Japan ruling party seeks big defense budget rise amid China threat

"And here I was, thinking Yonaguni's 170 Km was the closest Japan could get!"

Correction:

Ishigaki.

Sorry.

"Japan opens radar station close to disputed isles, drawing angry China response"

"The new Self Defence Force base on the island of Yonaguni is at the western extreme of a string of Japanese islands in the East China Sea, 150 km (90 miles) south of the disputed islands known as the Senkaku islands in Japan and the Diaoyu in China."

"https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-china-eastchinasea-idUSKCN0WT0QZ"

Yonaguni, 90 miles (150 Km) from the Aenkakus.

And here I was, thinking Yonaguni's 170 Km was the closest Japan could get!

"Meanwhile being only 180 nm from the Chinese coast puts Uotsuri within the dome of coverage for the longest range versions of HQ-9, HQ-9B range 250 km and HQ-9C range 400km. China's land based cruise missile of choice, the CJ-10 Long Sword has a range between 1500 and 2000 km, putting, placing all of the Ryukyus and any Japanese ships inside the first island chain easily within range of China's land based cruise missiles. YJ-62 is another Chinese cruise missile that can be shore launched as well as carried on ships and aircraft. Chinese literature shows an effective range of 280km, placing Uotsuri and surrounding waters within range of land based batteries. China has a lot of shore based firepower that can defend a landing party on Uotsuri."

Isn't this case applicable to American bases in Okinawa?

Okinawa sits at a slightly longer yet relatively equivalent distance from the Senkakus, as China does, thus what makes this strategy inapplicable there?

Why would Okinawa be unable to do exactly as you are arguing (argue, as a legal term, the one I am more used to), given that they have all the American missiles they need and the distance is nearly the same as China's?

There are both a map (Google) and a video in English (American military) very clear on this issue.

The map also shows not only Ishigaki is closer to the Senkakus, but also Miyako, Ishigaki, and Yonaguni.

"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Senkaku_Diaoyu_Tiaoyu_Islands.png"

Both reconfirm the 170 Km for Ishigaki and gives 330 for China (correcting the 400 Km I was allocating to China) and 410 Km to Okinawa respectively.

I just don't have the time to search for the video now but it can be found as it exists.

Moreover, isn't Japan increasing the range of Type II to an initial 300 Kn (later 500 Km) to be installed soon?

Please stop this attempt to re-arrange the map; it doesn't look good for someone who seems so well versed in military matters.

Here is the map you claim I am trying to alter.

https://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000018519.pdf

While Ishigaki is indeed closer to Uotsuri it is still outside the range of the Type 88 missile, and at the extreme end of the range for the Type 90. SOP for Type 90 is to be launched within 60 nm of the target to maximize the probability of a hit. Much the same for Harpoon. Effective range and maximum range are two different things. Unlike rocket powered air to air missiles that retain some energy and the ability to maneuver after rocket burn out, a subsonic sea skimming cruise missile like Type 88 or Type 90 hit the water seconds after fuel exhaustion. End game maneuvers such as corkscrews and weaves or terminal dives necessary to defeat enemy air defenses consume a lot of energy and cut into maximum range. That 60 nm launch window allows a missile that has been spoofed off its target by EW time to conduct another search, find a new target and maneuver to hit it, something called "re-attack" (that btw is how the Atlantic Conveyor was sunk, an Argentine Exocet fired at HMS Hermes was seduced off target by EW and during a re-attack search acquired Atlantic Conveyor, hitting it and causing fires that sank it). Shooting at targets at the extreme maximum range of a missile makes it supremely easy to defeat them with EW because they are a minute or less from fuel exhaustion as they make their final run in to the target and those terminal maneuvers might eat up enough fuel to splash them short of their target from fuel exhaustion.

