-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Japan's lower house passes bills that allow overseas troops for 1st time since WWII
- Thread starter drtomoe123
- Start date
- Status
Empyrean Heaven
Member
Fox News: Is Japan prepping for a new Pearl Harbor? Revenge from the rising sun could be heading for American shores!
The sad thing is, that headline is a prediction, not a joke.
The sad thing is, that headline is a prediction, not a joke.
Cow Mengde
Banned
If there's tension between China and Japan, America reaps the benefits of selling military equipment. The more tension, the better.
It's due to a lack of understanding of the geopolitics in East Asia. Which isn't that big a deal since an awful lot of politicians also have this lack of understanding.
But the main beneficiary of Japanese rearmament is China, and the secondary beneficiary is South Korea. The player who loses the most is actually the US because it ends up improving China's position with the other East Asian players.
I suspect that the Americans don't really have a good handle on what's going on and that they're pinning far too much of their hopes on Japan acting the US' best interests. It would be incorrect to call American foreign policy disinterested in the region though. Their presence there has increased significantly since about 2010, and most of that increase has been relatively negative.
Ganzlinger
Member
Yes?
Triplicates
Member
Why? This isn't evident to me at all since not much is going to change in reality.
Foreign policy objectives differ from the likely American response in the event of a crisis. I think Japan has a solid read of the situation, specifically that America would not be perfectly reliable in all security matters.
How is China breathing down their throat and how does a bill that allows Japan to launch an offensive on another country help even if this rhetoric was true?
I was referring to Japanese rearmament in general, not these bills in particular. Right now, the main players in East Asia are Russia, South Korea, North Korea, China, Taiwan and Japan. Of these players, all of them other than the US and North Korea (sort of) have territorial disputes with Japan and they're all closer to China's camp than Japan's. Normally, South Korea and Taiwan would look for American help if they feel that a neighbor is being belligerent, but they can't do so in the case of Japan, so it's natural for them to reach out to China instead.
I'm not particularly sold on any Japanese government institution. Realistically, Japan doesn't suffer from any foreign threat at all, and this sequence of events are designed primarily for domestic consumption.
Triplicates
Member
Rearmament in general just won't happen for various cultural and structural reasons but even if they threw off every shackle on the armed forces, Japan's diplomacy will remain oriented to the preservation of the status quo. With the possible (and that would be the barest of possibilities) exception of the Senkaku islands over which Japan recently made a fisheries agreement with Taiwan, those territorial disputes are not serious.
Further, I think you're mischaracterizing Taiwan's relation with Japan and China.
I don't know about that but this is clearly not for domestic consumption. Abe's government is facing its first existential risk as a result of these bills.
Papa_Squeeze
Neo Member
I won't opine on the young adult comment, but you can't look at this in a vacuum. It isn't an isolated movement. You have to look at the facts and the history and it becomes apparent why it's a concern.
It's interesting to see the belief that this is in the US's favour and will now be roped into an American conflict. Japan is probably banking on more-or-less the opposite. It's not a "quantum leap" as it is more of a step of many that Japan has already made. From whitewashing, to discrimination, to chest-beating (eg. Diaoyu Islands), this is not necessarily the makings of a "pacifist" culture.
I'd make a (rightful) analogy to the Germans, but it would simply be dismissed under Godwin's Law or maybe even Poe's law, despite the fact that it this is a situation where it could legitimately be used. Basically the gist would be if Germany had monuments that celebrated its war criminals, with Merkel or Gauck paying homage to Auschwitz or Mengele specifically, whitewashing of history and textbooks, denying war crimes, revoking apologies, never making apologies, getting frustrated when asked for proper formal apologies, and demanding that other countries remove monuments to victims of their war crimes and to remove information in textbooks that points to their war crimes.
EDIT: Just want to make clear I think (hope?) the "Pearl Harbor 2" comments and such are probably jokes. I'm afraid of Japanese aggression and even I don't think that's a concern. Also, most of my response to Triplicates is on his misconceptions of Japan's peaceful culture.
