The Japan Card

[DinoDoc]

[snip]

[T]he administration has chosen a strategy of economic and diplomatic isolation. The idea is to squeeze the North Korean regime to the point where it can no longer function.

That could be done. China supplies nearly all of North Korea's energy and 40 percent of its foodstuffs. South Korea has significant investments in North Korea. International organizations provide a huge amount of food aid. Moreover, North Korea has only a few major harbors. They could be blockaded. If China and South Korea were to cut off North Korea, it could not survive.

The problem with this scenario is that South Korea and China do not want to play ball. They fear the chaos that might ensue. The American containment strategy was already falling apart on Day One, when both the South Korean president and the president-elect criticized it.

The Chinese have been even more recalcitrant. They show no inclination to deny North Korea what it needs to survive. Even more ominously, Bill Gertz of the Washington Times reports that the Chinese have just shipped 20 tons of highly specialized chemicals used in extracting plutonium from spent reactor fuel.

What to do when your hand is so poor? Play the trump. We do have one, but we dare not speak its name: a nuclear Japan. Japan cannot long tolerate a nuclear-armed North Korea. Having once lobbed a missile over Japan, North Korea could easily hit any city in Japan with a nuclear-tipped weapon. Japan does not want to live under that threat.

We should go to the Chinese and tell them plainly that if they do not join us in squeezing North Korea and thus stopping its march to go nuclear, we will endorse any Japanese attempt to create a nuclear deterrent of its own. Even better, we would sympathetically regard any request by Japan to acquire American nuclear missiles as an immediate and interim deterrent. If our nightmare is a nuclear North Korea, China's is a nuclear Japan. It's time to share the nightmares.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3921-2003Jan2.html

[orange]

i think it's wrong to bully nations into doing our bidding

[DanS]

I hardly think that China needs to be reminded of the consequences of a nuclear NK. But why they haven't been more proactive on the issue is befuddling to me.

Why can't the powers in the region sit down and plan out an orderly collapse of NK (or at least as orderly as possible) and Korean reunification? It's time.

[Oerdin]

Even if it's in the world’s best interest? Remember that just four years ago the North Koreans sent suicide agents in to South Korea. We never found out what their mission was. They also routinely send gunboats into South Korean waters and open fire on South Korean Naval ships. What about the missiles they fired over Japan a few years back?

You have to stand up to nations that refuse to behave semi-rationally. Or at least you have to punish bad behavior and reward good behavior.

[Oerdin]

The Chinese communists won't ever willingly give up their Korean puppet. Even if it starves its people and acts like a deranged war monger.

[Arrian]

I read that article earlier today. The idea strikes me as unrealistic, dangerous, and of course hypocritical (the US supposedly opposes the proliferation of WoMDs).

Oh, and by the way: does Japan want nukes?

Besides, if it's a nuclear NK we're so worried about, why not give SK nukes, not Japan?

Any way you cut it, though, this would be getting into NK's brinkmanship game. And what if, perchance, when presented with the threat of a nuclear Japan, the Chinese shrugged and pointed at their nuclear weapons?

-Arrian

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Arrian
And what if, perchance, when presented with the threat of a nuclear Japan, the Chinese shrugged and pointed at their nuclear weapons?

Regardless of the merrits of the proposal, I don't think that is a strong possibilty if we take the American response to a nuclear armed NK as an example.

[DRoseDARs]

Japan with nukes? Hadn't thought of that before. Hell, not long ago Japan largely balked at the idea of having a regular standing military. Giving them nukes might actually be an effective deterent for North Korea, though I doubt it's a good idea in the long run. The more nations that have nukes, the more likely the risk of nuclear weapons being used in future conflicts...

[Oerdin]

Let's face it there are a lot of countries in the world that could build nukes if they wanted to. Our policies should be designed to punish those countries which opt for nukes and reward those countries which agree to give up nukes.

[Arrian]

Dino,

Why assume the Chinese will react to a given threat the way we would?

-Arrian

[Provost Harrison]

Surely Japan could have nuclear weapons any time it wishes, let's face it, it more than has the capability...

[Oerdin]

Japan, Germany, Poland, Ukraine, Italy, Spain, Sweden, South Africa, Brazil, Argentina, South Korea, Kazakstan, and a number of other countries could all build nukes if they wanted to. The whole point of trying to deter countries like North Korea from building nukes is so that other countries don't feel they also have to go out and build nukes for self defense.

If we sit on the fence with this issue and start the "that would just be bullying" sort of none sense then the world will quickly become less and less safe.

[Oerdin]

Japan, Germany, Poland, Ukraine, Italy, Spain, Sweden, South Africa, Brazil, Argentina, South Korea, Kazakstan, and a number of other countries could all build nukes if they wanted to. The whole point of trying to deter countries like North Korea from building nukes is so that other countries don't feel they also have to go out and build nukes for self defense.