Meanwhile being only 180 nm from the Chinese coast puts Uotsuri within the dome of coverage for the longest range versions of HQ-9, HQ-9B range 250 km and HQ-9C range 400km. China's land based cruise missile of choice, the CJ-10 Long Sword has a range between 1500 and 2000 km, putting, placing all of the Ryukyus and any Japanese ships inside the first island chain easily within range of China's land based cruise missiles. YJ-62 is another Chinese cruise missile that can be shore launched as well as carried on ships and aircraft. Chinese literature shows an effective range of 280km, placing Uotsuri and surrounding waters within range of land based batteries. China has a lot of shore based firepower that can defend a landing party on Uotsuri.

"https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/148696419.pdf"

Please! China is roughly 400 Km from the Senkakus.

Ishigaki sits at 170 km.

I repeat, insist, and can back it up.

Can you?

Short answer: NO.

"Under the all-features test, the Islands would fall outside the scope of the Treaty because they are approximately ten nautical miles closer to the Japanese islands of Ishigaki and Iriomote than to Formosa (see Figure 1).15"

"https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/148696419.pdf"

Source:

"Marquette University Law School Marquette Law Scholarly Commons"

Shall we believe them, you or a Mapa Mundi?

Plastered in there is a nice map showing how close the Senkakus are from Ishigaki and Iriomote.

They are even closer than Taiwan is.

Go read and check the beautiful map (inset) showing how close to the Senkakus the islands of Ishigaki, Yonaguni, Iriomote, and Miyako are.

More crucially, the same map will show you (and everyone else) how FAR China's nearest coastal point is.

Actually, check any Google map, the evidence is compelling.

Nothing you say will change the fact that China is NOT closer to the Senkakus than Ishigaki, Miyako and Yonaguni are.

Please stop this attempt to re-arrange the map; it doesn't look good for someone who seems so well versed in military matters.

Thing is, you are now attempting to deny some immutable truth.

And one of the links I sent you is explicit on the fact that the Senkakus are completely covered by radars and overlapping battery missiles fire from the three Japanese islands closer to it, already identified.

Japan doesn't have a surface to surface missile with a range of 170-190 miles, the distance from the Sankaku Islands to the three Japanese islands with missiles and radar. Type 88 is the current best surface to surface missile Japan has and it has a range of 97nm. A 2015 upgrade of the missile extended the range to 124 nm and is known as Type 12. Type 90 has a range of 81 nm.

The Senkakus are within 200 nm of the Chinese mainland which puts them inside the range of heavier shore based cruise missiles and also means aircraft operating over the Senkakus are within range of shore based Chinese anti-aircraft batteries. Keep in mind the range of the best Chinese air defense missiles is such that an aircraft operating in the landing pattern of many Taiwanese airports or air bases could be shot down from mainland China.

"However the Senkaku Islands are further west and closer to China than Yonaguni,"

With all due respect, you are incorrect.

Yonaguni is 170 miles from the Senkakus

Ishigaki 190 miles from Senkakus

Miyako 190 f miles rom Senkakus

Okinawa and Cina 400 miles for both of them.

I respect and enjoy reading your posts dealing with military matters but sorry to say, you are wrong.

And one of the links I sent you is explicit on the fact that the Senkakus are completely covered by radars and overlapping battery missiles fire from the three Japanese islands closer to it, already identified.

Sorry.

You should know about these "little issues" facing China, even before they can put their navy on the Pacific.

My active duty time was spent in the Pacific so the geography is familiar. The heat and humidity are seared into my memory forever. The missiles and radars you allude to would make it difficult for PLAN surface units to pass between them to blue water in the Pacific. However the Senkaku Islands are further west and closer to China than Yonaguni, Miyako and Yshigaki. They offer little protection from a raiding party delivered in the dark of the early morning hours by submarines. Think of the Makin Island raids only this time intending to stay. What would Japan and the US do if the sun rose one morning to reveal a couple of hundred PLA soldiers dug in on several of the Senkaku Islands and the PRC flag flying above them? One could also imagine major PLAN surface units showing up around sunrise to protect them. No need to get within range of any of the missiles on Yonaguni, Miyako and Yshigaki to do this. This is not a fantasy scenario. Now you are looking at a major fleet engagement followed by an amphibious operation to remove PLA forces. Japan on its own is incapable of doing this without the US Navy leading the fight. At that point it is anybody's guess how far such a fight escalates. And obtw, the Senkaku Islands are well within range of Chinese shore based missiles and air power. They are closer to the Chinese mainland than they are to Okinawa. Can the JASDF go toe to toe with the PLAAF over the Senkaku Islands knowing that China's HQ20s could engage them? Could the JMSDF operate that close to the Chinese mainland in the face of China's vast air power?

