The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Australia: the future junior ally of Japan > Comments

Australia: the future junior ally of Japan : Comments

By Peter Coates, published 5/2/2015

Japan is mainly thinking about the potential economic benefits of contested islands in the South China and East China Seas.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. All
Regarding the first paragraph. Naturally the US Government and its junior Australian ally want to remove Islamic State (IS) from the oil lands of Iraq.

Australia shouldn't stop at having one exclusive ally (the US). Australia needs more senior allies to lead it - to the conflicts of their choosing. Japan in 2 years? Maybe China in 10 years?
Posted by plantagenet, Thursday, 5 February 2015 9:03:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If the principle reason for buying new subs is for intell gathering, why buy noisy diesel electrics?

When we could have vastly less detectable nuclear powered ones?
And the lower dollar means making them here may make better economic sense?

Modern nuclear powered subs could get and maintain speeds of up to fifty knots; and just what you need to outrun the hunting destroyers; if ever called on to do so for any reason.

And you only need to top up the fuel once every 25 years, and we have 40% of the world's uranium.

Nuclear power also makes passing under the Arctic/Antarctic ice an option if ever needed?

Abbot has made a habit out of making massive mistakes, and this clearly is another, and for no better reason than really dumb domestic politics?

Perhaps he's not satisfied with the loss of Victoria and Q'ld to the other side?
But wants to ruin any chance of picking up S.A., anytime soon?

As for Japan as a self defense ally, there are worse, less reliable less honorable options?

And there is no way we could win any action with the likes of China on our own.

Wear a velvet glove, but carry a big stick! United we stand, divided we fall!

Being stronger via strong alliances may mean we are just not attacked in the first place; even if we're seen as the most desirable jewel in the pacific, with our resources; and vast empty spaces!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Thursday, 5 February 2015 11:59:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
plantagenet,

And India in between, perhaps? I think, realistically, that China will get the final say. Will Australia be an ally, or a special administrative region by then
Posted by Gaudium, Thursday, 5 February 2015 11:59:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rhrosty, going by our present fleet, & what else can you go by, if we were to build Nuclear subs in South Australia, they would never need fueling.

The only way such catastrophes would get to the base in WA would be at the end of a tow rope, probably behind a Chinese tug.

Rather than prop SA up with wasted money, & rather than think of fighting China, here is a thought.

Why don't we sell the place to China, If they owned a big, if totally useless bit of the place, they would be unlikely to want to fight us. Besides, that is probably the only way we will get the jobs digging up all that lovely uranium. They would not see it go to waste in the ground.
Posted by Hasbeen, Thursday, 5 February 2015 12:15:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Gaudium

Actually Japan has tried the same "we'll sell you submarines for an alliance" deal on India. see my article http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/india-may-be-interested-in-buying.html .

At least India, via the British Empire, has effectively been an Australian ally - from 1788-1947. India has never fought us - unlike Japan and China.

Does Australia want to be junior ally to a resurgent Japanese military?

---

Hi Rhrosty

Australia BUYING 4 nuclear propelled Vaginas off the US would be lovely if Australia were politically mature enough to do so. No way Australia has the tech - this side of 2 decades - to build nuclear propelled. Probably more like 35 knots max rather than 50.

We have a comprehensive alliance with the US. Australia fights alongside the US for oil. The US offers a nuclear umbrella.

Japan has not explained what its ultimate strategic goals are vis a vis North Korea, Russia and even China.

Does Japan want to complete its nuclear weapons cycle?

Does Australia want to join in a confrontation with China over some allegedly Japanese oil islands?

--

Hi Hasbeen

I agree that a whole submarine build can't go on in South Australia. But it is economically destructive and probably political suicide for Abbott not to organise the build of some sections - probably at Williamstown Victoria?

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Thursday, 5 February 2015 1:11:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pete

'Australia BUYING 4 nuclear propelled Vaginas off the US...'

You know ... men incessantly complain about feminism being unduly critical of men's enduring propensity to sexually objectify women and see women merely in terms of their f*kability.

What a pity that disgusting comments like this give those awful feminists SOOOO much ammunition.

And to logically extend your grubby adolescent analogy ... given the shape and movement of submarines, nuclear or otherwise, aren't you using the wrong gender anatomy?
Posted by Killarney, Thursday, 5 February 2015 10:42:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Arrrghh Killarney

Please be excusing my Freudian slip. Many a submariner be joken about the shape of their sub https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsurvincity.com%2F2013%2F07%2Fnuclear-submarines-a-comparison-of-projects%2F&ei=1GvTVJGoNYOZ8QXig4GIDg&psig=AFQjCNFRKgInBN-R5LH-_JWYKSBsVI_Rrg&ust=1423228109965153

Don't even mention the torpedo men sliding their torpedos into tight tubes. Heres a torpedo snug inside https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRke2Kl4R_ZQMbcwu0CFQgSOTgyZmMy9YJiqDS-CbjUZTif9okyyw

Size matters https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTC6ToGzLYmdJsh8Y-Xpx092yukHcBg5YUAcn_drnA-YAozzs00r

Planta
Posted by plantagenet, Thursday, 5 February 2015 11:12:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
US Admiral Thomas (mentioned in the article) might be right that the Soryu might be the closest approximation of of what the Australian Government thinks it wants. However Serving US military men should not get involved in what are key political issues between other countries (Australia and Japan).

