Military Review

In Japan, told about the purpose of the established US missile defense system

46
The ground-based missile defense system is aimed at protecting Japan and its citizens, will be controlled by Japan and does not pose a threat to Russia and other neighboring countries, said RIA News at the Japanese Foreign Ministry.


First of all, it is necessary to say that we refrain from commenting on the statements distributed through the media. As for the deployment of the Aegis Ashore missile defense system in Japan, the missile defense of our country is a purely defensive system aimed at protecting the lives and property of our citizens, and our country controls it, it does not pose a threat to Russia or other countries surrounded by Japan. The Japanese side reported this during the visit of Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono to Moscow in November during his meetings with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
- said the representative of the Foreign Ministry.

In Japan, told about the purpose of the established US missile defense system


At the same time, the Foreign Ministry emphasizes that Japan still "intends to persistently conduct negotiations to determine the ownership of the four islands," as Kunashir, Iturup, Habomai and Shikotan are called in Japan, and "conclude a peace treaty with Russia."

On Thursday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that Japan’s decision to deploy US missile defense systems would have a negative impact on the talks on a peace treaty between Moscow and Tokyo. She urged to take into account the fact that "the aforementioned complexes are equipped with universal launchers, which are also capable of using shock weapons." Zakharova stressed that this would mean the actual violation of the treaty on the elimination of medium and short-range missiles by the Americans with the assistance of Japan.

The government of Japan, 19 December, has decided to deploy Aegis Ashore’s two US ground-based anti-missile defense systems on the territory of the country. They are planned to be deployed in Akita prefectures in the north of the country and in Yamaguchi in the south-west. It is understood that the radius of their actions will be able to cover the entire territory of the country. Each installation will cost Japan 100 billion yen (about 890 million dollars). Tokyo expects they will be commissioned before the 2023 year.
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com/
46 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vard
    Vard 29 December 2017 11: 43
    0
    So ... and I'm not me ... and the hut is not mine ... Of course, right now there will be anti-aircraft missiles there ... but who's stopping a couple of containers from being placed nearby ... reloading launchers on tactical missiles is a matter of tens of seconds. ... And given that similar systems are already located in Romania and Poland ... then the oil painting ...
    1. SRC P-15
      SRC P-15 29 December 2017 11: 48
      +8
      The missile defense system is aimed at protecting Japan and its citizens, will be controlled by Japan and will not pose a threat to Russia and other neighboring countries, RIA Novosti said

      So our Iskanders located on the Kuril Islands do not pose a threat to Japan and "other neighboring countries"!
      1. BVS
        BVS 29 December 2017 11: 56
        +2
        "Iskanders" offensive tactical weapons. Any air defense and missile defense defensive weapon. So it is accepted in the world.
        1. SRC P-15
          SRC P-15 29 December 2017 11: 58
          +7
          Quote: bvs
          "Iskanders" offensive tactical weapons. Any air defense and missile defense defensive weapon. So it is accepted in the world.

          It is not customary in the world to use missile defense missile defense systems - which are offensive weapons!
          1. Vladimir16
            Vladimir16 29 December 2017 12: 43
            +3
            Japs Americans raped twice with the help of atomic bombs. Destroyed hundreds of thousands of people.
            Now the Americans are doing on the land of the Japs what they want, and the natives carry some crap about the purpose of American weapons.
            Japs, who are you? You are nobody and there is no way to call you. Gain sovereignty first, and then talk about the security of American weapons, and don't forget about Hiroshima and Nagasaki in this essay.
          2. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 29 December 2017 20: 24
            0
            Ask for sudden checks. What is the problem? The Japanese will agree.
            Both Romanians and Poles from NATO. Such checks are accepted and conducted between Russia and the United States. Russian officers visited US ICBM bases, and vice versa.
            1. _Jack_
              _Jack_ 29 December 2017 20: 58
              +1
              firstly, it’s not a fact that they will agree, especially the Poles, and secondly, it’s not a panacea, you don’t check every day, besides, you can refuse to check it when it is inconvenient (baud a good excuse), and when everything is in order, please check
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 29 December 2017 21: 37
                +1
                Easy to install round-the-clock video surveillance cameras. With a constant line with Russia. There is nothing secret in the outer box of launch missiles.
                And Russia will calm down, and NATO will agree. If you want, you can always agree on a mutual verification mode.
                1. _Jack_
                  _Jack_ 30 December 2017 11: 33
                  0
                  It was earlier, about 15-20 years ago, it was possible to agree on such a thing, now hysteria is artificially created in the West about Russia, the image of the enemy is being pushed into the masses, and quite successfully, judging by the general polls. opinions. No one will agree on this background, what agreements with the enemies. And such Russophobic countries as Poland will not agree on the principle.
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 30 December 2017 13: 54
                    0
                    The stations are owned by NATO. The US commands the NATO.
                    As the Americans say, it will. All checks between Russia and the United States are valid. And it looks strange: "ah, what if they deceive you?" And no concrete steps are taken to eliminate deception.
                    1. _Jack_
                      _Jack_ 30 December 2017 14: 33
                      +1
                      Such checks will not fundamentally change anything. While everything will be honest, the cameras will work and inspections will be carried out. As soon as they really need to replace missiles with offensive ones and the cameras are turned off and checks will be sent away. We will understand their intentions and what? The balance of power will not change this. Missiles at our borders will not become smaller.
                2. MOSKVITYANIN
                  MOSKVITYANIN 30 December 2017 22: 06
                  +1
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  Easy to install round-the-clock video surveillance cameras. With a constant line with Russia. There is nothing secret in the outer box of launch missiles.
                  And Russia will calm down, and NATO will agree. If you want, you can always agree on a mutual verification mode.

