politics

Japan, U.S. discussing offensive military capability for Tokyo

65 Comments
By Nobuhiro Kubo

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2014.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

65 Comments
Login to comment

Wow, I knew Abe wasn't the smartest tool in the shed, but if he decides to rearm Japan in this manner then he certainly is a tool. At the same time, however, I sense that this has more to do with the US trying to contain China rather than a policy decision that is in Japan's best interest. While not believing that this decision would necessarily bring war closer, it cannot be good for the region. Then again, if Abe really wants to get China's attention perhaps he should investigate the acquisition of atomic weapons. That would really set the cat among the pigeons.......

-10 ( +7 / -17 )

"Honestly this whole reinterpretation of the constitution- thingy is no big deal, just cutting out some red tape that's all. Will not change our policy one bit. No need to get worried. Everybody got that? Good. Now that we've got that settled, on a completely unrelated matter does anybody know a good place to buy Tomahawk cruise missiles?"

11 ( +15 / -4 )

出た!Very offensive indeed.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Couple things here;

This story once again reaffirms that you cannot have any type of diplomatic, sensitive discussion with the Japanese – if you talk about it, they will leak it. This really hinders their diplomatic relations with other countries.

Those that think the US is provoking things in Asia have it backward – the US presence in Asia performs a remarkable restraining function – just imagine if the US were not here to moderate or say “time to back off” to Japan, SKorea and China as they consistently test and prod each other.

If the Japanese really wanted some offensive capability, Europe or Israel would be more than happy to sell to them – France will sell to anyone; including the Russians……and Israel sells to China. Bottomline – the Japanese asked for some offensive weapons capability, and the US said no (using the typical oblique Japanese style of saying no – “we’re not ready to talk about that yet”…..
5 ( +14 / -8 )

North Korea and China really giving so much pressure on Japan , America get advantage out of that since 1945 after surrender to America Japan don t have any enemy .Japanese people working hard to keep economy strong just like slave .China and North Korea need to show mercy and forgiveness about past just keep quite wait and watch forget about past do not enter in Japanese area and don t allow Japan to enter in there area. do there own business if they do ,America will have less business in Asia i mean with Army power and pressure of war material .America can Open Mac D Starbucks all Junk food but not Army base they can do business but not as world police business Asia will be peace zone.We watching result of war we see middle east getting worse day by day. Arabian are suffering just because petrol and there orthodoxy mind Desire overpower on others we create war is not way we have to be more creative out of creative we can solve human problem according to scientist we are not in safe zone what is our need these days Study work hard eat sleep and die we call it peaceful life . Why we have to support to war .name of security we creating our own grave .Live and let Live this is my understanding may be i wrong Sunny

0 ( +6 / -6 )

lincolnmanSep. 10, 2014 - 04:25PM JST

This story once again reaffirms that you cannot have any type of diplomatic, sensitive discussion with the Japanese

In a democratic country, the people should know what their diplomats or military officers are doing, before things get too late. Secret diplomacy is disastrous, and it is so true in a talk of building military capability of aggression.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Listen, I totally get why Abe wants a bigger military and I totally get why the US wants a Japan to have a bigger stronger military. What I don't get is why war after war, no one learns a freaking thing. Stop fighting with people you just don't like (China, Korea, etc) and fight the actual fascist threats that are actually threatening the world: ISIS.

3 ( +7 / -5 )

Defensive weapons can change to offensive weapons instantly. There is no defensive weapons in the world. It is only a play on words. Our peace constitution constrains the uses of weapons offensively in peace time but when the time comes we need to use weapons offensively, it will be explained as a constitution-transcending situation.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

offensive weapons that would allow Japan to project power far beyond its borders, Japanese officials said, a move that would likely infuriate China.

My guess is that these discussions will infuriate the Japanese, since this is a direction most don't want to go.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Screw that, if the US wants that put it on there own islands or guam... making Japan a target for the US isn't cool.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

In a democratic country, the people should know what their diplomats or military officers are doing, before things get too late. Secret diplomacy is disastrous, and it is so true in a talk of building military capability of aggression.

