Japan Says It Faces Increasing Threats from China, North Korea

[jamhar]

Chinese 'Carrier-Killer' Missile Could Reshape Sea Combat

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2010/08/06/chinese-carrier-killer-missile-game-changer-expert-says/

This is an unseen, untested, news rumor which in theory wouldn't work. It's an ICBM, so the story goes. How do you hit a moving target with an ICBM while trying to defeat the US's ability to shoot down ICBMs? It's a non issue.

It's a "game changer" for news outlets hungry for a story.

Also, even if someone had such a thing and if it worked which it wouldn't, we have to assume there's a real war. China isn't going to start that. They simply don't have the hardware or technology to compete.

Japan will, for many years to come, rely on the US for protection. Their military is tiny when compared to China or the US.

NS, I dont know if the US military can take the chance that its just a story.

You cant put 5000men and women, plus 2-3 billion dollars at risk like that.

Also its not an ICBM, Inter Continental, rather its an ASBM Anti Ship Ballistic Missile.

I recall it would have a max range of 1000 miles to maintain the accuracy needed to hit a moving target like a carrier

The problem is that it can have a velocity of Mach10. Meaning it can cover the 1000 miles in ~20 minutes.

At Mach10, almost impossible catch up to it, and it would be one hell of a lucky shot to hit it head on.

You'd be lucky to know it was even launched in time to take any measures at all.

Which is why that new carrier based drone is critical. With a range of 2000Miles,

it gives the carrier the ability to strike, while staying out of the ASBM range.

[NeverSure]

Also, even if someone had such a thing and if it worked which it wouldn't, we have to assume there's a real war. China isn't going to start that. They simply don't have the hardware or technology to compete.

So why are you so worried about nukes and military budgets? You really have to decide which way you swing

Because China and Russia have nukes, Someone has to have even better nukes - more accurate, can be launched from deep under water from a sub that can't be seen, etc. as a deterrent.

The reason China won't start a war is because they'd get wiped off the map. So would Russia. That's why the budget.

[NeverSure]

Chinese 'Carrier-Killer' Missile Could Reshape Sea Combat

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2010/08/06/chinese-carrier-killer-missile-game-changer-expert-says/

This is an unseen, untested, news rumor which in theory wouldn't work. It's an ICBM, so the story goes. How do you hit a moving target with an ICBM while trying to defeat the US's ability to shoot down ICBMs? It's a non issue.

It's a "game changer" for news outlets hungry for a story.

Also, even if someone had such a thing and if it worked which it wouldn't, we have to assume there's a real war. China isn't going to start that. They simply don't have the hardware or technology to compete.

Japan will, for many years to come, rely on the US for protection. Their military is tiny when compared to China or the US.

NS, I dont know if the US military can take the chance that its just a story.

You cant put 5000men and women, plus 2-3 billion dollars at risk like that.

Also its not an ICBM, Inter Continental, rather its an ASBM Anti Ship Ballistic Missile.

I recall it would have a max range of 1000 miles to maintain the accuracy needed to hit a moving target like a carrier

The problem is that it can have a velocity of Mach10. Meaning it can cover the 1000 miles in ~20 minutes.

At Mach10, almost impossible catch up to it, and it would be one hell of a lucky shot to hit it head on.

You'd be lucky to know it was even launched in time to take any measures at all.

Which is why that new carrier based drone is critical. With a range of 2000Miles,

it gives the carrier the ability to strike, while staying out of the ASBM range.

That missile is nothing more than a rumor. If it exists, it is and ICBM, just another acronym for its launching platform, same as ICBM's launched from deep water subs.

And the US can detect it and shoot it down, if it exists.

[jamhar]

Also, even if someone had such a thing and if it worked which it wouldn't, we have to assume there's a real war. China isn't going to start that. They simply don't have the hardware or technology to compete.

