Japanese Politics

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Verso Sciolto

"The Japanese" aren't inherently evil but some of "their" ideas are. Unlike you, apparently, I'm not entirely certain "they" have learned the lessons about the costs associated with "their" revisionist courses, and I mean "they" and "their" to be read as "Abe".

Name some of "Their" ideas, please. I am very annoyed that you put that in quotes like I am suppose to read your mind.

In fact, I am CERTAIN you still believe that the Japanese are inherently evil. Just admit it and don't try to be coy. Argue your case for the evil Japanese that you fear so much.

Abe is pro-America. Abe is doing what he does under the support of the United States. If you want to fear Japan then you should fear America too who are actively aiding in re-militarisation.

[Verso Sciolto]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Name some of "Their" ideas, please. I am very annoyed that you put that in quotes like I am suppose to read your mind.

In fact, I am CERTAIN you still believe that the Japanese are inherently evil. Just admit it and don't try to be coy. Argue your case for the evil Japanese that you fear so much.

Abe is pro-America. Abe is doing what he does under the support of the United States. If you want to fear Japan then you should fear America too who are actively aiding in re-militarisation.

I did it that way because you wrote about "the Japanese" and used "they", giving me the impression as though all Japanese are in agreement. I also thought that my juxtaposition with the currently unfolding scandal involving PM Abe, his wife -in an official capacity- and several members of the cabinet and other -national and local- politicians - made it clear what I was referring to.

I'm not sure it would be so easy to find comments by the present German Minister of Defence, von der Leyen, that match what Japanese Defence Minister Inada has been reported as saying on behalf of the current Japanese Government, just today, for example ... and for which there has been vigorous questioning from the Japanese opposition, all day, with live coverage. I don't think the Japanese Defense Forces are in capable hands with these politicians too nostalgic for the Japanese Empire I'd much rather see resigned to -existing- history books, in stead of brushed off and repurposed by the revisionists currently in office.

I'm not at all convinced the course charted by the current US administration is any healthier than the course the mainland Chinese government has steered for a while now, either.

[Cosmic Eagle]

Originally Posted by Verso Sciolto

I think a case can be made that "Abe's" visions of Japan are much closer to pre-war Japanese imperialist ideologies than post-war German politicians have been to the NSDAP programm, for one thing. The Imperial Rescript on Education preaching [spelled erroneously as teaching here and there] scandal has made that much clear once again - as if we needed any more reminders of "Abe's" leanings...
"The Japanese" aren't inherently evil but some of "their" ideas are. Unlike you, apparently, I'm not entirely certain "they" have learned the lessons about the costs associated with "their" revisionist courses, and I mean "they" and "their" to be read as "Abe".

Personally I was hoping that you wrote this: as an "indictment" of those other nationalists, as well, and not as an attempt to justify or condone it when Japanese educators and politicians engage in such equally dubious practices.

Just curious....do you think America's or China's (as in PRC) policies are evil as well? I would say Japan (and yes, specifically, Abe's government) now is much milder than those two if you need a benchmark.


And BTW, you cannot compare current Japan to Imperial Japan for the simple reason that by the standards of the junta that controlled Japan in the 1930s, the current government would all be marked for assassination since they are still civilians who depend on a democratic vote.

(yes, don't forget that Taisho Japan was actually democratic and in line with the norms of the world then. They really only went full expansionist mode after the civillian leaders all got murdered or thrown out in various military coups)

[Ridwan]

No lie, with the nature of imperialism that has transpired under current post-US, post-end of history era, I kinda want to see China and Japan duking it out in planting bases surrounding Africa and collide their proxies against each other. Though most certainly Japan will be secondary to India and pretty much manipulated by Indonesia should they really push for overseas adventurism, which they likely will by this point.

[Cosmic Eagle]

You can't just go on a military adventure when your entire public is going to start screaming at you and revolving door leaders are common when people get upset. It's one thing to join foreign operations. It's another to actually start planting flags and claiming territory and bases far from home



Not to mention a more practical question.....who's going to man your overseas bases (proper bases. Not tiny outposts that serve no tactical purpose)? Japan's military is fully professional....and apparently not a top career choice. Conscription is also out

[Key Board]

China's economy and military eclipses Japan

Japan can't afford to have a "cold war" with China

[Toukairin]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

Conscription is also out

Only for now though.

But let's be honest though. Would a more aggressive China and a more aggressive North Korea possibly change Japan's stance regarding mandatory military service? My answer to the question is that it did for South Korea despite the amount of US military protection poured in the area since the Korean War. So I wouldn't rule anything out of the equation yet, especially with the isolationist who currently sits in the White House.

Originally Posted by Key Board

China's economy and military eclipses Japan

Japan can't afford to have a "cold war" with China

No, but Japan can always play its cards well with a Bismarckian method by rallying other Asian countries to isolate China on the diplomatic front. That would hurt more than just a "cold war".