The main problem with the Soryu is that selection of that submarine brings grave political risks for Australia. That risk is being drawn into Japan's battles involving Australia's main trading partner (China). Such Japanese battles may not even relate to Japan's national survival but to sometimes slender Japanese claims to undersea oil resources.

Japan appears unwilling to nurture peaceful precedent solutions like "North Sea Oil" agreements between the countries of Northern Europe from the 1950s.

Now I have to admit that politics encouraged Australia from the 1960s to choose then operate the British built Oberon submarine. But Britain by then was not expecting Australia to get involved in Britain's battles. Britain like the US was a long term friend and mentor of Australia - Japan isn't.

Life would be so much easier if the US had conventional submarines to sell to Australia or if Australia took up the US offer of buying Virginia SSNs.

That some or most of the submarine build take place in Australia is a political and economic necessity.

All things for Abbott to ponder in his relations with his backbenchers and some front-benchers from Australia's submarine states of Victoria, NSW, Western Australia and South Australia.

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Friday, 6 February 2015 1:07:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
On OLO you read it first (in the OLO article). That is concerning Abbott's possible demise threatening an "Australia buying Japan's Soryu" deal. That OLO article was on Thursday 5 Feb.

Now today - 7 Feb - The Australian has published an article most probably triggered by the OLO article. See http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/japan-fears-25bn-submarine-deal-at-risk-in-tony-abbott-crisis/story-e6frg8yo-1227211135322

"JAPANESE officials have met to discuss whether Tony Abbott’s leadership crisis could threaten a potential $25 billion deal to sell submarines to Australia...There is concern in Tokyo that if Mr Abbott is deposed as Prime Minister, the Coalition’s enthusiasm to buy submarines from Japan will wane, reviving the hopes of Germany, France and Sweden, which want an open competition for the project."

Basically voting for Abbott in the Party Room on Tuesday will be a vote against Australia - submarine-wise anyway. Voting for Turnbull may mean out-sourcing Australia's biggest defence project to Japan. Under Turnbull its more likely the $25 Billion future submarine project will stay in Australia - where Australia's money is sorely needed.

Roll on the German, French and Swedish "Build in Australia" bids OR at least a "Build Soryus in Australia" bid.

Pete
also see a much earlier article at http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/australian-prime-ministers-mistake.html
Posted by plantagenet, Saturday, 7 February 2015 4:20:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I wouldn't care if Turnbull was going to donate 25 billion to buy/build the subs out of his own pocket, nothing could ever get me to vote for a party with him as leader.

I would trust Turnbull about as far as I would trust Rudd. That is about as far as I could throw a sub, Ozzy or Jap built.
Posted by Hasbeen, Saturday, 7 February 2015 8:22:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Hasbeen

I reckon its not a serious expectation that Turnbull will be a mover-and-shaker. Its mainly about removal of two likely election losers - Abbott and also Hockey.

After http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utegate - how Turnbull shot himself in the foot - I have few misconceptions Turnbill will do much better. Its all about appearances.

Turnbull offers hope, by venturing nothing these past weeks, and thereby not making Abbott mistakes.

Regards

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Sunday, 8 February 2015 2:05:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I reckon the way to get the best subs at an affordable price and keep everyone happy is to build them in Japan and pay the ASC union workers to stay at home.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Monday, 9 February 2015 6:16:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Shadow Minister

What appears to be ambiguous heresay yesterday, that Abbott now supports an open tender, in which ASC can bid, may be as easily backtracted-on as his "Build in South Australia" late 2013 policy.

It is also possible Abbott will adhere to the policy of the previous Labor Government which is place action on submarines in the too-hard-basket until AFTER the next election.

Regards

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Monday, 9 February 2015 8:56:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is a tough choice.

A build very expensive crap subs in Aus, but keep a few jobs or

B build cheap and proven subs in Japan and get the unions baying.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Monday, 9 February 2015 2:53:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yep Shadow Minister

Its such a tough choice I think Abbott would describe it as a lose-lose decision. Odds on he makes no decision till 2017.

Also Australia doesn't have the $20-$25 Billions to afford 12 big, orphan, subs. Paying off many other voter-popular causes (health, education, welfare) would keep Abbott in his job as PM and the Coalition in power.

If I had my way I'd just buy 6 medium size (Scorpene, HDW 214s, Dolphin 2, or Kockums A26) from France, Germany or Sweden for $5 Billion TOTAL price.

None of these 3,000-4,000 (surfaced) mega expensive orphan subs.