                  Those. Israel will not mind if there are missile defense bases equipped with video cameras in the territory of the SAR
        2. 75 hammer
          75 hammer 29 December 2017 12: 02
          +5
          In your "democratic" world a lot of things are accepted! For example: shake a test tube and bomb the country, eliminate the legitimate government and grow ISIS in its place! Your most important rule: take away from the weak!
        3. sergo1914
          sergo1914 29 December 2017 12: 18
          +2
          Quote: bvs
          Any air defense and missile defense defensive weapon. So it is accepted in the world.


          Ha ha ha Stop. No need to joke like that anymore!
        4. Nikolay Fedorov
          Nikolay Fedorov 29 December 2017 13: 39
          +2
          Quote: bvs
          "Iskanders" offensive tactical weapons. Any air defense and missile defense defensive weapon. So it is accepted in the world.

          Especially for the British.
          Charging these defensive missile defense systems with Tomogavk offensive cruise missiles, missile defense systems remain a defensive weapon, according to the British? Well, then, applying the same technique, our Iskanders are a very defensive weapon. The most defensive weapon in the world, speaking English. yes
        5. Grits
          Grits 30 December 2017 02: 28
          +1
          Any air defense and missile defense defensive weapon. So it is accepted in the world.
          This is customary in a world where compliance is maintained. But this does not apply to the Americans.
          Dear Englishman, you will either come ... (oh, a short-sighted person), or fool around. After all, it is precisely the ABM system that the Americans are installing that just cannot be considered a purely defensive weapon. If you can read, and not just consider pictures, then I advise you to read the article more carefully. And there it is clearly said about it. I’m translating it into a simple language of a standard user - you can shove the Tomogavk into this “pipe” with a slight movement of your hand, after having previously thrown out the anti-aircraft missile from there. And voila - the complex smoothly turns into a percussion.
          Sorry, VO readers for the children's explanation, you are competent in these matters. Chewing is addressed to our close "partner".
      2. Chertt
        Chertt 29 December 2017 11: 59
        +6
        Quote: СРЦ П-15
        So our Iskanders located on the Kuril Islands do not pose a threat to Japan

        And the location on the islands of Kunashir, Iturup, Khabomai and Shikotan of military units and equipment of the Armed Forces of Russia, is carried out solely for the purpose of good neighborly relations with Japan
        1. SRC P-15
          SRC P-15 29 December 2017 12: 01
          +2
          Quote: Chertt
          And the location on the islands of Kunashir, Iturup, Khabomai and Shikotan of military units and equipment of the Armed Forces of Russia, is carried out solely for the purpose of good neighborly relations with Japan

          Correctly! After all, our "green men" are the most polite and kind! yes hi
          1. Chertt
            Chertt 29 December 2017 12: 09
            +4
            Quote: СРЦ П-15
            Correctly! After all, our "green men" are the most polite and kind!

