Three cherry blossoms: Japan breaks off the leash
Perhaps, in the light of recent events, it is time to talk about our peculiar neighbor, with whom we have not yet signed a peace treaty, that is, we are almost at war. Yes, if sakura, then we will talk about Japan. Three flowers because we will consider three components, if you will - three elephants, on which the Japanese worldview stands today.
Considering that today's Japanese have complete revanchism in their heads, this will not be superfluous.
So go ahead
Japan, as everyone knows, is a very, very specific country. With very peculiar cockroaches in the heads of the population, with original traditions and everything else. Everything is very complicated and difficult.
In addition, Japan is the only country in the world that has a ban on the creation of an army and military fleet fixed constitutionally.
However, the number tanks, Self-propelled guns, armored vehicles, artillery barrels and air defense systems in the "self-defense forces" number in the hundreds. The Japanese fleet does not leave the world top 10, and the "self-defense forces" are also rated very highly.
Where does all this come from, how did the situation turn out the other way around?
In general, the Constitution for Japan, as you know, was written by General MacArthur with his staff in 1947. And he wrote it so that the warlike Japanese would once and for all restrain their ardor. And the security and independence of the country will be perfectly able to protect and defend the American troops stationed in the country.
And so it was for more than 70 years, but recently something went wrong. And American soldiers with their brawls regularly cause gnashing of teeth among the Japanese, and "protection" costs more and more from year to year. So Japan's desire to jump out from under American protection and acquire its own full-fledged army and navy, it seems to be quite justified.
But what about the Constitution ...
In general, here you can say "also a document for me." There would be a desire to change, but there is a Tereshkova in any country. Moreover, this document was written / edited for the Japanese by a very intelligent person.
In general, then, after the war, accepting the surrender of Japan, General Douglas MacArthur did as much for the Japanese as, probably, no foreigner did.
First, he very carefully prepared for this process, the creation of the Constitution. And most importantly, he did not subject the Emperor Hirohito to any persecution. Although there was a reason, Hirohito's signature could be seen on very interesting documents, for which it was possible to play, if not in Nuremberg, then in Harbin.
The fact that all his power was taken away from the Japanese emperor is nothing, it is better to remain a doll in general, but on the throne. It's better than being on a gallows or in a cell, honestly.
So, keeping Hirohito the status of "governor of Amaterasu" on earth, which actually allowed the Japanese "not to lose face." In general, this is a fairly significant part of the internal world in many Asian countries, and Japan is no exception.
So the face and the emperor were left to the Japanese, but the army and the navy, on the basis of their merits to the Chinese, Koreans, Indonesians and other peoples of the region, were decided to be deprived. And they wrote it down in the very Constitution of Japan.
"Sincerely striving for an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people will forever renounce war as the nation's sovereign right and the threat or use of military force as a means of settling international disputes."
This is the 9th article of the Constitution of Japan.
In addition, they clearly stipulated that in Japan "land, sea and air forces, as well as other means of war, will never be created in the future."
And the last thing: in the same place, in the Constitution, the prohibition on declaring and waging an offensive war is clearly stipulated.
That is, in which case Japan had the right only to defense, and even then, relying on American troops.
In general, it is logical and deserved. Such territories in terms of area, which were captured by Japan during the Second World War, the Germans did not even dream of in the sweetest dreams. That is why they decided to limit it so harshly.
Even Germany did not receive restrictions of this order, the Germans already had the Bundeswehr in 1955, and in 1956 Germany was admitted to NATO. True, he did not remove the American bases from the territory, but this is a completely different story.
Japan, de jure, and today remains "unarmed". Laughter, of course, because 4 helicopter carriers, 40 destroyers and 1000 tanks are, of course, an indicator that the country is completely unarmed in the face of any threat from the outside.
How did this happen at all and why does everyone look at it as a completely normal phenomenon?
