs to Vietnam, while China did. This is one of many reasons why Vietnam will not side with the US in every matter, or even think of becoming an ally.

 Vietnam also has some newly purchased subs. China doesn't control any of the territory bordering the South China Sea except Hainan Island and a very small part of their extreme southern coast line. It is not credible for you to say China "fully controls the SCS" when it has no control of the great majority of the territory bordering it. Most of the shores bordering the SCS are controlled by adversaries of China. The US isn't lacking in the means to cripple their facilities either, especially now that the US is not bound by the IMF treaty and can pursue IRBMs and long range ground based cruise missiles.

I want to add that Vietnam also know how to independently all ammunitions and missiles now. One of their greatest missiles in arsenals are KCT-15 and Yakhont. Both of these can easily sink ships in the SCS from Vietnamese mainland as well as S-300 systems and other auxiliary SAM missiles that are unknown. They can do serious damages to the Chinese naval might.

Vietnam brought many Israeli weapons as well as technological schematics. Their modernization efforts are quite independent and impressive. They do not buy American weapons even with all restrictions have been lifted because the USA does not give anything that one can improve and modify. If Vietnam buys F-16, then they want to mod and improve it, so they may one day produce their own jets. However, the US weapons don't have such options as the Russian and Israeli ones where Vietnam can freely play "creative mode" for new products.

If there is anything that Vietnam wants to buy from the US, I bet it will be American "early warning systems" against submarine warfare and aerial warfare. Vietnam does not want to pay too much for an American plane or radar systems for this matter, so this is why they recently signed a defense treaty with Japan. Because Japan has the second-hand goods (The US never ever gave its allies the real things), so Vietnam hopes to emulate the early warning systems from those goods. Eventually, Vietnam can develop their own systems to implement with their Russian-Israeli arms.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Many European countries were havoc by the epidemics, the naval deployment to S.C.S. is unpopular in their countries and won't do much to change the situation there! Once they began losing their ships in battle, they will backoff from such posturing!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

voiceofokinawaJan. 7  06:22 am JST

OssanAmerica.

Japan under the Toshiki Kaifu administration didn't send SDF troops to Iraq at the time of the First Gulf War because of Article 9 of the Constitution but instead it made a donation to U.S. coffers in the amount of $1 billion. 

Last I checked Iraq never tried to claim Japanese territory. Nor did it threaten the energy route that keeps Japan alive. I know you want Japan to remain defenseless as possible so that your PLA can take over Okinawa, but that isn's going to happen.

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