• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Japan to expand military after nationalistic PM Shinzo Abe wins 2013 election

CougarKing

Army.ca Fixture
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
360
Once Constitutional changes are made, will this mean a return to the pre-WW2 Imperial military? (Japan still has an emperor even though MacArthur made Hirohito and his heirs renounce their divinity after WW2, if I can recall correctly, so this would mean a return to the "Imperial" nomenclature, I take it?)

National Post link

Japan’s ‘nationalistic’ prime minister expected to try to expand nation’s military after big election win

Japanese voters handed a landslide victory to the governing Liberal Democratic Party in parliamentary elections Sunday, opening the possibility of accelerated changes to Japan’s economy and a shift away from its postwar pacifism.

By securing control of both houses of Parliament for up to three years, the win offers Prime Minister Shinzo Abe – an outspoken nationalist who promises to revitalize Japan’s deflationary economy and strengthen its military – the chance to be the most transformative leader in a decade. Although a lackluster turnout suggested that Abe might not have as much of a mandate as his supporters hoped, the margin of victory was large enough to suggest he has an opportunity to also bring stability to the country’s leadership after years of short-lived and ineffective prime ministers.

The win comes at a time when many Japanese seem more open than ever to change, after years of failed efforts to end their nation’s economic slump, and as an intensifying territorial challenge by China has nudged this long pacifist nation toward accepting a more robust military.

Unlike some of Japan’s previous colorless leaders, Abe, 58, seems eager to become an agent of change. He campaigned on this being Japan’s last chance to regain its economic stature as the country has been eclipsed by China, with Sunday’s victory apparently largely because of the early successes of his bold economic plan, dubbed Abenomics. But his apparent desire to stand up to the Chinese by rewriting Japan’s anti-war constitution to allow a full-fledged military rather than self-defense forces have raised fears he will go too far and further isolate Japan in the region.

A week before the election, he became the first prime minister to visit a tropical island near the group of uninhabited islets at the heart of the dispute with China. He had earlier raised eyebrows by riding in a tank and climbing into a fighter jet in front of cameras.

“Abe has a pragmatic side and a strongly nationalistic side,” said Hiroshi Shiratori, a professor of political science at Hosei University in Tokyo. “This election could free him up to do more of the latter, which is what he really wants.”

It remains unclear how far the Japanese people will let him go. While Sunday’s results gave his governing coalition a comfortable majority in the upper house, they failed to deliver the two-thirds majority the conservative Liberal Democrats and other similarly minded parties had hoped for to easily revise the constitution, something that has not happened since it was crafted by U.S. occupiers after World War II. And the sparse turnout – at 52 percent the third-lowest showing in postwar history – suggests less popular support than the results implied.

(...)

In one of his few mentions of constitutional reform during the campaign, Abe sought to allay concerns about his intentions by suggesting that he wanted to retain the provision that renounces war as “a means of settling international disputes.” He also said having a more normal military was necessary if Japan wanted to play a larger role in international affairs, and to act as a full-fledged ally of the United States, its postwar protector.

(...)
 
S.M.A. said:
Once Constitutional changes are made, will this mean a return to the pre-WW2 Imperial military? (Japan still has an emperor even though MacArthur made Hirohito and his heirs renounce their divinity after WW2, if I can recall correctly, so this would mean a return to the "Imperial" nomenclature, I take it?)

National Post link

Would it also mean a return to the old Imperial rank insignia...stars and bars instead of the post-war chevrons?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_ranks_of_the_Japanese_Empire_during_World_War_II


:stirpot:
 
GR66 said:
Would it also mean a return to the old Imperial rank insignia...stars and bars instead of the post-war chevrons?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_ranks_of_the_Japanese_Empire_during_World_War_II


:stirpot:
Sure - why not.  I hear the Canadian Army is going back to old rank insignia.  Maybe it's like a virus or something  ;)
 
From a strategic standpoint Japan is a counter to China's ambitions.The US will continue to provide the nuclear umbrella for the region.But a larger Navy and Air Force would be welcome.
 
tomahawk6 said:
From a strategic standpoint Japan is a counter to China's ambitions.The US will continue to provide the nuclear umbrella for the region.But a larger Navy and Air Force would be welcome.