Here we must look at the year 1951, when Japan and the United States signed the Treaty on Defense and Military Cooperation. According to this treaty, an attack on Japan was considered an attack on the United States. With all the ensuing consequences. That is, the American armed forces immediately had to liquidate any aggression against Japan.
Well, and nothing at all that for this on the territory of Japan, the Americans received the exclusive right to build military bases wherever they want.
True, already in 1952 in Japan they began to think that the Americans are good, but they also need to have their own. And on the basis of the police corps, they created a security force of 110 people. And in 000, the construction battalion was revived, which was completed by conscription.
In 1954, on the basis of the construction battalion and the security forces, the Self-Defense Forces were created. The United States provided artillery and tanks for training purposes and things went well ...
As it became clear afterwards, the Japanese simply took advantage of the loophole in their Constitution, so unobtrusively provided by the authors. Indeed, is there a ban on the conduct of offensive hostilities? Yes, but not a word about the fact that it is forbidden to defend their territories.
From whom? Second question. Here the problem of the Kuril Islands appeared at the right time and China began to actively rise and develop, with which the Japanese have long-standing scores.
The Americans, who willingly developed the armed forces, provided equipment and trained officers in US military universities, openly supported the militaristic aspirations of the Japanese.
Here we must recall the year 1948, in March of which the headquarters of the US occupation forces in Japan issued a secret order to stop the dismantling of 125 enterprises included in the reparations list. Naturally, these were military enterprises of quite specific concerns. And in 1949, 73 Japanese companies that owned military plants and factories were excluded from the list of reparations.
It seems to be a trifle, but already at the beginning of 1950, enterprises producing military products started working again. Cartridges, mines, shells ... But that was the beginning, and then - more.
And in the end, quietly and without unnecessary noise, but by now Japan, which does not have an army and a navy, but has a self-defense police force, with these forces is in the top ten armies of the world.
250 thousand personnel, almost 1 tanks, 000 anti-aircraft missile systems, almost 350 fighters.
About 50 warships in the "neflot" (of which 4 aircraft carriers) and 21 submarines, about a hundred auxiliary vessels.
And it is very interesting that such a state of power ceases to satisfy very many in Japan. What is the problem? The fact that there are legally no soldiers and sailors as such. The Self-Defense Forces include some "employees" with a very ambiguous status.
It is understandable why in Japan they treat the status quo in this way. Eternal respect for the army and the navy (especially), multiplied by revanchism and militarism ... In general, the compote is still the same.
Who will be surprised by the fact that since 2012 some kind of military reform has been underway in Japan, the main, unveiled goal of which is to reformat the Self-Defense Forces into full-fledged Armed Forces? Nobody.
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, and the prime minister in today's Japan is above the emperor in influence, back in the year of the 70th anniversary of the adoption of the Japanese Constitution, in 2017, he hinted at length that the basic law should be amended. It is for the sake of the military in Japan becoming again the military, and not employees of the Self-Defense Forces.
Abe, of course, made a mess earlier, in 2015, when he pushed through parliament a law that significantly expanded the capabilities and powers of the Self-Defense Forces. Since the adoption of that law, members of the Self-Defense Forces have been able to participate in hostilities to protect the interests of friendly countries, despite the fact that these actions will be carried out without Japan being attacked.
A small nuance, Japan was not attacked, but it is necessary to provide assistance to friends-allies ... There is a difference. True, despite the fact that the rating of the Self-Defense Forces in Japan itself is very high, the change in the Constitution in the direction of recognizing the Self-Defense Forces as full-fledged Armed Forces of Abe turned out to be beyond his strength. More precisely, he simply did not have time.
It is worth noting that his successor, Yoshihide Suga ... was not as charismatic as Abe. And his actions lay on a slightly different plane than the revival of the Armed Forces. Apparently, this was the reason for the castling a year later. The new prime minister, Fumio Kishida, who has worked as foreign minister for a very long time, knows how to negotiate and look for compromises. We will see how and where the cabinet of ministers will lead its new head, but given the general sentiment in Japan, it is doubtful that it will reduce the Self-Defense Forces.