I don't know why they would would push for this now, it's going to sound like saber rattling in that region. The Japanese military is already a premier fighting force. Hopefully it's not legit warmongering from out of touch leaders, the way they pass some bills makes me revisit that "how we should act like the Nazis" quote from the deputy prime minister 2013:
The last thing Japan and its population needs is to send their dwindling youth to war, so hopefully there won't be a major conflict in our lifetime for everyone's sake.
The last thing Japan and its population needs is to send their dwindling youth to war, so hopefully there won't be a major conflict in our lifetime for everyone's sake.
Papa_Squeeze
Neo Member
Want to +1 these points.
Please look at facts and cast aside the horrific anti-Chinese sentiment from the media (and the US government).
To add to your point, the US is largely responsible for much of what we call "Chinese aggression" anyway. The incorrect divisions of the land following WWII has been difficult for China to properly handle, particularly as it attempts to nurture the wounds of its civil war and resulting dictatorship. We should support sympathy and open dialogue rather than marching out jets and naval ships to try to enforce "peace and order".
Wolf Dawgz
Member
Triplicates
Member
Note that I was speaking of Japanese society; pacifist values are deeply instilled in the Japanese. This is why we're seeing widespread opposition to these bills and we will surely see deeper opposition if the government drives Japan into a foreign conflict. The government is another story but...
Pacifism is specifically defined as the renunciation of war. Historical revisionism, racial discrimination, and most of the other well-known controversies are peripheral at best to this topic. The only directly relevant issue you're bringing up here is "chest-beating" but even the most strident rhetoric coming from the government is hardly the language of aggression.
Even if I disagree on a few of the particulars, I largely am with you in spirit. Japan's attitudes towards history undermines its credibility. However, does that mean these bills represent a resurgent militarism? No way.
makingmusic476
Member
It makes me happy to see so many people in Japan so discomfortable with the mere thought of war. I wish more of the world were like that.
They wave their dick all around region. Diaoyu island. Fisherman boat in other country sea. Build the military base island in conflict area. Etc. See what they do to all smaller southest asia nations.
Japan in defensive mode will make China even more arrogant. As they know there is no chance japan will make the move first. Without US which is the only country in the world that capable of striking back China. The whole region will be heavily bullied. And it will get worse from now on.
China will not invade anyone of course. But we need to calm them down a bit.
Japan in defensive mode will make China even more arrogant. As they know there is no chance japan will make the move first. Without US which is the only country in the world that capable of striking back China. The whole region will be heavily bullied. And it will get worse from now on.
China will not invade anyone of course. But we need to calm them down a bit.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Nonsense.
The fishing boats are absolutely sponsored by the state. This is fucking China we're talking about.
And, I may just be ignorant of a specific incident, but when has America or any other nation built bases in the middle of the ocean by straight up constructing new islands (amazing feat of engineering), and then demanding that planes re-route because that place is now sovereign water?
I don't buy that China won't invade anyone. I hope they won't, but there are enough border disputes to make me skeptical. If they do, I think they'll play it like Russia and just take over a tiny little bit at a time--play the long game. The international community won't go to war over a province or city at a time.
Upsidedown Fuji
Member
I agree Japan will eventually need to have a full fledged military but the way it's being accomplished is not the way it should've been done.
The prime minister didn't get a mandate from the public to ramrod his life ambitions through parliament. His party is actually in breech of election law constitutionality due to the massively unbalanced electorate in the countryside vs metro areas. Secondly Abe hasn't followed constitutional law to carry out this change, he is instead ignoring scholars, law experts, and his own public opinion, to reinterpret the law as he sees fit.
