politics

Japan may send ships to patrol off Yemen instead of Strait of Hormuz

30 Comments

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

© KYODO

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

30 Comments
Login to comment

How about send them to some disputed islands?

We got some problems to settle over China and Korean peninsula.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

"We can't just do nothing",

Yes you can! Because once you slide down that slippery slope the other guys will be there waiting with the same "We can't just do nothing". That means the start of tit for tat and then one day terror will visit Reiwa Japan.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

IMO I have to agree with Kazumichi, that sounds like a much better alternative way forward than ships in the Yemen area. Our security is more probable around our own borders than elsewhere. Encroachment issues continue by SK, China and Russia yet instead we find ourselves patrolling where these countries are not.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

The administration of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is reluctant to send the Maritime Self-Defense Force to the strait, a key sea lane through which around a fifth of the world's oil passes, out of concern that doing so could hurt Tokyo's friendly ties with Tehran.

But not out of concern that it violates the constitution.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

I would like to see Japan take some kind of measure in this area.

2 oil tankers already got hit... If a 3rd or 4th gets damaged or destroyed would you still say No?

Area around Japan is important Yes, but you shouldn't ignore the rest of the world either.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

As a compromise, Japan is considering sending MSDF destroyers and P-3C Orion surveillance planes to the Bab el-Mandeb Strait between Yemen and the Horn of Africa, the sources said.

.....The mission would likely be taken up by forces already engaged in anti-piracy operations off Somalia. The Japanese vessels would not be part of the U.S.-led coalition, though the area of operations would overlap.

.....Britain and Israel have announced they will participate in the coalition, 

Japan has the ships, and they have the manpower. Might as well put them thru their paces with a little live fire practice.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

The administration of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is reluctant to send the Maritime Self-Defense Force to the strait

Well, of course! Wouldn't want to do anything to offend Iran!

Wouldn't it be nice if no one needed oil from the Middle East and no one would have to protect oil tankers going through there?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Japan has the ships, and they have the manpower. Might as well put them thru their paces with a little live fire practice

Just great. The U.S. started the present crisis by ditching the deal with Iran, the U.K. went even further by hijacking a tanker in international waters, but now Japan should send its warships to normalize the situation? Thanks, but no thanks. You started the mess, you clean it after yourselves.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Well, that's all well and good.

But, if Japan isn't willing to defend takers that are delivering oil to Japan, why should anyone else defend them???

But defending tankers that are delivering oil to Japan from attack would actually be.... "self defense"??

I am so confused, I thought Abe wanted a proper military to protect Japan's interests....

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Interesting take on all this...

Regardless of differing opinions, Japan must first as a water borne country surrounded by deep oceans all around and treasure troves of natural resources on the land and in the oceans, but faced with many ill intended adversaries in the immediate proximity all to the North with only a narrow sea a barrier and as the only defensible are, it needs all its forces close to protect itself. The sad fact is that in spite of all the resources it must obtain much of its energy as oil from Iran. And so far Iran has not been adversarial to Japan till the recent incident, proving that indeed Japan is part of the larger global conflict wanted or not.

It must then protect its interest at areas where there are NO policing forces to assure Japan's energy supply. Just that Japan has limited military resources due to the restrictions set forth by its own Constitution.

It is wiser that the administration do not commit the limited but the only physical barrier and deterrent, the Naval Force, facing the immediate threats now upon Japan from all Northern nations. It may make sense if Japan did have more naval vessels to spare in foreign seas. Either that, Japan must increase its Coast Guard by a huge number rather soon.

As during the Russo Japanese war when many of their ships were acquired from foreign navies, the only alternative for now may be to "buy" what is needed for defense as with the F35 until such time as Japan is able to increase its forces by building its own. And of course build more allies in Asia.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

"We can't just do nothing," a senior Abe administration official said.

Itching to prove to everyone that Japan, although once licked, was never beaten.

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/cef7aa6c-e5ab-44fe-9cea-7567a525c1c7

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@zones2surf

But, if Japan isn't willing to defend takers that are delivering oil to Japan, why should anyone else defend them???

Typical US/ UK approach: start a crisis and then drag everybody else into it, just like in Iraq in 2003. Let me remind you that before the present crisis nobody attacked the tankers heading for Japan. With such "allies" as U.S. and U.K. no enemies required.

I thought Abe wanted a proper military to protect Japan's interests....

To defend Japan, not to be a meek satellite in somebody else's military adventures.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

"We can't just do nothing," a senior Abe administration official said.

Yes you can there is no reason whatsoever to become aggressive towards enemy's of America's satellite state Saudi Arabia.

Britain and Israel have announced they will participate in the coalition

Of course they will, they have to obey the US government's marching orders.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I looked up Bab el-Mandeb Strait, no you will not fool Trumo and the itchy for war Americans around him.

Patrol the Hormuz alone or with the Europeans. Dont do Israelis bidding!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

At the time when P.M. Abe was visiting Iran for talks with President of Iran Hassan Rouhani, Japanese-flagged oil tankers passing through the Hormuz Strait were attacked by unknown attackers. The U.S. government said immediately afterwards that it was an hostile act by IRGC, a branch of Iranian Armed Forces, later showing, at Tokyo's request, a blurred picture of masked men in black costumes trying to attach limpet mines on the hull of one of the vessels.