Indeed. A lack of military transparency should only really occur when they need to conceal actual military operations, you know to protect the soldiers themselves. Otherwise everything else should be shown to the public. It's their taxpayer after all.

Defensive weapons can change to offensive weapons instantly. There is no defensive weapons in the world.

That's why they're called weapons after all. But they're specifically referring to strike weapons namely things like surface and submarine launch Tomahawk cruise missiles, guided bombs, bombers, strike fighters. Things design to attack road convoys, military bases and harden installations. As it stands most of Japan's weapons are only dedicated to destroying tanks, aircraft, ships and submarines. They do have some bombs but only for striking outposts not for turning missile bases into smoldering craters, they don't even have anti-radiation weapons (weapons designed to take out enemy radar).

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Love the transparency of the story...

Somewhere in China and NK, someone is reading this like "ooooh secrets!!!!"

3 ( +4 / -1 )

I think this is a great idea. The Tomahawk CM will definitely be a good deterrent against any nation. Sometimes a good offensive weapon serves a better defensive purpose. Several thousands of these couple with a few hundred F35s will definitely halt any aggression against Japan. These missiles are not that expensive, I think Japan should really look into acquiring them. Honestly you can't be concerned about what China and Russia do since they have their own weapons programs. And they are catching up fast. So Japan should do the most sensible thing by rearming itself to the point that others will think twice before doing something stupid.

1 missile for export is about 2mil usd. 1000 missiles only cost 2 billion. With system and command supports, 10 billions tops. Adding the cost for refitting on sub and surface fleet, at most another billion. Japan can afford this. Raytheon might even provide a discount for bulk purchases.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

This is goods news, and an indicator of where we may be going in the future. Done properly, it will triple the biggest obstacle to China's aspirations in Asia, the US-Japan alliance. In the meantime since China has offensive weapons and is actually offending everyone they can shut their pie hole.

-4 ( +9 / -13 )

Good! Japan is a world power. Japan should have offensive weapons. This is not 1914--things are different.

0 ( +9 / -9 )

which could open the door to billions of dollars worth of offensive missile systems and other hardware.

Last thing I heard there wasn't a lot of money to go around - where will this all come from

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Part of Japan’s motivation for upgrading its capabilities is a nagging suspicion that the United States, with some 28,000 troops in South Korea as well as 38,000 in Japan, might hesitate to attack the North in a crisis, Japanese experts said.

Wait - that's a bad thing? And Japan attacking North Korea (presumably without the South's support - otherwise, the Yanks would be there, too) is anything short of insanity?

"Japanese experts" need a refresher course on reality.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Japan needs Tactical Nuclear warheads. Like bunker busters that can stop a nuclear silo.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Please make no mistake, the offensive military capability discussed between Washington and Tokyo is primarily to deter N.K’s nuclear ambition, not something else wished by some people here.

Speaking of N.K, the worse scenario which the US worried about would be that the N.K might drop its nuclear arsenal at the first sign of a large scaled armed conflict with any of its enemies.

Guess which country might be N.K’s first target? the US, S.K and Japan are all N.K’s enemies. But, the US is too far for N.K's ballistic missile to reach. S,K, on the other hand, is too close because the nuclear fallout would definitely affect N.K itself in terms of radioactive dusts. In addition, as they say "blood is thicker water". Therefore, logically Japan becomes the most vulnerable and easy target for N.K to do the evil thing.

As N.K is close to finish its neclear weapon, Japan needs to be ready to deal with it (even it may put further financail burden on it already strained debts) when push comes to shove.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

slip, slip, slipping down the slope

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

The Japanese people have more to fear from the policies of Shinzo Abe than they do from Kim Jong-un.

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

i love japan but on this topic i have no idea????

2 ( +3 / -1 )

NK threatens japan with a statement it will be consumed in nuclear flames, japan has very right to want to arm up to be able to mitigate that threat. I say go for it before the north can carry out its threat, by then it'll be too late.