So why are you so worried about nukes and military budgets? You really have to decide which way you swing

Because China and Russia have nukes, Someone has to have even better nukes - more accurate, can be launched from deep under water from a sub that can't be seen, etc. as a deterrent.

The reason China won't start a war is because they'd get wiped off the map. So would Russia. That's why the budget.

That assumes it goes nuclear.

If it stays conventional, AND the conflict is in the Asian theater.

The logistics support of the US forces would be a piss poor situation.

and the billion Chinese would have the edge, both in numbers and logistics.

Regardless, you have to plan for various scenarios.

[NeverSure]

Chinese 'Carrier-Killer' Missile Could Reshape Sea Combat

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2010/08/06/chinese-carrier-killer-missile-game-changer-expert-says/

This is an unseen, untested, news rumor which in theory wouldn't work. It's an ICBM, so the story goes. How do you hit a moving target with an ICBM while trying to defeat the US's ability to shoot down ICBMs? It's a non issue.

It's a "game changer" for news outlets hungry for a story.

Also, even if someone had such a thing and if it worked which it wouldn't, we have to assume there's a real war. China isn't going to start that. They simply don't have the hardware or technology to compete.

Japan will, for many years to come, rely on the US for protection. Their military is tiny when compared to China or the US.

NS, I dont know if the US military can take the chance that its just a story.

You cant put 5000men and women, plus 2-3 billion dollars at risk like that.

Also its not an ICBM, Inter Continental, rather its an ASBM Anti Ship Ballistic Missile.

I recall it would have a max range of 1000 miles to maintain the accuracy needed to hit a moving target like a carrier

The problem is that it can have a velocity of Mach10. Meaning it can cover the 1000 miles in ~20 minutes.

At Mach10, almost impossible catch up to it, and it would be one hell of a lucky shot to hit it head on.

You'd be lucky to know it was even launched in time to take any measures at all.

Which is why that new carrier based drone is critical. With a range of 2000Miles,

it gives the carrier the ability to strike, while staying out of the ASBM range.

A ballistic missile is like throwing a rock. It is launched high, sometimes into space, and then it coasts to its target. It has retro fire rockets to slow it so it will drop to its target.

China is way behind on launching additional missiles from ballistic missiles to hit targets, and even then I have no idea how they hit a moving target with pre-calculated ballistics.

I think it's a rumor. No one has seen one, or detected on being tested. Even if they have it, it won't work.

[NeverSure]

Also, even if someone had such a thing and if it worked which it wouldn't, we have to assume there's a real war. China isn't going to start that. They simply don't have the hardware or technology to compete.

So why are you so worried about nukes and military budgets? You really have to decide which way you swing

Because China and Russia have nukes, Someone has to have even better nukes - more accurate, can be launched from deep under water from a sub that can't be seen, etc. as a deterrent.

The reason China won't start a war is because they'd get wiped off the map. So would Russia. That's why the budget.

That assumes it goes nuclear.

If it stays conventional, AND the conflict is in the Asian theater.

The logistics support of the US forces would be a piss poor situation.

and the billion Chinese would have the edge, both in numbers and logistics.

Regardless, you have to plan for various scenarios.

Assuming it's not nuclear, the conflict would be in the water. No one is stupid enough to go onto Chinese soil because they have so many troops. But China also doesn't have the ability to move those troops to Japan while retaining all of their arms and legs.

[jamhar]

That missile is nothing more than a rumor. If it exists, it is and ICBM, just another acronym for its launching platform, same as ICBM's launched from deep water subs.

And the US can detect it and shoot it down, if it exists.

I think the latest Anti ICBM missile tests have had a 50% success rate.

And i also think our missile guys are thinking that we can probably build something like that

so they can probably also, esp since they are spending more R&D on missiles than the US are.

Dude, i'm with you in thinking that the US could handle it. But its not safe to underestimate the opposition.

Thats all i'm trying to say.

[NeverSure]

That missile is nothing more than a rumor. If it exists, it is and ICBM, just another acronym for its launching platform, same as ICBM's launched from deep water subs.

