Japan, faced with rising China, shifts its strategy

[Reashot Xigwin]

The best way to contain China is to form an Anti China military and economic Alliance......

With U.S,Japan,Australia,Taiwan,India,Vietnam,Philipines,If possible S.Korea,Myanmar too etc being core members of this alliance....


The first goal of this alliance should be to reduce import of chinese products....

That's a really bad idea...

We say ‘no’ to boycott of Chinese goods
Posted on July 17, 2012

boycott of Chinese goods

Cartoon by Roni Santiago

Last June 22, dozens of Filipino and Vietnamese Americans staged a rally in New York during which they called for a boycott of Chinese-made products. The rally was in protest of Beijing’s “creeping aggression toward countries around the South China Sea.”

“Boycott made-in-China goods,” said Eric Lachica of the U.S. Pinoys for Good Governance, which organized the rally held in front of the United Nations headquarters in New York.

Dr. Hoi Van Do, president of the Vietnamese community in Florida and one of the rally organizers, said his country and the Philippines are on the same side of the issue. “Communist China dominates and takes over our islands and Scarborough Shoal of the Philippines,” he told The FilAm newspaper.

It was also reported that Filipino and Vietnamese leaders are slated to meet with top executives of major retailers like Wal-Mart, Costco, K-mart and Home Depot to ask them to stop selling Chinese-made products.

Doctor Do and the other rally organizers said they were even willing to stay away from Chinese restaurants.

We beg to disagree with the rally organizers as we oppose the call for boycott of Chinese goods.

We fear that the boycott could prompt Chinese authorities to launch a counter-boycott, and this could mean a complete stoppage of importation of Philippine goods. They did this recently when they banned the entry of Philippine bananas, although they claimed that quarantine issue was the reason behind the ban.

Chinese quarantine officials barred the entry of Philippine bananas, claiming pest contamination. Of the 1,500 container vans of bananas sent to Beijing, Chinese quarantine officials allowed only 290 vans.

The Chinese counter-boycott could lead to mass layoff of thousands of banana farm workers in Mindanao. And the laid-off workers could become targets of recruitment by the communist New People’s Army, which is very active in Southern Philippines.

China is a major market not only for Philippine bananas but also for other Philippine consumer goods. On the other hand, China considers the Philippines as just as another source of imported products. The balance of trade between the two countries is heavily tilted in favor of China.

We likewise reject a plan calling for Filipinos and Vietnamese “to stay away from Chinese restaurants” here in the US. We believe such action is unfair to the restaurant owners who have nothing to do with the territorial dispute. Just like us, the owners have become more of Americans than Chinese.

The boycott could likewise adversely affect many American companies that have set up factories in China. The goods produced by the companies are sold here in the US.

It is our humble view that the territorial dispute could still be resolved through the diplomatic channels. Meanwhile, we should refrain from taking actions that can aggravate the dispute.

There are 2 things that make a total war less desirable: Nukes & Free Trade.

 

[jhungary]

To be honest, after all the derailed post, coming back to Japanese Issue.

japanese have every kind of technology and heavy industry, if they were to shift to Arms building, they should have a good future as a alternative to US/Russian arms.

What they should do now is to set up basic infrastructure for producing and procuring arms first, the problem is not the lack of technology or infrastructure itself but money, what Japan have been done before is to make their own stuff for their own market and with technological transfer, they should first find buyer within the Asian Circle. Then try to make the weapon as affordable as possible. With Japanese technology on a low price tag. They should be pretty much very welcomed by tier 2 or Tier 3 country.

Yes, this is make uncle Sam and China very uncomfortable. But this is the only way to go.

 

[terranMarine]

lol mr Chinese Troll just got up and wanted to troll some more??

What do you know about military and Military service and what do you know about war??