"Japan currently has no actual soldiers garrisoned on any of the several Senkaku Islands"

That's correct.

But you are omitting the fact that the Senkakus are now totally covered by radars and anti-ship/air missiles from Yonaguni, Miyako and Yshigaki.

"Japan deploys anti-ship, surface-to-air missiles on southernmost islands"

"https://defencereviewasia.com/japan-deploys-anti-ship-surface-to-air-missiles-on-southernmost-islands/"

"Whoever establishes a military outpost there first may end up being to the ultimate owner of these islands"

Once landed can they survive?

There's plenty of writings defending the opposite; that any advance Chinese party that lands will perish there, most probably by starvation.

China has a geography problem; geography favours Japan massively in any maritime conflict; again plenty of "literature" focusing on this is available.

I am not creating any military doctrine; all has been said by people who should know what they are talking about. The US military is saying what I am merely typing.

"China might be making a bid for “maritime primacy” in the Indo-Pacific region, but it must first get its navy beyond the Ryukyu Islands. That entails not only sailing its naval forces into the Pacific Ocean, but also keeping them safe and supplied once they are there. Japan’s growing defenses in the Ryukyu Islands complicate China’s ability to do either. China may have built a powerful navy, even a blue water one, but no one said that getting it into the blue waters of the Pacific Ocean would be simple."

"https://www.fpri.org/article/2021/02/the-ryukyu-defense-line-japans-response-to-chinas-naval-push-into-the-pacific-ocean/"

"Japan and the US Prepare to Choke Chinese Submarines Along the Nansei Islands chain"

"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px_OL7mRtbM"

You should know about these "little issues" facing China, even before they can put their navy on the Pacific.

This really baffles me when anyone interested could do a little search in order to find out that the Senkakus are indeed well defended and under permanent watch.

Japan currently has no actual soldiers garrisoned on any of the several Senkaku Islands. This could be a critical problem. Whoever establishes a military outpost there first may end up being to the ultimate owner of these islands and the resources in the surrounding EEZ. Many question whether Japan would be able to mount an effective counter attack to dislodge a Chinese landing force were the Chinese able to put a force on the Senkakus before the Japanese could. The current force structure of the JSDF is insufficient to defeat a serious Chinese amphibious operation involving one of their two new LHDs and backed by one of their aircraft carriers or maybe both. The Japanese do not even fire at the many Chinese vessels that enter Japanese waters there. China sees this timidity as weakness to exploit. Many wonder if the US would be willing to sink Chinese ships, shoot down their aircraft and kill Chinese soldiers in order to forcibly remove a Chinese landing force, and in the process risk an unrestricted war with China. Were the US to intervene and defeat a Chinese force, which the US could unquestionably do, would the Chinese cease hostilities and withdraw in defeat knowing that could be the end of CCP rule over China or would this lead to a much wider war? The US side hints it can land a force of Marines from an SSGN before the Chinese could get their own forces ashore but that claim seems to imply the US has the means to anticipate a landing early enough to put its own forces ashore, with the thought being the Chinese would not try to shoot their way in to an island in the face of an established US force. There are lot of moving part and a lot uncertainty. Japan having troops on the Senkaku Islands themselves, a naval and air force that could credibly defeat a Chinese amphibious assault and more Japanese Coast Guard vessels willing to forcibly remove Chinese fishing boats and Coast Guard ships would go a long way towards deterring a serious Chinese attempt to take the Senkakus.

"China's TFR is 1.6, while Japan's is 1.3."

Explain this then:

1) "https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335285911_China_has_faster_pace_than_Japan_in_population_aging_in_next_25_years"

2) "https://merics.org/en/analysis/ageing-china-facing-japanese-style-lost-decade"

"China will begin to resemble Japan in crucial ways, except that Japan got rich before it aged, whereas China, still not rich, will age first."