In a tough hostile world sometimes you have to take a tough hostile approach just to maintain your own safety, this is one of those cases.

Time to man up and face the threat.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

Maybe if they raise the consumption tax to 20% they'll have enough money to buy these offensive weapons.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

If Japan dear to trigger the first shot to China under whatever kind of situations and has whatever kind of support, China will destroy Japan in 20 mints. If you dont believe this, please try.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

Ossan: "In the meantime since China has offensive weapons and is actually offending everyone they can shut their pie hole."

This is your answer to people who offend others? to offend others? Not surprised you can't heed your own advice or recognize the hypocrisy. What's worse, you can't admit that Abe is offending the majority of people in Japan not only by ignoring them, but putting them further and further in harm's way with every move he makes and every word that escapes his yap. You want to see the threat? look in the mirror and you'll see at least half, if not more.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@ gogogo at Sep. 10, 2014 - 06:59PM JST Screw that, if the US wants that put it on there own islands or guam... making Japan a target for the US isn't cool. It was Japan who approached the US for the weapons not the US approaching Japan! Read the story Abe is making Japan a key player and putting the target on Japan. If the US military was not in Japan the country would have been probably attacked by the likes of North and South Korea, China and all the other countries who are asking for apologies. So be thank the US presence is there if not sirens would be blaring daily and the people like yourself would feel very uneasy with the thought of being attacked look at Israel they armed up have many enemies but because of their military might and US backing that keep countries at bay just as in the article Japan said they wanted the weapons because they can't wait for the US to strike Israel did the same they approached the US Obama did nothing so Israel retaliate against Hamas Give your country some credit they are seeing what's going on and don't want to be in the same position

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

you can't admit that Abe is offending the majority of people in Japan not only by ignoring them

Of course he can't. Abe's approval rating has jumped 13 points to 64% since the Cabinet reshuffling, the highest ever.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The time is long overdue for Japan to move out the basement and get a job. Japan's head in the sand attitude towards war is dangerous for the maintenance of peace in the region and the world.

Now before any of you rate my comment down, I put the burden on you to defend Japan's submission to US power, US violence.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Japan the country would have been probably attacked by the likes of North and South Korea, China and all the other countries who are asking for apologies

Why though? Wars are generally fought for resources - I don't see why there would be any strategic benefit to attacking mainland Japan. North Korea is perhaps the exception because of the slight chance they might sacrifice everything. I would have thought the main deterrent for an attack is not how many guns Japan has, but that it would most likely trigger a global conflict. I can't help but wonder if China isn't playing cold-war style tactics. A few fishing boats and fighter jets has shown that they have quite a lot of control over Japan domestic policy. It's sent certain political factions into an almost hysterical frenzy - seeding division amongst the general population - and putting Japan into an arms race.

Of course he can't. Abe's approval rating has jumped 13 points to 64% since the Cabinet reshuffling, the highest ever.

I think you might be manipulating your data points a little there.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

I think nukes are important to get because they are the only thing China will respect. The only thing bullies understand is violence.

@mgglife and Peking and Shanghai would be gone in 19 mins.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Tokyo acquiring offensive weapons

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Notice it is not Japan constructing weapons. USA is trying to sell to Japan. USA will be disappointed that Japan Inc will build weapons, instead of Japan becoming US weapon industy customer.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

What suprise.....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

F-35 = Joint STRIKE Fighter

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Military strength really comes from military extortion. Let's go back to Lyndon Johnson. Who do you think was talking him into Vietnam in the first place? Ultimately military lobbying from either corporations or the heads of military departments maintain pressure on civilian officials by lobbying for more weaponry based on fear mongering. But nobody sees this as extortion. What Japan should do to play China properly is to ask them for security assistance. North Korea has a major economic problem. It's top heavy with armaments (sounds like another Tom Waits snack-Get a Grip On Some Armamints Today) Anyway, North Korea deals with the world by threatening to build and use nuclear weapons, etc. and asks for huge playoffs not to invest in them. It's a very sick system. All the billions leaving the U.S. to stabilize regions and prop up fragile regimes are based on extortion. Help us, or.... We simply do not know how to play this game. Pull the funds and weapons and watch the beasts pull their heads out of the sand, and watch the military lobbyists panic. And how will they show themselves? How are they doing it now?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Seems more like a conversation calculated to get the Chinese upset rather than an actual plan - at the moment. I wonder what the People's Daily will have to say about it.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

