Japan, faced with rising China, shifts its strategy

[jhungary]

first of all, I totally agree with you that Japan have the full right to defende itself

but it will not be equal to China's power .Recently, the whole world witnessed the major escalation

of Chinese influence economically,politically.....and militarily very soon

I believe that the best choice for Japan is to avoid confrontation with the dragon

Nobody asked to get to the same level to China as it cannot be done with current constitution of Japan, but Constitution aside, they should be allow to at least defend their home soil. The problem is, if we keep the same troop level and pretent everything is the same as in the 70s, then Japan will be in a hard fight with China if Japan was attacked.

I am not saying or implying that China will attack Japan or Japan will be aggressive toward China, but limiting one defense capability mean asking that nation to roll down and die when attaacked, it is not the way to go. From what we see now, China is pretty much aggressive toward the Japanese , Indian, Vietnamese and Phillippine. Japan should not be restricted on their defense just because they gone crazy 70 years ago.

Face it, As CHina progress, US cannot cover Japan and their own Asian Interest anymore. It's time for Japan to fight for themselve.

 

[Viet]

did you read the words on the picture?
'revise the constitution ,get nuclear weapons,defend our territory'
let me explain to you what is it means.
Japan's constitution
ARTICLE 9. Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.
(2) To accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.

which means"Japan's military strength can only be maintained at the level required for self defence, no more than 100,000 troops, not more than 30 the number of warships, the displacement may not exceed 10 million tons, and can not have aircraft carriers and nuclear-powered submarines, not more than 500 the number of combat aircraft,may not have long-range bombers, can't develop ballistic missile technology, military expenditure must not exceed GDP%1, no rights fight a war with other countries"

Sure, I can read it!

And again, it´s the time for Japan to revise the constitution, considering the rising threat from China, for both of us. Yes, China poses a danger for peace and stability for the whole reagion.

Japan has learned from history, unlike China. I fully support Japan´s remilitarisation. Japan invaded us only one time, China 17 times. Imperial China was much worse than Imperial Japan. We need Japan to counterbalance China in Asia.

 

[XName]

And again, it´s the time for Japan to revise the constitution

I doubt it

China poses a danger for peace and stability for the whole reagion.

no one country good,no one bad,just for interests.As far as I know,Viet Nam is very depend on China,Viet Nam also important for China.

Japan has learned from history

not 'learn',Their constitution was written on the print paper by MacArthur. 'article 9' is very famous,you can find similar article in the constitutions of Germany and Italy

China 17 times

I don't know,I know your history is very similar with Korea.

We need Japan to counterbalance China in Asia.

Compare with China, Japan is too small, only the United States can.But sooner or later ,US will leave the Western Pacific

 

[474474]

Japan needs to stay as a pacifist. I don't support the idea of a militarised Japan. Their defence is under our umbrella. They should focus more on their country. Many Americans are still sensitive about Pearl Harbour.

How long will you keep thinking the world revolves around you? Politically Japan may suck up to USA but do you seriously think that the populations of Japan and other US allies think they don't have the right to a strong independent military?
Pearl harbor is NOTHING compared to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or Iraq, Vietnam and cast Lead for that matter. Get this straight, no one likes you. No one in the world has any respect left for us since I guess Ronald reagan.

 

[terranMarine]

BY THE WAY, I AM STILL WAITING ON WHICH COUNTRY THINK IRAQ WAR IS NOT LEGIT, I HAVE READ AND DISECT THE WHOLE POST 76 AND ONLY FOUND KOFI ANNAN THOUGHT THE WAR IS ILLEGAL.

Just you and your buddy think the Iraq war is not legit does NOT make it not legit, i have see a lot of investigation from ICC and even UN investuigation, all i find is a UN Directive that to insertt military trainer to Iraq. WHich all 15 voted yes. SO Where exactly is the illegal comment makde by a country? Iran perhaps? or Maybe Israel ?? Hehe Answer me this

You can think it's legit based on the report from ICC or UN and that the war against Iraq is justified but that does not mean people around the world think it's legal. I never said leaders from around the world stating the war as illegal but citizens got it? You have said war is unavoidable because Iraq didn't allow for all sites to be inspected and that there are proof they are making wmd (be it chemical weapons or nukes). North Korea has conducted nuclear test already, what more proof does US want? Running out of $ or perhaps a chicken to wage another war? You still haven't answered me this.