3) "https://www.forbes.com/sites/miltonezrati/2021/03/25/recognize-that-china-has-huge-demographic-problems/?sh=d7a96f239e43"

4) "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31434814/#:~:text=It%20will%20take%20China%2023,in%20the%20next%2025%20years."

"It will take China 23 years and 10 years respectively for the aging rate increasing from 7% to 14% and then to 20%, while Japan took 24 and 11 years respectively, which is much shorter than developed countries in the West. Furthermore, China has a faster pace than Japan in population aging in the next 25 years. We found that from 2019-2044, China's aging rate, elderly dependency ratio, oldest-old coefficient and median age of population will increase 13.24 percent points, 24.21 percent points, 8.33 percent points, and 8.47 years, while the four indicators of Japan will increase 8.38 percent points, 22.52 percent points, 8.29 percent points, and 6.20 years, respectively."

And there are countless more articles dealing with this issue.

Sorry, I have a "nasty" habit of quoting from publications easily verifiable.

Unlike many posting here.

Peeping_TomToday  07:46 am JST

Given the fact that the Chinese population is rapidly aging. (FASTER than Japan's) and dying off, what is China going to attack? Better spend the money encouraging more children.

China's TFR is 1.6, while Japan's is 1.3.

"Yes, the Chinese population is aging, but no, it is not dying off yet"

If you are paying attention all I did was do a little re-working on someone else's statement; nothing there new apart from the substitution of China for Japan, as "originally" posted.

On the same token:

1) Japanese are aging (China is aging even faster, fact);

2) Are the Japanese "dying off"?

I really don't understand many people's pre-conceived, sometimes belief that the Senkakus are totally unprotected and all China has to do is swim in and take possession.

This really baffles me when anyone interested could do a little search in order to find out that the Senkakus are indeed well defended and under permanent watch.

The whole of the Senkakus are covered by radars, overlapping battery missiles, spy drone, who (knows where the Soryu subs are?),

That Japan territory (Yonaguni) is 170 miles from the Senkakus, while China is 400 miles, that Miyako and the Yayema's are closer to the Senkakus, both at 190 miles, that all three of them house radars and anti-ship/air battery missiles, the access to the Miyako straits can be easily blocked off, again by overlapping battery missiles, mines, submarines, and JMSDF destroyers, that Japanese and American planes would be wreaking havoc from Okinawa, and I could simply carry on.

It really baffles me people on this site, who don't bother doing any research, yet believe Japan is sleeping, waiting for China to take over before Japan can go "cry" to the US!

Ask yourselves, if it was that easy, WHY has China no taken the Senkakus, just like they did in the South China seas?

Why is that "invasion" of Senakus waters is strictly restricted to Chinese coast guard ships?

Do they know something JT "Chinese adapts and military genius" don't/will not want to learn?

To be, or not to be....

And yes, I agree that Japan must increase the defense budget.

Make it an 8% of GDP, as already requested by the ministry of defence.

Then sit down and watch South Korea JT "expertise" cry.

China does not want peace, it wants power. The power to manipulate the responses and actions of other nations to benefit China. China has the worlds largest navy and largest military ship building program. China lends money at huge rates that little countries can not repay and then takes control of harbor assets for extended periods of time. Nations that act in their own benefits like Australia calling for an inquiry about Covid, are punished with trade tariffs and bans against trade agreements.

Japan has territory China wants to control and it sails many ships around these islands every week of the year. China wants to control all of the South China sea and has manufactured man made islands to situate military assets and missiles there to ensure control, banning local fishing by the nations who's EEZ they have illegally occupied.

Japan and other have no option but to defend their interests against a nation not looking for anything more than total control of the region and using that to help it control world trade directing everything China needs towards China and ending competition to ensure China remains the center of world trade and power. China will dictate new world policy and international laws will need China's approval.

Japan must defend its interests and freedom of choice and action both now and into the future. As does the entire region.

Decrease trade with China while increasing trade with other trade partners and wean yourselves off China.

