politics

Japan warns of toughening security climate in east Asia

58 Comments

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2013. Click For Restrictions - http://about.reuters.com/fulllegal.asp

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

58 Comments
Login to comment

Does the situation warrant additional U.S. troops in Japan? perhaps No.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Situation warrants a massive diplomatic push. War is unthinkable. Unwinable. Truly unwanted.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

I am concerned about the rapidly increasing defense budget of China. They will be outspending the US soon.

-5 ( +8 / -13 )

Where is the security threatened, government using the media to whip up a frenzy. Lets not forget who started this. Diplomacy is what is needed not nationalistic war mongering. This is just trying to reinforce the governments arguments and intention to change article 9 of the constitution. I do hope the Japanese citizens are not fooled by this excitable rhetoric .

8 ( +15 / -7 )

Mr Sakamoto, cited in the article is right. Japan most definitely needs to keep or possibly develop a deterrence capability. That is the only way to keep their independence/sovereignty over time. It may cause China to be frustrated but it will be worth it. When China decides to scrap their arms it is a good time for Japan to consider doing the same. History is very clear on these issues.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

"The balance of power will be lost if we don’t start considering striking back when attacked," said Osaka University professor Kazuya Sakamoto, who sits on a panel advising Abe on security policies.

The Philippines and Vietnam should be looking into developing a "strike back" capability as well. Cold War 2.0 can't be far off. India is also building up its military.

"India is the only country in the world that says that it is developing its military power because of China's military threat," said Luo.

The Romans knew a thing or two about maintaining peace: Si vis pacem, para bellum - If you want peace, prepare for war.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

You reap what you sow, Japan. The more belligerent you are towards your neighbours, the less likely they are to be kind in reply. If Japan truly wants better ties with hits neighbours, they need to get rid of Abe for starters. If they want to whine and complain and play the victim while denying history, white-washing texts, rescinding apologies, claiming there's no dispute with A islands but there is with B, saying neighbours should move on and forget the past while demanding the past be addressed when it involves abductees or other issues where Japan is the victim, justifying visits to shrines where war-criminals are enshrined, etc., then please don't pretend Japan is not at all in the wrong.

It's a two-way street. If Japan wants a more secure Asia, it should start by actually trying to mend fences, not put up more.

5 ( +19 / -14 )

minello7

Lets not forget who started this.

May I ask who started what? Buying islands from Japanese citizens will not count as threat or anything. On the other hand, buying an aircraft carrier which is not required for defending its territory but is offensive counts as military pressure against surrounding countries.

-6 ( +6 / -12 )

well.. we do have two helicopter destoryers (can be converted into a VTOL/STOVL aircraft carrier).. and a 19k ton, 248m, 22DDH class helicopter destoryer.. again can be converted.. is been build, and another is been planned.. so 4 helicopter destoryers.. (aircraft carriers).. by 2020..

its no wonder the chinese have a 48k ton, 305m Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier (russian).. which is landlocked..

why cant they just play chinese chess.. in tokyo, and Shogi in Beijing.. its more fun..

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Jeffrey Bader, former Senior Director for East Asian Affairs on the National Security Council published a memoir, "Obama and China's Rise." In this, he discusses the Senkaku issue, stating that "it is absurd to think that China and Japan would have an armed conflict over the rocky islets or that the United States would be drawn in" (p. 107). To the U.S. government, the idea that the United States would be dragged into an armed conflict over the Senkakus is a sheer absurdity.

Abe would like Japan to be a "special U.S. ally" like Israel, Taiwan, and South Korea, that would be defended by the United States no matter what. In order to curry favor, Abe agreed to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, to construct a new base at Henoko, and to allow the deployment of Ospreys. However, it is quite clear that the U.S.A. has no intention of making Japan a special ally. Abe has yet to recognize the position he is in: whatever tribute he may offer, he will be cut off the moment his true intentions are exposed.

