politics

Japan planning to send 270 MSDF personnel to Middle East to guard ships: report

20 Comments

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2019.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

20 Comments
Login to comment

It would seem that Japan no longer needs or wants US protection.

-9 ( +4 / -13 )

This is all they care?

About their military prestige abroad to show off to some other G- whatever country how powerful and important they are.

Meanwhile the local economy is impoverishing the average people with almost no social welfare and little rights for employees.

But yeah,if I’m not wrong since 2012 the military expense raised and other domestic values still have problems.

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

Nothing in the article suggests that Japan no longer needs or wants US protection.

10 ( +14 / -4 )

It would seem that Japan no longer needs or wants US protection.

Protectionism, surely?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Japan is working on a plan to send about 270 seamen to the Middle East to guard ships supplying Japan under a law that allows military deployments for research and intelligence gathering, The Nikkei said the government would propose deploying one escort ship and a patrol aircraft from the Maritime Self-Defense Force on a one-year mission that could be renewed annually.

Wait a minute I have to agree with DPJ on this one, and this is rare. If the law allows military deployments for research and intelligence gathering why does it have to be in the Middle East? Also why are they guarding ships instead of conducting research or intelligence gathering. Seems the Abe LDP is really stretching the interpretation of the law. Totally against the violation of Article 9 under the Constitution. Japan is only getting itself in the middle of bee's nest.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Have you heard about the JP doctor killed at the Kyber Pass and PM Abe commenting?

If there is one country to give up naivety, believing on being alone in the economic world only, we all know where to look.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

If one argues about the precise wording of the law (art 9) then the JSDF can not even exist, as stipulated in the second paragraph, despite having existed for some 70 years. This is a perfect example of why Article 9 needs to be amended, and sorry, but no one, even Shinzo Abe, is suggesting changing the first paragraph which prohibits Japan from waging war to settle disputes.

The deployment has to be in the middle east because that's where most of the J-flag and J-controlled tanker tonnage lload cargoes and that is where there has been activity that requires protection.

The JMSDF are guarding those ship's because they exist to protect Japan, it's people, it's propert, and territory. Obviously the vessels fall under the first two categories. Protecting the vessels includes research and intelligence gathering as P-3s will undoubtedly be deployed in combination with surface ships.

Japan is avoidig getting into a "bee's nest" by protecting it's interests but not joining the US lead coaltion which is seen by Iran as a strategic aggressor.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Protecting the vessels does not validate research or intelligence gathering on enemies of Japan since Japan is at war nor involved with war activities, etc in the Middle East. Pure business interests that serves corporations, which can be divested elsewhere. Guarding leads to defense and offensive maneuvers key word is offensive at that point it is clear there is no research or intelligence gathering and then for what purpose? Japan under Art word for word should not even have JASDF. Japan is clearly getting itself involved in an area that doesn't need protection as no one is or planning to attack Japan aside its neighbors closest to its shores.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Although a small force, this is a highly significant and signals a large change in future policy making.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

rgcivilian1Today 08:07 pm JST

Protecting the vessels does not validate research or intelligence gathering on enemies of Japan since Japan is at war nor involved with war activities, etc in the Middle East.

Perhaps you are not aware that Japanese persons and property have been attacked. And Japan is not at war with anybody in the middle east or elsewhere.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-tanker-attack-mine-gulf-oman-japan-oil-us-evidence-uk-a8965181.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/01/world/middleeast/islamic-state-militants-japanese-hostage.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shosei_Koda

Pure business interests that serves corporations, which can be divested elsewhere. Guarding leads to defense and offensive maneuvers key word is offensive at that point it is clear there is no research or intelligence gathering and then for what purpose?

Guarding doesn't lead to defense, it is defense. Defensive action is not offensive action. Research and intelligence gathering includes knowing when and where possible attacks may occur so that they can hopefully be avoided.

Japan under Art word for word should not even have JASDF. Japan is clearly getting itself involved in an area that doesn't need protection as no one is or planning to attack Japan aside its neighbors closest to its shores.

I already said that Article 9 2nd para states Japan should not have a SDF, which it has now for 70 years. Japan is doing what the JMSDF exists to do, without getting involved in the aggressive stance of the U.S. against Iran.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

One day.. a pissed off middle eastern faction will come knocking on the door of Japan. The later the better

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Good for them.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

This in effect makes them paid mercenaries, unless Japan is conceding that it is sending troops on missions overseas again, still covering up what happened in South Sudan before they ran.

It's not about protection, it's about Abe trying to justify the massive military spending, and to slowly but surely erode the Constitution so that one day he can just ram legislation through that changes that, too, and saying, "I was voted in, therefore the public (despite the majority clearly being against it) has said I could change it. I will make them understand later". He is a true dictator and he desperately wants his legacy to be a change in the Constitution.