@Peeping_Tom

Chinese population is rapidly aging. (FASTER than Japan's) and dying off, what is China going to attack? Better spend the money encouraging more children

Yes, the Chinese population is aging, but no, it is not dying off yet. Meanwhile Chinese encroachments on the Senkakus are very real right now, better to be prepared. Japan does not need the same huge arsenal as China, it needs just enough force to make any Chinese attack on the Senkakus too costly. The rest of money can go to the family/children fund, that would be great.

Make peace with China” 

All problems solved.

only when china bends at the knee

“Make peace with China”

All problems solved.

"True, but the Koreans are spending more on research."

Yet Koreans have nothing to match the Soryus and the Mayas and SM-3's Japan produces at a fraction of all that Korean "research" spending.

The truth is Korea will be eating dust (or even more dogs) if Japan really decides to go the whole hog militarily.

IkebookuroMay 27 04:21 pm JST

Seems to be a recurring theme recently ....

And a justified one. Look, you only need to check out the Chinese language stuff on Youtube - they are proudly flaunting their military muscles using visual media, both official and "unofficial" individuals.

Peeping_TomToday 12:22 am JST

Smaller than Japan's current $51 Billion, i.e. 1% of GDP.

True, but the Koreans are spending more on research. One advantage of conscription is that you do save money while keeping a big military or spend more money buying the latest equipment.

Peeping_TomToday  07:46 am JST

"Given the fact that the Japanese population is rapidly aging and dying off, what is Japan going to defend, a couple dozen old-age homes? Better spend the money encouraging more children."

Correction:

Given the fact that the Chinese population is rapidly aging. (FASTER than Japan's) and dying off, what is China going to attack? Better spend the money encouraging more children.

How do you like them apples?

Why do you assume 'China is going to attack"?. The US, in general, is the only country that 'attacks' these days; the only reason the US doesn't attack Japan is that it already has, and has occupied the country militarily for over 70 years.

"Given the fact that the Japanese population is rapidly aging and dying off, what is Japan going to defend, a couple dozen old-age homes? Better spend the money encouraging more children."

Correction:

Given the fact that the Chinese population is rapidly aging. (FASTER than Japan's) and dying off, what is China going to attack? Better spend the money encouraging more children.

How do you like them apples?

Given the fact that the Japanese population is rapidly aging and dying off, what is Japan going to defend, a couple dozen old-age homes? Better spend the money encouraging more children.

Make no mistake about it, China will not stop until it is the dominant Asian power. When they feel they are strong enough they will move against Tawain, preceded by a possible strike on US military installations in Asia to blunt a US response. Japan would be wise to invest heavily in it’s military NOW. There will be no time to play catch-up when the shooting starts, as it will. Japan needs to be able to mount a viable defense on it’s own, as does S. Korea. The only language China understands is force. When met with a military force exceeding their capability they will back down. The US, Japan, S. Korea and other allies better prepare NOW.

Japan does not need to keep up with China, it just has to have a sufficiently powerful and effective military that it is not an option for China to contemplate an attack

That is correct. However where fifteen or even ten years ago the JASDF was fully capable of dealing with the PLAAF and JMSDF would dominated the PLAN, the opposite is true today. Japan has fallen well behind China in some important areas specifically in missile defenses, amphibious capability and ground based anti ship missiles. The JMSDF is particularly wanting in shipboard fixed wing aviation and large multi-product underway replenishment ships to permit naval forces to operate for long periods of time far from their home bases and outside the protection of land based air cover. Japan looks like it will remedy its JASDF shortcomings with the F-35 but should approach the USAF about participating in the NGAD program. With China bringing on large CATOBAR aircraft carriers it will be impossible for the JMSDF to be survivable outside the range of Japan's shore based fighter units.

@Peeping_Tom

Japan includes US troop support in defense budget. Korea does not.

Japan includes defense R&D in its defense budget. Korea does not include a significant portion of it.

Korea has a much lower operating cost than Japan.

@ReasonandWisdomNippon

R&D spending is higher for SKorea, yet Japan with less money produces more patents filed each year.

We are talking military/defense R&D here.

This increase is overdue and necessary.