Regards

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Monday, 9 February 2015 3:21:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Personally, considering the size of the Australian coast and the area that Aus needs to cover with its subs, using diesel is marginally more useful than using rubber bands.

Aus should simply buy or lease 3 Virginia class nuke subs from the USA and provide a serious deterrent.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Monday, 9 February 2015 5:15:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Shadow Minister

I agree. Actually buying 4 Virginia SSNs would be a good idea and it wouldn't involve a problematic alliance with Japan.

The Australian Financial Review reported way back in February 2012 that:

"The United States has indicated for the first time it would be willing to lease or sell a nuclear submarine to Australia in a move that will inflame tensions with China and force the Coalition to declare its policy on ­bolstering regional defence."

see http://www.afr.com/p/national/us_floats_nuclear_subs_option_uPMgRrev3KjNwBLfFxpdeO

China, that bought Russian nuclear submarine technology decades ago (and that is after Russia donated a nuclear weapon to China) shouldn't complain. Brazil at the moment is building a SSN with French help.

Regards

Pete
see http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2014/01/brazil-future-ssn-dcns-assistance.html
Posted by plantagenet, Monday, 9 February 2015 6:44:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I can't see much point in more than 3 subs, unless we want to stick them in dry dock somewhere as a monument to the past when we had a navy.

My ex navy son is home this week. They offered him the world to stay, then tried to stick him on a ship he had never seen, with machinery he knew nothing about, just because they needed his qualifications on the thing. He has resigned, & won't be going back.

Very soon there won't be any experienced men to train the new chums.

There is not much point building or buying things we can't man. With the reputation of the current Oz built garbage, locally built is a recipe for no crew to man the things. They was offering very silly money to go to subs, & can't get any takers.

If we really want a sub force the next things had better be reliable competent things to go to sea in.

The one point most appear to be missing that if we have subs, it is because we plan to have people fight in the things. With the current subs, ordering men to fight in them is getting pretty close to committing murder.
Posted by Hasbeen, Monday, 9 February 2015 7:37:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Hasbeen

A dispiriting time for your son. I hope he finds some certainty, a niche, soon.

Our Navy, DMO and/or industry are again over ambitious with 12 large subs. Modern advances mean more automation, meaning smaller crews.

Just 6 medium size conventional subs with crews of less than 40 would mean far less negative impact on the Government's budget and at least 4 could be manned at any one time.

- the HDW 214 just needs 27 all up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_214_submarine

- HDW Dolphin just 35 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin-class_submarine - with smaller crew when the Dolphin's nuclear missile capability is removed.

- Scorpene - 31 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scorp%C3%A8ne-class_submarine

- Kockums A26 http://www.saabgroup.com/en/Naval/Kockums-Naval-Solutions/Submarines/Kockums-Next-Generation-Submarine/ would be around 30

All have offered build in Australia and/or overseas. Train overseas and here with far less language-cultural-secrecy-contractual problems.

Less risk than being Japan's first major customer.

Regards

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Tuesday, 10 February 2015 4:25:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No country is so much misunderstood as Japan as far as modern history is concerned, particularly when it comes to the World War II. This is a very interesting topic, but of course 350 words is far from enough to tell. Just a few words, since no one will pay me a penny.

Japan invaded China and China did not invade Japan in the modern era. From this people have drawn a lot of mistaken conclusions. China, from its historical experiences, has seen itself as being situated at the centre of the world, having everything excellent that the whold world should learn; she deserves to be the rule-maker. Read if interested, for instance, June Teufel Dreyer/China's Tianxia/YaleGlobal Online/30 Oct. 2014.

Japan, from her history, has thought that bonnie things lie over the ocean, in China until 1867 and in the Occident since 1868. Despite the war of agression, "...the Chinese have never reciprocated the warm feelings of the Japanese, viewing them with distrust and more than a little contempt. The Japanese nostalgia for China is a classic case of unrequited love (Edwin O. Reischauer, The Japanese.)" To be continued.
Posted by Michi, Wednesday, 11 February 2015 11:41:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I do not want this comment to be long. Some tidbits that I hope might surprise you. The exchange of shots that took place on July 7, 1937 developed into a big war between Japan and China in spite of the two countries' will to contain it.
Japan entered into the negotiations with the United States to withdraw from China, though with some imperialistic interests implanted and preserved in Norther China, and to avoid armed hostilities with the United States. Did Nazi Germany start talks with Stalin or President Roosevelt to prevent war? To be continued.

Hitler invaded Russia on June 22, 1941; he had made the decision on July 1940. Japan received a reply, called in Japan the Hull Note,from U.S. Secretary of State Hull on Nov. 26, 1941. It was a total negation and refusal of what the two countries had been discussing in Washington DC. She made the final decision of going to war on Dec. 1, seven days before the Pearl Harbour attack.
Posted by Michi, Wednesday, 11 February 2015 12:02:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tojo resigned from the posts of prime minister and war minister in July 1044 when Japan lost Saipan, a South Pacific Island. He was simply put on the retired generals' and officers' list. When did Hitler resingn? Was it when Nazi Germany lost the battle in Stalin Grad? Or was it when he lost the battle of Kursk or when the Allied Forces landed on Normandy?