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

nedotjp: "One day.. a pissed off middle eastern faction will come knocking on the door of Japan. The later the better"

That's true. He's also gladly making Japan a target.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

Incoming facts

Japan had 2 ships be hit in the middle east this past year.

We also had Japanese citizens die in that region as early as this past week. People who only wanted to help, got caught in the cross fire. They were not soldiers, they were not mercenaries.

Not being involved in a changing world is a mistake with consequences for Japan.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

@OssanAmerica : Perhaps you are not aware that Japanese persons and property have been attacked. And Japan is not at war with anybody in the middle east or elsewhere.

I am quite aware in more ways than I am allowed to post, however this one isolated incident is not cause enough for Japan to meddle in ME affairs either correct? In fact since you bring up the attack, it is up to the US to defend Japan in its waters or land within Japan or International waters that pertains to its interests, yet the GOJ needs to invoke that clause and actually should be asking "hey US why are not stepping up the effort and let us get what we pay for? Correct? In regards to war, No your wrong it is in an economic war that is not being reported by mass media, and keep in mind many countries have not forgotten the past nor do they intend to either. In meddling in affairs using a weak far fetched stretching i.e. research and gather intel does not fit the criteria for Japan "military" forces which is in violation of Art 9, in international waters where its ships have not been attacked nor need to worry about as you pointed out Japan is not at war with anyone right, so why invite the ME issues here to Japan by its getting involved in the hornet's nest? hmmm. which only proves why no issues of them causing problems with Japan.

Guarding doesn't lead to defense, it is defense. Defensive action is not offensive action.

Again twisting of words to meet your point. Guarding is protection and does not involve firing back, at that point it is offensive to gain a more defensive position. The two go hand in hand. That is what is involved in any engagement.

The best solution is to invoke the clause and let the US protect the Japan interests, that is what the funding is all about all of these years.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

good send those pretend soldiers with their imperial mindset to face reality

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

@macv: Japan has never backed away from conflict, quite the opposite and which is why the Constitution should remain as is. Not for fear of fighting but for fear of waking up a long sleeping Samurai spirit. This country is a resilient and still possesses much of the warrior in them, as it takes much greater courage and strength in not showing it or following through. Unfortunately many forces beyond their control is pulling it towards a destiny most certainly heading in that direction. A pacifist Japan is for the better good of all.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

rgcivilian1Today  01:40 am JST

@OssanAmerica : Perhaps you are not aware that Japanese persons and property have been attacked. And Japan is not at war with anybody in the middle east or elsewhere.

I am quite aware in more ways than I am allowed to post, however this one isolated incident is not cause enough for Japan to meddle in ME affairs either correct?

Wrong. Sending the JMSDF to protect it's own flagged and controlled merchant vessels from possible attack by any party is not "meddling" in ME affairs. You are confusing this with the actions of the United States and UK both of which have a long history of literally "meddling" in ME affairs.

In fact since you bring up the attack, it is up to the US to defend Japan in its waters or land within Japan or International waters that pertains to its interests, yet the GOJ needs to invoke that clause and actually should be asking "hey US why are not stepping up the effort and let us get what we pay for? Correct?

Wrong. The obligation of the United States to defend Japan stands per Article 5 of the US-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty. It provides for the US to defend Japan from attack. It does not cover issues such as territorial incursions or attacks on assets outside of Japanese jurisdiction.

In regards to war, No your wrong it is in an economic war that is not being reported by mass media, and keep in mind many countries have not forgotten the past nor do they intend to either. In meddling in affairs using a weak far fetched stretching i.e. research and gather intel does not fit the criteria for Japan "military" forces which is in violation of Art 9, in international waters where its ships have not been attacked nor need to worry about as you pointed out Japan is not at war with anyone right, so why invite the ME issues here to Japan by its getting involved in the hornet's nest? hmmm. which only proves why no issues of them causing problems with Japan.

Japan is not conducting any war against any country. Japanese ships have been attacked. Protecting Japanese merchant ships is not a violation of Article 9. It is not meddling in ME affairs.

Why get involved? Because Japan imports most of it's energy from the ME.

Guarding doesn't lead to defense, it is defense. Defensive action is not offensive action.

Again twisting of words to meet your point. Guarding is protection and does not involve firing back, at that point it is offensive to gain a more defensive position. The two go hand in hand. That is what is involved in any engagement.

Wrong. My words are accurate and definitive. Your concept of "Guarding leads to defense which leads to offense" is an example of not only twisting words but logic and common sense as well.

The best solution is to invoke the clause and let the US protect the Japan interests, that is what the funding is all about all of these years.

See above. The US-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty does not cover protecting Japanese assets outside of Japanese jurisdiction, partucularly when no state of war exists against Japan from any country.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Global commodity trading has been rocked this year by attacks on international merchant vessels that Japan's Western allies have blamed on Iran.

Has it?  Hmmmmm.

Oil price pretty low at the moment.

also 270 personnel not likely to deter any concerted attempt to damage or sieze a ship or 2.

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