Japan's military sees record spending: Nikkei

Obviously, Japan can start a war at any moment.

Purchases of American-made equipment could help Tokyo ease trade friction with Washington as U.S. President Donald Trump pushes Japan to buy more American goods, including military gear, while threatening to impose tariffs on Japanese auto imports to cut a trade deficit with Tokyo.

This raises the question: Is this record high military budget really necessary or this appeasement?

Why? Japan has a very limited resource, it's not a envious country. Nobody wants to take on a debt burden with no chance of making profit from it. Shuffling old people are not a threat.

Not enough compare to our neighbors on the mainland.

Even poor North Korea can hit Japan with ballistic missiles armed with nuclear warheads. Remove the paficist constitution and raise spending to at least 2% just like European countries are doing.

Remove the paficist constitution and raise spending to at least 2% just like European countries are doing.

I would support a 2% level, but if Japan is going to invest that heavily, at 2% of GDP per annum then we need to take another look at Japans defense industry. If I was Japanese, I would be wanting a real industrial payback for that sort of investment, not just buying off the shelf U.S or European gear. I would be taking a longer term view of how Japan could fit into the global defense picture.

We know there are ongoing thoughts surrounding 6th generation aircraft, but there is lower hanging fruit of less technical difficulty in which Japan could seek cooperation with allies. I also think that its high time Japan look into hypersonics and if the pacifist constitution is overturned, I think they will. There will be certain classes of defense gear that the U.S will be reluctant to provide and that could be one of them.

AlexBecu, I would support Japan to raise 200% if that will help to safe guard the peace of Northeast Asia.

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.

This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.

I do not often agree with Akie but his message in the above quoted post is quite clear and is one I happen to agree with.

There are countless better causes to which the money, efforts, and resources of the world can be spent on other than munitions.

Unfortunately the reality of the world makes it necessary for humans to arm themselves against each other.

Strangerland, hasn't Japan spend too much on wars ? Now they asked Japan to spend money on 6th generation fighter, they asked Japan to spend on hypersonic weapons, they asked Japan to abandon peace constitutions, and they will ask Japan to sacrifice their lives eventually. To them, Japan is just a trash can they can throw any garbage in.

Akie, are you saying about China?

Remove the paficist constitution and raise spending to at least 2% just like European countries are doing.

There is no legal or administrative impediment in Japan for defense spending to approach 2% of GDP in defense spending. The 1% limit is just an internal self-imposition so as not to infuriate the Japanese people. And Article 9 also does not legally preclude an increase in defense spending.

and if the pacifist constitution is overturned, I think they will.

I think so, too. It is only a matter of time. Article 9 is obsolete. And it is something that the Japanese people are beginning to realize. But it will still take a few decades to update that text.

Schopenhauer, China has been Japan's neighbor for 5000 years, during which time China had been the only superpower for 4500 years, yet China never invaded Japan, occupied Japan, bombed Japan, raped Japan. Quite contrary, Japan invaded China, occupied China, bombed China, raped China, even with very limited temporary power. Do you know what China has learned from Japan's brutality ? Only wars can destroy wars, only weapons can destroy weapons.

 Only wars can destroy wars, only weapons can destroy weapons.

That's why self-defence is needed.

and China kept being invaded, raped by not-just Japan. China kept invading China too.

Akie, Japan today is not the same Japan before. China has no danger of being invaded by Japan today. One party dictatorship China is a dangerous country.

Schopenhauer, again, you din't lie. Today, Japan still has a peace constitution. But what about tomorrow when Japan abandons her peaceful constitution ?

Akie calm down. It's not the end of the world, as John Lenonn said "let it be" if we all respect each other and space there will be no problem.

China has not attempted to project its power as the US has done for many years.While China is in no way a perfect state I would argue that it does not interfere in countries far from its borders and is not a security concern for Japan

Why can't we rely on the Americans and pretend everything is fine as usual?

China has not attempted to project its power as the US has done for many years.

You said it, China has never opened our ports by force, nuked us. If that is not a decent start to peaceful foreign relations, I don't know what is.

Japan is in the midst of an arms buildup. We are hearing the reasons, valid or not: Trade deficit, North Korea, China. These seem more and more like excuses. The trade deficit (so-called), North Korea and China have always been with us, as has been has been the Soviet Union at one time. In past years (which includes the Cold War) we have not seen military spending rise as much as now. Is this necessity or is it hubris? This is a fair question to ask the day after December 8.

A recent Vox Populi column in the Asahi talked about the hubris that prevailed in Japan after Pearl Harbor and other surprise attacks in the Pacific and Asia. Only a few people saw how all this would end in disaster.

We are not at that stage now but we do have a Prime Minister with things of war.

Last sentence! We are not at that stage now but we do have a Prime Minister who has a fascination with things of war.

The only reason Japan is increasing its defence spending is because of the increasing expansionism and nationalistic rhetoric from China as well as a demonstrated threat from North Korea and its missiles (so it provides a convenient excuse to placate Trump at the same time but was happening anyway). China has of recent years shifted its military from a powerful defensive force (with which no one had an issue) to an expansionist aggressive force backed up by the rhetoric of aggression.

kurisupisu, if you do not think China has attempted to project its power, ask the Indians, Vietnamese, Taiwanese, all their neighbours in the South China sea and the Japanese Coastguard.

Akie, China for centuries bullied its neighbours and conquered territory, why else do you think it is as large as it now is, it has conquered and colonised its neighbours since the first emperor, it is now reverting back to its old ways.

You don’t make weapons just to sit on them. You don’t change a constitution just for protection. Sad.

talaraedokko Dec. 9 11:38 pm JST

You don’t make weapons just to sit on them. You don’t change a constitution just for protection. Sad.

Unfortunately, article 9 of the constitution is obsolete. It's something no one likes to admit. But the reality is there.

The JSDF (the army of Japan). They should not exist. But they exist and the war potential of those forces is increasing year after year. And it's incompatible with the current constitution. The reason for its existence is the deliberate disobedience of Article 9. Ignoring its existence is for now the only alternative that Japan currently has. Until the Japanese people understand that this article needs to be reformed.

Finally, I put the definition of the obsolete word that comes in the dictionary.

obsolete

outdated or inappropriate to current circumstances, fashions or needs. An obsolete teaching system.

Does Japan even have the demographics to use / man these weapons, and fight any probable fallout after the first strike (whether they are defensive or offensive)? Or are we going to use our recently passed immigration laws to allow others to fight “our” wars?

Landing helicopter Dock is NOT an aircraft carrier! It wont help China or North Korea tendering their words or attitudes! How many such aircrafts can carry and  how long the endurance they could fly? You know this is limited1

About time Japan stepped up its spending on their military.  It doesn't mean Japan is going to start a war; it means Japan wants to be less reliant on U.S. military forces and take a more active role in protecting the region around them as they see fit.   What's wrong with that?

On the other hand, if China wants to start something, especially around the Senkaku Islands and Okinawa, that's another story. Does anybody here deny Japan the right to protect those regions?  Especially without U.S. "meddling"?

At the same time, PM Abe sees the writing on the wall:  There will be a time when U.S. military forces will be withdrawn from mainland Japan and Okinawa.  PM Abe is preparing for that day and wants to ensure Japan won't be defenseless.  These preparations takes time and better now before it's too late.

It's sending a message to Korea and China to kindly ratchet down the rhetoric a bit. I also noticed the four Escort Class (Helicopter Carriers my hide) Carriers are V/STOL capable in a pinch. Which China has to be nervous about, as they have only one sorta working one ATM