If war against Iraq was justified Bush wouldn't have to make the following statement huh.

If a war between China and Japan breaks out it's about defending the sovereignty and not based on some report whether some country is making WMD or not. You can support Japan for re-militarizing whether they are gonna change their constitution is another. Time will tell.

 

[Viet]

some pictures from the Japanese Army. The soldiers seem to dress like their US counterparts.

Soldiers of the Ground Self-Defence Force set Patriot missiles at the Defence Ministry in Tokyo. — Photo AFP

Japan Ground Self Defence Force JGSDF members
Permission under Public Domain as a work of the United States Marine Corps.

Sailors aboard Japanese destroyer JS KONGO.
Permission under Public Domain as a work of the employee of
US Navy .

JASDF F-15J fighter planes taking off
Permission under Public Domain as a work of the
US Federal government.

Japanese Soldier with Night Vision Goggles

Japanese cadets. Permission under Public Domain as a work of the employee of
United States Marine Corps.

MSDF Vessel Kongo launches SM3 missile

 

[Tshering22]

Japanese have some good military technology but their stuff is too expensive to buy for many countries. While Indonesia and Vietnam might be the emerging countries, others may find it difficult to justify the price tags (somewhat similar to European programs).

The ShinMaywa US-2 is a good plan for tactical transport of marines, commandos, casualties in a war and emergency naval cargo during naval warfare and is a truly multi-role aircraft. Apart from Russia and Canada, it is the only country that makes such large flying boats.

I feel that this is one product many Asian countries with coastal lines would be interested to buy. However, the aircraft will face tough competition from the tried-and-tested Beriev Be-200 which is actively used in a hell load of activities internationally well known.

 

[EastSea]

U.S. Senate OKs amendment backing Japan in Senkaku dispute

WASHINGTON —
The U.S. Senate has unanimously approved an amendment that reaffirms the U.S. commitment to Japan in its territorial dispute with China over the Senkaku Islands as Washington tries to counter any attempt by Beijing to challenge Japan’s administration of the archipelago.

The measure was attached to the National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2013 still being debated in the Senate. Senators Jim Webb of Virginia, James Inhofe of Oklahoma, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and John McCain of Arizona have co-sponsored the measure.

The amendment notes that while the United States “takes no position” on the ultimate sovereignty of the territory, it “acknowledges the administration of Japan over the Senkaku Islands.”

It further adds that “unilateral actions of a third party will not affect United States acknowledgement of the administration of Japan over the Senkaku Islands.”

The legislation reaffirms the U.S. commitment to Japan under the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security and warns that an armed attack against either party “in the territories under the administration of Japan” would be met in accordance with its provisions.

The amendment also noted U.S. opposition to any efforts to coerce, threaten to use force, or use force to resolve territorial issues.

The Senate reiterated the U.S. national interest in freedom of navigation, peace and stability, respect for international law, and unimpeded lawful commerce in the region.

“This amendment is a strong statement of support for a vital ally in Pacific Asia,” Senator Webb said in a statement.

It “unequivocally states that the United States acknowledges the administration of Japan over the Senkaku Islands, and that this position will not be changed through threats, coercion, or military action,” added the Democratic senator.

Webb chairs the Senate Foreign Relations East Asian and Pacific Affairs Subcommittee.

The sovereignty of the islands has been a source of friction for decades, but the row erupted earlier this year after the nationalist governor of Tokyo said he wanted to buy them for the city, forcing the Japanese government to nationalise them.

Chinese vessels have been spotted in and around the territorial waters every day for the last month.