Aren't you concerned that with the changes that Abe wants, that Tokyo may even eventually take a stance that won't be aligned with US/Western nations'  interests...or even contrary to them.
 
S.M.A. said:
Aren't you concerned that with the changes that Abe wants, that Tokyo may even eventually take a stance that won't aligned with US/Western nations'  interests...or even contrary to them.

Unless they align themselves with a block of other countries, eg: Indonesia, that may decide to reject the US umbrella they are not likely to be a major force in the area.

Rejecting the US umbrella suits China just fine, as in "divide & conquer".....
 
A few years down the road and we'll have the return of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere?
 
link

Japan to mull pre-emptive strike ability in defense update

By Linda Sieg

TOKYO (Reuters) - Japan is likely to start considering acquiring the ability to launch pre-emptive military strikes in a planned update of its basic defense policies, the latest step away from the constraints of its pacifist constitution.

The expected proposal, which could sound alarm bells in China, is part of a review of Japan's defense policies undertaken by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's government, an interim report on which could come as early as Friday. The final conclusions of the review are due out by the end of the year.

The hawkish Abe took office in December for a rare second term, pledging to bolster the military to cope with what Japan sees as an increasingly threatening security environment including an assertive China and unpredictable North Korea.

Article 9 of Japan's constitution, drafted by U.S. occupation forces after its defeat in World War Two, renounces the right to wage war and, if taken literally, rules out the very notion of a standing army. In reality, Japan's Self-Defense Forces are one of Asia's strongest militaries.

The Defence Ministry will call in the interim report for a study of how to "strengthen the ability to deter and respond to ballistic missiles", the Yomiuri newspaper and other media said on Thursday.

But in a sign of the sensitivity, the report will stop short of specifically mentioning the ability to hit enemy bases when the threat of attack is imminent, the Yomiuri newspaper said.

The ministry will also consider buying unmanned surveillance drones and creating a Marines force to protect remote islands, such as those at the core of a dispute with China, media said.

"The acquisition of offensive capability would be a fundamental change in our defense policy, a kind of philosophical change," said Marushige Michishita, a professor at the National Graduate Institute of Policy Studies.

Obtaining that capability, however, would take time, money and training, meaning any shift may be more rhetorical than real. "It's easier said than done," Michishita added.

The updated guidelines could also touch on Abe's moves toward lifting a self-imposed ban on exercising the right of collective self-defense, or helping an ally under attack, such as if North Korea launched an attack on the United States.

The defense review may also urge replacing with new guidelines a self-imposed ban on arms exports that has already been eased to let Japanese contractors take part in international projects.

Clear guidelines for companies as to what and to whom they can sell could help Japanese defense contractors such as Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd, Kawasaki Heavy Industries Ltd, and Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd seek business overseas.

Some experts stressed that the changes were evolutionary rather than a sudden transformation in Japan's defense posture.

QUESTIONS OVER HARDWARE, COST

"It's all part of a process of Japan edging away from the most restrictive interpretation of Article 9," said Richard Samuels, director of the MIT-Japan program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Still, given Japan's strained ties with China over disputed isles and how to frame the narrative of Japan's wartime history, China is likely to react strongly to the proposals, which come after Abe cemented his grip on power with a big win in a weekend election for parliament's upper house.

"No matter how Japan explains things, China will attack it pretty harshly," said Michael Green of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Although China has been a nuclear power for decades and North Korea is developing nuclear arms, Japan says it has no intention of doing so.

Support has grown in Japan for a more robust military because of concern about China, but opposition also remains.

Japan last updated its National Defence Programme Guidelines in 2010 when the Democratic Party of Japan was in power
.


Those changes shifted Japan away from defending areas to its north, a Cold War legacy, to a defense capability that could respond with more flexibility to incursions to the south, the site of the row with China over tiny, uninhabited islands.

Japan has for decades been stretching the limits of Article 9 and has long said it has the right to attack enemy bases overseas when the enemy's intention to attack Japan is evident, the threat is imminent and there are no other defense options.

But while previous administrations shied away from acquiring the hardware to do so, Abe's Liberal Democratic Party in June urged the government to consider acquiring that capability.

Just what hardware might come under consideration is as yet unclear. And with a huge public debt, Japan may be in no position to afford the bill.