UNtil the day you know about these stuff then we are at the same level to talk about it, in the meantime, shut up and listen

By the way, as i said, the Reason for invasion to Iraq is NOT because Iraq have WMD, IRAQ DID HAVE WMD, and they still have them at the begining of 2012 and you also did not denial Iraq have Chemical Weapon (Which IS WMD) in the former exchange we had, the reason for invasion is because Iraqi was NOT complying and cooperating with the UN request, even Hans Blix said so. So you can stop your trolling

Iraq is not the only country to have chemical weapons, so does the US. In case you forgot US didn't hesitate to use chemical weapons during the Vietnam War and even now they have the Agent Orange stuff stored in Okinawa. The chemical weapons that was found were the ones back in the 80's and it doesn't look like Iraq was developing more dangerous chemical weapons before being invaded dumba$$. Oh did you know so far there's only 1 country that has used nuclear weapons on another country? Hope you enjoyed your meaningless war in Iraq as they had nothing to do with 9/11 which drove you to get patriotic and fought in Afghanistan. Why aren't you still serving your country soldier? Got traumatized or disillusioned American?

 

[jhungary]

Iraq is not the only country to have chemical weapons, so does the US. In case you forgot US didn't hesitate to use chemical weapons during the Vietnam War and even now they have the Agent Orange stuff stored in Okinawa. The chemical weapons that was found were the ones back in the 80's and it doesn't look like Iraq was developing more dangerous chemical weapons before being invaded dumba$$. Oh did you know so far there's only 1 country that has used nuclear weapons on another country? Hope you enjoyed your meaningless war in Iraq as they had nothing to do with 9/11 which drove you to get patriotic and fought in Afghanistan. Why aren't you still serving your country soldier? Got traumatized or disillusioned American?

Lol what the heck does American Chemical Weapon have to do with Iraqi WMD program, as i recall there is a UNSC resolution stating that Iraqi MUST disarm all WMD equipment, but i don't seems to recall there is a UNSCR require US to disarm all the WMD in their inventory. As far as i know, American is NOT ON TRIAL HERE. Stop deflecting attention just because of your fail trolling.

Failed to agrue with me on the case of Iraq and trying to pin it on how immoral the American are?

Dude, again, if you know nothing about being a soldier and war, PLEASE can you not talk about it?? Unless you get some battlefield experience, and then i will sit there and listen to you and your war. Otherwise you are just disrespecting every soldier in every war with every country that fought and die for their clause, including the Chinese soldier who lost their live in WW2 and any war they may have fought.

And if not for them 2 Atomic bomb, we ought to call China Manchukuo now, and you will not be speaking and writing CHinese and English, you will be speaking japanese. How about that, let's go back to Japan in 1945 and stop american dropping the bomb, see who suffer more..

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

To be honest, after all the derailed post, coming back to Japanese Issue.

japanese have every kind of technology and heavy industry, if they were to shift to Arms building, they should have a good future as a alternative to US/Russian arms.

What they should do now is to set up basic infrastructure for producing and procuring arms first, the problem is not the lack of technology or infrastructure itself but money, what Japan have been done before is to make their own stuff for their own market and with technological transfer, they should first find buyer within the Asian Circle. Then try to make the weapon as affordable as possible. With Japanese technology on a low price tag. They should be pretty much very welcomed by tier 2 or Tier 3 country.

Yes, this is make uncle Sam and China very uncomfortable. But this is the only way to go.

If Japan offers ToT on its defence prodcuts, India will certainly be a buyer.

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Lol what the heck does American Chemical Weapon have to do with Iraqi WMD program, as i recall there is a UNSC resolution stating that Iraqi MUST disarm all WMD equipment, but i don't seems to recall there is a UNSCR require US to disarm all the WMD in their inventory. As far as i know, American is NOT ON TRIAL HERE. Stop deflecting attention just because of your fail trolling.

Failed to agrue with me on the case of Iraq and trying to pin it on how immoral the American are?

