| Submit your comments on this article | |
| China-Japan-Koreas | |
| Abe Pushes for More Active Japanese Military | |
| 2014-05-16 | |
Citing a rising climate of disquiet in north and southeast Asia, Abe said Japan needs to cast off constitutional strictures that have prevented its so-called Self Defense Forces from firing a shot in combat since 1945. "As prime minister, I have the responsibility to protect the lives of people under any circumstances," he told news hounds in Tokyo. "I don't think the constitution says we have to abandon the responsibility to protect the lives of people. "If we can enhance our deterrence, it will prevent our country from being involved in war." Around 500 people demonstrated against the prime minister's plans near his official residence, with some carrying banners that read "Exercising collective defense is equal to waging war." The prime minister has long nurtured a desire to see more flexibility in Japan's pacifist constitution, which was imposed by the occupying United States in the aftermath of Tokyo's World War II defeat. Article 9 of the document -- which has reportedly been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize -- says Japan forever renounces the use of force as a means of settling international disputes. For decades, governments have held that this means Japan's military may only open fire if fired upon, even if that entails leaving U.S. counterparts in danger on the same battlefield. Unable to change the constitution because of deep domestic resistance, Abe has argued for the next-best thing: a reinterpretation of the laws to permit "collective defense". A panel of academics, diplomats and military advisers convened by the prime minister has come up with a series of proposals on possible legal frameworks for military action. Over the coming months, Abe will use this document to persuade a sometimes-skeptical public of his case as he looks to shepherd his plans through the labyrinth of Japan's political system. The move is controversial and risks forcing a split with his ruling party's coalition partner, New Komeito, secular Buddhists without whom Abe does not have an outright majority in the upper house of parliament. "It will be the first reinterpretation of the constitution by a politician in Japan," said Tomoaki Iwai, professor of Japanese politics at Nippon University in Tokyo. "It's going to be a turning point in the country's politics," Iwai said, adding he expected the formal reinterpretation that Abe wants by the end of the year. Voters are lukewarm on the idea; a poll of more than 2,000 adults nationwide showed 63 percent oppose the concept of collective defense, the Asahi Shimbun reported last month. That was up from 56 percent last year and more than double the 29 percent who support the idea, the poll showed. Abe wastes no opportunity to remind his audience, both at home and abroad, of Japan's track record since 1945. "We have consistently walked on the path of pacifism for 70 years after the war and there will no change to this," he said Thursday. Despite this repeated reassurance, Abe's drive to strengthen the military triggers intense emotions in China and on the Korean peninsula, where memories linger of Tokyo's brutal expansionism in the last century. Beijing has sought to paint the prime minister as an atavistic militarist, bent on resurrecting the warmongering of imperialist Japan. However, there is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened... his position is welcomed in Washington, where there have long been calls for Japan to pull its own weight in a very one-sided security alliance. U.S. President Barack Obama Republicans can come along for the ride, but they've got to sit in the back... welcomed the move when he held a summit with Abe in Tokyo last month. Unease in Japan about China's increasing assertiveness, and specifically its strident claims to disputed islands in the East China Sea, has helped bolster Abe's push to enhance the role of the military. | |