Japan had a new cabinet, the Suzuki cabinet in April 1945. The Americans like Joseph Grew, the last U.S. ambassador to pre-war Japan, knew from the line-up of the minisiters that it was the cabinet to lead Japan to surrender. Tojo said, "This is the end. This is our Badoglio Cabinet (Ben-Ami Shillony, Politics and Culture in Wartime Japan.) When did Nazi Germany have a Badoglio government and Hitler say, "This is the end. This is our Badoglio cabinet?"
He had said instead, "We may be destroyed, but, if we are, we shall drag a world with us--a world in flames (quoted in Frederick Schuman, International Politics.)"

The key note in Japan's foreign policy in modern times was to consider the interests of Great Britain and the United States and make necessary adjustments and compromises with them. Unbelievable? Just read Japanese history in stead of newspapers and weeklies. "The polical values of wartime Japan were part of a wider cultural milieu, in which traditional concepts had already been deeply modified by Westerm attitudes (Ben-Ami Shillony, ibid.)" "Japan would never have entered it (the war) had the armed forces kept out of politics, or, failing this, if the army had been content to allow the Foreign Ministry--its quality was impressive--unimpeded control of the handling of Japan's relations with China and the West in the 1930s (Richard Storry, A History of Modern Japan)."
Posted by Michi, Wednesday, 11 February 2015 12:47:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
PS Bernard Roling (Roeling) was a justice,sent from the Netherlands, at the Tokyo International Tribunal. He said that a very small country like Luxembourg would have started war like Japan if dealt with in the same manner. This summer is the seventieth anniversary. Seventy years is somewhat long enough to be emotionally detached and intellectually keep neutral. Apart from talking politically about the political justice or injustice of the tribunal, we could talk about the truth academically.

If a little bit more interested, and I hope some of you will, read Moriyama's comment to www.thediplomat.com/China, Japan, and the 21 Demands. Moriyama is shown by two Chinese characters.
Posted by Michi, Wednesday, 11 February 2015 2:36:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes Michi

Japan could have ended the war in China, Southeast Asia, the Western Pacific, Papua-New Guinea and over Darwin and Broome earlier - especially if Japan had not started the war in 1937, then widened it in 1941.

Around 35,000,000 Asians, mainly in China, died in Japan's war of aggression.

The reason I am bringing up this history is that Japanese historians and school-book editors have largely deleted mention of Japanese aggression and murder in World War Two.

In contrast Germans remember their own country's history of aggression and are particularly apologetic about World War Two.

When Japanese tourists come to the Australian War Memorial in Canberra they are amazed about Japanese acts of aggression in World War Two. These tourists know about Hiroshima and the Tokyo raids but basically nothing else. They wonder why Japan advanced all the way south to New Guinea. It is as if they have never been aware of Japanese aggression before. That is because the Japanese Government chooses not to make them aware of it.

Regards
Posted by plantagenet, Wednesday, 11 February 2015 2:49:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Plantagenet,
As for the number, 35,000,000, I would like you very much to read Yoshimichi Moriyama's five comments on www.yaleglobal.yale.edu/Alistair Burnette/War Drums in Asia.

A group of people at Stanford University compared history textbooks of Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan and the United States. I felt Japanese textbooks got the highest ratings. They were least nationalistic and most impartial and comprehensive. I am not good at the Internet, but you can read brief summaries at "Divided Memories:History Textbooks and the Wars in Asia," "Compartive study of history textbooks of Asian countries by Stanford University," "Japan's teaching on war doesn't deserve bad press/Education..." and "Gi-Work Shin and Daniel Sneider (eds),History Textbooks and the war in Asia."

The step-mother said to Cinderella, "You stay where you belong." This is the Sino-centric tributary hierarchy, and China and (South) Korea are saying, "You stay where you belong, Japan." There are three Confucianist countries in the world, China, Korea and Vietnam. Japan is not. If interested a bit more, please read Yoshimichi Moriyama's comments to www.project-syndicate/Ian Buruma/East Asia's Nationalist Fantasy Islands."
Posted by Michi, Thursday, 12 February 2015 12:14:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Michi

I can see there are communications problems. There is nothing like usable and recent hyperlinks.

The process of discussion is not aided by booklists.

I'm talking to people from Japan frequently but I'm not going to raise what there grandfathers did in the War directly.

Regards

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Thursday, 12 February 2015 12:29:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Japan did not advance into South East Asia and the South Pacific Area for "the noble cause of liberating colonized countries and the ambitious desire of building an empire." It went into those regions to make access to natural resources like oil an bauxite. It allowed itself to drift into a big war (Joseph Frankel, The Making of Foreign Policy, Oxford University Press.) The liberation of those countries was the unintended by-products. (People of those countries, except the Philippines, say that unless set free once, their colonial status would have endured much longer.) If Japan had not been made dry and empty, it would have gone on negotioating with the United States, and ultimately came to face up to the inconvenient fact, which many leaders of pre-war Japan had known, that is, that Japan had to pull out from hopeless war with China.

