Allow Japanese Nukes

Washington Post ^ | 10/20/06 | Charles Krauthammer

[AmericanExceptionalist]

The first stop on Condoleezza Rice's post-detonation, nuclear reassurance tour was Tokyo. There she dutifully unfurled the American nuclear umbrella, pledging in person that the United States would meet any North Korean attack on Japan with massive American retaliation, nuclear if necessary.

[Retief]

Other countries in Asia haven't forgotten World War II. They still fear and loath the Japanese.

That's why Japan is such a great US ally . . . because everyone else hates Japan. Japan is like Israel. Everyone else in the world hates the country.

Unfortunately, Japan, like Israel, needs nukes. The US can't be trusted as an ally and may cut-and-run as it did in Vietnam, and as the Dems are threatening to do now in Iraq.

It's far better to have nukes and not need them, then to need nukes and not have them.

[diesel00]

That's why Japan is such a great US ally . . . because everyone else hates Japan. Japan is like Israel. Everyone else in the world hates the country.

Japan isn't like Israel. Israel and jews didn't go around killing, raping and looting all those Germans, Muslims, Poles and Frenchmen.

East Asian wariness of Japan is not the same as fanatical Muslim hatred of Israel. The former has good and solid historical basis.

[Alter Kaker]

That's why Japan is such a great US ally . . . because everyone else hates Japan.

Except the US can't afford for the Far East to turn into the Middle East. The US needs to have not just Japan, but also South Korea, Thailand, Indonesia, Taiwan, the Philipines, etc. in its sphere of influence, not China's, if it wants to contain China. Also, I'm not sure that Japan sees its relations with the US in quite the same way that Israel does.

[elmer fudd]

I'm not sure I understand your point. How does a nuclear Japan help things? If the interest is in deterring a Korean attack on Tokyo, the US could simply reassert its historic commitment to providing a nuclear umbrella. A nuclear Japan isn't any more likely to launch a preemptive attack on Pyongyang than a nuclear Washington is. In fact, it's probably less likely to.

Put yourself in Japan's shoes. Would you trust the Americans to come to your aid? Now? Sure, but how about 5 years from now under the Clinton or Obama administration? When you've got nukes you never need to worry about whether someone else will provide your deterent for you.

[Constantine XI Palaeologus]

Well, I might be wrong, but I thought Taiwanese industry would be capable of producing missiles with adequate range. I'm talking about technological capability to produce, not whether they can legally. IIRC South Korea was pressured not to produce ballistic missiles by us a while back. Maybe we've got something like that in place for the ROC.

I don't know why we're so reluctant to share technology with Taiwan (they're still using upgraded Kidd-class destroyers IIRC). Are we behind them or not (but that's another issue).

[Alter Kaker]

Put yourself in Japan's shoes. Would you trust the Americans to come to your aid? Now? Sure, but how about 5 years from now under the Clinton or Obama administration?

I understand why Japan wants nukes. But I don't see how the US would want Japan to get nukes. A nuclear Japan would increase China's power relative to the US enormously. A slight increase in Japanese peace of mind results in a tremendous decrease in American regional influence.

[Constantine XI Palaeologus]

If we're talking about historical hegemony, Korea'd do well to remember that China dominated them for a good deal of their history. The same goes for much of Asia. The Vietnamese still remember Chinese domination, and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't want a return to that past.

Apart from a few pirates here and there and the brief moment of expansionism, Japan has left well enough alone for most of its history. Unless I'm forgeting something. :)

[elmer fudd]

I understand why Japan wants nukes. But I don't see how the US would want Japan to get nukes.

Because it could prevent both a war and a human tragedy. Our nukes probably won't always be a deterent to North Korea attacking Japan and we shouldn't have to put ourselves in the position of risking WW3 to defend a country with the means to defend itself.

[Atlantic Bridge]

I'm sorry, having Japan nuclearize has the same amount of appeal as having a nuclearized Germany. We don't need more countries having nuclear weapons, period. Ally today, enemy tomorrow.

Japan or German will not ask you if they see the necessity of a own nuclear force. It will happen silent and fast - just like it happened in Israel a long time ago. No offical statements but everybody will know that they have damm good working nukes since we do not have to discuss the technical skills of those countries.

It is not probable that Germany will produce its own nukes in the near future, because it is under the direct nuclear umbrella of France. In difference to the US the defense of a nuclear attack in Germany would also be a question of survival for France. Everybody in Germany knows that. The confidence into the US upon this question is not that strong anymore in the meantime.

I assume that the Japanese have the same reservations (as long as we talk about this question) against the US just as political Germany has. In difference to Germany they have no "nuclear" neighbour that is "married" (sarcasm) to them. Therefore it is not sure to me if they not already rule over a nuclear inventory. If I would be the Japanese prime minister I would.

[Retief]

The US needs to have not just Japan, but also South Korea, Thailand, Indonesia, Taiwan, the Philipines, etc. in its sphere of influence, not China's, if it wants to contain China.

Forget South Korea. That's just the France of the far east.

Forget Indonesia. That's 98% radical Islamics, working on ethnically cleansing the 2% Christians from their islands. The US would have about as much chance as getting Indonesia on its side as it would Iran. Remember the Tsunami? How grateful was Indonesia for US aid?

The Philippines, maybe. They kicked the US out of their bases there, but they need help fighting of the Islamofacists.

Thailand, not much of chance. They just had a military coup and installed a Muslim PM, and the Islamofacsits are advancing from the south.

