politics

Japan to seek assurance of U.S. defense pledge, including nuclear deterrence

29 Comments

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

29 Comments
Login to comment

OssanAmerica, I guess I picked at your sore spots, but you are welcome.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"The words “freedom and democracy” are outdated"

Not if your living under an authoritarian dictatorship. Or living with the threat of that becoming a reality.Thanks for the load of CCP propaganda.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Halwick, so your logic is the US is acting as police protecting the innocence. However, the fact is all the “violence and crime” have been created by the US in order to benefit from the crimes. If the US has a good track records I would agree with you, but the evidence shows that wherever the US is involved the chaos will pursue. Crooked police are even harder to control. I do not want to see Asia turning to be like the middle east.

According to you, “U.S. military presence is needed to keep China military actions in check and provide stability in the region,” but the thing is why keep China military actions in check? The US has benefited tremendously from the sales of arms into the region. Is this the way to keep China in check? Has the US succeeded? No. Chinese military capability is growing year by year. The US power is subsiding in the region.

“China is allowing NK to make all kinds of threats while quietly watching in the background to see what the U.S. and Japan will do.” This is your conjecture. China has in many occasions publicly denounced the NK threats. But the West especially the US put the blame on China for not doing enough. Think for a minute why should China help the US? Like they said, “You made your bed you sleep on it,” expecting China to help then the US should leave the region. NK would not develop nukes if the US was not there ready to pound on them. And, I don’t see anything wrong with united Korea to favour China more. The ultimate goal for China is “peace” in the region. Who cares about the government as long as people still have their jobs and are happy making money. The words “freedom and democracy” are outdated, every western government is pulling back especially the US and Japan. You are brainwashed to think that China is a threat and failing to see that what China is doing is for peace and security in the region. To “annex Taiwan?” Taiwan does not need to be annexed because Taiwan is a part of China as confirmed by the UN, US, Japan, in fact all the western countries. Believe me China has its own time table regarding Taiwan. The time will come when China is on par or exceeds the US in terms of military and economy, then Taiwanese people will see the benefits of being Chinese.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Appeasing China is already a political deathblow for any Presidential candidate regardless of party. And that is only going to get worse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I forgot to add that whether China will succeed in its objectives will depends on the U.S. leadership. President Trump indicates he will stand up to China and will protect Taiwan. But I doubt he will be re-elected in 2020 and instead a more leftwing pacifist Democrat President will be elected, more than eager to appease China to avoid war and casualties at all costs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@ flowers, your line of thinking reminds me of the "logic" that U.S. liberals and the ACLU makes about crime in the U.S. cities, i.e, "there is violence and crime in the streets because of police presence and police brutality. The police is the culprit for the violence.  Remove the police and there won't be any violence and all will be safe."

On a larger scale, what I hear y'all are saying is: "The North Korea crisis was brought about by the U.S. (your words); The U.S. military presence is the threat to peace in the region; Get the U.S. out of South Korea, Japan and Okinawa and there will be no threats from NK and China."

I disagree. U.S. military presence is needed to keep China military actions in check and provide stability in the region. (I'm sure "voiceofokinawa" does not regard China as a threat)

As for the relations between China and NK: A good military tactician lets his second-in-command attack while he watches for weakness and opportunities. China is allowing NK to make all kinds of threats while quietly watching in the background to see what the U.S. and Japan will do.

China's goals are to get the U.S. and South Korea to the negotiation tables with NK to negotiate a "peace treaty" that will end the standoff, a pullout of U.S. military in SK, and a unification of the two Koreas (read surrender of SK) under a ruling government more favorably tilted toward China. With U.S. troops out of Korea, then China will work on getting the U.S. out of Okinawa ( with Gov. Onaga happily cooperating) and eventually out of Japan. Then with a stronger unified Korea closely aligned with China, China will control East Asia and annex Taiwan, its true objective.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Reckless, China does not have allies only friends. It’s true NK is economically dependent on China, but it’s not right to punish the NK people for their government wrongdoing. China has adhered to UN resolutions and always opposed NK nuclear program. NK might be used in a proxy war but China will not interfere in NK domestic affairs, such as toppling or coercing NK government. China is not in control of any foreign government as you may be led to believe. Last year a group of female entertainers selected by the NK leader himself had to pack their bags and go back because Chinese high-ranking officers did not attend. The relationship between China and NK is not that rosy as you may think. China is obligated to protect NK if it is under attack because of the treaty, but China will not help NK if NK attacks first. So, if the US is not in the way, SK can set up a treaty with China to ensure that NK will not attack SK then there will be peace in Korean peninsula and Japan will not require the protection from the US. I know saying is easy but the thing is US does not want leave SK and Japan and using NK as an excuse. Think about it Japan is a third party but it becomes the main target in the event of a war. Is it worth it to expose the Japanese people to another nuclear annihilation? Yes, Japan is not only a US ally but it’s also an under dog, it does not have the backbone to protect its own citizen. Back to the claim that China is an expansionist, why didn’t China annex NK then the whole problem would go away? China will not take the land that it doesn’t own. When China was weak a bunch of countries stole from China and now China just wants them back. But you see China only got small pieces back. Back in 1962 Sino-Indian war, China got control of large piece of land from India but instead of taking it China moved back all because the land does not belong to China. So, Japan should not fear China but embrace it and make the relationship with China stronger, and eventually Japan can get rid of the leash.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