Both sides have publicly refused to back down on their respective claims to the Japan-controlled islands, known as Senkaku in Japan and Diaoyu in China.

National pride as well as potential mineral reserves are at stake in the decades-old dispute, which has hit the huge trade relationship between the world’s second and third largest economies.

© 2012 AFP

 

[Obambam]

Nobody asked to get to the same level to China as it cannot be done with current constitution of Japan, but Constitution aside, they should be allow to at least defend their home soil. The problem is, if we keep the same troop level and pretent everything is the same as in the 70s, then Japan will be in a hard fight with China if Japan was attacked.

I am not saying or implying that China will attack Japan or Japan will be aggressive toward China, but limiting one defense capability mean asking that nation to roll down and die when attaacked, it is not the way to go. From what we see now, China is pretty much aggressive toward the Japanese , Indian, Vietnamese and Phillippine. Japan should not be restricted on their defense just because they gone crazy 70 years ago.

Face it, As China progress, US cannot cover Japan and their own Asian Interest anymore. It's time for Japan to fight for themselve.

That is true and it is not in the US interests to be dragged into war by the Japanese over some rocks.
Having said that, I doubt things will escalate into military levels. It will be the usual back and forth warnings, increased patrols, military exercises and trade wars.

 

[jhungary]

You can think it's legit based on the report from ICC or UN and that the war against Iraq is justified but that does not mean people around the world think it's legal. I never said leaders from around the world stating the war as illegal but citizens got it? You have said war is unavoidable because Iraq didn't allow for all sites to be inspected and that there are proof they are making wmd (be it chemical weapons or nukes). North Korea has conducted nuclear test already, what more proof does US want? Running out of $ or perhaps a chicken to wage another war? You still haven't answered me this.

If war against Iraq was justified Bush wouldn't have to make the following statement huh.

If a war between China and Japan breaks out it's about defending the sovereignty and not based on some report whether some country is making WMD or not. You can support Japan for re-militarizing whether they are gonna change their constitution is another. Time will tell.

Have i told you my Youtube was down?? It took me 20 minute to watch that 49 second video..... The video He admitted invading Iraq was a mistake is what people cut it to be, it's taken out of context, the whole video is not shown. LOL, if you think the Video is of true content, i think i overestimated your tiny brain. Everyone, even my 5 years old niece know, that video is a re-edit.

But since you are here on the topic, i want to ask you a question, Mistake = Illegal??

Say you drive a car, you make a mistake by turning on the turning indicator, is that illegal?
Say you go to a shop, you make a mistake by purchasing a wrong brand of milk, is that illegal?
Say you go to the beach, you mistakenly forgot to bring a bathing suit, so you go in fully clothed, is that illegal?

Dude, Mistake is a wrong choice or a wrong course of action, Doesn't not necessary make it illegal, or unjustified. What the mistake have been made, combine with the action that follow, he could have said invading Iraq is a mistake, does not mean he think the war is unjust. Nor does he publicly apologise for what he did in Iraq. Again, a lot of mistake happens. It does not automatically goes to unjust. If you arte claiming that, that mean you are out of context.

I don't really care if you think people around the world think the war is wrong, cos that will be BS. At best you heard news or poll and see "Some" people say the war is wrong. Unless you have talked to all the people in all the nation, you cannot use the phase "PEOPLE IN THE WORLD THINK THE WAR IS WRONG" When you don't have proof that this is indeed evidence, all you hear is hearsay, and you know what is hearsay, right?

Granted, you can say you believe the war was wrong, you can say your friend believe the war was wrong, you can, at some extent say, you believe your countrymen believe the war was wrong, but you have to be either egoistical or you have actually talk to all the people in the world to say people(or in your own word, citizen) in the world think the war is wrong. Well i don't supposed you had talk to EVERYONE in the world? So what you think muct be what other people in the world think then, if that is not ego narcissist, then i don't know what.