Dude, again, if you know nothing about being a soldier and war, PLEASE can you not talk about it?? Unless you get some battlefield experience, and then i will sit there and listen to you and your war. Otherwise you are just disrespecting every soldier in every war with every country that fought and die for their clause, including the Chinese soldier who lost their live in WW2 and any war they may have fought.

And if not for them 2 Atomic bomb, we ought to call China Manchukuo now, and you will not be speaking and writing CHinese and English, you will be speaking japanese. How about that, let's go back to Japan in 1945 and stop american dropping the bomb, see who suffer more..

Manchukuo is located in Manchuria region, located west of Russia Far East. It was a Puppet State created by the Japanese in order to gain access to China steel & coal. Not China but just another country created by cutting one of Chinese region

Even if it does true that Iraq has WMD what make you think a war in Iraq is justifiable or in my opinion did any good to the country. The situation in Iraq doesn't even need to escalate to war.

1 example of the Iraq War done to the US economy:

If Japan offers ToT on its defence prodcuts, India will certainly be a buyer.

Not likely the Japanese government might sell but giving a Transfer of Technology..... Its still not possible in the foreseeable future

 

[terranMarine]

Legality of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The legality of the invasion and occupation of Iraq has been widely debated since the United States, United Kingdom, and a coalition of other countries launched the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The then United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in September 2004 that: "From our point of view and the UN Charter point of view, it [the war] was illegal."[1][2] The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court reported in February 2006 that he had received 240 communications in connection with the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 which alleged that various war crimes had been committed. The political leaders of the US and UK have argued the war was legal, while many legal experts and other international leaders have argued that it was illegal.

 

[jhungary]

Manchukuo is located in Manchuria region, located west of Russia Far East. It was a Puppet State created by the Japanese in order to gain access to China steel & coal. Not China but just another country created by cutting one of Chinese region

Even if it does true that Iraq has WMD what make you think a war in Iraq is justifiable or in my opinion did any good to the country. The situation in Iraq doesn't even need to escalate to war.

1 example of the Iraq War done to the US economy:

Not likely the Japanese government might sell but giving a Transfer of Technology..... Its still not possible in the foreseeable future

Okay, seems like you are a nice guy, let's talk about Iraq war more.

The problem with Iraq is, there are WMD, and they are require to disarm those WMD they have stock piled (Even if they were expired) as per UNSCR 1441. There are WMD, even to this date, yet to be dissemble by colition government in Iraq, but back in 2003, we don't know how much and how many were there, all you got is a dogged response from Saddam Hussein, as there are no way to know in 2003 whether Iraqi still have Chemical Weapon, or worse yet, Nuclear weapon, US called for UN to sanction an Military Operation in Irar to open up the suspected site for UN inspector. UN refuse to sanction such operation not because of UN do not want a war in Iraq (They do as per subsequent United Nations Security Council Resolution 1546 which authorise the formation of NTM-I under NATO Command) , they just wanted to wait it out, but as you read on, you will already know, the wait have been 5 years and 5 years are long enough.

The thing is, UN wanted to wait some more and with the increasing tension on No Fly Zone and resistence offered by Iraqi to the International Observer, Bush decided to act and form its own colition of troop to liberate Iraq.

Many people would have just stopped at the first part which is how US start war in Iraq without UN consent, but as the matter of fact, they do, UN did gave the power in form of 1441 to do whatever necessary to gain access for inspection, which included a military mean. The war is not justified on the cause of whether Iraq have WMD, but rather a Justified on the clause of refusing to disarm them itself (Refusing to let inspector to inspect the site is a direct violation of 1441), or at a very least Resising the International Observer to inspect the site of the alleged WMD storage.