It's time for Japan to stand again as military power. I know this may rankle the more sensitive types but the reality is that pacifism is a pipe-dream and a one-way ticket to being the vassal of some other state. The US should push Japan to change its constitution and to stand as an equal against the states that are dangerous to free-thinking and democratic people. You can't hug your enemies when they are bent on taking your land and killing your people. Seeking to engage in pacifism only puts ones head on the chopping block for those who have no qualms in dropping the ax. Japan needs to beef ups its military and get ready for the pending conflicts that it well may see itself engaged in. Si vis pacem, para bellum

1 ( +3 / -2 )

mgglife: If Japan dear to trigger the first shot to China under whatever kind of situations and has whatever kind of support, China will destroy Japan in 20 mints. If you dont believe this, please try.

You got a point but the obvious outcome of that line of thinking is for Japan to equip itself with nuclear-tipped missiles, nothing else deters same.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Sometime you need to prepare behind the secure door rather than displaying Hanabi. I don't like confrontation with neighbors and both parties must respect each other.

There's no doubt about increasing chance of possible full scale war in Asia, East Europe, Middle East and West Africa. Japan or China or S. Korea need to well prepare and develop defensive and offensive war strategy against unforeseen enemy.

Current Russia leader Putin's madness, reckless and threatening nature will lead to full scale war in East Europe. Putin lead Russia is more threatening to Japan than China.

American will need Japan its side when full scale war broken out East Europe because US is only power in NATO force. Now US is involving in fighting with ISIS and Taliban in Afghanistan. In Asia- Pacific region, US needs stronger Japanese military to balance Chinese threatening to its small and weak neighbors' territory.

21st century Japanese Military is for peace and defend peace and stability in Asia-Pacific region rather than threatening and intimidating against its neighbors.

War mongers will not pity and let Japan because Japanese peoples love peace when war broken out. Japanese Government has responsible for to defend nation and safety of lives of Japanese peoples. Let Government to do what Government has to do with its job.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

When I should probably be thinking positive about any kind of rearming, all I can think about is the consumption tax rising even higher. But I am just waking, so maybe I am still in a dream.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

zorken, how can I manipulate Abe's approval rating.

http://www.asyura2.com/14/senkyo170/msg/809.html

1 ( +3 / -2 )

zorken, how can I manipulate Abe's approval rating.

That's not quite what I'm saying. But going by the link you posted your claim that his current approval is 'the highest ever' is a fabrication.

My problem is that you've seized upon a single data point - an approval rating from one newspaper (and one that just happens to give Abe the highest rating) taken after a reshuffle - and tried to use it to justify widespread popular support for Abe's military policies. Except (again by your own link) it's obvious that these were the very policies that drove his approval rating so low in the first place.

His current approval rating is reactionary - let's see where is in a few months - and maybe then you'll be right.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

zorken, I know approval ratings differ among papers. Abe's rating was up and still high after the reshuffle. My point was to refute smithinjapan. He said " Abe is offending the majority of people in Japan ". Well, in fact the majority of people in Japan support Abe despite tax hike, which is amazing thing if you know the history of J politics.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