During the thirty-five years, the Korean populatin rose from ten million to twenty five million; the average life expectancy from twenty-four to forty-five years; compulsory education had been introduced but had not spread, only 2.5 percent of the people went to elementary school just before Japan's annexation, but of the Koreans born in the 1930s 78 percent received it and 17 percent had more than twelve years' education. The northern half of the peninsula had been heavily industrialized and this is why Kim Ilson embarked on the war of unification in 1950. "By this standard, however, the best colonial master of all time has been Japan, for no ex-colonies have doen so well as (South) Korea and Taiwan...(David S. Landes, The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, W.W. Norton.) To be continued.
Posted by Michi, Thursday, 12 February 2015 1:17:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Michi

If only the average, tertiary educated Japanese person had the same sophisticated knowledge of Japan's WWII history that you have.

But the average is left with "Japan was the victim. Nanking was a police action to restor order. Only deaths of Japanese really counted or really happened."

The Japanese were not intricate record-keepers like the Germans. Also the overwelming Japanese atrocities, in China, were either obscured by:

- the rapid Russian "liberation" of China mid-late 1945

- the Chinese civil war in the decades up to 1949, or by

- Chinese communist rule, 1949 on.

The senior Japanese Administrators of China 1937-45 would have known but they are probably all dead or won't dishonour their living or dead colleagues, hence won't tell.

Regards

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Thursday, 12 February 2015 6:41:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Plantagenet,
I feel the Japanese have been far more apologetic. Prime ministers, foreign ministers, chief cabinet secretaries made statements of sincere apologies. The Diet (the Japanese parliament) passed at least two resolutions of apologies. As I understand, there is an English site provided by the Japanese Foreign Ministry, but I do not know how to guide you there.
Did any German chacellors or foreign ministers express, on behalf of (West) Germany or of the people, forman remorse? I am not sneering here; I simply do not know. Did the (West) German parliament pass a resolution of apology? I do not know. I will continue.

I (Yoshimichi Moriyama) said in my comment on www.thediplomat.com/Stefan Soresento/What Japan and South Korea Learn from Europe, "I know Willy Brandt was a hero of anti-Nazi resistance movements. The photo of him kneeling down in the pouring rain was indeed moving in spite of what Wawer said. But (West) Germany has been fortunate, unlike Japan, in that she did not have fundamentalists in her neighborhood. She even obained an apology from Czechoslovakia...." I mean China and South Korea by fundamentalists (of the philosophy of Confucianist Zu Zhi or Chu Hsi).
Japan gave a lot of money and economic assitance to both China and South Korean. The CCP has kept the people in the dark about this and a small number of South Koreans know.
Posted by Michi, Thursday, 12 February 2015 11:23:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
uLet's see what Wawer (perhaps a Polish) said in his/her two comments on What Japan and South Korea Could Learn.
"Brandt attention and point of 1970 visit in Warszwa was rather towards Jewish victims than Polish."
"I would like to point out that German example is not quite adequate from Polish site of view....But communistic authorities where disappointed that chancellor Willy Brandt nealed down before the monument of ghetto heroes in Warsaw, but forgot to do the same for Polish victims of Warszwa uprising 1944. Yes there where two uprisings in Warszwa! First in Jewish Ghetto 1943, second led by Polish Underground Movement.... There is also case with Polish forced labour. Over one million of Polish workers were deported to Germany for harsh labour during the war....After joining UE they have gained ridiculous repayment of 150$ each for their slave labour in Germany."

After the Polish uprising of 1944, Warsaw was emptied of anybody except Germans. Warsaw citizens were deported to Germany and elswhere. German soldiers stood on the both sides of the march, picking out women they liked out of the walking columns.
I also understand that Wehrmacht imposed a choice on women in Eastern Europe between going to Germany to work in factories or on farms and staying in their homelands to entertain friendship with German soldiers. I think I will continue a little bit more.

Regards.
Posted by Michi, Thursday, 12 February 2015 11:48:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Michi ( Yoshimichi Moriyama )

Glad to meet you. I'm Peter Coates :)

I was not aware Japan gave any money to China or South Korea. All the Western media and many scholarly sources come up with is the negatives: the comfort woman issue; the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_surrounding_Yasukuni_Shrine etc.

I increasingly recognise that many of the ongoing bad news stories about Japan in WWII are due to current Japan-China friction.

I know more about Germany. I'm aware that Germany has provided TKMS-HDW Dolphin submarines $Billions in total below price to Israel in apology for the Holocaust http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin-class_submarine#Additional_procurement .

While we are chatting. Do you have any views on how influential the Nippon Kaigi are in Japanese politics - particularly on defence issues?

Regards

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Friday, 13 February 2015 9:59:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Plantagenet,
The Nippon Kaigi is made up of generally conservative people but with economicaly, politically, and socially diverse interests. It has
some influence. But if it has something in common, it is the culturally conservative mood.