The refusal of inspection can be dating back to 1998 as the then UN Weapon inspector Scot Ritter resign his post of Weapon Inspector over what he claimed "illusion of arms control" and "The sad truth is that Iraq today is not disarmed... UNSCOM has good reason to believe that there are significant numbers of proscribed weapons and related components and the means to manufacture such weapons unaccounted for in Iraq today ... "Now remember the time he said such thing is August 1998 after ward Hans Blix take the helm of Weapon Inspection and the man itself saying in January 2003 (Which is 2 months before invasion of Iraq) "Iraq had "not genuinely accepted UN resolutions demanding that it disarm". Although he do believe and in his report stated there are no WMD TO BE FOUND in Iraq, his believe is also of that Iraqi is not cooperate with the weapon inspector.

Now, if we wind back to 2003, given you know Iraqi have WMD, it may or may not be expired on Feb 2003, they have used it before, and 2 consecutive inspector express concern that Iraqi have not fully cooperate with the weapoin inspection, if you were on the other side of the table, what would you think??

People are more indulge into american bashing than more into the truth. I usually not talk about it as i don't think anyone, except people who have been there (I mean in Iraq) will know about the truth. Of course it did not concern you as you live in your living room, 6000 miles away and safely watching TV, but for those poeple on the ground, those who live in Iraq, those soldier who serve in Iraq, that is another story.

No body in the right mind want to fight in a war. I been there, not particular something i really want to remember for the rest of my day. But sometime war is needed for people or country to comply with international demand, war sometime is not avoidable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_Training_Mission_–_Iraq
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationale_for_the_Iraq_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_up_to_the_Iraq_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_the_Iraq_War

 

[terranMarine]

unavoidable? Tell that to the rest of the world who label the war as illegal.

 

[jhungary]

unavoidable? Tell that to the rest of the world who label the war as illegal.

Lol who exactly label the war illegal??

If they do then where is the country who take part in UNSCR 1546 formation of NATO Training Mission – Iraq (NTM-I)

It does not seems they are sees as illegal in

United States
Italy
Denmark
Netherlands
United Kingdom
Turkey
Romania
Lithuania
Estonia
Poland
Bulgaria
Albania
Czech Republic
Iceland
Slovakia
Slovenia
Norway
Hungary
Germany
Japan
UAE
Canada
France
Poland
Spain
Jordan
Egypt
Ukraine

Lol i doubt you even know UN Sanctioned NTM-I do exist in Iraq, read more before you post, here is a start

NATO Training Mission

dude, may i remind you one last time, this thread is NOT ABOUT IRAQ INCURSION, is about japanese military development, if you have question on IRaq, you want to raise, i am more than gladly to educate you when you open a thread, otherwise this is my last time i talk about Iraq war here, you want to get banned is your business, i don't

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Okay, seems like you are a nice guy, let's talk about Iraq war more.

The problem with Iraq is, there are WMD, and they are require to disarm those WMD they have stock piled (Even if they were expired) as per UNSCR 1441. There are WMD, even to this date, yet to be dissemble by colition government in Iraq, but back in 2003, we don't know how much and how many were there, all you got is a dogged response from Saddam Hussein, as there are no way to know in 2003 whether Iraqi still have Chemical Weapon, or worse yet, Nuclear weapon, US called for UN to sanction an Military Operation in Irar to open up the suspected site for UN inspector. UN refuse to sanction such operation not because of UN do not want a war in Iraq (They do as per subsequent United Nations Security Council Resolution 1546 which authorise the formation of NTM-I under NATO Command) , they just wanted to wait it out, but as you read on, you will already know, the wait have been 5 years and 5 years are long enough.

The thing is, UN wanted to wait some more and with the increasing tension on No Fly Zone and resistence offered by Iraqi to the International Observer, Bush decided to act and form its own colition of troop to liberate Iraq.

Many people would have just stopped at the first part which is how US start war in Iraq without UN consent, but as the matter of fact, they do, UN did gave the power in form of 1441 to do whatever necessary to gain access for inspection, which included a military mean. The war is not justified on the cause of whether Iraq have WMD, but rather a Justified on the clause of refusing to disarm them itself (Refusing to let inspector to inspect the site is a direct violation of 1441), or at a very least Resising the International Observer to inspect the site of the alleged WMD storage.

