In view of the recurring anti-Japanese riots in Chinese cities, a US naval analyst wrote an essay on "The Sino-Japanese Naval War of 2012"(Foreign Policy, 20 August).
It says that 'China's navy is far superior in sheer weight of steel' if all its three fleets are put together. But there may be other factors operating at the time of a decision. The Senkaku islands in question are 'the hardest assets to defend from the Japanese standpoint', but 'a war would set back their(China's) sea-power project to construct a powerful oceangoing navy'. He gives no conclusion, the analysis is 'in strictly military terms', and that makes it very sensible. It is also good not to go into the nature of the Japan-US military alliance.
Without going into this alliance, the 'weight of steel' of the Japanese fleet, and the Constitutional question on the Japanese Self-Defense Forces, one wonders why China is so keen, as is often reported, in building 'a powerful oceangoing navy'. Apparently there are, and can be, no hypothetical enemies. China is building it for its own sake, and to the extent it is accomplished, it claims more of overseas territories and resources. Such a huge country is now keen on wrestling a groups of small inhabitable islands from a small one.
What is surprising is that a few, still a few, military men are talking of a possibility of a military action on the Senkaku by China. That has not happened in Japan, as yet, although the possibility is always there. Most worrying for us is that some people, like our usual conservative ideologues, will easily be tempted to respond that 'Didn't we tell you? Our present Constitution is not enough to defend the country. It should be amended to make our right of collective self-defense usable'. This is exactly what our people have been preventing to happen, especially by a network of thousands of Associations of Article 9, renouncing a war and the armed forces. Do we have to see it eroded by the Chinese propaganda?
Propaganda? But what other name? The rioters are unaware that those islands have been not only once put on Chinese maps as Japanese territories, until the attention of the Chinese authorities was called to the existence of resources in the area around 1970.
Why not make use of the resources jointly then, in a friendly way? Many Japanese will agree. For that, however, the Chinese authorities must speak the truth, and make their own people well-informed, to suit a great people.
What about the Japanese factories and shops destroyed and looted in the broad view of the whole world? Better come home, and create jobs there.
It says that 'China's navy is far superior in sheer weight of steel' if all its three fleets are put together. But there may be other factors operating at the time of a decision. The Senkaku islands in question are 'the hardest assets to defend from the Japanese standpoint', but 'a war would set back their(China's) sea-power project to construct a powerful oceangoing navy'. He gives no conclusion, the analysis is 'in strictly military terms', and that makes it very sensible. It is also good not to go into the nature of the Japan-US military alliance.
Without going into this alliance, the 'weight of steel' of the Japanese fleet, and the Constitutional question on the Japanese Self-Defense Forces, one wonders why China is so keen, as is often reported, in building 'a powerful oceangoing navy'. Apparently there are, and can be, no hypothetical enemies. China is building it for its own sake, and to the extent it is accomplished, it claims more of overseas territories and resources. Such a huge country is now keen on wrestling a groups of small inhabitable islands from a small one.
What is surprising is that a few, still a few, military men are talking of a possibility of a military action on the Senkaku by China. That has not happened in Japan, as yet, although the possibility is always there. Most worrying for us is that some people, like our usual conservative ideologues, will easily be tempted to respond that 'Didn't we tell you? Our present Constitution is not enough to defend the country. It should be amended to make our right of collective self-defense usable'. This is exactly what our people have been preventing to happen, especially by a network of thousands of Associations of Article 9, renouncing a war and the armed forces. Do we have to see it eroded by the Chinese propaganda?
Propaganda? But what other name? The rioters are unaware that those islands have been not only once put on Chinese maps as Japanese territories, until the attention of the Chinese authorities was called to the existence of resources in the area around 1970.
Why not make use of the resources jointly then, in a friendly way? Many Japanese will agree. For that, however, the Chinese authorities must speak the truth, and make their own people well-informed, to suit a great people.
What about the Japanese factories and shops destroyed and looted in the broad view of the whole world? Better come home, and create jobs there.
No comments:
Post a Comment