If we sit on the fence with this issue and start the "that would just be bullying" sort of none sense then the world will quickly become less and less safe as more and more countries become nuclear armed.

[orange]

how can the western world exist with nuclear weapons, more than enough to blow the world to bits, and tell other nations that they can't have them? If you want to use embargoes and diplomatic pressure to convince a nation not to build nuclear weapons, fine...but threatening them with military action or nuclear force and bullying third party nations into going along with it is, in my opinion, wrong.

[Oerdin]

It's called the real world. Like Apolyton it is not always a Democracy nor is it fair. The point now becomes what is in our interests and how do we make the world a safer place; i.e. how do we keep the number of nukes as small as possible?

The anwser is the carrot and the stick. Good boys and girls get the carrot while the naughty boy who doesn't listen gets made an example of.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Arrian
Oh, and by the way: does Japan want nukes?

Not at you, but at the idea:

The only ideas that would be quicker for political suicide in Japan (not just for the individuals, but entire political parties) would be a suggestion of rearamament and forcible reinstitution of the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere.

Giving up national sovereignty and becoming a province of (pick the country of your choice) wouldn't be as self-destructive politically.

100% tax rates and state collectivazation of all property, including the clothes on your back wouldn't be as self-destructive politically.

The Japanese go through a sham of officially pretending that US warships paying port calls or based in Japan are not carrying nuclear weapons aboard - as long as it's denied and deniable, people can look the other way.

Developing any form of domestic nuclear weapons capability can't be pretended away - there would be physical facilities, money spent in the budget, etc. - there is simply no way in hell that such a thing would happen - not in this century, or the next, or the next.

[monkspider]

MtG: What is it that makes you think that the Japanese public is so adamantly opposed to the idea of owning nuclear weapons?!?

With an economic power as huge as Japan, acquiring nuclear weapons is inevitable. Japan is already considered a "paranuclear" state. Japan has the raw materials, technology, and capital for developing nuclear weapons. Japan could possibly produce functional nuclear weapons in as little as a year's time. On the strength of its nuclear industry, and its stockpile of weapons-useable plutonium, Japan in some respects considers itself, and is treated by others as, as a virtual nuclear weapons state and I would say that it will almost assuredly take the next step to full blown inclusion in the nuclear club within the next fifty years. If not much less.

[Oerdin]

Japan is the most adimitely anti-nuclear country I've ever been to. Bar none.

[orange]

Originally posted by monkspider
MtG: What is it that makes you think that the Japanese public is so adamantly opposed to the idea of owning nuclear weapons?!?

With an economic power as huge as Japan, acquiring nuclear weapons is inevitable. Japan is already considered a "paranuclear" state. Japan has the raw materials, technology, and capital for developing nuclear weapons. Japan could possibly produce functional nuclear weapons in as little as a year's time. On the strength of its nuclear industry, and its stockpile of weapons-useable plutonium, Japan in some respects considers itself, and is treated by others as, as a virtual nuclear weapons state and I would say that it will almost assuredly take the next step to full blown inclusion in the nuclear club within the next fifty years. If not much less.

60 years ago they would have been very interested, but not now...not for a looooong time. I'm with MtG's analysis on this one

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
The only ideas that would be quicker for political suicide in Japan (not just for the individuals, but entire political parties) would be a suggestion of rearamament and forcible reinstitution of the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere.

No one is suggesting rearmament and forcible reinstitution of the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere though. It appears nowhere in the original post.

While I've got you here though, How would you get China to effectively yank NK's chain and get them to behave reasonably then?

[Oerdin]

The anwser to how china can stop NK was in the first post. 100% of NK energy and 60% of it's food comes from China. Stop that support and NK is a dead duck. The Koreans know this, the Chinese know this, and we know this.

[chequita guevara]

Every country in East Asia would cut off trade with Japan the moment it said it had nukes.

[orange]

Originally posted by Oerdin
The anwser to how china can stop NK was in the first post. 100% of NK energy and 60% of it's food comes from China. Stop that support and NK is a dead duck. The Koreans know this, the Chinese know this, and we know this.

and knowing is half the battle, so combined, we have 150% of the battle done

So why do we still have problems?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by monkspider
MtG: What is it that makes you think that the Japanese public is so adamantly opposed to the idea of owning nuclear weapons?!?

With an economic power as huge as Japan, acquiring nuclear weapons is inevitable. Japan is already considered a "paranuclear" state. Japan has the raw materials, technology, and capital for developing nuclear weapons. Japan could possibly produce functional nuclear weapons in as little as a year's time. On the strength of its nuclear industry, and its stockpile of weapons-useable plutonium, Japan in some respects considers itself, and is treated by others as, as a virtual nuclear weapons state and I would say that it will almost assuredly take the next step to full blown inclusion in the nuclear club within the next fifty years. If not much less.