Taiwan, yes. That's another country without allies. Vulnerable and nobody will stick up for them because if you do, you invite powerful enemies. It's sort of like being friends with Israel. Say something bad about both countries and hopefully China and the Islamofascists will leave you alone.

[DB]

Tell that to the Chinese of the late 1930's...

A million or more dead at the hands of the Japanese.

In addition Japan has a modern navy. Japan would be able to retaliate to the point of total destruction regardless of land mass size or damage done to their home.

[DB]

What regional "powers" would that be?

China, Russia and Japan are the regional powers.

The threat of a nuclear armed Japan is the strongest force we and Japan have short of war to forcing China to take care of its proxy anti-US weapon North Korea.

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

Despite his newness, I tend to agree with him and welcome him to FR.

Japan has never even come to terms with its history. They are a homogenous people who let a demi-god like dictator lead them to a disatrous war and now they are trying to gloss over the ill deeds they did. Better to keep that nuclear genie in the bottle. Besides, they could build nukes in 3-6 months anyway.

[Retief]

Japan has never even come to terms with its history. They are a homogenous people who let a demi-god like dictator lead them to a disatrous war and now they are trying to gloss over the ill deeds they did.

Being nuked . . . twice, and occupied for seven years, which to some degree is still ongoing as the Russians refuse to return the Kurile islands isn't enough atonement. Being Japanese is like being white. You have to pay for the sins of your ancestors FOREVER.

As for being homogenous, what's wrong with that? Should Japan open its islands to unrestricted immigration and let Islamofacist immigrants pour in until they're a major threat like in EuroArabia?

[diesel00]

If we're talking about historical hegemony, Korea'd do well to remember that China dominated them for a good deal of their history.

Chinese domination of Korea in history was rarely militarial. For the most part it was an economic and cultural domination. The few times that China interfered with Korea were mainly China choosing sides among various Korean kingdoms.

Japan has left well enough alone for most of its history. Unless I'm forgeting something. :)

You clearly forgot Hideyoshi's brutal military campaigns against Korea during the 16th century. Japan since the 1400s has had its eye on Northeast Asia, repeatedly invading the Korean peninsula with a desire to rule over continental China. Diaries from Japanese rulers from the 16th century clearly state their intentions of establishing a Japanese-dominated empire in Beijing, to overthrow the ruling Manchus. World War II was not an isolated incident for Japan, but one of nearly half a dozen failed attempts by the Japanese. The Japanese believed strongly that China under the Manchus was no longer the Classical China that the Japanese admired, and thus it was the Japanese's "duty" to restore the lost values of Ancient China. This thinking was ironically used during the 20th century by both the Japanese and the Chinese nationalists.

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

As for being homogenous, what's wrong with that?

There is nothing wrong with being homogenuous per se. However, it allows for the much easier creation of an "us" vs "them" mentality as well as claims of genetic superiority.

It is easier to justify destroying your enemy completely and indiscriminately if you can claim that you and your people are the only true pure humans.

Homogeneity is much more fertile ground for racist/facist thinking.

Moreover, I am not asking Japan to "pay for its sins" but rather to stop trying to gloss over the history of the atrocities they committed. It must be taught to the children no matter how painful. You will find that I will advocate this for any peoples regardless of their color.

You seem to have a very unusual chip on your shoulder regarding this subject. Care to tell us why?

[diesel00]

As for being homogenous, what's wrong with that? Should Japan open its islands to unrestricted immigration and let Islamofacist immigrants pour in until they're a major threat like in EuroArabia?

There are plenty of things wrong with homogeneity when it is viewed as the ultimate goal or the guiding principle. Islamofacism is a homogenous ideology. You are either a muslim or an infidel in Islamofacism.

BTW, being Japanese is not like being white. Japanese is a nationality and ethnicity found mostly in one nation-state, it is not a race. From the perspective of nationality, the Japanese SHOULD pay for the sins of their ancestors if they lost the war and surrendered unconditionally. That's part of the game. Only an apologist would say otherwise. On the otherhand, what some white Frenchmen did in Algeria should not be blamed upon me just because I'm white also.

[Retief]

Japanese SHOULD pay for the sins of their ancestors if they lost the war and surrendered unconditionally.

Whitey should pay for the sins of their ancestors forever. Sounds fair to me. A few of whitey's sins: (1) stealing the land from the American Indians, (2) nuking the Japanese; (3) interning Japanese Americans; (4) enslaving Africans and then discriminating against them even after they were emancipated; (5) cutting-and-running from its south Vietnamese allies; (6) stealing the American southwest from Mexico. The list just goes on and on.

[snowrip]

Wrong. Wrong. And...wrong.

South Korea is about as vital to US interests in Asia as France is to US interests in Europe. We have wasted a lot of blood and treasure to prop up an "ally" that goes against our interests at every turn. Yet, like the French dependence upon NATO, Seoul screams like a child when the US mentions troop withdrawals from the DMZ.

Let them posture like the silly "progressives" in France. They are well aware who keeps the wolves at bay.

Ditto the rest of the Pacific rim countries. Their fear of an expansionist China greatly outweighs any traces of animosity towards WWII Japan, who BTW has a modern history of nothing but peaceful relations with its neighbors.

[snowrip]

A nuclear Japan isn't any more likely to launch a preemptive attack on Pyongyang than a nuclear Washington is.

Your logic is circular... If this is the case, than why should anyone in the region fear a nuclear Japan, as you have suggested?

In fact, it's probably less likely to.

And the tiger shows his true stripes.