This is a very thorny issue for Japan. Doubtless China will express outrage just at these informal talks, regardless of whether Japan opts for strike capabilities or not. This matter, for once, is not about China though, but about China's trigger happy pet: North Korea. That's a volatile nation that has already suggested that Japan will be "consumed in nuclear flames." I'm not surprised that the possibility of strike capabilities is being considered, but getting it enforced is a very different story. China and the Koreas are not the only ones who would respond negatively. Many countries are liable to get nervous at the very least. Of course, the Japanese people are unlikely to approve of this. It was difficult enough to make the move for collective self defence. The increase in defence spending has also been met with criticism from the Japanese citizens. Trying to enforce strike capabilities would likely be vehemently opposed, even if that means relying upon America to "be a sword." The Japanese don't want to be seen as remilitarizing, and they don't want to do anything that could provoke China or North Korea any more than has already been done. I think this would be the final straw for China, and violence would soon follow. Perhaps then it's best to stick to defence, rather than offence.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Approving rate. You have to be selected as a participant in enquette organization that will send questionaire form and send back your answers every time you receive. Too many questions for politicians researxch. The questions are derails of tiny actions each. It is not like you participate in Nielson type questions that require you watch TV programs all day long. You don;t want to be a participant but some do. Japanese politicians, Japanese language. You lose privacy in becoming participant. The organization usually have ........ Chosasho, ...... Chosakai. type suffix on names. The results by each research organization usually differ. After all they make income on these ankeeto. (enquette).

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

"rockets into the sea separating the Koreas from Japan"

It seems that this article doesn't want to say "The Sea of Japan" It is this kind of attitude that makes Japan want to build up military capablility.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

tinawatanabe: It seems that this article doesn't want to say "The Sea of Japan" It is this kind of attitude that makes Japan want to build up military capablility.

Dare they to toy with the English language like that! Smash 'em! >:(

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Fox Sora WintersSep. 11, 2014 - 10:49AM JST I'm not surprised that the possibility of strike capabilities is being considered, but getting it enforced is a very different >story. China and the Koreas are not the only ones who would respond negatively. Many countries are liable to get >nervous at the very least.

Apart from South Korea, like who?

I think this would be the final straw for China, and violence would soon follow. Perhaps then it's best to stick to >defence, rather than offence.

So you believe China which already has offensive capability would start a war with Japan because it too obtained offensive capability?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

In a democratic country, the people should know what their diplomats or military officers are doing, before things get too late. Secret diplomacy is disastrous, and it is so true in a talk of building military capability of aggression.

I would have to respectfully disagree with this. I think you may be confusing privacy with transparency. I think governments, like individuals, have the right to privacy. They do not, however, have a right to withhold information permanently. A good example is the current TPP negotiations – conducting these negotiations in private, then releasing the results for the public to review and assess is appropriate. Conducting clandestine talks with whomever, with the intent to hide them from the public is not.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Japanese politician hiding events and their actions from public ? Except Abe, about all Japanese politicians have big mouth. Aso never shut up. Tokyo assembly politicians a few months ago. It is difficult to find Japanese politicians who does not blurt out. Abe leaks after action, but others even love to insult women in public. One of new female ministers has been talking every day. They don't know how to be quiet.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

This twist in the US-Japan strategic defence relationship will of course ’infuriate’ China as the report says but it is also in a way provocative and indeed a total reversal of the post-war US Far East policy! After the fiery situation in the Middle East caused mainly by US intervention to protect its oil interest there, the US presence being enhanced in the Far Eastern region does not seem to be contributing to world peace! At the end of the day, there is of course the fear that a miscalculated single spark could lead to a major conflict engulfing the entire world! Would that be necessary is the Catche-22 question as it would ruin the world economy and drag it back by at least a century if not more if at all there is any trace of human race left on planet Earth!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Japan needs sand diving suits just when Kim starts shooting missiles dive into sand and pretend we don't hear and see nothing.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

It is really amazing to read the comments of all the "naysayers" of the Japanese people wanting to have the capabilities to protect themselves. Japan has just as much technology as the U.S., if not more. So for those of you suggesting that somehow its the US prodding this decision are really somewhat delusional. PM Abe is right to revise the country's constitution. Every country should determine its own national security interests; and with the constant saber-rattling of the PLA of China (More than half of Chinese see war with Japan: poll ) Abe is strongly correct in his assertions of the need for Japan to meet any immediate threats to the sovereignty of Japan independently. Who cares what China and South Korea thinks....still living the past of 1930's & 40's. It is unthinkable that in this day and age, that these naysayers would suggest the Japanese people should just bow down and be passive to a militarily assert China.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

So you believe China which already has offensive capability would start a war with Japan because it too obtained offensive capability?