[Ithekro]

Despite the lack of trust of the Japanese in Asia due to the Second World War, the locals know that China is becoming the big bully of the region and also know that aside from the United States, Japan is their best bet on a counter to the Chinese. For one thing, the Chinese can't march into Japan. Sure there are ways to get there that are far more reliable that back in the old days, but Japan has the defensive technology to make that a tricky option for China should they ever want to invade Japan. The Japanese know full well that invading China is a fool's errand, even if backed up by the Americans, Koreans, and even Taiwan. So military expansion is likely not a viable idea in this century for that region of the world.

Imperialism is basically dead. At least the classical version seen in the 19th and 20th centuries. Corporate invasion is possible, but that gets you money and power, not territory and people. Japan and China will do what they do when they decide to do it. Japan will likely be backed by the Americans because even the current administration does not trust China.

[Cosmic Eagle]

Originally Posted by Toukairin

Only for now though.

But let's be honest though. Would a more aggressive China and a more aggressive North Korea possibly change Japan's stance regarding mandatory military service? My answer to the question is that it did for South Korea despite the amount of US military protection poured in the area since the Korean War. So I wouldn't rule anything out of the equation yet, especially with the isolationist who currently sits in the White House.

If you give them enough impetuous sure.... But the idea of getting a bunch of boys out from their comfy homes into the mountains suddenly and millions of them at that means that even then, the implementation will, at least initially, be a nightmare and never going to reach the 1930s level of fervor where expansion of territory was popularly welcome


Re-militarized Japan won't be the traditional big military anymore because it's just too inefficient. It will most likely be a regional power that relies on large amounts of technology and materiel to control geographical space and defeat opponents but not the kind that can send men everywhere to carry out long term annexation of territory (or in short: Subs and cruise missiles + next gen fighter aircraft >>>>>> Men, carrier battle groups and airborne invasion forces)

[Ridwan]

I bet Japan will make attempts to get neck to neck with China in terms of global presence. It has already set up a base in Djibouti and I'm sure it's wanting for more, hopefully preempting China in gaining remaining strategic spots surrounding the Indian Ocean Rim. But unlike China it is going to totally depend on the good will and Counter-China commitment of the major economies of IORA(which already have shown them by creating Jakarta Concord). Of course, it remains to be seen about where said Jakarta Concord will go after Indonesian chairmanship of IORA.

[Somethindarker]

Just to chime in as someone who has some family there and grew up there, there is no chance in hell Japan would become an imperialist nation. Most japanese are very westernized with the idea of capitalism and a country being governed by the people. Korea or Russia has a better chance of turning toward imperialism. 誰かが私をバックアップ?

[Ridwan]

If you think imperialism as WW2 invading spree, then no, Japan will never repeat that. But China and India have pretty much change the game of neocolonialism since the late 2000s at the latest that I expect it will be palatable to long-held post-colonialist sensibilities of the Japanese and of world at large. I mean, if a country like Indonesia can pull stunts like bribing PNG for rice exports monopoly and cutting the moral support off the back of the Papuan separatists through combination of diplomatic and economic pressure and pivot the entire Indian Ocean to check on Chinese advance to South China Sea, I don't see any reason why Japan will not pursue this kind of 'politically correct' hegemonism, which is what we should think of imperialism as these days.

Japan already has set up a base in Djibouti. Though I'm more partial to them failing against China to counter set up strategic maritime bases surrounding the Indian Ocean, I'm sure they will try, or perhaps they will come out with some kind of common initiative with Indonesia, India and other Indian Rim countries. But I'm pretty positive that will include sending some JSDF troops abroad.

[Ithekro]

Considering that five foreign countries have bases in Dijbouti (China, France, Italy, Japan, and the United States) and that is Japan's only base outside of Japan, I don't think they are heading in that route. This is also China's only base outside of China. Given the strategic location at the end of the Red Sea, it makes some sense that the outside world is keeping anti-piracy forces there to keep the shipping lanes open.

[Ridwan]

I said Maritime, not naval. Though I guess Japan doesn't have any equivalent of autonomous state institution like China has with SASAC, which is capable of actually buying a strategic port in Sri Lanka.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-0...t-deal/8168110

So yes, China can get away by saying "but this is not a PLA base" through their giant autonomous institutions. I'm honestly curious how Japan will counter that, or seek to climb towards the position to counter that, though I get how underwhelming their decision makers and political process can get.

[SeijiSensei]

Japanese Government conducts evacuation drill out of fears of DPRK missile strikes

Sirens blared and loudspeakers broadcast warnings in Japan's first civilian missile evacuation drill, conducted in a fishing town by officials wary about the threat of North Korean missiles.

The exercise came just over a week after North Korea launched four ballistic missiles into the sea off the country's northwest coast, with one rocket landing about 124 miles from the town of Oga.

Friday's drill played out a scenario in which North Korea had fired a ballistic missile on the Japanese islands.

Whether this had anything to do with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson's bellicose suggestion that US military action against North Korea is "on the table" is anyone's guess. I know if I lived in Tokyo, or worse Seoul, I'd be worried.