Changing Article 9 overdue and necessary.

Taking more responsibilities In Asia necessary and overdue.

Helping USA militarily necessary and overdue if you want this relationship to last.

Samit

R&D spending is higher for SKorea, yet Japan with less money produces more patents filed each year. I still support an increase in Japan R&D to leave S. Korea in the dust where it belongs.

Using your logic, go and take over North Korea then. If you have such huge advantage over Japan which is modern country and military.... You shouldn't have a problem or issue against North Korea which is 100 years behind.

Samit Basu

It's too late and Japan cannot keep up with China and Korea in arms race.

Japan does not need to keep up with China, it just has to have a sufficiently powerful and effective military that it is not an option for China to contemplate an attack.

"It's too late and Japan cannot keep up with China and Korea in arms race."

Oh dear, so much ignorance on this site it gets painfully ridiculous sometimes.

Even with this latest (2021) budget increase, S Korea's military budget is STILL lower than Japan's measly 1% of GDP expenditure.

"South Korea’s Ministry of National Defence (MND) has announced a 2021 defence budget of KWR52.84 trillion (USD48 billion)."

"South Korea’s Ministry of National Defence (MND) has announced a 2021 defence budget of KWR52.84 trillion (USD48 billion)."

Source: Jane's defence.

Smaller than Japan's current $51 Billion, i.e. 1% of GDP.

Knowledge is at your fingertips, yer no?

Just by increasing its budget to 2% Japan will have China sweating and stinking far worse at night.

Now just imagine if the Diet were to accept the Ministry's request for an 8% increase!

It's too late and Japan cannot keep up with China and Korea in arms race.

Japan's defense R&D budget is 1/3rd of Korea, a tiny fraction of China's.

This is why China and Korea can build own stealth fighters and missile defense while Japan must import them.

https://news.yahoo.co.jp/articles/a6ce0ddd184ee09fc1b64bfeb70d20adb22499c2

防衛費増強では諸外国の防衛予算の前年度比伸びが米国5・4％増、中国6・6％増、韓国7・4％増に対し日本は1・2％増。

韓国の研究開発予算が4053億円に対し、日本が1290億円しかない実情も示し、危機感を訴えた。

I think Taku Otsuka is a tad deluded if he thinks Japan is “leading the international community” but there is no doubt that Japan is now living in an area of heightened threat due to the aggression and Imperial ambitions of the current Chinese leadership.

If China is really such a Military Threat, then cut Economic Ties with it. Why should Japanese Companies be allowed to make profits by doing business with China while Japanese Taxpayers have their monies spent on weapons to defend Japan against China.

So holding the games also doesn’t save any of the money otherwise due for payment to the IOC. I am really curious about who can pay all that, intensively study about it, develop or engineer it, produce it and then manage and use it all, the not born children or the over 100s in the rural senior residences?

"Having cool weapons is no doubt nice, but will the same people handling the vaccine process and the Olympics also be handling the decisions about the military?"

1) If Japan was REALLY interested in vaccinating its population they would do it in a tick; that they are not doing it shows clearly they are not interest for some reason outsiders don't know yet pretend to understand.

2) As far as defence and wars Japan doesn't need lessons from anybody; their enemies know extremely well what Japan can do when push comes to shove.

Smart and prudent move for Japan to maintain its territories and freedoms.

Yes, let's increase the already massive budget deficit. the printers are already red hot.

Raise your hand pls ( in a room full of Japanese industrials ) whose turn is it for government contracts and to grossly overcharge us ?

Ka-ching! Bring on the industrial-military complex!

Blame China.

Seems to be a recurring theme recently ....

Japan's defense budget has long amounted to around 1 percent of the country's GDP

1 percent of the GDP is woefully inadequate in 2021 - the most dangerous time for Japan in 75 years.

A doubling of Military expenditure should be a bare minimum if Japan wishes to go toe-to-toe with Communist China or Russia in any future conflict. 3 or 4 Aircraft Carriers being built should be in the budget.

If it wasnt for the enormous buildup of Chinas ever-threatening Military, none of this spending would be necessary. Blame China.