What good will it be if we invade North Korea, they have Already have nuke, if we invade it it will be most likely turn into a thermonuclear war. Which will include China being nuke by North Korean, (Their nuck cannot reach US mainland at the moment) are you wanting to see that?? If you do, i don't mind LOL

We will defend Japan and Senkaku, that much is for sure, that's the US-Japanese Mutual Defensive pact we have signed back at 1950s. I believe whether Japanese change their constitution is Japanese own business, Chinese nor American have no say in it. So does how Japan plan to defend themselve is their own business, anyone not Japanese have no say in it.

War in Senkaku will be a big set back for China, that's why all they do now is harassment tactics. For China, it's a prospect road ahead, a war will damage their own economy, depend on how long the war last and how heavy the casulty is and the extend of the war, the damage can be light or heavy. What Japan have got to lose? Their economy is crap, they don't have their own defence industry (Most of the equipment they got is from us) they don't have much to lose ANYWAY. For the US, at worse we lost the whole 7th fleet, but we do have another 11 fleet (We have 12 Fleet with 11 active fleet and 1 training and reserve fleet) For US, it will be business as usual.

As for the right of war, when there is a dispute, there will not be right or wrong, depends on who fire first. I don't see how Japanese will fire first as they HAVE the island in their control. So, if you think the reason will be in Chinese side, you better think again.

If you do not know this, then you are less capable than i originally thought.

Japanese have some good military technology but their stuff is too expensive to buy for many countries. While Indonesia and Vietnam might be the emerging countries, others may find it difficult to justify the price tags (somewhat similar to European programs).

The ShinMaywa US-2 is a good plan for tactical transport of marines, commandos, casualties in a war and emergency naval cargo during naval warfare and is a truly multi-role aircraft. Apart from Russia and Canada, it is the only country that makes such large flying boats.

I feel that this is one product many Asian countries with coastal lines would be interested to buy. However, the aircraft will face tough competition from the tried-and-tested Beriev Be-200 which is actively used in a hell load of activities internationally well known.

Their tech is always good but the price tag is high mostly because they do not have (or rather they cannot have) mass production in them in mind, unlike America or France, when they invented a military hardware, they can mass produce it and sell it to other people, which will help out the cost. Every tech Japanese have, financially thinking is a F-22 Project, invest in high price and cannot transfer them to another coutnry and only made a little, hence their price is a lot higher than similar platform.

In Japan case, it's cheaper for them to buy off-the -shelf hardware rather invent their own as they will be cheaper and they do not need a military industry to support them.

some pictures from the Japanese Army. The soldiers seem to dress like their US counterparts.

Soldiers of the Ground Self-Defence Force set Patriot missiles at the Defence Ministry in Tokyo. — Photo AFP

Japan Ground Self Defence Force JGSDF members
Permission under Public Domain as a work of the United States Marine Corps.

Sailors aboard Japanese destroyer JS KONGO.
Permission under Public Domain as a work of the employee of
US Navy .

JASDF F-15J fighter planes taking off
Permission under Public Domain as a work of the
US Federal government.

Japanese Soldier with Night Vision Goggles

Japanese cadets. Permission under Public Domain as a work of the employee of
United States Marine Corps.

MSDF Vessel Kongo launches SM3 missile

I had a training exercise with the JGSDF once, the first impression is they are too polite, like they will invite you for teas before they shot at you, but man, did i make it wrong for thinking they are just paper tiger.....

 

[terranMarine]

Always writing a summary about nothing no wonder you studied politics. I see no point for you to discuss the whole matter about the consequences for China and Japan if a war is gonna break out right now. We all know what kind of tactics China is using and i believe i never said China was going to start a war any time soon. Sorry but your attempt to label me less capable has failed utterly. Next time read carefully what i said and what i ask instead of overloading the thread with an essay.

I never said mistake equals illegal. Read again blind man i said if the war was JUSTIFIED he wouldn't have said the war was a mistake. Get some glasses will ya.

 

[Battle of Bach Dang River]

I had a training exercise with the JGSDF once, the first impression is they are too polite, like they will invite you for teas before they shot at you, but man, did i make it wrong for thinking they are just paper tiger.....