[SeijiSensei]

Right-Wing School Scandal Entangles Two Women Close to Abe

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan has staked a significant part of his governing agenda on his plans to empower women. But an unrelenting scandal over allegations that a right-wing education group received improper political favors has ensnared two of the most prominent women in Mr. Abe’s life: his wife, Akie Abe, and his defense minister, Tomomi Inada.

The scandal has dented Mr. Abe’s popularity, and his feminist credentials have been especially hard hit.

Inada always seemed like a strange choice for Defense Minister even though her predecessor was also a woman. (I wondered why the Defense Minister in the film Shin Godzilla was female.)

Even in her own Liberal Democratic Party, some lawmakers have asked why a lawyer who had never been a vice minister in either the Defense or Foreign Affairs Ministries would be selected for such a significant post, particularly as tensions in the region escalate, with North Korea developing nuclear missiles and China pushing territorial claims.

It seems her support for right-wing revisionism over Japan's role in World War II was her defining criterion.

One thrust of the article is that neither Abe-san nor Inada-san are truly feminists, but rather that their prominence represents attempts at window dressing by the Prime Minister.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Inada always seemed like a strange choice for Defense Minister even though her predecessor was also a woman. (I wondered why the Defense Minister in the film Shin Godzilla was female.)

The Defence Minister of Japan was always going to be a difficult job. Article 9 just makes the responsibility contradictory. It could almost be a type of sexism to pick a woman for the job, thinking that a female is less likely to be militant than a man. It is obviously not logical, but politics rarely is about logic.

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

The Defence Minister of Japan was always going to be a difficult job.

The Times article discusses how much difficulty Inada has had getting the military to see her as legitimate. While she has been criticized for her choice of wardrobe on trips abroad:

“It’s very disappointing that all the attention goes to female politicians’ fashion,” said Kiyomi Tsujimoto, a member of the House of Representatives from the opposition Democratic Party who has been one of Ms. Inada’s harshest critics in Parliament. The real problem, Ms. Tsujimoto said, is that Ms. Inada does not have “confidence and experience and knowledge of the army.”

Questions about Ms. Inada’s competence have intensified since disclosures that the Ground Self-Defense Force, Japan’s army, had withheld reports on the activities of peacekeeping units in South Sudan [which] described several episodes of “combat” between warring factions in South Sudan. The law forbids Japanese troops to participate in missions where active conflict is involved. In a faxed statement, Ms. Inada ... said that she had ordered a special investigation into the South Sudan reports. If any problems emerge, she wrote, “ I will try to improve it under the defense minister’s responsibility.”

But analysts say that if army officials or bureaucrats hid the reports from her, that shows her lack of power in the ministry.

That's a major reason why I thought Inada made an unlikely Defense Minister in a country with as patriarchal a culture as Japan's.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by SeijiSensei

That's a major reason why I thought Inada made an unlikely Defense Minister in a country with as patriarchal a culture as Japan's.

But that is exactly why she was chosen. There are many groups in Japan who still distrusts their own military outright, as the whole point with WW2 was how the military assassinated civil leaders and took power. You are assuming the Japanese are interested in a "strong leader" for their military, when it is just as likely that the position would be filled by someone who was meant to keep the military handicapped.

[Verso Sciolto]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

... as the whole point with WW2 was ...

The whole point, seriously?

On revisiting and revising history a slightly older piece, directly linked, NYT Norihiro Kato OP Ed 2014.

TOKYO — On Sept. 3, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe reshuffled his cabinet for the first time since he came to office in late 2012. Determined to show that he is progressive on women’s issues, he appointed five new female ministers, tying the record set by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. The foreign media seem to have been impressed by the gesture. But Japanese outlets were more interested in the gains of another group: Fifteen of the 19 members in the new cabinet belong to Nippon Kaigi, the “Japan Conference,” a nationalistic right-wing group that was all but unknown until recently.

A U.S. Congressional report on Japan-U.S. relations from early this year mentioned Nippon Kaigi as one of several organizations to which Mr. Abe has ties that believe that “Japan should be applauded for liberating much of East Asia from Western colonial powers, that the 1946-1948 Tokyo War Crimes tribunals were illegitimate, and that the killings by Imperial Japanese troops during the 1937 ‘Nanjing massacre’ were exaggerated or fabricated.” This is standard fare in the noxious world of Japanese ultra-nationalism. So, too, are the goals of Nippon Kaigi.... etc"

If not for copyright I'd quote "the whole" piece on Japan's Rising Nationalism

What "Abe" yearns for isn't "Taisho". He is more than just tied through family heritage but as such also an an actual ideological heir to the architects of the "Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere". "Abe" is without a shadow of a doubt an imperialist in that meaning of the word as well, representing the narrow minded interpreters of history with selective ideological revisionism of the past. Unlike German politicians who unequivocally disavow political affiliations with the ideas that got their country "into trouble", Abe and his ilk continue to embrace the indefensible.