Japan already has a very limited attack capability with its F-2 and F-15 fighter jets, mid-air refueling aircraft and Joint Direct Attack Munition guidance kit. Tokyo also plans to buy 42 Lockheed Martin's F-35 stealth fighters, with the first four due for delivery by March 2017.

Acquiring the ability to hit mobile missile launchers in North Korea - the most likely target - would require many more attack aircraft as well as intelligence capability for which Japan would most likely have to rely on the United States, Michishita said. Cruise missiles might also be considered.

Obtaining the ability to strike missile bases in mainland China would be an even bigger stretch, experts said, requiring for example intercontinental missiles. "It would cost lots of money, and take time, training and education to acquire a robust and meaningful capability," Michishita said.

(Additional reporting by Kiyoshi Takenaka; Editing by Robert Birsel)
 
Hard to say. Japan could be the keystone of an anti-Chinese coalition due to their strategic position and relatively dominent military and economic position, but there is also a lot of historical baggage that would make this unattractive all along the "First Island Chain" and SE Asia. So far, the various nations can subsume their differences by operating under the American nuclear umbrella and trusting the United States to act as a unifying force vs the political, diplomatic, econommic and (yes) military challenges that they collectively face from China.

I suspect that to be successful, the nations in the region will need to shift to a more subtle cooperative approach (something like Robert Kaplan has been outlining in his more recent works like Monsoon and The Revenge of Geography) rather than the boisterous sabre rattling of late.
 
Hard to say. Japan could be the keystone of an anti-Chinese coalition due to their strategic position and relatively dominent military and economic position, but there is also a lot of historical baggage that would make this unattractive all along the "First Island Chain" and SE Asia. So far, the various nations can subsume their differences by operating under the American nuclear umbrella and trusting the United States to act as a unifying force vs the political, diplomatic, econommic and (yes) military challenges that they collectively face from China.

I suspect that to be successful, the nations in the region will need to shift to a more subtle cooperative approach (something like Robert Kaplan has been outlining in his more recent works like Monsoon and The Revenge of Geography) rather than the boisterous sabre rattling of late.
 
I rest my case about the Japan-China rivalry even making itself felt in the model ship industry...  :facepalm:

TIME : Even Toy Ships Can’t Escape Islands Dispute

Aoshima kit's artwork :
cover-art-image-2.jpg


Being alert to headlines, Aoshima upgraded the Hyuga, a helicopter carrier, with V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft and amphibious assault vehicles, and labeled the model “Operation Remote Island Defense.”

The previous cover showed the Hyuga sailing benignly in open seas. But the new illustration showed the sleek warship with Ospreys buzzing overhead and decks awash with landing vehicles and attack helicopters. In the background was a small island, and nearby was another warship, on fire and sinking below the waves. That warship bore an uncanny resemblance to the Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning, which the PLA Navy launched with much fanfare last year, and is viewed with much suspicion in Japan.

 
Washington sends a message to Tokyo:

U.S. fretting over Japan’s desire to militarily strike enemy bases
Source: Japan Times

http://stratrisks.com/geostrat/14562

The United States has expressed concern about Japan’s desire to acquire the ability to attack enemy bases in an overhaul of its defense policies pursued by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, a government source said in Tokyo.

One of the American officials attending bilateral talks on foreign and defense policy cooperation late last month in Tokyo asked the Japanese side to consider the possible negative fallout on neighboring countries if Abe’s administration embarks on such a policy shift, the source said Tuesday.

The U.S. official conveyed Washington’s message that Tokyo should not further worsen relations with China and South Korea that have been plagued for months by territorial rows, as well as the issue of Japan’s wartime aggression.

Tokyo is currently compiling new defense guidelines, an interim report of which stated last month that Japan should take on a greater regional security role and reinforce its defense capabilities, including enabling the Self-Defense Forces to attack enemy bases.

The proposal comes as Japan faces threats from North Korea’s missile and nuclear development. The government is planning to agree within the year on the long-term guidelines, which would also mention the need to counter China’s increasing military assertiveness.

< Edited >
 
Now what are enemy bases ? I think it would be prudent to allow Japan the means to defend their sovereignty.That does not equate with Japan's militarism of the 30's.
 
Back
Top