Very doubtful.
By the way, it is very peculiar, but the fact that Japan really wants to create its own armed forces and unmoor from American patronage is a great merit of the Americans themselves.
It is common knowledge that Okinawa and the military bases there are a source of constant concern for the Japanese.
American soldiers do not allow anyone to relax, keeping the authorities and security officials in good shape with negativity from drunken brawls and fights to outright criminality. And in 2020, and in general, the bases, or rather, their personnel, became the source of the spread of coronavirus on the islands.
But, perhaps, the main nail in the coffin of relations between the military of the two countries was driven by Donald Trump. It was he who, during a visit to Japan, began to "bend" the Japanese by increasing the cost of maintaining the American army from 2 to 8 billion dollars a year. This is the maintenance and repair of ships, the maintenance of bases and the like.
The Japanese deny, but former Trump national security adviser Bolton both said and wrote in his book that Trump not only tried to increase the defense bill, but also threatened to withdraw American troops from the islands altogether.
However, not taking litter out of public, the Japanese still more and more come to the conclusion that such money can be spent on their own. And this is quite logical.
Cracks appear in the relationship. What is the disruption of the supply of ground-based Aegis Ashore missile defense systems, which were supposed to be deployed in Akita and Yamaguchi prefectures by 2023.
In general, the deployment of missile defense systems in these prefectures is quite understandable in light of the systematically transmitted "greetings" of a ballistic nature from North Korea. Since the Koreans "train" the Japanese by launching ballistic missiles in their direction, then something that could counteract these missiles on the shores of Japan is quite justified.
In addition, the complex in Akita prefecture could easily keep the launchers under control in Russia.
And now it didn't work out. Allegedly, the upper stage "Ashore" is unsafe for the civilian population in case of deviation from the given trajectory.
Total: there are no complexes, there is a probability of arrival from North Korean missile forces, there is nothing to defend with. Today in Japan they are not only concerned with what can be used to repel a blow from North Korea, but also with what can be used to respond. Moreover, when he was under the Minister of Defense, Taro Kano seriously considered the issue of the possibility of a preemptive strike against North Korea. And this can in no way be attributed to defensive actions.
If we add to this the constant work of Japan in terms of nuclear energy ... Well, after Fukushima, the whole program was given a "stop" and all the reactors were shut down. However, today out of 62 reactors, 33 are in operation. In terms of nuclear energy, Japan ranks first in Asia and third (after France and the United States) in the world.
Here, the day is not far off when Japan will think about building nuclear submarines or creating a nuclear weapons... Yes, at one time Japan signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, but: The Japanese Constitution does not prohibit the country from developing and having these weapons. And, accordingly, apply. To repel aggression or in response.
This, of course, is said somewhat running ahead. But at one time Japan had several training old American tanks and a dozen howitzers to train the Self-Defense Forces. Today the country has a first-class army and navy.
Tomorrow?
And tomorrow the Constitution of the country may be easily rewritten and then nothing will be able to keep Japan from another plunge into the abyss of militaristic revanchism. Fortunately, there is someone to argue with. Fortunately, rewriting the Constitution is not such a difficult thing, is it, Russians?
If, even under the conditions of prohibitions, Japan creates such armed forces that are not only called by them, then what will happen if the Japanese get off the leash? Moreover, the US aid, paid in yen, will remain in terms of equipment and technology.
The emergence of another uncontrollable player in the Asia-Pacific region could significantly worsen the already not very calm situation. Claims with North Korea, disputes with China, disputes with Russia ...
And all this is very well spiced with Japanese revanchism. You can make a nice pack of yeast in a summer toilet in the July heat. The fact that the Japanese can easily get off the leash of the United States and begin to pursue their policy in the region, I will add that this policy will be openly aggressive - this is a quite possible option. Today's sentiment in Japan indulges this, as well as indulge the main "defenders" from the United States to the development of the armed forces in a country that has no right to possess them.
But this is the topic of the next conversation.
Information