What he has done is a coup from the top down. Some may find my opinion frivolous but I feel Abe wants to scale back public freedoms and reduce democratic procedures back to pre war Japan days. Abe wants to throw out the western imposed constitution that is one of the primary reasons modern Japan exists, as he feels its given Japan a loser image. It's preposterous and so far from reality but Abe was so influenced by his own grandfather who taught him his slanted view of a gander Japan without the impediment of the constitution that he thinks doesn't fit Japan culturally.
Change is good and should eventually come but not by this man and not in the fashion it's being carried out.
The prime minister didn't get a mandate from the public to ramrod his life ambitions through parliament. His party is actually in breech of election law constitutionality due to the massively unbalanced electorate in the countryside vs metro areas. Secondly Abe hasn't followed constitutional law to carry out this change, he is instead ignoring scholars, law experts, and his own public opinion, to reinterpret the law as he sees fit.
What he has done is a coup from the top down. Some may find my opinion frivolous but I feel Abe wants to scale back public freedoms and reduce democratic procedures back to pre war Japan days. Abe wants to throw out the western imposed constitution that is one of the primary reasons modern Japan exists, as he feels its given Japan a loser image. It's preposterous and so far from reality but Abe was so influenced by his own grandfather who taught him his slanted view of a gander Japan without the impediment of the constitution that he thinks doesn't fit Japan culturally.
Change is good and should eventually come but not by this man and not in the fashion it's being carried out.
TheBryanJZX90
Member
I'm sure America exerted influence for this most recent change, but can you really compare the bargaining position of postwar, Japan to the Japan of today, third largest economy in the world? I'd think postwar Japan's almost complete inability to resist American influence is what makes the original constitution imposed upon them. On the other hand, influence by an ally is something impossible to avoid in pretty much any decision with international implications today, I would think. Influence isn't imposition.
eyeball_kid
Member
Totally agree. Abe has been working towards this since he got elected. While Japan does need to start pulling its weight militarily, a constitutional change must come via the will of the people. I actually have no clue what the rules are for changing Japan's constitution though. Is it like America in that the populace must directly vote on an Amendment, or can the legislative houses simply vote on it?
Upsidedown Fuji
Member
2/3 majority vote from both upper and lower houses. It will fail in the upper house but the lower, which has more power as his party holds 2/3 of the seats will pass it through after 2 months anyway.
He's sideskirting this by not actually amending the constitution directly, just very loosely reinterpreting what's written to suit his needs. It's ironic the war bill is officially called the Japan peace and security legislation bill. This isn't bringing peace to anyone and good luck finding willing soldiers to fight foreign wars for you. I expect to see a mass exodus of JSDF members drop out, as they are free to do any time they wish.
He's sideskirting this by not actually amending the constitution directly, just very loosely reinterpreting what's written to suit his needs. It's ironic the war bill is officially called the Japan peace and security legislation bill. This isn't bringing peace to anyone and good luck finding willing soldiers to fight foreign wars for you. I expect to see a mass exodus of JSDF members drop out, as they are free to do any time they wish.
Valkerionseven
Member
It's not that they are just tiny little private fishing boats, no one would care if it was just a couple of them going a few miles into their territory. Its hundreds, and they are not even on the china side of the ocean, they are on the EAST coast of Japan as well. Countries have regulations set up on how much can be fished in areas to preserve the balance of the area, these random boats don't follow these regulations nor obviously the regional issues of being in someone else's territory. And it's not just fish for food, they are tralling (tearing up the bottom) of the ocean especially the coral reefs around eastern Japan and selling them as polished jewels. So its territorial and environmental issues. Even South Korea, and everyone under/around has this issue with China about this. If it was international waters, no one would say anything but it's not. China keeps just letting it happen, then gets "outraged" when these people are arrested or have their boats and hauls taken then destroyed.
Alex Connolly
Member
It was interesting to see a detachment of JSDF troops under the direction of the USMC during the recent Talisman Sabre/Saber joint training op in Australia. As an expat Aussie living in Japan, I'm actually all for Japan slowly growing into a sovereign nation who can provide more than mere logistics for the region. Not sabre-rattling, but providing solid input for regional defense initiatives like pacts with India and the ASEAN nations.