Japan is like a tiger which locked in zoo for long time. It is not dangerous and aggressive as a wild tiger. However, if it released, it will still be a real tiger...

 

[JSCh]

The Japanese people has always been a very nationalistic people. That Japanese nationalism has been on the rise for a while now and recently even more feverish. The Diaoyu/Senkaku island incident is manufactured primarily by some right wing Japanese politician for their internal political gain. There are also other element that want to use Japan to counter China ultimately for what they believe to be their gain. The Japanese military is already one of the strongest in the world. The talk of re-militarization has deep implications. Are we sure we know what we are getting into?

 

[jhungary]

Always writing a summary about nothing no wonder you studied politics. I see no point for you to discuss the whole matter about the consequences for China and Japan if a war is gonna break out right now. We all know what kind of tactics China is using and i believe i never said China was going to start a war any time soon. Sorry but your attempt to label me less capable has failed utterly. Next time read carefully what i said and what i ask instead of overloading the thread with an essay.

I never said mistake equals illegal. Read again blind man i said if the war was JUSTIFIED he wouldn't have said the war was a mistake. Get some glasses will ya.

lol one post you said the war is illegal, now you said the war is unjust, which direction you are going, take a pick please.

Again, is mistake = unjust??

If i am driving a car, i turned on the turning indicator by accident, does that mean the indicator i turned on is unjustified?
If i am in a supermarket, i mistakenly pick up a skim milk over non skim, is my action unjust?
If i am going to the beach, and i forgot to pack my bathing suit by mistake, so my trip to the beach is unjust??

The word may be different, the end are the same.

The problem is you fail to see the you tube video is a re-edit, either you

a.) Want to misled people saying Bush say invading Iraq was a mistake
b.) You are this stupid as you cannot see the video is re-edit

Can you answer me which one are you??

LOL. I don't need to label you incompetent, all the things you say indicate you are, so you are saying you are incompetent

Again, where is your argument the war is unjust now?? Have you talked to EVERYONE in the world yet??

I HAVE NEVER SAY CHINA ARE TO ATTACK JAPAN SOON, i believe my post was "If China were to attack Japan now, not that i imply or saying China is going to attack now....)

and in my last post i said "War in the senkaku will be a big set back for China(Did not specific a time), that's why they NOW use harassment tactics. I NEVER EVER EVER NEVER say china were to go to war with Japan now am i??

You are the one who needed corrective lenses. I NEVER say China were to attack now. LOL If you have nothing else to say and cannot answer the question i raise, can you please close your month.

Regardless of what you say or i say, Japan have its own right, AS A COUUNTRY, to defend themselve. Same right apply to every country. From USA to Nauru. You simply cannot ask one country to roll over and die in case of an invasion. You can't just start beef up security when you are being invade

PS I am enjoying my Trip to Chinese Embassy in Australia renewing my new HKSAR Passport lol.

 

[Ryan]

Nobody asked to get to the same level to China as it cannot be done with current constitution of Japan, but Constitution aside, they should be allow to at least defend their home soil. The problem is, if we keep the same troop level and pretent everything is the same as in the 70s, then Japan will be in a hard fight with China if Japan was attacked.

I am not saying or implying that China will attack Japan or Japan will be aggressive toward China, but limiting one defense capability mean asking that nation to roll down and die when attaacked, it is not the way to go. From what we see now, China is pretty much aggressive toward the Japanese , Indian, Vietnamese and Phillippine. Japan should not be restricted on their defense just because they gone crazy 70 years ago.

Face it, As CHina progress, US cannot cover Japan and their own Asian Interest anymore. It's time for Japan to fight for themselve.

By the same token, Japan should have the nuclear weapon. Japanese economy went down-hill right after the Plaza Accord under the threaten of nuclear armed USA. Just because USA N-bombed Japan once for the right cause, it does not mean USA won't misuse its N-bombs in the future. Japan should be able to defend and retaliate vis-a-vis USA.