The Kaigi is like the Liberal-Democratic Party (LDP) because of its diverse interests groups. LDP has been in power in post-war Japan almost without a break. It has had strong ties with big business and conservative groups. This aspect is very visible and still made more so by mass media.
What is not observed is that it has been trully a Japanese grass-roots party, almost always with more than a half representation in the parliament and for a considerably long time with close to two thirds of the seats, because it has had links and ties not only with big business but with farmers, peasants, small business, shop-keepers; it has also catered to the interests of unorganized workers. It has been a catch-all party or the only grass-root party in this sense, which has made it stay in power.
The Kaigi has its own limits. I think the increase of its moody influence owes much to the anti-Japanese policy of China and South Korea.
Japanese politics has been deeply divided between conservatives and non-conservatives, and deeply divided among conservatives. If Abe trys to go beyond certain bounds, the division in his own party or among the conservatives will become appararent. For instance, countries like the Philippines, Malay, Vietnam seem to have wanted a stronger Japanese commitment, but Abe seems not to have been able to do that on account of his intra-party support and of Japanese public opinion.

The British forces can go to distant, overseas lands to engage in battle; the Japanese self-defense foreces are not so composed as to be able to act like that; they are so constructed as to best fight in Japanese propinquities by fulfilling subsidiary and supplementary roles to assist the US Forces. To be continued.
Posted by Michi, Friday, 13 February 2015 1:53:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Plantagenet,
Continued from above.
The Japanese Self-Defense soldier sort of has a rifle with no telescope attached to it to take aim; the US commander in Okinawa has it. I think that Australian generals and military planners know this.

I hope that this area of the world will someday and in no distant time in the future free itself from an armament race and live cooperatively and friendly, free from an apprehensive cloud.

Best regards,
Michi Moriyama.
Posted by Michi, Friday, 13 February 2015 2:01:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Michi

Thank you very much for your reply. I've been thinking about the Australian equivalent of Nippon Kaigi.

I think the Liberal-National Coalition with all of its members of Parliament, branches and business connections in the city and monied rural areas is most equivalent. Another Australian synonym is the Big End of Town adding in farmers and small business. Australia would stoutly deny that we have "peasants" as that is something we claimed to have left behind in the UK and Ireland in 1788.

I think some people in the US equate Nippon Kaigi with the Tea "Party" but the Tea Party is far more recent, more rightwing, unused to Governing and visibly over-represented by lightweight loopies like Sarah Palin.

I can see Japanese politicians would have problems engaging with smaller nations of Southeast Asia. Those nations may want some balance against Chinese influence but those nations may see Japan as an addition to already present US influence. The legacy of the War is of course complicated - with many southeast Asian nationalists created 1941-45.

My inexpert suggestion is that Japan needs product definition, at the public level separate from the US - which will take time. Australia meanwhile is stuck with the "whitemen" of Asia tag so we can't escape the quasi-US identity.

The US in its attempts (in some ways) to divest some of its defence costs and responsibilities onto the non-Communist powers (Japan, S Korea, Australia, India, Indonesia) in the region may be able to help with its soft power.

The paramilitary regional aid approach using landing helicopter dock ships and hospital ships during regional natural disasters may be one way for Japan and Australia to increasingly shine. The Japanese movie industry competing with the ever more successful Chinese movie industry is another way to spread strategic goodwill.

Just some suggestions.

Regards

Pete

PS. I'd like to discuss your points about Japan's re-emerging defence identity tomorrow. Cheers.
Posted by plantagenet, Friday, 13 February 2015 7:22:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Plantagenet, thank you for your interest.

I do not think the Nippon Kaigi is a strongly united pressure group. I think it is a club, composed of many different political and economic interests, rather than a politically united group.

I suggest that you read, to know better than from me, for instance, www.thediplomat.com/Sheila Smith/Japan:Electoral Landslide With an Ambiguous Mandate.
Smith's interview with the diplomat.com, www.youtube/Abe's Post-Election Agenda for Japan, was also interesting to me.

I am not good at things like the Internet and its related terminology, but I also suggest thay you go to www.thediplomat.com/ and then click "interviews"; then you will find interview lists. You might find a litte bit of interest, Japan and its Neighbors: Shinzo Abe's North East Asia Diplomacy, China and the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and China and Japan's Deteriorating Relationship.

Youtube/Sino-Japanese Relations: Old Enmities and New Rivalries- Dr. Amy Catalinac and Dr. Amy King is not very good but not very bad to me.

Regards,
Mich
Posted by Michi, Saturday, 14 February 2015 12:06:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Michi

The increasing disunity of Australia's Liberal-National Big End of Town Movement (I'll makeup an acronym :) are make it more like the disunited Nippon Kaigi.

I read The Diplomat frequently. Your advice prompted me to dig further.