It's a tough call, but the American reliance can only last for so long.
It's a tough call, but the American reliance can only last for so long.
Everyone is talking about a China vs. Japan scenario, but the more immediate conflict is Japanese armed troops in American wars. If Japanese soldiers start dying in other people's wars, or Japan becomes a target for extremists due to their heightened involvement, I can see it hurting Abe and his party badly. There is already ill sentiment about being in the region due to the deaths of several Japanese journalists. One right now is missing in Syria. It doesn't exact set a good precedent for Japan's involvement with the region.
PdotMichael
Banned
Japan has a full fledget military for decades- a navy only behind the USA and China in tonnage. And the definition what offensive and defensive weapons is basically already completly blurred.
This is just the last step of shitting on a pacifist constitution.
Upsidedown Fuji
Member
My mistake. Am unfettered military. Yes it's already a fully equipped one for all intents and purposes. Its navy is as large and modern as the British navy. All they lack is experience abroad, which they'll have soon enough.
Abe is following closely in his grandfather's,an accused war criminal and former PM, footsteps, as he's the one who also reinterpreted the constitution to create our modern JSDF.
So what is the method by which laws get repealed for being unconstitutional in Japan?
It's happening in a lot of places at the moment. Japan, Australia, to an extent Canada.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
All they lack is experience abroad, which they'll have soon enough.
Did Abe announce a war or something? Outside of participation in international peacekeeping missions I'm not sure what there would be to deploy to, unless he wants to attack Japan's own regional allies or pick a fight with nuclear armed states.
GTP_Daverytimes
Member
I dont think you actually beleive that, unless the Chinese are willing to build a bridge from mainland to Japan and then march millions of troops that way they will inevitably have to come up against the JMSDF, and dare i say that Japans Navy is only second to the United States. In war time China could vastly outproduce Japan but Japan remains one of very few countries that could produce any and all types of marine vessels with zero outside help. The could pump out superior frigates and destroyers and they are capable of building Aircraft carriers, something China is nowhere near capable of doing. To compound the disadvantage, Japan has faaaaaar more experience in naval battles than any other country (barring the US ofcourse) talk less of China. This is what the Chinese will be up against, and thats well before the US comes into the picture. One thing is certain, if not fear the chinese certainly respect the Japanese navy, thats why there arent a string of artificial islands popping up in the east-china sea.
A constitution created by the very nation which defeated and destroyed Japan and imposed right after the fact. Definitely something they should keep forever...
Don't really have a problem with this. Especially given how Germany and Italy was treated, Japanese postWWII corset always struck me as unfair.
Their attitude towards their past is troubling but they're hardly alone in this.
Don't they have some kind of constitutional tribunal to check whether the law doesn't break said constitution ?
Their attitude towards their past is troubling but they're hardly alone in this.
Don't they have some kind of constitutional tribunal to check whether the law doesn't break said constitution ?
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
I'm not aware of any actual combat experience that the Japanese navy have had since 1945. Unless they're planning on bringing some hundred year old officers out of retirement I don't think they have any advantage in naval battle experience. The Chinese navy is currently on track to have two new Aircraft carriers of the Liaoning class in active service by 2020 (construction has already begun), with an eventual planned strength of 5 carriers of unknown type. Their first carrier became operational in 2013 for testing and training purposes, the ship being a rebuild / extension of an incomplete Soviet carrier.
Japanese military planners are not really concerned with the Chinese navy in 2015, however the Chinese navy of 2025 and beyond will be more than a match for the JSDF. This shouldn't be surprising, given that the Chinese economy still has room to grow, and their military spending scales alongside this growth. It already outstrips the Japanese spending by more than three times. The gap will just get wider from here. Japan will want to increase spending more, but long term the only way it's going to be competitive is with continued US presence in the region.