Given the uproar China made about Japan's defence budget increase, and again about Japan lifting its self imposed ban on weapons exports, and yet again about Japan altering its constitution to allow for collective self defence, I would say that China would certainly react with utmost volatility to Japan obtaining strike capabilities. They protest every time Japan holds exercises near the Senkaku Islands, this is something with substantially more gravity. China would see it as absolute proof that Japan was re-militarizing and returning to its Imperialist past. That's just China for you. Deeply paranoid and hypocritical.

Apart from South Korea, like who?

At the very least, Taiwan. It's my understanding that they also have sore feelings with Japan over territorial disputes, despite having a common enemy in China. Russia would likely react badly as well, suspecting that Japan may attempt to take back the Kuriles by force. Beyond that is speculation, but I can't see that Vietnam, the Philippines or India would welcome obtaining offensive capabilities with open arms. Paranoia seems rife these days. A pacifist nation suddenly arming itself with cruise missiles is bound to set alarm bells ringing.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

China has offensive weapons that allow China to project power beyond its borders, far into Taiwan, Japan, Guam, Hawaii, San Francisco, Los Angeles, a move that does not infuriate Japan.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

K threatens japan with a statement it will be consumed in nuclear flames,

In North Korea, they threaten to have some country consumed in nuclear flames almost daily. It's like a greeting, "How are you?" or "Have you eaten?" People kept misunderstanding and think it's aggressive or something...

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Fox Sora WintersSep. 12, 2014 - 11:23AM JST "So you believe China which already has offensive capability would start a war with Japan because it too obtained offensive capability?" Given the uproar China made about Japan's defence budget increase, and again about Japan lifting its self imposed >ban on weapons exports, and yet again about Japan altering its constitution to allow for collective self defence, I would >say that China would certainly react with utmost volatility to Japan obtaining strike capabilities. They protest every time >Japan holds exercises near the Senkaku Islands, this is something with substantially more gravity. China would see it >as absolute proof that Japan was re-militarizing and returning to its Imperialist past. That's just China for you. Deeply >paranoid and hypocritical.

I fully agree with all of the above. China has and will continue to whine about anything that Japan says or does that is not entirely in heir favor. However I do not believe that China would start a "shooting war" with Japan over this or any other issue until they feel they can defeat the US-JPN alliance.

"Apart from South Korea, like who?"

At the very least, Taiwan. It's my understanding that they also have sore feelings with Japan over territorial disputes, >despite having a common enemy in China. Russia would likely react badly as well, suspecting that Japan may attempt >to take back the Kuriles by force.

I disagree with both of the above. Taiwan does have a dispute but theirs is based on an honest desire for natural resources. In contrast with China's demands which are based on both natural resources and strategic advantage, You may be aware that Taiwan and Japan did reach an agreement on fishing rights around the Senkakus which is why we don't hear of Taiwanese protests. Additionally, there has been considerable pressure from Taiwan on Japan to "remilitarize" after 1996 and to bring them into an agreement to help the US defend Taiwan. While unrealistic from the Japanese point of view it does indicate Taiwan's view on security. I also suspect that Russia will not be concerned at all since it knows that Japan eagerly wants to develop closer relations with Russia, not just for economic reasons but for security. And Russia mistrusts China to the extent that they may give Japan room to counter balance them.

Beyond that is speculation, but I can't see that Vietnam, the Philippines or India would welcome obtaining offensive >capabilities with open arms. Paranoia seems rife these days. A pacifist nation suddenly arming itself with cruise >missiles is bound to set alarm bells ringing.