Because I've lived there, speak the language, and have discussed geopolitics, military issues, power projection, nuclear power and weapons, and all sorts of fun stuff with people all over the political spectrum, all over the country, and aged from high school to survivors of WWII.

The simple fact is that (backed repeatedly by polls) the Japanese would rather surrender to an invader or at most engage in post-invasion passive resistance rather than even actively fight against an invasion. This "shell-shocked" effect goes further, in that there is huge resistance to increases in the military budget in any climate, especially the current economic slump, and the consensus view is that increasing military capability is more likely, not less, to make Japan a target of future aggression.

The politics of nuclear weaponry is created largely with the help of the huge numbers of school tours of the a-bomb sites in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and a large number of anti-proliferation political groups. The populace in general is very anti-military, and politics reflects this - the Jieitai ("self-defense forces") ground forces can't even officially call themselves an army, training ops that even look slightly offense oriented have to be very very limited, and even within the ranks of the military, there's no real support for a larger power projection role, and none for NBC capability.

It will simply never happen.

edit - weird typo

edit - add: The Japanese stocks of Plutonium are from their civilian power production facilities (Suruga and others), dating back to the 1970's. They are not from weapons production or R&D programs, and there is a high degree of public accountability, because nuclear power is a sensitive issue.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
No one is suggesting rearmament and forcible reinstitution of the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere though. It appears nowhere in the original post.

While I've got you here though, How would you get China to effectively yank NK's chain and get them to behave reasonably then?

I was just trying to think of something that would be more absurd and unpopular in the Japanese domestic political environment. It's hard to find things that will have support levels in the fraction of one percent range, which is about the support range for Japan becoming a nuclear power. Convicted child molesters would have a brighter political future than anyone who proposed developing a nuclear force.

China has no real interest in yanking the DPRK's chain, unless we really kiss their ass and offer them something too yummy to resist. Then after a while, they can let go of the chain.

The PRC will yank for their own benefit (telling Kimmy what will happen if he flings a megaton of **** into the global fan without a good enough reason) behind the scenes, but if NK can be a headache for Bush and undermine US foreign policy and power projection, while the PRC keeps it's hands clean, why would they object?

A diversion and thorn in the side that limits US influence and ties up political and foreign policy resources is perfect - the PRC has nothing to really lose by the present arrangement, and Kimmy is one hell of nice poker chip to be able to put on the table at the appropriate time.

[chequita guevara]

And who here thinks that the DRPK's recent anouncements aren't about putting a fly in Bush's ointment? Go ahead, raise your hands.

After all, the DPRK was tossed into the Axis of Evil to show that America wasn't solely anti-Islam. But the US can't do to the DPRK what it's trying to do to Iraq, so no we look like hypocrits to the world of Islam, since we can't come down anywhere near as hard on a country with actual WoMD programs as we are on one that we merely accuse of having programs.

Got to say, whether it was the PRC or the DPRK that thought this up, it's brialliant.

[MichaeltheGreat]

The DPRK isn't that agile. The first admission, that they had an under the table weapons program, was made after the AoE speech, but about a program that had been operating since the late 90's.

The DPRK had already started a gamble that it could bluff/blackmail more concessions after the agreed framework, but to get anything, you have to give something, so they were looking for goodies to give - they had to create something, since the DPRK isn't exactly either mineral rich, or an exotic tourist mecca

Bush's AoE blunder wasn't the cause, it was just very fortuitous so far, as it fit well with what the DPRK wants, which is to be bought off, without giving up anything of substance.

[Shi Huangdi]

MtG: Haven't there been some opposition parties that have a more active foreign policy role, with some more Japanese politcian who called for Japan to be a "normal nation"

[MichaeltheGreat]

SH/BD:

That's all about amending the MacArthur constitution, scrapping with the 1% limit on military expenditures (the game during the Reagan admin, when Japan was pressured by the US to do more military, was to spend 1.002% of GDP and see how loud the screaming was), and allowing things like participation in UN Peacekeeping missions with combat personnel. That's about it.

Even those positions have very low support, because the Japanese think in terms of a slippery slope. Eventually, some of that will come to pass, but it will still be limited to UN actions, or some similarly non-controversial international framework. If there's one thing I'd bet on, it's that nukes will be a permanent taboo.

[chequita guevara]

There is still a somewhat "strong," i.e., well-financed, fascist "movement" in Japan, mainly composed of old guardists and yakuza and the like. AFAIK, main stream Japanese think of them as kooks, dangerous thugs, but kooks nonetheless.