I located an excellent essay by Ms Mina Pollmann, Feb 6, 2015 which enlarges on many of the points you and I have raised on Japan evolving a new defence policy posture. The article also raises the views of that increasingly quoted post MacArthur titan Admiral Robert Thomas, Commander of the Seventh Fleet.

"Admiralissimo" [I coined it here first :)] Thomas declares - Paragraph 5 http://thediplomat.com/2015/02/japan-wades-into-south-china-sea-issue/:

“I think allies, partners and friends in the region will look to the Japanese more and more as a stabilizing function.” Adm. Thomas went as far as to imply an offshore balancer role for Japan, meaning that Japan would help forestall conflict by helping the weaker disputants “balance” China. Adm. Thomas said, “In the South China Sea, frankly, the Chinese fishing fleet, the Chinese coast guard and the (navy) overmatch their neighbors. … I think that [Japanese Navy] operations in the South China Sea makes sense in the future.”

So there we have - marching orders for Abe and Defence Minister Nakatani ;-)

I am next writing an article on Japan's changing defence posture as it is influenced by Abe and Nakatani.
- One major issue is the implications of the following 2009 article http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aVoR7GOucg_k :

“May 26 [2009] (Bloomberg) -- Japan should consider developing the capability to conduct pre-emptive military strikes given North Korea’s nuclear test yesterday, a ruling party lawmaker said. “North Korea poses a serious and realistic threat to Japan,” former defense chief Gen Nakatani said today in Tokyo at a meeting of Liberal Democratic Party officials. “We must look at active missile defense such as attacking an enemy’s territory and bases.”

Is Nakatani still working towards such a capability?

Regards

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Saturday, 14 February 2015 5:19:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Plantagenet,

Is Nakatani still working toward such a capability? I do not know. As for the missle defense, perhaps Japan is cooperating in the research and development of the US missile defense (the project of shooting down an enemy's flying missile with a missile.)

Regards.
Mich
Posted by Michi, Sunday, 15 February 2015 4:18:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Michi

Submarine launched Tomahawk missiles are something the US and UK have used in the Middle East though only against countries with weak or no real military forces.

I had a look at Tomahawks in relation to Japan and unearthed http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/09/japan-us-military-weapons_n_5794414.html .

If North Korea holds more threatening nuclear tests and Japan-tailored-missile tests then the relevance of first and/or second "strike capability" would no doubt increase.

Something the US and Japan are no doubt acutely conscious of.

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Sunday, 15 February 2015 5:10:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
An interesting issue, February 25, 2015: "In a rare foray into a controversial political issue, Japan’s Crown Prince Naruhito, 55, told reporters on the occasion of his birthday that he felt that it was critical for Japan to “look back humbly on the past.”

Naruhito, heir apparent to Emperor Akihito, noted that while ”[he himself] did not experience the war … it is important today, when memories of the war are fading, to look back humbly on the past and correctly pass on the tragic experiences and history Japan pursued from the generation which experienced the war to those without direct knowledge.”

The statement, which will be scrutinized by political leaders in China and South Korea, was read by Japanese observers and netizens as a rebuke to calls by conservative Japanese politicians to present a sanitized and sympathetic version of Japan’s history to the public and in textbooks, sidelining wartime atrocities committed by Japan."

see http://thediplomat.com/2015/02/japans-crown-prince-rebukes-historical-revisionism/
Posted by plantagenet, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 8:14:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Plantagenet,
Thank you.
Mr. Panda says, "The Imperial House continues to excercise a major influence over Japanese public opinion." No, the House does not have a political influence. Since the Big Bang for Japan, which was in 660 B.C., Japanese emperors were impotent. Akihito, the present emperor, took dislike as the Crown Prince to Nakasone, prime minister from 1982 to 1987.

Kant was in his cozy, dogmatic slumber as all German philosophers were. He did not realize it until he was shocked by David Hume's scepticism. I would like to say some things, out of a thousand things, that I hope will be surprising, because, unless we are surprised if not shocked, our thinking takes the course of least resistance.

Hirohito was politically impotent like his father, Yoshihito, and grandfather. His father was mentally feeble, so he was Regent Prince. The powers that be did not encourage the people to know Yoshihito's mental disorder, but people knew it. They were not punished, let alone jailed, because they talked about it.
When I was a junior or senior high school student, I knew that President Franklin Roosevelt could hardly walk on his own feet because he was struck by polio. I thought it added to his greatness and that Americans knew it. It was a little surprise when
I was reading Henry Kissinger's On China (or it may have been his Diplomacy.) That fact was hidden as much as possible from the public. I looked for the part,in vain, so that I could quote it verbatim.