            We bring to the world a little more politeness
        2. Angel_and_Demon
          Angel_and_Demon 29 December 2017 12: 55
          +5
          Quote: Chertt
          conducted exclusively for good neighborly relations with Japan

          1. Chertt
            Chertt 29 December 2017 12: 59
            +1
            The map is slightly incomplete. Several Eastern, Central and Western European countries, as it were, are not shown in red.
            1. Angel_and_Demon
              Angel_and_Demon 29 December 2017 13: 03
              +4
              Quote: Chertt
              Several East, Central and West European countries, as it were, are not depicted in red

              Well, you are a foodie - do you need trans-European regions?
              1. Chertt
                Chertt 29 December 2017 13: 25
                +2
                Quote: Angel_and_Demon
                Do you need trans-European regions?

                I would have to finish the smoking shed on the site, But do I need to ask the president’s advisers on Geopolitics if these areas are needed in Russia. Here straits yes, it is definitely necessary winked
  2. newcomer
    newcomer 29 December 2017 11: 45
    +3
    yeah, defenders, damn it. the future aircraft carrier, too, probably for protection.
    1. figwam
      figwam 29 December 2017 11: 59
      +1
      Quote: newbie
      yeah, defenders, damn it. the future aircraft carrier, too, probably for protection.

      That's for sure, all their weapons are not lethal and defensive, but in Russia, a lethal offensive.
    2. Chertt
      Chertt 29 December 2017 12: 01
      +1
      Old Russian proverb "It is best to be friends with a neighbor, through a strong fence"
    3. Angel_and_Demon
      Angel_and_Demon 29 December 2017 13: 04
      +4
      Quote: newbie
      the future aircraft carrier, too, probably for protection.

      so this is a holy wind however request
  3. DMoroz
    DMoroz 29 December 2017 11: 48
    0
    The fact that the US missile defense system in Japan to protect it from Iran is a well-known fact, but the fact that Japan is still
    "intends to aggressively negotiate to determine the ownership of the four islands,"
    this is an obsession - an obsession.
    Unlike the rational doubts inherent in every healthy person, the obsession does not disappear even after the patient makes sure of its unfoundedness. In content, such thoughts can be very diverse and arise as a result of experienced traumatic circumstances, stress, insurmountable doubts and memories).
    fool
    1. Angel_and_Demon
      Angel_and_Demon 29 December 2017 13: 06
      +4
      Quote: DMoroz
      In content, such thoughts can be very diverse and arise as a result of experienced traumatic circumstances, stress, insurmountable doubts and memories).

      So, Hiroshima and Nagasaki - is this not stress?
  4. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 29 December 2017 11: 50
    +3
    Everything that is being placed, and not without the help of the Americans around Russia, is all defensive against someone (Iran, North Korea ...), but not against us. It's just that Russia has not successfully chosen its location on the globe. But if it didn’t exist at all, then there was no need to spend money on armaments. The logic of the adherent of the “Russian threat”.
  5. Vadim851
    Vadim851 29 December 2017 12: 05
    0
    On the other hand, it makes sense to place 24 Tomahawks on the islands in these TPKs? It’s much easier and cheaper to build a pair of destroyers with 96 TPK and to hit with “axes” from a closer distance.
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 29 December 2017 12: 16
      +3
      Or install the MK-41 on the ground, without any appendages like an expensive radar.
    2. Topotun
      Topotun 29 December 2017 13: 21
      +2
      The islands can be placed anywhere. The cost of TPK - compared with the cost of the destroyer - is garbage. Plus, do not spend money on the crew of the destroyer. Plus, the Kyrgyz Republic can lie relatively close and wait an hour - and before that it’s air defense .... Plus, it’s easy to equip hidden emergency positions on the island. And if necessary, to increase the number is not so difficult. There are many pluses.
    3. BVS
      BVS 30 December 2017 05: 27
      +2
      And what does “24 Tomahawk on the Islands” pose a great danger to the Far East of the Russian Federation, moreover, in the usual version (not a special part)?
  6. chidoryan
    chidoryan 29 December 2017 13: 14
    +1
    “She urged to take into account the fact that“ the mentioned complexes are equipped with universal launchers that are capable of using shock weapons as well. ”“ Is there another chatter or is there evidence?
  7. ul_vitalii
    ul_vitalii 29 December 2017 14: 07
    +6
    There is a usual polite chatter of two warring parties. Everyone has everything thought out and tested. And I deeply doubt that the Iskander was used at an officially permissible distance, but was not mixed somewhere near Astrakhan with the Caliber.
  8. 7gor
    7gor 29 December 2017 14: 22
    0
    No need la la !!!! No. I do not believe!
  9. Thunderbolt
    Thunderbolt 29 December 2017 15: 22
    +1
    Maria Zakharova said that Japan’s decision to deploy US missile defense systems will negatively affect negotiations on a peace treaty between Moscow and Tokyo.
    They wanted to spit on the negotiation process ... the issue of the "Northern Territories" is used by Japanese politicians to play on the nationalist feelings of ordinary Japanese voters during an inter-party struggle. So, if it doesn’t work out peacefully, then Japan plans to expand by taking over (maximizing military and economic weakening of Russia). Zakharova found something to frighten, because it is clear that Japan will not refuse to deploy missile defense and develop its offensive capabilities. Well, for whom then is the "peace treaty" and the prospects opened up with it more important ...?
  10. razved
    razved 29 December 2017 15: 49
    0
    Old song. The author is the same, only the performers are changing.
  11. Old26
    Old26 29 December 2017 21: 39
    +1
    Quote: Vard
    So ... and I'm not me ... and the hut is not mine ... Of course, right now there will be anti-aircraft missiles there ... but who's stopping a couple of containers from being placed nearby ... reloading launchers on tactical missiles is a matter of tens of seconds. ... And given that similar systems are already located in Romania and Poland ... then the oil painting ...