Any armed conflict or "cold war" would be impossible. Economically the U.S.A. and China are joined at the hip. China's U.S. Treasury holdings in April this year stood at $1,206 billion, $160 billion more than second-place Japan's. China holds one-eighth of all outstanding U.S. Treasury securities. Further, China's foreign exchange reserves exceed $3 trillion, roughly three times Japan's.

The United States is the biggest importer of Chinese goods in the world, surpassing Hong Kong, China's intra-regional trading partner. The dollars China earns from its exports to the United States go back to the U.S. to cover U.S. debts. This pattern, established in the 2000s, has not been altered even by the financial crisis. In other words, for both the United States and China, a direct armed conflict would be catastrophic to their respective economies.

There is no "toughening security climate" in East Asia, except that which Abe would like to create.

And as for why the Marine Corps keep "hinting" at going to war in the Senkakus from Futenma? It's self-preservation. The Marine Corps and the US Army are facing drastic cuts, and Obama has declared that the U.S.A. will no longer engage in large-scale ground combat. The Marine Corps is also pushing the idea of imminent threat from China and NK for survival purposes. In Okinawa it's heavily subsidised by the Japanese government.

As some14some says, this situation doesn't warrant extra US troops in Japan. In all honesty, it doesn't warrant any US troops, because there is no situation.

See more at: http://www.japanfocus.org/-Sato-Manabu/3964#sthash.AZQJ3wO2.dpuf

11 ( +16 / -5 )

My critically capable mond tells me something else is up. Much like Bertie says above,

There is no "toughening security climate" in East Asia, except that which Abe would like to create.

I think this whole "situation" is set up by Abe&Co in pure self interest. They know the Japanese public is an apathetic bunch. They want to change the constitution (for whatever reason) but know the disinterested public won't go for that just like so. Enter the "toughened security climate". Many fools will buy into this and the Abe&Co ub might just get their way. Then, who knows what will happen.

At present, Japan acts like the itazura kid that smiles and sits down in his chair when the teacher is around only to be a complete pain in the ass when no teachers or adults are around. Extremely immature and unnecessary.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Enter the "toughened security climate

Worked in the States.

The only deal breakers would be if Japan cashes in it's US bonds on a massive scale, or, hits hyper-inflation, or Fukushima blows and the north needs to be evacuated. All very unlikely, except for Fukushima. Other than that, the US will always protect Japan.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

...the US will always protect Japan.

Come on, man, they're here as much to protect as to control.

6 ( +12 / -6 )

Other than that, the US will always protect Japan.

One of the primary reasons the United States entered the Korean War was to protect Japan.

One facet of the changing attitude toward Korea and whether to get involved was Japan. Especially after the fall of China to the Communists, "...Japan itself increasingly appeared as the major East Asian prize to be protected". "The recognition that the security of Japan required a non-hostile Korea led directly to President Truman's decision to intervene... The essential point... is that the American response to the North Korean attack stemmed from considerations of US policy toward Japan."

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Bertie: "However, it is quite clear that the U.S.A. has no intention of making Japan a special ally."

Cut the anti-US stuff on a thread about Japan and its neighbours. Or if you insist on this 'special ally' thing, why does Japan NEED it (and don't kid yourself, it does) so badly? The answer is that Japan is relying on the US to save it yet again as the government here becomes more and more hostile towards its neighbours. Do you think, since you bring it up, Israel would act as it does -- threatening pre-emptive nuke strikes and what not -- if it didn't know for a fact it has carte blanche from the US? Do you really want that for Japan? for Japan to just casually threaten everyone and anyone then hide behind the legs of the US more than it does now? Japan needs to work on relations with its neighbours ON ITS OWN, not hiding behind the US as it makes threats. The US is not here for Japan to be offensive, only to defend IF necessary.

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

China and North Korea? Hypothetical enemies of the US... Abe is just following US order as usual.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Every country has the right to defend itself, and how many times have we heard posters saying Japan should develop it's own defense instead of relying on the U.S.