When SOFA was signed, Russia and China stopped to make Japan as a communist country. Time changed. Pacifists and Okinawans are against bases. Japan asked USA to protect Japan originally. With N Korea missile threat, Japan revealed it created missile interception system. Pacifists will accuse this is unconstitutional. So, again Japan has to behave it depends on USA military.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@flowers: "NK crisis is brought about mainly by the US, think about it, NK would not develop nukes to counter its main enemy and Japan would not be a target. Without the US Asia would be peaceful.

North Korea is an ally of China, and economically dependent on China. North Korea versus US is a proxy war of China versus US. I think China is playing a dangerous game if it cannot control its vassal. Having nukes and continually trying to lob them across the ocean are two different things. North Korea could probably easily keep the status quo without developing long term missile capability as even the ability to strike Seoul keeps the situation tense but stable.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The U.S. s not weak. It simply does not want to risk the 12 million residents of Seoul being held hostage. China still has 10 territorial disputes, half pertaining to the South and East China Seas. China today is expansionist, with no intention of retracting the 9-dash line or recognizing the PCA rulng.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

All leaders in the world are dictators. US is now so weak it can’t even do anything to NK. US is so scared of NK as can be seen from the flip flopping policy regarding NK. China has settled territorial disputes with 14 neighbours which most of them gained more lands than China just for the sake of peace and security. China only has two land borders left to be settled which are Bhutan and India. China is proposing to give up a bigger part of the area to Bhutan but because Bhutan is under the control of India the settlement is dragged on. Through out history China was everything but expansionist. Japan fears China because of guilty conscience thinking that China will one day take revenge. But China has no intention to slap Japan or grab Okinawa. NK crisis is brought about mainly by the US, think about it, NK would not develop nukes to counter its main enemy and Japan would not be a target. Without the US Asia would be peaceful.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

American bases in Japan play a major role in keeping the Chinese dictatorship's expansionism in check. North Korea may not attack Japan but China would try to take Okinawa. Eventually they will control all of East Asia, an idea that does not sit well with the many nations that comprise it.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

American bases in Japan and SK are American soil and they are the targets for attack. So, why risk the lives of your own people. Without American bases the chance that the NK and even China would attack Japan is almost none. Let Japan be neutral and free from the risk of another nuclear catastrophe.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

As an American citizen, I hope my country will stand by its decades long pledge to defend Japan and South Korea as if they are American soil.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

HalwickToday 02:42 pm JSTInteresting to say the least.

For decades the Anti-U.S. Pacifists have demanded disarmament, removal of the evil occupying U.S. military, abolition of nuclear weapons and so forth.

But when their country and people are threatened, all of a sudden, they need the protection of the U.S. military.

You're mixing up a small segment of the Okinawan population with the Government and entire population of Japan.

They want to abolish nuclear weapons, but when they are threatened, they want a nuclear deterrence or want U.S. nuclear umbrella protection.

You're mixing up the small segment of the population, Hiroshima and Nagasaki mayors, the anti-nuclear advocates with the Government and entire population of Japan,

Why should the U.S. continue to protect those who hates them and don't want their presence in their country?

The U.S. should listen to the those Anti-U.S. Pacifists Protesters and give them what they want: removal of all weapons, relinquish the bases, get out of Japan and Okinawa......and LET THEM FEND FOR THEMSELVES, that is, if they are willing to.

The US has as much a stake in having a military presence in Japan, as Japan does for it's own defense. Japan is the hub of US military operations in Asia through the Korean war and Vietnam war. Either you have zero knowledge of this, or you would like to see the US retreat from Japan in the face of Chinese assertiveness.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Halwick,

But when their country and people are threatened, all of a sudden, they need the protection of the U.S. military.