Totally disagree with the above. Those nations have already welcomed Japan's change in military position. And merely "having" offensive capability does not increase a threat unless that nation already poses a threat. Which in the case of those countries does not exist. If a pacifist nation acquiring offensive weapons is enough to "set alarm bells ringing" what about the existence of a Non-pacifist nation already possessing not only offensive weapons but nuclear capability as well?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

North Korea is propped up by China anyway so the latter is responsible for the existence of the regime. Every time it threatens Japan, Chinese leaders are grinning with glee.

Japan has every right to defend itself and have nukes launch-ready against North Korea AND China. China will never get over its humiliation by Japan. China is not a minority group like Jews. China prides itself on its long history and cultural contributions, and it feels it is responsible for the cultural enrichment and development of Japan. To think little Japan was smart enough to modernize early and beat China to submission is infuriating to the Chinese. They want their revenge, and to prove to Japan and the rest of the world, especially the West, that it is no longer a paper tiger.

I had to edit a book at work written by a Chinese nuclear physicist and I was horrified how he praised the glory of nukes which will be used to demonstrate the strength of China. Whether China does get into war with Japan remains to be seen, but certainly they love fanning the flames and if North Korea frightens Japan, all the better.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I knew that the changing of article nine, was only just the beginning of a much larger agenda. So many posters defended it, while saying we were only trying to strengthen our defenses. Now we see there will be no end in sight and the military industrial complex couldn't be more pleased!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Totally disagree with the above. Those nations have already welcomed Japan's change in military position. And merely "having" offensive capability does not increase a threat unless that nation already poses a threat. Which in the case of those countries does not exist. If a pacifist nation acquiring offensive weapons is enough to "set alarm bells ringing" what about the existence of a Non-pacifist nation already possessing not only offensive weapons but nuclear capability as well?

Philippines and Vietnam are not only welcoming a more assertive Japan, but also encouraging it by accepting military hardware and training from Japan. As far as nuclear weapons, regardless of its anti-miltartist norms and strategic culture of pacifism, the relative decline of the U.S. virtually guarantees that Japan will eventually acquire nuclear capabilities. They technology is already there. Japan will eventually come to realize that the U.S. no longer has the resources, nor the will, to protect and ensure Japan's security and national interests. China and North Korea both have nuclear weapons. Japan won't be a sitting duck and allow a nuclear China and North Korea run roughshod over Japan. I would argue a nuclear Japan will offer more, not less, stability in East Asia. China and North Korea would be far less likely to challenge a Japan that possesses the capabilities to fight back.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Expatriated_Realist: So you say that Japan is and has only been a sitting duck? Japan can defend itself, even more so since the changes to article nine. NOBODY can truly defend against multiple Nuclear strikes and if you think we could win a nuclear war, I'd say that's crazy!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think this isn't really about Japan but about USA. Obama said USA would no longer be the police of the world. That means to Japan that USA would not be the leader of the free world. And USA is actually not acting like the leader of the free world under Obama.

Does America really mean that? because in that case surely Japan should reform her national security strategy for her own survival as Japan is surrounded by irrational fundamental aggressors like NK,SK and China.

I think Abe is not counting on Obama, but still counting on DOD.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

What animated discussion. Much ado about nothing. It's part of a political campaign designed to assuage the hawkish. After election everything back to normal.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Expatriated_Realist: So you say that Japan is and has only been a sitting duck? Japan can defend itself, even more so since the changes to article nine. NOBODY can truly defend against multiple Nuclear strikes and if you think we could win a nuclear war, I'd say that's crazy!

That's not at all what I said nor intended to say. Please read my post more carefully before posting gibberish.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Expatriated_realist: You did suggest that Japan will have NO alternatives but to acquire nuclear weapons or else they will be a "sitting duck". Since we don't have them yet, it sounds like you think we ARE a "sitting ducks"? WE ALREADY HAVE DEFENSIVE CAPABILITIES! As for nuclear weapons bringing stability to Asia, lol. By that logic, if every country in the world possessed nuclear weapons, we would have peace on earth.

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