Now that it actually wants to start making moves in that direction we get the same Japan bashers giving the place the bash again.

North Korea wants to bully SK and Japan and China is also wanting to through its weight around, I think japan should show some in the area it isn't going to roll over to it's neighbours who have never got past nearly 70 years of appologies.

In this day and age one can only remain passive for so long.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

I feel somebody is preparing the public opinion for a change of the constitution...

9 ( +9 / -0 )

StormR: "Now that it actually wants to start making moves in that direction we get the same Japan bashers giving the place the bash again."

If Japan is being criticized (most of the time people claim 'bashing' as a knee-jerk reaction to what they don't want to hear) it is because the government deserves it -- this comes JUST before they are set to win a majority, and with Abe having made it clear he has nationlist interests in mind. The fact is Japan's neighbours wouldn't be getting more hostile towards Japan if Japan were not prompting it, and not denying its history of prompting it. Call that 'bashing' if you like -- the rest of the world know it as fact.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

China has been bolstering its military spending. North Korea now has near nuclear weapon capabilities. The USA military forces are going to leave South Korea soon. So what is so alarming if Japan wishes to bolster its own military spending? Japan is merely trying to address the situation that has grown in the area, which Japan is not responsible for. This is reactive, not pro-active. Just as the American are going to be pulling out of South Korea and letting them handle their own defenses, it would only seem logial that they would have the same view for Japan. Japan also has the technology to develop military technology which in turn would assist peaceful spin-offs.

ShinMaywa US-2 and Kawasaki P-1 are examples of home-grown Japanese technology.

The question is, how much the Americans would trust the Japanese to have greater control of its own military? South Korea has taken the route to strengthen ties with China. This is certainly not what Japan should do.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Ops... better to keep in secrets things like put in the space surveillance satellites and other things.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Obviously one article triggers a variety of responses. Still the main issue is wether or not China has started to position (pushing) themselves towards their neighbors. Even if it is mostly news media that has been reporting on this issues it seems clear to me that China has changed its ambitions in the asia/pacific area. As far as I can see Japan did not. Ergo it seems more appropriate to discuss what Japan would do to respond to this changed ambition. More apologizing will most likely not change a thing, simply because that is not what is at stake here. The real agenda, from my point of view, is global competition about business, resources and power. Thus the big game is between the US and China. Japan is a powerful business partner to the US and I think China would prefer if Japan would ally themselves on Chinas side, against the US. To put it in a different way. If your neighbor in your typical suburb starts buying arms, play war-games and then demand that the fence should be moved 2,5 yards in on your lawn so that the neighbor can stage bigger war games, then I think you might be bothered, maybe even feel a "toughened security climate".

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@smithinjapan: you really don't understand that behind Japan's foreign policy, there's always its "alliance" with the USA. And this "alliance" isn't on equal basis. Japan must act according to the USA interests, basically (in Italy it's the same). China knows it very well.

The military is conducting joint drills with the United States, its main security ally, and fortifying defences against missile attacks, while the government is reviewing its mid-term defence policy.

The USA are ok with the current Japanese foreign policy, while they were against DP pro-Asia administration.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

If you would like to worry, the problem will be China and Russia moving together. That would be a problem, and we see a foreshadowing of it in joint exercises.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I think most people would agree a country is fine setting up its own armed forces for BOTH offence & defensive purposes.

Japan had a few things happen in the 1930-40s & as a consequence lost & has since had only "defensive" forces, Japan has been free to change things if it wished but hasn't much. It also had the choice with how to deal with its history, sadly it took & continues to take the low road in that regard.

So here we are, Japan is still perfectly free to change its constitution etc BUT that doesn't mean there wont be consequences, pretty simple really.

Now just imagine if Japan had done similar to Germany & wanted to change its constitution & forces, things would be quite different, would the Senkaku's still be an issue.......maybe maybe not but things wouldn't be near as bad as they will get if Japan does go ahead & change its constitution etc.

