| Submit your comments on this article |
| East Asia |
| Japan Votes to Send Troops to Iraq |
| 2003-07-25 |
| EFL Lawmakers voted Friday to send Japanese forces to Iraq to help with reconstruction, despite delaying tactics by the opposition that deteriorated into a wild shoving match. The passage of the bill was a victory for Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, who campaigned hard to send peacekeeping troops overseas as he seeks to raise Japan’s profile on the world stage. He also aims to distance his administration from the "checkbook diplomacy" for which Japan, the world’s second-richest nation, was criticized during the 1991 Gulf War. Opposition parties criticized the legislation, saying such peacekeeping missions could violate Japan’s pacifist constitution and put troops in the line of enemy fire. The peacekeeping bill allows Japanese ground troops to provide non-combat support for U.S.-led forces in Iraq. It also gives the government power to send forces to trouble spots around the world to offer medical assistance, repatriate refugees, reconstruct buildings and roads and give administrative advice -even on missions without United Nations support. Military planners are reportedly considering up to 1,000 combat engineers and other troops for transport and construction duties in Iraq. Welcome aboard! |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #9 Once again, Japan quietly pulls their weight and follows through. There will prolly be protests and such, but no doubt they considered all angles long ago. The Zeropeans, who love to take symbolic stands (which they seem to believe elevates them to some imagined morally superior plane of existence) and to hell with reality, should take note. Down the road, when the dust has settled, we won't forget who did what - and who didn't do dick. |
| Posted by: PD 2003-7-26 12:11:42 AM |
| #8 It's a good thing. Sure, their constitution forbids them from becoming a substantial military power, but after 50+ years in the dog house, they have proven themselves to be responsible members of the world community. I have no problem with Japan getting involved in peacekeeping operations, and in terms of national defense, the experience would be invaluable (and timely). Losing WW2 killed Japanese imperialism and has made the country stonger. Sure, they don't have an army that controls all of east asia, but economically, they couldn't have hoped for anything better. Welcome to Iraq! |
| Posted by: jason 2003-7-25 7:02:25 PM |
| #7 Picture on Yahoo of the shoving match looked like the Free China parliment at its best, or our own Congress in the early years. Ain't democracy grand? |
| Posted by: Chuck 2003-7-25 6:44:57 PM |
| #6 Samurai vs. jihadis Compared to the Chinese, Koreans, Japanese and Vietnamese, Arabs are just a piece of cake - they're definitely not the Arabs of antiquity that took on both the Byzantine and Persian empires. Note that the Israelis whupped their combined forces several times without the kind of high tech weapons we have. Don't know anything about current Japanese forces, but they certainly have few blemishes on a proud military tradition. Of course, the Greeks used to be something, too, but by Byron's time in the 19th century, he was complaining that they seemed to be notably lacking in the fighting spirit of their storied ancestors. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2003-7-25 5:00:07 PM |
| #5 If the North Koreans get frisky and hit Japan will the opposition parties in Japan complain that it violates their "pacifist constitution". Economically and politically Japan is back in the big leagues and I think they are starting to wake up to the fact. The biggest danger to the Japanese in this is if some time in the near future they have to send peace keepers to Indonesia or some place else they are not exactly remembered fondly. Besides they've got a lot bigger stake in mideast stability than we do aside from the WoT |
| Posted by: Someone who did NOT vote for William Proxmire 2003-7-25 4:50:59 PM |
| #4 Samurai vs. jihadis. I'll take the samurai to beat the spread. Good luck, good hunting, and get home safe. |
| Posted by: Mike 2003-7-25 4:42:53 PM |
| #3 D'ya get the feeling the Japanese think that some people with actual, live combat experience might come in handy in the near future? |
| Posted by: mojo 2003-7-25 4:22:21 PM |
| #2 Ooooh, I'm liking this. In early June, I was having an My claim was that it did not make it harder; my stance was that "where you stand depends on where you sit": if you are against US policy in Iraq, you will always find another reason to be so even if they find Hussein standing next to a vat of anthrax, and if you support U.S. policy, that is because you realize there are a large variety of compelling reasons to do so. However, I was One specific prediction that I disagreed with was that lack of WMD necessarily meant that Prime Minister Koizumi would not be able to convince the Japanese Diet to provide assistance to the U.S. in the occupation/reconstruction of Iraq. I *** love *** vindication. I'm going home tonight to open a good homebrew in celebration... |
| Posted by: Carl in NH 2003-7-25 3:38:41 PM |
| #1 Yep, more arrogant unilateralism. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2003-7-25 3:03:07 PM |