A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics
|
|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics | |
|
November 23, 2005War capabilities in Asia?Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara claims that U.S. ground forces, except for the Marines, are "extremely incompetent" and that we would lose a war with China. According to the article, this view is shared throughout the region, which thinks that the war in Iraq has revealed American weaknesses in "low-tech warfare". And it's not just our military, it's us. Speaking of a potential war with China, he said: "I believe America cannot win as it has a civic society that must adhere to the value of respecting lives." Further, he added that the U.S. could not counter an onslaught of millions of Chinese soldiers because after 2,000 casualties, the U.S. military would be forced to withdraw. He sees war with China as a real threat, because predictions of China evolving into a stable democracy with free elections are "totally wrong." I have myself voiced concerns about China here, when one of its generals threatened to use nuclear weapons if the U.S. were to militarily defend Taiwan. If this does indeed reflect a growing consensus of our allies in the region, it has serious implications for our hopes for progress on China, North Korea, and other issues. If Japan decides that it cannot rely on the U.S. for military protection, it will rebuild its own military. That would worry the Chinese, the Koreans, and other countries in the area who have had historical experience with a powerfully armed Japanese nation. If China believes that we would acquiesce to (or be defeated by) an armed takeover of Taiwan, they will do it, subjugating 22 million people to their despotic government. North Korea has the largest ground army in the world, and gives every appearance of being aching to use it. In short, I fear that being seen as militarily weak in that region would be like going for a swim off Amity Island while covered with chum. We're always fighting the last war. It's time to take the lessons learned in Vietnam, Panama, Grenada, Somalia, Bosnia, and Iraq and begin thinking how we would apply them in an Asian conflict with China, North Korea, or anyone else. (The first lesson being, of course, to never get involved in a land war in Asia.) Posted by PatHMV at November 23, 2005 11:53 AMComments
Any reason to think we should give a rat's fart about what the governor of Tokyo thinks? Is he a military expert, or is he just some politician with a finger in the wind who is talking out his ass to grab a few votes? IOW, is this like when the city council passes a war resolution? Posted by: bk at November 23, 2005 12:12 PMThat's an excellent question Brian. Apparently, he is elected by the 12 million people who populate the "metropolis" of Tokyo and presides over 23 municipalities (wards), each with their own elected mayors and assemblies, as well as several cities in "West Tokyo". Governor Ishihara is a former member of both the upper and lower houses of the Japanese parliament, served as a minister in two different cabinets, and ran for President of Japan in 1989. He is 73 years old. He appears to be a fairly controversial figure in Japanese politics. He is also an accomplished author of plays, novels, and even a musical version of Treasure Island, and is known for having a deep-seated xenophobia. One of his campaign planks was to close the U.S. Air Force base at Yokota in the Tokyo suburbs, so he is clearly no great friend of the U.S. But he has great disdain for China, as well. He looks to be the Japanese equivalent of Pat Buchanan, frankly. Very intelligent, with a long history of governmental service, but staunchly isolationist and anti-immigrationist. The only difference being that he seems to be really, really popular in Tokyo. What that means to me is that he is in a position to know what a lot of other officials in Asia are saying privately, and he is independent and contrary enough to repeat them publicly. Colored with his own biases, of course. But the article suggests the reporter spoke with other "officials" who confirmed that these issues are being privately discussed by many other Asian leaders. Posted by: PatHMV at November 23, 2005 12:36 PMAlso, he recently spoke at a gathering sponsored by the Foreign Policy Association in New York on "The Future of Asia: The View from Tokyo." Posted by: PatHMV at November 23, 2005 12:41 PMAnd on an unrelated note, just because I ran across this, the Japanese young adults are every bit as apathetic as American young adults when it comes to politics and voting! Posted by: PatHMV at November 23, 2005 12:45 PMFinally, and I'll shut up now, his call for rebuilding the Japanese military and overlooking