    Structurally, the launch of this Aegis Ashor complex is a radar complex with a command post and three units for 8 missiles. Let us leave aside for now whether cruise missiles will be placed there or not. but I really liked your resume, that reloading these launchers takes a dozen seconds ... A cruise missile is taken about 6-7 meters long and weighs one and a half tons. Further, this rocket must be lifted by a crane system, and the nose of the rocket should be raised by 12-14 meters so that the bottom of the rocket could be sent to the launch cell. If you need several tens of seconds to do this, well, you are either the Lord God or his deputy.

    Quote: СРЦ П-15
    It is not customary in the world to use missile defense missile defense systems - which are offensive weapons!

    Can tactical missile launchers be used for medium-range missiles?

    Quote: Vadim851
    On the other hand, it makes sense to place 24 Tomahawks on the islands in these TPKs? It’s much easier and cheaper to build a pair of destroyers with 96 TPK and to hit with “axes” from a closer distance.

    It won’t work. Then the comrades will not be able to talk about violations of the treaty by the Americans. Although while there are no cruise missiles there are no violations of the articles of the treaty ...

    Quote: donavi49
    Or install the MK-41 on the ground, without any appendages like an expensive radar.

    You do not understand. This is a disguise. Americans are willing to spend millions in vain (on radars) just to trick us ...

    Quote: Topotun
    The islands can be placed anywhere. The cost of TPK - compared with the cost of the destroyer - is garbage. Plus, do not spend money on the crew of the destroyer. Plus, the Kyrgyz Republic can lie relatively close and wait an hour - and before that it’s air defense .... Plus, it’s easy to equip hidden emergency positions on the island. And if necessary, to increase the number is not so difficult. There are many pluses.

    The cost of the TPK, or rather the launcher block, is really with the cost of the destroyer - garbage. The question is different. What are you going to equip cruise missiles to strike in Russia? High explosive head? And to covertly build a complex consisting of a central block and three blocks 7 meters high - this is such a small thing. To build is how to draw on paper
    1. MOSKVITYANIN
      MOSKVITYANIN 30 December 2017 22: 16
      0
      Old26 Although while there are no cruise missiles there are no violations of the articles of the treaty ...

      The treaty extends not only to short-range and medium-range missiles, but also to short- and medium-range ballistic missiles; American missile defense systems fall into this category ....
      Why again, gullible members of the forum are deceiving?
    2. MOSKVITYANIN
      MOSKVITYANIN 30 December 2017 22: 24
      0
      Old26 And to covertly build a complex consisting of a central block and three blocks 7 meters high - this is such a small thing.

      Nobody hides anything ....
      В Romania launched the US missile defense base
      The construction of the Aegis Ashore facility in the Deveselu area was completed in May 2015, in December it reached functional availability. Another such facility should be ready for the 2018 year in northern Poland (in the Redzikovo region, the Baltic Sea coast), its construction is expected to start on 13 in May 2016 of the year.

      https://lenta.ru/news/2016/05/12/romania_bmd/
      I read in ZVO recently that the complex that was built is nothing more than a ship superstructure of American destroyers equipped with the Aegis system, so the flow method can be said to have long been mastered ...
  12. Wolka
    Wolka 30 December 2017 19: 36
    0
    Samurai, are you really smarter than anyone in the world ...
  13. Old26
    Old26 31 December 2017 13: 22
    +1
    Quote: MOSKVITYANIN
    The treaty extends not only to short-range and medium-range missiles, but also to short- and medium-range ballistic missiles; American missile defense systems fall into this category ....