The refusal of inspection can be dating back to 1998 as the then UN Weapon inspector Scot Ritter resign his post of Weapon Inspector over what he claimed "illusion of arms control" and "The sad truth is that Iraq today is not disarmed... UNSCOM has good reason to believe that there are significant numbers of proscribed weapons and related components and the means to manufacture such weapons unaccounted for in Iraq today ... "Now remember the time he said such thing is August 1998 after ward Hans Blix take the helm of Weapon Inspection and the man itself saying in January 2003 (Which is 2 months before invasion of Iraq) "Iraq had "not genuinely accepted UN resolutions demanding that it disarm". Although he do believe and in his report stated there are no WMD TO BE FOUND in Iraq, his believe is also of that Iraqi is not cooperate with the weapon inspector.

Now, if we wind back to 2003, given you know Iraqi have WMD, it may or may not be expired on Feb 2003, they have used it before, and 2 consecutive inspector express concern that Iraqi have not fully cooperate with the weapoin inspection, if you were on the other side of the table, what would you think??

People are more indulge into american bashing than more into the truth. I usually not talk about it as i don't think anyone, except people who have been there (I mean in Iraq) will know about the truth. Of course it did not concern you as you live in your living room, 6000 miles away and safely watching TV, but for those poeple on the ground, those who live in Iraq, those soldier who serve in Iraq, that is another story.

No body in the right mind want to fight in a war. I been there, not particular something i really want to remember for the rest of my day. But sometime war is needed for people or country to comply with international demand, war sometime is not avoidable.

Still the situation doesn't need to escalate into war. Pakistan & India have Nukes without signing the NPT. Which is even more illegal than Saddam owning a Biological/Chemical weapons. Why the situation even need to resort to war? that is what I'm asking.

 

[terranMarine]

Why don't you read post #76 if you want to know who labelled the war illegal.

 

[jhungary]

Still the situation doesn't need to escalate into war. Pakistan & India have Nukes without signing the NPT. Which is even more illegal than Saddam owning a Biological/Chemical weapons. Why the situation even need to resort to war? that is what I'm asking.

The problem is there are no UNSCR (Which US, UK, China, France and Russia) state that Pakistan and India must not have Nuclear Weapon or WMD, but there are 3 UNSCR stated that Iraq MUST Disarm the WMD stockpile, the situation is different.

While should it escalate into total way is a debatable point but a military action of some sort is covered in UNSCR 1441, UNSCR 678 and UNSCR 687. The situation is differnt, as part of 1991 Gulf war, Iraqi have to disarm as per UNSC resolution as stated above, 678 amd 687 is the disarming order, while 1441 is the final chance. In which Iraqi have acted on and ignore all 3 resolution. Hence a military operation are justified.

People genearlly don't know about the big picture before commenting, seems like you are a person with an open mind, you need to look at the evidence yourselve and jusge, not to listen to anypeople saying anything.

Why don't you read post #76 if you want to know who labelled the war illegal.

lol, let's break down post 76 shall we??

The legality of the invasion and occupation of Iraq has been widely debated since the United States, United Kingdom, and a coalition of other countries launched the 2003 invasion of Iraq

Debating is not the same admission that the war is illegal, it may be illegal, yet it can be legal

The then United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in September 2004 that: "From our point of view and the UN Charter point of view, it [the war] was illegal."[1][2]

Ok, then Kofi Anna think the war is illegal, he is not a country, nor he spoke for UN (He is the secretry of UN does not mean he is in charge of UN) so 1 man opinion eh?

The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court reported in February 2006 that he had received 240 communications in connection with the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 which alleged that various war crimes had been committed.

War crime investigation does not mean the war is either legal or illegal, in a legal war declared by UN (Such as Korean War) there are war crime involved. Plyus an investigation does not mean the war itself is illegal. It could be, again it could be not.

The political leaders of the US and UK have argued the war was legal, while many legal experts and other international leaders have argued that it was illegal.