The ole reap what you sew thingy you see. So while Japan hasn't created all its problems it sure has created MOST of them, just sayin!

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Smithinjapan

Are you really suggesting that Japan is the belligerent nation in this scenario?

1 ( +6 / -5 )

It's hilarious that someone can think that a country occupied by the military of another country has freedom about its foreign policy. It would be like to say Italians are free to decide if we want to go to Iraq or not. We simply can't. We have to obey. If Japan becomes more belligerant towards its neighbours, it's because the USA are ok with this policy. They could blame it officially, but if they are letting it, this means they can take advantage from it someway (for example, this could lead Japan to isolationism in Asia).

0 ( +3 / -3 )

He who lives by the sword will surely die by the sword. I came into possession of an Imperial Army Soldier's book recently and it is a stark reminder that the only way Abe's offense is ever going to work is by forced conscription. The opposition parties should make it clear that Abe's reckless plan to restart an offensive army is a sad case of those who forget history are sure to repeat it. The parents of Japanese high school boys should be told that the Self-Defense force is fixin to become the Self-Offense force and that their sons may well be forced to serve and die in the name of "The Emperor?" or whoever. This is the beginning of the end of the nation-state of Japan.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Agree with Smith Japan and Bertie Wooster. It looks like President Abe is up to something, deceiving the Japanese people.

On the spiritual side, (Moderator permitting), here are some thoughts about what it is supposed to happen, (although it is beyond my understanding):

Revelation 16:12 And the sixth one poured out his bowl upon the great river Euphrates and its water was dried up, that the way may be prepared for the kings from the rising of the Sun.

Daniel 11:44 "But there will be reports that will disturb him, out of the sunrising and out of the north, and he will certainly go forth in a great rage in order to annihilate and to devote many to destruction".

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

It looks like President Abe is up to something

Unless you are talking about Lincoln, who is dead, S.hinzo Abe is the prime minister of Japan, not the president

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Japan needs China, China needs Japan! Both countries need to make $$, so at the end of the day, we all need to WORK together, not try and kill each other off. IMHO

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I know that to many Americans opinons like mine are "heavy", but they should deal with it. You don't know what means to live in a country occupied by the military of another country. WWII is over more than 60 years ago. If the USA went out from EU and out from Asia, the world would be more peaceful. Maybe a united Asia would be possible, like Mr. Hatoyama wanted. But the USA obstacled Hatoyama administration. To the USA a nationalist Japan has always been useful in function anti-communist. For this reason many war criminal were left free, and Japan continues to be ignorant about its history. In Germany was different, because Germany wasn't completely American. It was partially Sovietic. Italy was completely American, so we are more oblivious about our war crimes like Japan. We didn't get something like Process of Norimberga. EU is only a monetary union, but it doesn't work because we lack of a true political union. For example, France is really free (it won WWII) so they are always the first ones to oppose to the USA in many occasions. Italy is in a weaker position. We have to obey, only this. Your average American people can't understand.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@Bertie: Thank you for your comment. USA is almost bankrupting. The largest creditor is China, Next, Japan now., Not only that, by keeping troops to Japan, Japanese Govt pays more than $ 2 billion a year to USA. Right now, Congress will be deciding to give more than 12 billion dollars a year to Egypt or not. Then, US troops has to get out Arabic and African countries rapidly. It kept US force in Japan to protect from Russia, once claimed. Then China, N. Korea, etc.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The Governor of Tokyo knew what he was starting when he offered to buy those pathetic islands and his friends at the Defense Ministry are playing the line. In reality N Korea posses no threat to Japan. And the only argument that Japan with China has is over a couple of little rocks sticking out of the water. Pity that much of the mainstream media seems to be playing the same game- the losers are the Japanese public. No-one wins from more military spending- not even the Chinese.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

smithinjapanJul. 09, 2013 - 04:59PM JST You reap what you sow, Japan. The more belligerent you are towards your neighbours, the less likely they are to be >kind in reply.