And the US can detect it and shoot it down, if it exists.

I think the latest Anti ICBM missile tests have had a 50% success rate.

And i also think our missile guys are thinking that we can probably build something like that

so they can probably also, esp since they are spending more R&D on missiles than the US are.

Dude, i'm with you in thinking that the US could handle it. But its not safe to underestimate the opposition.

Thats all i'm trying to say.

Yes, they would probably fire a half dozen anti ICBM missiles at it. They'd get it.

I still don't think it exists. ICBM's weren't intended for moving targets. The US does have some ICBM's with multiple nuclear warheads that split off and hit multiple targets but at this time they are still pre-programmed. Again, "ballistic" is like lobbing a rock at something. If it moves while your rock is in flight, you miss it.

The topic is about protecting Japan. The US can do that with nuclear subs. China can't see those subs. The US can also launch stealth fighters and bombers from Clark or Guam or from a carrier. China doesn't have stealth. Even the US's drones are stealth.

The US recently flew two huge stealth bombers non-stop from Kentucky, dropped practice bombs at S. Korea, and flew home. How far is that - 40,000 kms round trip and non-stop with a heavy payload? I really don't know how far it is but it's a very long distance.

China has nothing like that. Not even close. China has one inferior carrier, still in development, and it would be sunk by stealth bombers. Who needs a "carrier killer" ICBM which wouldn't work when you can come in overhead with some huge stealth bombers?

They'll never make it to Japan.

[jamhar]

They've already practiced illuminating our comsats with lasers, And they have probably have antisat missile capability (comsats are sitting ducks).

So they can blind us anytime.

using the NK's they could combined forces and take SK peninsula in 24 to 48 hours. And there nothing we can do without using nukes, if they take out our carriers.

Then japan is only 100-200 miles across the sea. And we cant see anything they are doing.

Hard to plan air strikes from thousand of miles away without eyes on target.

I'm just playing the devils advocate. I'd be surprised if the Japanese haven't already seen this possible scenario.

Thats why they need to beef up their defensive capability. And we need the long range carrier drones to stay out of the ASBM range.

Just the way I see it.

[Publicus]

Chinese 'Carrier-Killer' Missile Could Reshape Sea Combat

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2010/08/06/chinese-carrier-killer-missile-game-changer-expert-says/

This is an unseen, untested, news rumor which in theory wouldn't work. It's an ICBM, so the story goes. How do you hit a moving target with an ICBM while trying to defeat the US's ability to shoot down ICBMs? It's a non issue.

It's a "game changer" for news outlets hungry for a story.

Also, even if someone had such a thing and if it worked which it wouldn't, we have to assume there's a real war. China isn't going to start that. They simply don't have the hardware or technology to compete.

Japan will, for many years to come, rely on the US for protection. Their military is tiny when compared to China or the US.

NS, I dont know if the US military can take the chance that its just a story.

You cant put 5000men and women, plus 2-3 billion dollars at risk like that.

Also its not an ICBM, Inter Continental, rather its an ASBM Anti Ship Ballistic Missile.

I recall it would have a max range of 1000 miles to maintain the accuracy needed to hit a moving target like a carrier

The problem is that it can have a velocity of Mach10. Meaning it can cover the 1000 miles in ~20 minutes.

At Mach10, almost impossible catch up to it, and it would be one hell of a lucky shot to hit it head on.

You'd be lucky to know it was even launched in time to take any measures at all.

Which is why that new carrier based drone is critical. With a range of 2000Miles,

it gives the carrier the ability to strike, while staying out of the ASBM range.

That missile is nothing more than a rumor. If it exists, it is and ICBM, just another acronym for its launching platform, same as ICBM's launched from deep water subs.

And the US can detect it and shoot it down, if it exists.