the Japanese expansionist crimes of the past is one growing in popularity among members of the ruling Liberal Democrat party in Japan, of which he is a member, according to this Washington Post article. This kind of rhetoric in a re-armed Japan would surely trigger an Asian arms race. Posted by: PatHMV at November 23, 2005 12:50 PMI'd like to go into the number of ways thwarting a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is different than the current fight going on in Iraq, but I just had a big lunch. Do I need to bother, anyway? Posted by: WHQ at November 23, 2005 01:28 PMI should add, Pat, that I'm not being dismissive of your post in general, just what I see as a silly if existing perception of American weakness in Asia. Posted by: WHQ at November 23, 2005 01:31 PMThat's how I took your initial post, don't worry. But silly or not, if it is an existing perception, then it can have real consequences. Just as Saddam was intransigent prior to Gulf War I because he really didn't believe the world community would unite like it did (and plenty more examples in this historical vein), an erroneous perception of weakness could force us into a fight, even though we would eventually win it. So I guess my question is more, what can we do to reverse that perception? Posted by: PatHMV at November 23, 2005 02:50 PMHmmm... Admittedly I'm no expert on warfare, but if we got into some kind of major scuffle with the Chinese, wouldn't we institute a draft? It would seem to me that in a draft situation (especially if the nation was behind the war..rather than what we're seeing now)...the casualty rate would be exponentially less onerous to the citizenry. This seems like stupid posturing to me. Posted by: carla at November 23, 2005 04:13 PMIt would seem to me that in a draft situation...the casualty rate would be exponentially less onerous to the citizenry.Why would that be? This conclusion strikes me as highly counter-intuitive. Posted by: David Fleck at November 23, 2005 04:25 PM Brian; Any reason to think we should give a rat's fart about what the governor of Tokyo thinks? Is he a military expert, or is he just some politician with a finger in the wind...I think his finger is elsewhere. ;-) Posted by: c3 at November 23, 2005 05:20 PM Wouldn't a war over Taiwan be a naval war for the most part? I think a large portion of the perception that we are weak is it's been long time since we've fought anything where we've been able to "take off the gloves". Posted by: Dennis at November 23, 2005 08:28 PMAnd because part of our political class can't see the wisdom of a united public front. OK, to be honest neither side likes to act united with the other for more than a week or the next opinion poll. But the "weak" perception is the predictable result of the domestic infighting. Posted by: Tully at November 23, 2005 08:38 PMA+ to Tully for getting one of the points. Posted by: PatHMV at November 23, 2005 11:12 PMThe Japanese are in the process of trying to change their constitution to allow a real military and the ability to fight wars on foreign soil. I think the governor is posturing for a local population. All politics is local! Posted by: Bob J Young at November 24, 2005 02:11 PMYeah Bob, I picked up on that later last night as well. When i saw the story on Japan looking to authorize a more conventional military than what they've had since post-1945 surrender, I made this connection too. Since Japan and China hate each other, this might be a good idea. Posted by: bk at November 24, 2005 08:58 PMAnd I'd also like to point out that "rebuilding the Japanese military" is something of a misnomer. In qualitative terms, the Japanese Self-Defense Forces are already the best military of any Asian nation. Even the South Koreans (themselves a fantastic fighting force) and the Taiwanese take a backseat to the Japanese. And, of course, quantity is a quality in and of itself, and the Chinese have that market more or less cornered. What's controversial with the Japanese military is precisely what Bob Young points out in his post: that they are in the process of trying to change their constitution to allow the ability to fight wars on foreign soil. That is where the real debate lies in Asia. All of Asia is already more or less aware that the Japanese have already achieved military parity, if not outright superiority. Posted by: Bobby at November 25, 2005 02:09 AM |
Archives
March 2006
February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Dubai Out
Why So Long Between Democracies? Round One, Centrism Rock Lobster? Blackwell Releases "Worst-Treated" List "IRV" used in Burl., VT for mayor election. Great idea! Random Thread Election 2006: Round One A Proper Multiculturalism Bush proposes line item veto act - what's changed?
|