So, the leader of US and UK think it's legal, some "Legal expert" think not, in the end of the day, who in charge of the country? The leader in charge of the country or the "legal expert"??

So, technially, form post 76, you only say kofi annan is the only one think the war is illegal. Big deal, many people think the war is illegal, even in America. So where is the country you said think the war is illegal. If they were indeed feel illegal, then why the heck UNSCR, which France, China, Russia (Don't mention the US and UK) sign the NTM-I in resolution 1546, can you tell me that??

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Okay enough, lets back to the topic at hands shall we

Japan could better exploit its defense technology

The Yomiuri Shimbun

Shin Meiwa US-2 (photo : Airliners)

Transfers of military technology--on a limited scale--could be an effective way to maintain the nation's vital defense technology while also supporting defense-related companies.

The Defense Ministry is studying a plan to transfer aircraft it developed to private use. The plan includes converting the Maritime Self-Defense Force's US-2 search-and-rescue seaplane to a firefighting flying boat and also converting the XC-2 next-generation transport plane now being developed by the Air Self-Defense Force to a large civilian cargo airplane.

The transfer of military technology to civilian use is unprecedented in this country. But search-and-rescue and transport planes are not really armaments in the first place. Adapting them for civilian use would have no effect on Japan's ideal as a "pacifist nation."

The government would be able to recoup some of its development costs by collecting usage fees from private companies. The procurement costs for Self-Defense Forces planes could also be reduced through the efficiencies of mass production. Manufacturers, for their part, could expect certain levels of earnings because the global demand for firefighting flying boats and cargo airplanes is large.

Kawasaki XC-2 (photo : Airliners)

Widespread benefits

Transfer of SDF technology to private use would benefit both the private and public sectors. The practice should have been promoted much earlier.

Recent years saw an increasing number of companies withdraw from the military equipment industry due to the continued decrease in defense budgets. The loss of the high-level engineers and specialized manufacturers that are indispensable for the development, production and improvement of such equipment undermines the bedrock of national security.

But at the same time, the security environment surrounding Japan has become grimmer. Under such circumstances, it is essential to maintain a foundation for defense technology even while making more efficient use of defense budgets.

In line with the revision of the National Defense Program Guidelines scheduled within this year, it is important to make a drastic review of the arms export ban.

Regarding military equipment that entails huge development costs, such as the F-35 next-generation fighter jet candidate, joint development involving two or more countries is a global trend. Japan cannot take part in such multinational projects because its principles only allow participation in such projects to be undertaken with the United States.

Review export ban principle

Japan's ban on arms exports applies to almost all nations other than the United States. The government must study limiting the ban to countries involved in international conflicts and those supporting terrorism. We suggest that Japan be at least permitted to undertake joint development of military weapons with ordinary countries and that a system be introduced to screen arms exports on a case-by-case basis.

Allowing the export of purely defensive materiel, such as mine detectors and bulletproof vests, would not harm Japan's image as a pacifist nation.

Both the Democratic Party of Japan and the Liberal Democratic Party called for transfers of military equipment to private use in their campaign platforms for the House of Councillors election in July. There could be room for cooperation beyond the framework of ruling and opposition parties on the issue of reexamining the export ban.

In the previous Cabinet under former Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama, Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa expressed positive thoughts about revising the arms export ban. But the review could not take any concrete shape due to opposition from the Social Democratic Party, which was then a member of the ruling coalition.

Now that the SDP has defected from the coalition government, the political barriers to transfers of military technology appear to have been lowered drastically.

(From The Yomiuri Shimbun,)

 

[terranMarine]

You can label the war as legal as a soldier, i and plenty of people can label the war as illegal. Everyone has their own opinion. You think there's plenty of proof Iraq was hiding WMD from the world and it was justified to invade them. The case of North Korea is not questionable as they are developing nukes, plenty of proof right? Why not start another war? Seems to me a war is avoidable huh