According to the article, it's Abe cabinet ministers -- Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera and Foreign Minister Taro Kono-- who will ask U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to protect Japan from a North Korean threat when they meet at a two-plus-two meeting to be held in Washington..

So if you have any complaint about it, cast blame upon Prime Minister Abe and his cohorts, who are agitating for fear that a North Korean attack on Japan is imminent by testing and activating the nation-wide J-alert system. Fear mongers they are, attempting to realize their decades-old agenda to revise the constitution and  confirm the U.S. nuclear umbrella without realizing that it is tantamount to its own nuclearization.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Interesting to say the least.

For decades the Anti-U.S. Pacifists have demanded disarmament, removal of the evil occupying U.S. military, abolition of nuclear weapons and so forth.

But when their country and people are threatened, all of a sudden, they need the protection of the U.S. military.

They aren't willing to defend themselves or build a capable military force, but want someone else (i.e., the U.S.) to fight and protect them.

They want to abolish nuclear weapons, but when they are threatened, they want a nuclear deterrence or want U.S. nuclear umbrella protection.

You can't have it both ways.

Why should the U.S. continue to protect those who hates them and don't want their presence in their country?

The U.S. should listen to the those Anti-U.S. Pacifists Protesters and give them what they want: removal of all weapons, relinquish the bases, get out of Japan and Okinawa......and LET THEM FEND FOR THEMSELVES, that is, if they are willing to.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Just like the Administration confirmed their commitment to protect NATO countries earlier this year. Even if it's written down, the beneficiaries of our protection like to be reassured on a regular basis.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Jim Mattis and Rex Tillerson had earlier convened US assurance to provide complete security to Japan under Japan US treaty when they visited Japan including that Treaty also covered Senkaku islands .

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Does Japan have to seek the U.S assurance of protection of Japan in the face of a North Korean threat in spite of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, Article 6 of which states:

For the purpose of contributing to the security of Japan and the maintenance of international peace and security in the Far East, the United States of America is granted the use by its land, air and naval forces of facilities and areas in Japan.

In other words, the U.S. forces are stationed here for the security and protection of Japan in exchange for which Japan provides them with bases and facilities on the house. If Japan has to ask for the assurance of U.S. protection against a North Korean threat, doesn’t it mean Tokyo thinks the U.S. is not trustworthy and that the security treaty is nothing but a piece of waste paper?.

What's the purpose of maintaining so many bases, especially, in Okinawa??.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

GoodlucktoyouToday 11:37 am JST for those that don't believe and downvoted me...

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/08/14/national/history/japan-officially-gave-u-s-consent-bring-nukes-ahead-okinawa-reversion-accord-document/

Japan does not have it's own nuclear weapons. The U.S. has nuclear weapons in Japan (Okinawa) as we do in the Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Turkey. All nations without their own nuclear weapons.

https://news.vice.com/article/american-nuclear-weapons-in-belgium-kleine-brogel

Japan is widely known to be able to build their own nuclear weapons quickly and without too much effort, but chooses not to for political and constitutional reasons.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

for those that don't believe and downvoted me...

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/08/14/national/history/japan-officially-gave-u-s-consent-bring-nukes-ahead-okinawa-reversion-accord-document/

https://www.rt.com/news/399592-us-nuclear-weapons-okinawa/

check out Tokai NPP.

there is more.

we are safe.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I thought Japan was a pacifist country

they are

And now you have the Japanese government asking for the use of nuclear nukes if necessary...

How hypocritical to say the least !

But indeed alk countries should have the right to be best protected.

So which is it then - make up your mind.

Japan IS peaceful and will stay that way as long as there are no external threats. That's not being hypocritical, that is common sense.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I thought Japan was a pacifist country with the will to remove all nuclear capacity over the world and claiming that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes.

And now you have the Japanese government asking for the use of nuclear nukes if necessary...

How hypocritical to say the least !

But indeed alk countries should have the right to be best protected.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

any assurance is just words. when comes time to act, america will do what's in its best interest, not japan's.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

in case you don't read the news, Japan has had nukes since 1968. we are fine. i personally think we should make an alliance with china, russia, SK. then defuse NK problem, let NK and SK integrate and tell USA to go to Guam.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Japan needs to get an independent nuclear deterrent like France has, and the Brits used to have before they gave the keys to the Americans.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Like who? China? Russia? Like any non-nuclear power has a big choice.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

If you're a country that is depending on Trump's America to protect you, I'd find a new insurance provider.

Cuz believe you me, if or when Trump launches an attack on North Korea or China or even Mexico, who knows, it will not be because he is "protecting" another country, it's because he's a loon.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

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