A Chinese invasion of Japan is pretty much fantasy land for the foreseeable future, but not because the Chinese are pushovers. They certainly won't remain a second rate naval power for long. It's more because they would rather enjoy prosperous trade relations with Japan and the US than risk everything in a crazy war. Future aggression by China is not going to be that overt, and it won't be directed at hard targets like that.
Alex Connolly
Member
I'm still living in the George Friedman fantasy lands of The Coming War With Japan [against the US] and Japan Launches Nukes From The Moon.
Gotta love speculative what ifs, with the accuracy of a Scud.
IdreamofHIME
Member
You think this coming after the USA humiliated them at the World Cup is just a coincidence?
Sickboy007
Member
What's the likelihood of the Supreme Court repealing it?
Upsidedown Fuji
Member
Of course he hasn't done anything of the sort and may not survive politically long enough to even send them on their first ever peacekeeping mission. After I've learned about how this guy ticks, I just can't allow him the benefit of the doubt.
I don't think he's the war bogeyman bent on throwing Japan into another all-out war, but I do know his intentions are not as clear and noble as just wanting to help out with UN and US missions. It doesn't help he set up a government secrets law a couple years back as well, has the media cowering in his back pocket, and is very out of touch with public opinion.
My biggest concern is about his brazen move to circumvent the law of the land. The constitution is the greatest and most important document in Japan that holds their nation and all its laws in balance, unless you happen to not a fan of its rigid contents that refute all warlike activity. Without this constitution, Japan would have never been able to grow as quickly and have so much traps success without it. Not having to spend money on offence is a big money saver. Of course it came with a price, American bases aren't always on rosy terms here...
Circumventing the constitution shows his contempt for the law. What's the point of a constitution if everyone keeps reinterpreting it without going through the proper channels?
If he wants to have a military he should do it by the books and actually leave it up to vote by the people, not his close cabinet of cronies he's set up around him. Of course they're going to go through with what he says. They're of like mind.
He should respect the constitution and work within the confines of its laws. He hasn't done that and has publicly said he'd like to replace the constitution all together. His main goal is to weaken the constitution and reform Japan into something most likely regressive from modern democracy. Less participative government and more direct power to the top.
This is a coup. Not your traditional military one with guns and generals, but more calculated and political.
I hope I'm wrong and I'm willing to admit as much. I haven't seen much proof to convince me otherwise.
GTP_Daverytimes
Member
I wasn't aware we lived in a world were military men died with their knowledge and not pass it on, besides the Japanese has been training with the USN since the end of the war, now unless the USN are vastly inferior to the Chinese in naval maneuvers there is something to be said about the country (Japan) whom they (USA) have groomed since the end of the war. Also, no one can argue China's eventual strength. Nevertheless China knows the strength of the foe they face, and i doubt they will ever openly attack Japan in the foreseeable future whether they have superior strength or not.
cooljeanius
Member
It's a good thing to have in a constitution regardless of the circumstances with which it was added. Heck, I'd support adding an amendment to the US Constitution that does something similar.
The kind of amendment that would've prevented the US from joining every single war it took part in the 20th century. Wars can be necessary and nations should always be reluctant to fight, but that doesn't mean it should be forbidden.
That's a good point, but I think it's unlikely in the near future. I think this is a token move in response to Chinese aggression in the region.
LiveFromKyoto
Member
Nah. Whatever rivalry South Korea has with Japan, they're no fools. They know exactly how far the Chinese government can be trusted, and the enmity they feel towards the North Korean regime the Chinese have been propping up is greater still. Taiwan's certainly not taking China's side. And the ASEAN nations are wary and sick of China gobbling up their territory.
Assuming this passes - and it's not assured - Japan getting involved in foreign adventurism adds up to very little. In the end other countries can only criticize Japan so much when it's not as though their own militaries operate with any type of constraints. The bitterness over WWII will remain the same empty political football it always has been.
- Status