It seems some people even here at TVF know of this anti-ship ballistic missile but you deny its existence at the operational level. You have an entire new set of realities to face regarding the CCP-PRC naval buildup. Ignore their one silly aircraft carrier, which is for show. Thailand has one aircraft carrier too, listing to port down along the Gulf of Thailand, a rattletrap that will never be seaworthy. Beijing's purchased aircraft carrier will be deployed but for show, not as part of an aircraft carrier attack group, of which - as you well know - the US has 11 with the accompanying ships of each carrier attack group.

Beijing instead has focused on missiles, not carriers, to use in naval warfare, against satellites, and against land based targets. Beijing still has 800 missiles aimed at Taiwan from directly across the strait. Beijing in 2007 shot down its own weather satellite in space, at extremely high speed - the equivalent of hitting a bullet with a bullet. ( How China Loses the Coming Space War (Pt. 1) http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008/01/inside-the-chin/ Check out this link to MIT Defense Labs Researcher Dr. Geoffrey Forden.)

China has carrier-killer missile, U.S. admiral says

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/27/china-deploying-carrier-sinking-ballistic-missile/

China's military is deploying a new anti-ship ballistic missile that can sink U.S. aircraft carriers, a weapon that specialists say gives Beijing new power-projection capabilities that will affect U.S. support for its Pacific allies.

Adm. Robert F. Willard, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, disclosed to a Japanese newspaper on Sunday that the new anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) is now in the early stages of deployment after having undergone extensive testing.

The four-star admiral, who has been an outspoken skeptic of China’s claims that its large-scale military buildup is peaceful, said the U.S. deployment assessment is based on China’s press reports and continued testing.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/27/china-deploying-carrier-sinking-ballistic-missile/#ixzz2YqnFUiIA

I would add that Japan is vital to defending against this missile because an anti-ballistic missile based in Japan could destroy this missile right off the launch pad in the far western mountains of the PRC. I'd already mentioned the value of an anti-missile system in Japan to also getting North Korean ballistic missiles right off the launch pad too, at even closer range. Plus the US has its own anti-ballistic missile system in Alaska, which makes it already well positioned.

The possibility of the PRC's ASBM penetrating the thick and swift defenses of the ships that are a part of a US aircraft carrier attack group also remain uncertain, given the awesome capabilities of the defensive systems on the attack group's escort warships whose sole purpose is to defend the carrier. But this PRC missile exists and is operational, and until it's tested in combat, no one knows what the possibilities or the probabilities are.

You need to stop being so waving-off dismissive of the CCP-PRC naval buildup, capabilities and threat.

[NeverSure]

They've already practiced illuminating our comsats with lasers, And they have probably have antisat missile capability (comsats are sitting ducks).

So they can blind us anytime.

using the NK's they could combined forces and take SK peninsula in 24 to 48 hours. And there nothing we can do without using nukes, if they take out our carriers.

Then japan is only 100-200 miles across the sea. And we cant see anything they are doing.

Hard to plan air strikes from thousand of miles away without eyes on target.

I'm just playing the devils advocate. I'd be surprised if the Japanese haven't already seen this possible scenario.

Thats why they need to beef up their defensive capability. And we need the long range carrier drones to stay out of the ASBM range.

Just the way I see it.

This is part of the reason the US has re-stocked Guam and Clark and Subic. China doesn't have stealth. They also don't have the ability to move large numbers of troops. NK would never get forces over the border. That has long been planned for. I don't think NK or China are stupid enough to use nukes. If they do, the subs in the water would take them out.

The lasers would be taken out by stealth.

The Japanese would be decades away from developing what the US already has in the water, ready to defend them and the same applies to S. Korea.

The Chinese are decades away from catching up with technology. It's leapfrog. By the time they get anything near to what the US has, the US will have more and better.

The Chinese just tested their first military cargo plane - something badly needed to move troops and supplies. That plane is so small that it would literally fit into the cargo bay of the US's largest cargo plane. If you removed the wings, it would not only fit inside including the wings, but the US's plane could carry the weight.