In pre-war Japan censorship was conducted like "She hated him. She cried, 'You, son .. . ......" Each Chinese character or Japanese letter deleted was shown by one black mark. In post-war Japan under the Allies' occupation the censorship was done like "She was in love. She said, 'I adore you." You could not have guessed any part was changed or deleted. To be continued.
Posted by Michi, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 10:48:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Plantagenet,

In pre-war days in Japan, Americans and Englishmen were the most popular foreign people. Hirohito was an Anglo-Saxonphile like most Japanese. Deep mistrust of Germany was widely shared in the Japanese leadership, though not by all. "During the war the Japanese could hardly hide their dislike for the haughty Germans. But they liked the French, whom they associated with the achievements of French culture (Robert Guillain, quoted by Ben-Ami Shillony in Politics and Culute in Wartime Japan.)" "Japanese judges tended not to impose severe sentences, in order to enable the offender to correct himself (ibid.)" Compare this, for instance, with China in Ralph Townsend/Ways That Are Dark. The two classic works on fascism or nazism, Emil Lederer/State of the Masses and Sigmund Neumann/Permanent Revolution do not treat Japan as a totalitarian country,etc.

Please read my five comments, as to Hirohito's political impotence, on www.project-syndicate.org/Nouriel Roubini/Global Ground Zero in Asia. I would also like you to read my comment on www.project-syndicate.org/Brahma Chelleney/East Asia's Historical Shackles.

People used to think that the sun went round the earth. Who was the first revisionist that said the earth went round the sun? I do not know if Einstein was a revisionist, but he at least added a lot of new facts to, and modified Newton's theory by introducing relativity.
What I mean is that Japan should be blamed for what it did but not for what it did not do; a lot of fabficated guilts have been put on Japan. Seventy years is some time to look back more detachedly.
Posted by Michi, Wednesday, 25 February 2015 11:51:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Michi

You make observations with great elegance. The Japanese Imperial House appears to have a similar complexity as the many levels of respect for the British Royal Family.

With the wonder that is Wikipedia I also looked at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Taish%C5%8D#Early_life .

Royals make for a complex society as natural people, representatives of polity and conduits to God.

Interesting Japan fought the Anglo countries (US, UK) that Japanese liked while Japan was allied to the disliked Germans in WWII.

The last paragraph of http://thediplomat.com/2015/02/japans-crown-prince-rebukes-historical-revisionism/ indicates:

"Curiously, Abe’s own party, the Liberal Democratic Party, in its most recent proposal for constitutional overhaul, has suggested reverting the emperor’s role back to that of a “head of state,” as during the Meiji era. If the LDP succeeds in its bid to reform the constitution, the party and Japan’s conservatives could face the prospect of Naruhito one day leading the country."

I need to look at your comments:
- www.project-syndicate.org/Nouriel Roubini/Global Ground Zero in Asia
- www.project-syndicate.org/Brahma Chelleney/East Asia's Historical Shackles
- and other references.
tomorrow because I have a guest visiting today.

Regards

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Thursday, 26 February 2015 1:50:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi again Michi

Thanks for those references and your Comments on them.

What particulary struck me was Brahma Chellaney’s Jan 12, 2015 essay "East Asia's Historical Shackles" at http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/east-asia-historical-territorial-disputes-by-brahma-chellaney-2015-01, where he comments:

“All countries’ legitimizing narratives blend historical fact and myth. But, in some cases, historical legacies can gain excessive influence, overwhelming leaders’ capacity to make rational policy choices.

That explains why [South Korea's] Park has sought closer ties with China, even though South Korea’s natural regional partner is democratic Japan.

One source of hope stems from Abe’s landslide victory in the recent snap general election, which gives him the political capital to reach out to Park with a grand bargain: If Japan expresses remorse more clearly for its militaristic past, South Korea will agree to leave historical grievances out of official policy."

South Korea would be a very useful and natural military and political ally for Japan. Both are in China's would-be sphere of influence and are threatened by North Korea's nuclear sabre-rattling.

On the submarine front South Korea is developing a new indigenously designed submarine of 3,000 tons. As Japan has done that very same thing with the Soryu there is obviously logic in Japan and South Korea cooperating in submarine knowledge and construction.

Regards

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Friday, 27 February 2015 3:31:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As Japan develops its hard power doctrine (reformed military policy and alliances) Japan would do well to alter its soft power image to make it more compatible with its Western allies.

In that regard Ms Ayako Sono's recent writings advocating racial segregation for immigrants in Japan have not helped things http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21644496-japan-considers-welcoming-more-foreign-workers-its-shores-bestselling-author-calls-their .

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Sunday, 8 March 2015 3:00:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Plantagenet,
Thank you. I knew that Ms. Sono said something that suggested different living quarters for racially or culturally different people. I read it now. You can read the Sankei Newspaper's article in English at the following Internet address.

http://durf.tumblr.com/post/110772241382/yesterday-sono-ayako-contributed-an-opinion-piece.
Posted by Michi, Sunday, 8 March 2015 10:42:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks for that article Michi.

Ms Sono's advocacy of apartheid, like old South Africa, certainly reads badly.

I've changed my mind a bit on whether Japan needs to change its social order to sell weapons to countries. Given Japan has sold millions of cars to the Western countries and built factories and buildings there selling weapons need not involve any big social change.

Regards

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Monday, 9 March 2015 8:22:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy