In the past few days, although the movement in Japan is not big, it is very intriguing.
According to Japan’s “Yomiuri Shimbun”, citing several politicians, the negotiations between Japan and the United States on the purchase of Tomahawk missiles by the Japanese Self-Defense Forces have entered the final stage, and the United States has shown a very positive attitude towards reaching a deal.
Recently, the Japanese government’s idea of using military force has become more and more obvious. Since the three governments of Shinzo Abe, Yoshihide Suga, and Fumio Kishida, Japan’s defense budget expenditure has been frequently increased in an attempt to fundamentally give Japan a “counter-attack force”.
Especially after the assassination of Shinzo Abe, there are more signs of right-leaning radicalism in Japan, which is an opportunity for Fumio Kishida to revise the National Security Strategy at the end of this year.
Behind Japan’s active enhancement of its armed forces is the great game of the international environment and changes in Japan’s domestic situation.
First of all, when the US Asia-Pacific strategy was gradually implemented, Japan realized that it was imminent to lift the restrictions imposed by the international community on Japan after World War II.
Japan’s position after World War II was very embarrassing, not only losing its military autonomy, but also being restrained politically and economically. In history, it is not that Japan has not resisted. It once thought about overtaking in corners in technological revolutions such as semiconductors, but it ended up being miserable.
This time the Fed raised interest rates and reduced its balance sheet, which also had a serious negative impact on the Japanese yen. The outside world was pessimistic about the future financial situation in Japan.
Under the severe unequal relationship between the United States and Japan, Japan is not without benefits.
What Japan values most is whether it has a “counter-attack force”, in other words, whether it can have an effective deterrent force against neighboring countries.
Although no one doubts Japan’s military strength, due to international rules, Japan has been unable to develop ultra-long-range strike missiles on the bright side. Because once this kind of weapon is ready, it must be notified to neighboring countries for test firing, in order to avoid misunderstanding. And where does Japan dare to speak up?
The U.S. attitude was previously ambiguous because Japan beat the U.S. military hard in the Pacific during World War II, and East Asia did not want another “tiger” to appear.
But now the situation has turned a lot, mainly because the US military finds its military strength in the Asia-Pacific is stretched, and it is no longer enough to meet the increasing challenges.
If a conflict breaks out, Japan can at best be a logistics supply hub and work in coordination, such as anti-submarine, air defense, and reconnaissance.
Is this the picture the Pentagon wants to see? Obviously not!
From the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, we should recognize the temperament of the Americans. They are more willing to see others as cannon fodder in front of them, while they reap the benefits.
For Japanese individuals, they certainly have the opportunity to resolve territorial disputes with neighboring countries, and even use these islands as a springboard to continue to realize their World War II dreams.
In the recent training, the project of the Self-Defense Force has obviously more landing operations and more subjects that are suitable for actual combat. These all indicate that Japan’s ambition is not limited to the so-called “counter-attack force”, but to occupy.
In the past two years, the United States has continuously increased its arms sales to Japan. One is willing to buy and the other is willing to sell. It seems that there is no problem, but it affects the stability of the entire region.
Whether it is the F-35 or the “Aegis” system or the current “Tomahawk” missile, these are the world’s top equipment and are compatible with the US combat system.
This means that the cooperation between the United States and Japan will be very smooth, and after Japan is separated from the United States, its combat power will be difficult to condense.
Therefore, in the context of complementarity, the relationship between the United States and Japan will become more and more profound, and the foundation will be solid and will not be easily destroyed from the outside.
Second, the United States has begun to build a camp of Pacific allies.
Whether the “Okus” security framework or the US-Japan-South Korea military alliance, its core is a US-centered military organization.
This is the “island chain plan” of the United States, but compared with the “first” and “second” island chain, its scope will be greatly increased. Even if the United States insists on forming it, other member states are powerless.
The “NATOization” of East Asian countries and the “Asia-Pacificization” of NATO countries are gradually integrating. More and more European warships are beginning to enter and exit the Asia-Pacific waters frequently, and Japan and South Korea are also trying their best to join the NATO framework from a technical level.
From this perspective, NATO does not seem to be a military defense organization of the United States and its Atlantic allies, but rather a group of military fighters led by the United States.
The essence of such an organization is to maintain the foundation of hegemony and maintain the original world order. It does not want any country to jump out and break the situation. Its essence is to go against the normal logic of the development of things.
The United States does not want the situation to change, and the situation in Japan is similar. After all, Japan’s geographical location and historical entanglements are very sensitive. If it does not hold the thigh of the United States, when it will become a normal-looking country is even more distant.
All in all, the US and Japan’s arms purchase plan is exactly what they call “a factor that exacerbates regional instability.”