Anyone who can read the news knows that it isn't Japan that's being belligerent,. In fact their constitution prohibits it.,

-4 ( +8 / -12 )

Japan-China relations improved a lot during PM Tanaka Kakuei-era, so Japan needs another guy like Kakuei. PM Hatoyama tried to improve Japan-China relations, but I guess the American government didn't like that, so they called him "loopy".

2 ( +5 / -3 )

I am concerned about the rapidly increasing defense budget of China. They will be outspending the US soon.

@ch3cho - please wake up and smell the coffee. acccording to wiki, US spends $682 billion, 4.4% of gdp, 39% of world share. Contrast that with China, who spends $166 billion, 2% of gdp, 9.5% of world share.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

but I guess the American government didn't like that, so they called him "loopy".

The American government did not vote him out of power, the Japanese public did.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Japan is rich and. has democracy. So if one party fails and screws up, another can take over. China is one party government who has all kinds of problems to manage. Falter in one area, and the government will be in deep kimchi. Everyone knows that China really does need a Diaoyu problem. That is why they agreed to let it be for decades. But if Japan loses out in the Diaoyu issue, it can still get going. That it why they are creating all these! However Japan has to be careful. Push the dragon to the wall, and it will fight back, even if it knows this is perilous. This dragon is not as weak as it was a century ago.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Political gimmick from both sides at the expense of the population!

Egos from political leaders need their daily meat to be satisfied.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Diplomacy can only work when you have weapons.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The American government did not vote him out of power, the Japanese public did.

He were't able to keep his promise about Futenma, because of USA's hard opposition. This has been one of the main reasons why Japanese were disappointed by him. But now, the USA with Abe are way more complaisant.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Right wing cretins in the LDP trying to play the "national security" card, with China and NK being portrayed as existential threats.

Obviously lies aimed at tightening their grip on power by creating fear that can subsequently be exploited to push reforming Article 9 of the Constitution, while surreptitiously making one step closer to creating conditions for conflict with China, which means conflict between the USA and China.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Good on Japan. Hope this does work out and hope for the better.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

He were't* able wasn't

@ubikwit: you are implying the USA aren't behind Japan's foreign policy. The USA are behind foreign policy of every country they occupy.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

lol, everyone here, educated, etc (ok, 10% know Japanese at least) write how Japan 'fired up' Senkaku issue few months ago with it's nationalization. Meanwhile, I had opened my old ONZ Encyclopedia from 1975 and look what's there! It's written there that CPR started to care about the islands since 1973! Not from 2012. It started 40 years ago...

3 ( +5 / -2 )

He were't* able

wasn't

Finally I corrected it, lol.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I am concerned about the rapidly increasing defense budget of China. They will be outspending the US soon.

Every country in the region increases it's expenses on military. Aside from Japan which keeps it stable or even decreases slightly...

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Dylan Otoshiro: "Smithinjapan. Are you really suggesting that Japan is the belligerent nation in this scenario?"

I'm not 'suggesting' anything. What's I'm saying, and what is fact, is that it's not ONE nation that is acting belligerent, but ALL nations in the area, and mostly out of pride. Sersioudly, Dylan... the whole 'with us or against us' argument is lame to begin with -- a war is not fought by one nation, nor is even an argument. Yes, Japan is A belligerent party, but not THE belligerent party, as in only one.