    Or maybe still the respected MOSKVITYANIN, you will understand the terminology before writing. The agreement was not on missiles small and medium range. And on medium and lesser range. Apparently you do not catch the difference in terms of short and short range.
    The terms related to the missile range were agreed upon, as they are different for different countries. So the treaty covered missiles and range (from 1000 km to 5500 km) and missiles lesser range (from 500 to 1000 km). Short-range missiles, according to contract terminology, are considered tactical missiles.
    In the text of the contract BLACK ON WHITE IN RUSSIAN (and English) LANGUAGES it is said that missiles designed to intercept targets in the atmosphere, as well as target missiles designed to practice interception DO NOT BE SUBJECT TO CONSIDERING THIS AGREEMENT. Class rockets only ground to ground. Therefore, do not invent or repeat someone’s nonsense that you read that American missile defense missiles are medium-range missiles that violate this treaty. Then it turns out that our long-range anti-missiles from the belt around Moscow are also a direct violation of this treaty? And they also, unlike the US, carry nuclear charges.
    Take, for the sake of interest, read the agreements: OSV-1 and OSV-2, START-1/2/3, the ABM Treaty, the INF Treaty. Discover a lot of interesting things for yourself. As in the program "Obvious-Incredible" - HOW MUCH WE ARE MIRACLES DISCOVERIES ....... Seriously. It will become clear in many cases when they hang noodles on your ears (it makes no difference, yours or others), and when not

    Quote: MOSKVITYANIN
    Why again, gullible members of the forum are deceiving?

    So when you read, for a change, at least the INF Treaty, you won’t have any questions who is lying to the gullible members of the forum and who isn’t ...

    Quote: MOSKVITYANIN
    Nobody hides anything ....

    This post was a response to the post of one of the forum users who wrote, and what is so difficult to covertly build (attach) several more VPU modules and place the CD there. Another forum member generally says that something is business. It takes several tens of seconds to reload these launchers ...

    Quote: MOSKVITYANIN

    US missile defense base launched in Romania
    The construction of the Aegis Ashore facility in the Deveselu area was completed in May 2015, and it reached functional readiness in December 2015. Another such facility should be ready by 2018 in northern Poland (in the Redzikovo region, the Baltic Sea coast), its construction is expected to start on May 13, 2016.


    https://lenta.ru/news/2016/05/12/romania_bmd/
    I read in ZVO recently that the complex that was built is nothing more than a ship superstructure of American destroyers equipped with the Aegis system, so the flow method can be said to have long been mastered ...

    So to speak. Externally and internally, this tower of the control center with radars repeats the cabin of the ship. Also on 3 or four levels are located machines and mechanisms. But this is not a 100% copy of the cutting. Only outwardly. It is built from prefabricated structures. But still, this is not a stream method. Another thing is if this “logging” was done at a shipyard and transported to a ground base - it could be considered a channel. But here it is piece production, although using modern technologies
    1. MOSKVITYANIN
      MOSKVITYANIN 31 December 2017 14: 03
      0
      Old26 Or maybe still the respected MOSKVITYANIN, you will understand the terminology before writing.

      I made a little mistake. I know this agreement better than you, and more than once you commented on it in its individual articles. I just wanted to point out that it regulates not only the KR SMD but also the BR SMD ...
  14. Old26
    Old26 31 December 2017 16: 39
    +1
    Quote: MOSKVITYANIN
    I made a little mistake. I know this agreement better than you, and more than once you commented on it in its individual articles. I just wanted to point out that it regulates not only the KR SMD but also the BR SMD ...

    Of course not only. And rockets of shorter range. After all, because of this, all the fuss with the Americans. They argue that the range of our ground-based cruise missiles exceeds the permissible limit and that these missiles fall, if not under the definition of medium, then at least under the definition of missiles lesser range. Sometimes we ourselves add fuel to the fire when we start at several forums and the media to say that the Kyrgyz Republic with Iskander will almost cover Europe. Initially, after all, they also ranked Iskander as violations. Therefore, of course, the contract governs medium and shorter ballistic and cruise missiles