| Posted by:trailing wife |
| #8 As per "HAMBURGER HILL", dats M-I-S-T-E-R VICTOR CHARLIE! Iff OWG Globalism says Islamist Hard Boyz can get Nukes-WMDS, why NOT any + all other post-Cold War, 9-11 "Black Groups" e.g. Pro-Separatist ATZLAN MOVEMENT, + MEXICAN CARTELS, ETAL.??? Again, however rough or imperfect what matters is GLOBAL/UNIVERSAL "PARITY", NOT "INFERIORITY". |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2014-05-16 20:06 |
| #7 Charlie? With Nukes? WTF? Well, you make the cashier's check payable to "Kim Jong Un" and then it's all delivery details. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2014-05-16 17:42 |
| #6 More results of expert diplomacy from the third smartest guy in the otherwise empty room. FIFY And lets not forget the Obama's administration habit of emboldening our (and their) enemies and refusing to back our allies. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2014-05-16 16:33 |
| #5 Charlie? With Nukes? WTF? |
| Posted by: Shipman 2014-05-16 16:11 |
| #4 More results of expert diplomacy from the smartest guy in the room. |
| Posted by: ed in texas 2014-05-16 13:48 |
| #3 The Obama administrationlast week sent to Congress the text of a bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement signed in December by the United States and Vietnam. If lawmakers do not object during an ensuing 90 days of continuous session and review, the agreement will then enter into force. Some critics argue that unless this agreement is renegotiated, the United States would take a step back in its global nonproliferation leadership role and thereby ease the way for Vietnam and other states to develop nuclear weapons capabilities. Read more: http://thehill.com/opinion/op-ed/205876-nuke-deal-with-vietnam-good-for-us#ixzz31tw2co1y |
| Posted by: Bobby 2014-05-16 13:36 |
| #2 SAME > [The Hill] NUKE DEAL WID VIETNAM GOOD FOR THE US Wait, what??? |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2014-05-16 06:18 |
| #1 See also RELATED JAPAN TIMES > CHINA VOICES CONCERN OVER ABE'S BID TO END PACIFIST DEFENCE POLICY. * SAME > PACIFISM AT A CROSSROADS FOLLOWING PANEL'S VERDICT. ARTIC = As an example, denotes that widout Japan having the Right to Collective Self-Defense, Japan may not be able to help its ally the US intercept any NOKOR LR Missle heading over the Pacific towards any sovereign American territory, e.g. GUAM. IMO a NOKOR or PLA LRBM strike would be an act of last resort - personally, as resident of Guam I'm more concerned about a mass Conventional First-Strike via the Motherly PLA Airborne Forces + Air, Sub SPECOPS. * NEWS ON JAPAN > JAPAN SDF TO DEFEND COUNTRIES WID CLOSE RELATIONSHIPS [Ties]| JAPAN MAY ALLOW SDF TO SUPPORT MULTI-NATIONAL FORCES [Coalition] IN COMBAT. * CHOSUN ILBO > JAPAN'S ABE TAKES FIRST STEP TO ALLOW JAPAN TO GO TO WAR AGAIN. versus * TOPIX > CHINA THWARTS US CONTAINMENT WID VIETNAM OIL RIG. Yuuup. * SAME > A SECOND VIETNAM-CHINA WAR? PHIL likely won't go to war agz China widout US backing; Vietnam on the other hand has the spunk to take China by itself widout the US but Vietnam = PHIL = lacks everything. IMO WORST-CASE SCENARIO: VIETNAM = PHIL = ALLOW CHINA TO MILITARILY INVADE BUT THEN WAGE "DEFENSIVE" GUERILLA/PEOPLE'S WAR ON LAND AGZ THE PLA. FYI this option has been brought up in recent past by both PHIL + Vietnam officials in response to possible mil conflict agz China. * SAME > [The Hill] NUKE DEAL WID VIETNAM GOOD FOR THE US. * SAME > [SCMP] PLA GENERAL BLAMES US, VIETNAM FOR UNREST + VOWS CHINA WILL NOT CEDE ["one inch"] OF DISPUTED TERRITORY. PLA General Fang Fenghui. * SAME > [VOA] PHILIPPINES MAY OFFER US NAVAL BASE ON WESTERN PALAWAN ISLAND, i.e. Oyster Bay. * DEFENCE.PK/FORUMS > CHINA TOLD TO MAKE FOES PAY AN "UNAFFORDABLE PRICE". "CHINA DAILY" State-run media. ------------- FYI all the above + more is why I believe the US should base more BMD-capable AEGIS ships + THAAD on Guam, CNMI, + Iwo. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2014-05-16 01:51 |