OssanAmerica: "Anyone who can read the news knows that it isn't Japan that's being belligerent,. In fact their constitution prohibits it.,"

Anyone who reads a dictionary knows that the word is not limited to acts of physical warfare, which Japan will be able to do when Abe suggests revising Article 9, by the way and since you bring it up, but relate as well to exhibiting assertiveness and hostility, which Japan has been doing for ages and continues to do more and more. So, once again I ask you to go look up the word 'hypocrisy' to see what Abe espouses, then take a minute to recheck 'belligerent'. Japan is indeed being belligerent, and no one can deny that. In return, so are Japan's neighbours.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Japan has every right and every reason to form a robust military. The threats against it are going to be no less in the future. China is a threat to world peace as a whole, not just to Japan, so the world needs a powerful well equipped Japan to tame China and their forever outlook of domination,which has been their dream and determination from thousands of years past. Just look at the great leap forward where the leaders are responsible for tens of millions of their own people deaths based on these leaders dreams of domination at all expense, these are still the main foal of China today as we are witnessing. Build your defenses Japan and your offensive ability. The world needs you and so does the Philippines, all of East Asia and South East Asia needs you, and us to in the US!!!!!!

5 ( +7 / -2 )

More sabre-rattling on behalf of the Military-Industrial complex to generate sales of more advanced weapons and people killers, as sales dry up in other regions?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Well, just cross my mind that a toughening security climate should not play good for 2020 Olympics bids... If Japan wants to grow defensive arsenal I think it is legitimate but not for being offensive or change the constitution so they can blow the first strike. Japan acted like invaders in WWII and was Nazi allies, they played their cards and they lost the war, what make Japan feel they are even now ? I do not care it is 30 or 60 years ago, this not even 1 generation yet. and Japan is yet to have done a clear and sincere redemption like Germany has already done being part now of a united Europe (for good or bad).. I am not feeling safe for the world security to see Japan re-arming under the direction of the LDP and rights wingers who use hate and discrimination to divert people from the real problems and will push without thinking any nuclear button if they have some toys to play with. so "Yes" for more protection if real threat are identified but "No" for the change of constitution and right to first strike.. Japan politician are not mature enough and you do not give matches to children...I am quite confident the US is thinking the same...

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

tyvtgo1US: "Just look at the great leap forward where the leaders are responsible for tens of millions of their own people deaths based on these leaders dreams of domination at all expense, these are still the main foal of China today as we are witnessing. Build your defenses Japan and your offensive ability."

You have to love it! The paranoia and idea that China is 'taking over the world' and so while they are evil and wrong in building up their army, Japan 'has every right' to build up offenses capabilities, bla bla bla. Reminds me of the "Israel is allowed this, but not Israel's enemies" hypocrisy. Japan has shown in the past what it does with offensive capabilities, and after it came back to bite them in the behind they renounced such acts of hostility and war with the consitution, namely article 9. This is, as it very well should be, a major source of pride for Japan (and by 'is' I say many people think that way... obviously the nut-bag wingers don't). People like Abe want to forget Japan's past of aggression, force others to learn only how Japan is the victim in history, and scrap one of the things that make this a truly great nation -- and all of this belligerence leads to an equal reaction in Japan's neighbours. The hypocrisy would be astounding if it were not so obvious and expected.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