Is this the reason why the JMSDF must send warships and fighter jets to the Persian Gulf as part of the U.S.-led Coalition? Why should Japan fight against or be at loggerheads with Iran, with which Japan has kept friendly relations for decades?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@kazetsukaiToday 12:06 pm JST

As during the Russo Japanese war when many of their ships were acquired from foreign navies, the only alternative for now may be to "buy" what is needed for defense as with the F35 until such time as Japan is able to increase its forces by building its own. And of course build more allies in Asia.

Unlike planes and tanks, Japanese warships are actually built reasonably to schedule and at controlled costs. Looking at the recent results of European warship construction, I don't think I'll want to chance buying anything off them nor would they be able to contribute too much.

voiceofokinawaToday  06:17 pm JST

Is this the reason why the JMSDF must send warships and fighter jets to the Persian Gulf as part of the U.S.-led Coalition? Why should Japan fight against or be at loggerheads with Iran, with which Japan has kept friendly relations for decades?

Wait, wait wait, why does sending a warship necessarily mean fighting Iran? If Iran doesn't attack the convoy, then there is no battle. If there is, they can defend the merchants.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

At the time when P.M. Abe was visiting Iran for talks with President of Iran Hassan Rouhani, Japanese-flagged oil tankers passing through the Hormuz Strait were attacked by unknown attackers. The U.S. government said immediately afterwards that it was an hostile act by IRGC, a branch of Iranian Armed Forces, later showing, at Tokyo's request, a blurred picture of masked men in black costumes trying to attach limpet mines on the hull of one of the vessels.

Exactly even the writers of 24 or Homeland could have cooked up something better with regards to this fake accusation at the expense of Iran.

Even Netanyahu's big "reveal" with regards to Iran violating the nuclear agreement was less fake than this nonsense.

Is this the reason why the JMSDF must send warships and fighter jets to the Persian Gulf as part of the U.S.-led Coalition?

Abe and his LDP will obey to Washington's orders no matter what they are just trying to spin this fact any way they can.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Patrol the Hormuz alone or with the Europeans. Dont do Israelis bidding!

It's better to stay away there altogether.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Japan should send an independent fleet to protect its merchant navy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But if Yemen is a country in civil war.

There are four sides that control that country right now. Not to mention that ISIS is also present, albeit to a lesser extent.

1). The Houthis rebel part. They control the capital of the country. (Pro-Iran).

2). Those loyal to Hadi. The government recognized by the UN. Established in the city of Aden. (Pro-Saudi Arabia).

3). The independence faction of southern Yemen. Another rebel group at odds with the other groups in conflict. They have a fairly large area of control including the Socotra archipelago.

4). And finally Al-Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula.

With the exception of group 2. The rest usually attack the international forces deployed in the area. Especially the Houthis. It will be a delicate enough area to operate JSDF, with Article 9 of the constitution in force.

Here I put the link of the wikipedia about this war conflict, so that people are well informed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemeni_CivilWar(2015%E2%80%93present)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But if Yemen is a country in civil war.

Japan won't be caught dead near that country. I'm sure they'll be somewhere in international waters and Djibouti where they have a base. So don't worry, they will be there strictly for Japanese props.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan should stay at home and let the US ( the greatest, the best, the mightiest, the biggest military) take care of the dispute it created. If more countries told the US to stick it, the US might not be so aggressive, might not go looking for enemies.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Japan should send ships thru the Taiwanese strait instead. After that a port call in Taiwan.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

us reamer:

That means the start of tit for tat and then one day terror will visit Reiwa Japan.

No. I agree Japan should stay away from the area, but terror will come to Japan only to the degree that Japan allows islamic immigration, complete fundamentalist clerics. Two different issues.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

If this is a crisis of America's making, why is Iran attacking Japanese ships? Iran doesn't care if you are 'friendly' with them, they've always just been looking for an excuse to attack the West and it's allies. Backing out of the nuclear deal is exactly the opportunity they wanted.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Godspeed SDF.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Why is Iran attacking Japanese ships?

Iran never attacked Japanese or other ships in the Straight of Hormuz.

Again a blatant lie by the US government without a shred of evidence in order to have an excuse to invade a country to secure its natural resources.

Need I remind you we are still waiting for that proof of the "weapons of mass destruction" when they invaded Iraq ?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Backing out of the nuclear deal is exactly the opportunity they wanted.

Iran did not back out of the nuclear deal in fact the international nuclear control agency who were on site clearly stated Iran fully complied to the set agreements.

Only when another one of the US government's puppets on a string, Netanyahu, started to spread false rumors about Iran violating the nuclear deal the US government one-sidedly called of the deal and bullied its allies not to do business with Iran anymore.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Yet again, Japan wants it's cake and eat it.

A modern world dilemma, how do you ask Japan to participate, while keeping Japan on a lease.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Kazuaki Shimazaki,

Wait, wait wait, why does sending a warship necessarily mean fighting Iran? If Iran doesn't attack the convoy, then there is no battle. If there is, they can defend the merchants.

But that's not an ordinary good will visit to a country by warships, is it? Trump-proposed Coalition is for the containment of Iran, thus characterized as hostile forces, isn't it?’

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