There seems to be a lot of fear for an imagined Japan out there. Here are a few ideas that might be reasonable concerning the discussion. The Japanese public of today is very different from the Japanese public 70-80 years ago. This has major implications for what is politically possible today. It seems likely that a little more military spending in Japan will not lead to a new imperialist military trying to conquer the world. At best it will increase the deterrence capacity against neighboring countries. If it is worth it or not in the current economic situation, can’t say. Politically I think it is a necessity. I think everyone knows that the recent problems about the Senkaku islands started with the fact that under democratic rules some nationalists tried to create an incident with China, which was stopped by the Government. I’m quite sure that China knows this. But of some strange reason China has decided to pursue this issue even after the nationalist have been locked out. Of course Japan cant back down on the Senkaku, unless they would like to be treated as a lap dog in the future. But what is Chinas agenda? The confessional practice that many seems to hold dear, as the right way for Japans to take responsibility for the imperial army’s actions during ww2 is a western practice. Basically you are saying that the other (Japanese people of today) should be like us (do what we do) and then we might forgive you. Like it or not but this is a typical imperialist or post-colonial ideal that you are trying to put on the Japanese people. If I were a present day Japanese I would most certainly try to avoid such an insult in order to dodge a fruitless conflict about bad manners. If I were about 90 years old I might agree that we can never be free from guilt, and then an endless row with apologies could be okay. I’m sure Abe will do his best to change the country according to the LDP policy. That is exactly the way it should be in a democratic society. The people will tell Abe what they think about his efforts the next time they have an election. People that do not share Abe’s ideals will of course prepare for the next time and do our best to make sure he doesn’t get elected for a second term.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Japan is making its nighbours, China and Korea, to be enemies. The first step made by Japan was to nationalized the disputed island and arresting chinese fishman. Japan can keep moving towards right as specaial ally till the war happenes. US only cares its own interests, won't get involved against China. Who will win? Count missles, warships, air force, population, the size of land, even unclear, clearly the answer is not hard to get. China's tone is always to expect talks and take win-win. The japanese politicans chose wrong direction and lead Japan people going to danger.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

smithinjapanJul. 10, 2013 - 08:57AM JST OssanAmerica: "Anyone who can read the news knows that it isn't Japan that's being belligerent,. In fact their constitution prohibits it.,"

Anyone who reads a dictionary knows that the word is not limited to acts of physical warfare,

Yes it is, Belligerence means acts or threats of war, hostilities or aggression. All of Asia agrees that China is guilty. The entire world agrees that North Korea is guilty. Yet you alone in the universe suggest that "Japan is belligerent". Thank you for the laugh. I suggest you read Article 9 of the Japanese constitution and review Japanese post WWII history and diplomatic relations with China. You might even notice that Japan was not an official participant in the UN action known as the "Korean War".

which Japan will be able to do when Abe suggests revising Article 9,

Which both China and North Korea have been doing and are doing now since they have no "peace constitution".

Japan is indeed being belligerent, and no one can deny that. In return, so are Japan's neighbours.

Your anti-J rants are reaching for it.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Japan has the right and the responsiblity to protect itself both in action and in words. That means a strong stand now and a respectful stand on historic events. No one wins wars really but no nation should be expected to betray its ancestors...and frankly it is ridiculous for China to try to bully Japan over an island chain when it has a vastly larger national territory and prospects for resources. It is clearly a matter of trying to gain power thru projected force, ie enhanced bullying and none of us should support that. To say it is ridiculous for the issue to be over the islands, relaized that Japan itself is a set of islands and no matter how large or small, those islands in question have the same meaning as any of the others. All of it IS Japan. So well done Japan so far and keep it up.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

It’s the J politicians who ruined the image of Japan. Basically they did everything just for their own political gains; their timing in raising the China Threat theory has been impeccable. And once they got their way in changing the constitution they would be acting even more aggressively towards the neighbours because of their superiority complex. Think about it, why would S Korea choose to go against japan when they are both US allies? It’s obvious that S Korea has been leaning towards China more to hedge their bet and so are a number of other neighbouring countries, such as Pakistan, Myanmar, Mongolia, Russia, Cambodia, Thailand, Laos, and even Vietnam . The Korean has come to trust China more and more, and even downplay the China Threat theory. But is there really a threat in China rise? Now considering the following points: China’s increase in military budgets is reasonable as the US spent five or six times more than China; China only reacts when provoked as China did not initiate any disputes; the whole world knows that China adheres to the peaceful rise and non-interference policies and to do otherwise would be detrimental to China’s image; China has been proposing to shelve the islands issue with Japan since the beginning; and China has agreed to follow the code of conducts at seas. So, Japan seems to be the ring leader in Asia that promotes China Threat theory while bribing its way through for supports, such as giving free patrol boats, forgiving debts and offering financial aids. In the long run, Japan will be politically isolated and the only way to assert its power is by way of war.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

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