The Chinese may have 2 million troops more or less, but they have to feed them, equip them (with cold war era equipment such as AK-47's and AK-74's) and they don't have the equipment to move them, and move the supplies for them. Any attempt to move them toward Japan or S. Korea would be shot to pieces.

I know there are a lot of US haters on this forum, but that's no excuse for being blind to what the US can actually do, or how much high tech equipment it has.

[Publicus]

The U.S. sees Japan as the UK of the East, a totally trustworthy island ally off the continental mainland, separate and distinct from the continent, connected to the Pacific Ocean, cooperating with the U.S. and other US allies 100%. PM Abe sees the same thing.

I would have to agree Pub.

But i would add SKorea in that mix.

The US and Japan have been doing joint marine/land exercises at Camp Pendleton this year near San Diego, to develop the Japanese Marines.

The Japanese commander said in an interview that the goal was to develop a Japanese Marine Corp that has the capabilities of the US Marine Corp.

Sounds like the Japanese are interested in protection some islands.

I'd say you're well onto something here and that you well know it.

It's plainly obvious that Beijing is finding out that Japan is not Asean. Japan bites back, for one thing. And Japan, as Washington makes clear, has the biggest dog on the block backing it up.

Japan practices retaking island drill with US

Joint exercise comes as Tokyo and Beijing face off over disputed archipelago

http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/article/1258484/japan-practices-retaking-island-drill-us

Japan and the United States have started a joint drill to practice retaking remote islands, the Japanese government said Tuesday, as Tokyo and Beijing continue to face off over a disputed archipelago.

Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera, who has previously stressed “Dawn Blitz” was not aimed at China, told reporters that the joint exercise was designed to “significantly contribute to our capability”.

It is the first time all the three arms of Japan’s Self Defence Forces - army, navy and air force - have taken part together in a drill based on the US mainland.

Of some 1,000 Japanese personnel participating in the multi-national amphibious exercise, the bulk are naval troops from three destroyers of the Maritime Self Defence Force, according to Japanese media.

Canada, New Zealand and military observers from seven other nations are also taking part in the US-led exercise in California, which will last until June 28 according to the US Marine Corps. Japan’s participation lasts until June 26.

Japan would respond with force if any attempt is made to land on disputed islands, PM Shinzo Abe has warned.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22260140

Japan would respond with force if any attempt is made to land on disputed islands, PM Shinzo Abe has warned.

His comments came as eight Chinese government ships sailed near East China Sea islands that both nations claim.

A flotilla of 10 fishing boats carrying Japanese activists was also reported to be in the area, as well as the Japanese coast guard.

US Takes Japan's Side On Disputed Territory in East China Sea, Saying 'Senkaku Islands' Fall Under 'Security Obligations'

http://www.ibtimes.com/us-takes-japans-side-disputed-territory-east-china-sea-saying-senkaku-islands-fall-under-security

The U.S. made its position on the East China Sea territorial dispute over the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands very clear this week when U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel met with his Japanese counterpart Itsunori Onodera.

During talks with Onodera, Hagel confirmed that the U.S. will be supporting Japan, clarifying its commitment to its ally by referring to the islands by their Japanese name “Senkaku” and saying that the islands “fall under our security obligations,” according to the English-language publication Japan News.

Though Hagel never referred to China by name when discussing the dispute, his strongly worded statements echoed the recent actions the U.S. has taken by sending warnings to China when its ships approached island waters.

“The United States opposes any unilateral or coercive action that seeks to undermine Japan’s administrative control [of the islands],” Hagel said.

I would add that this makes Beijing stop and think, very seriously.

[SinglePot]

2 points from me having read all the posts on this thread:

1. anti US people have got no idea of the realities that the US deal with as per this thread. Snowden figures in this equation as some of you know.

2. Never underestimate the enemy as they say. I have lived there. They are not sitting around smoking opium and playing mahjong. If NeverSure knows about US military capability in SE and E Asia you can bet your bottom dollar they know a helluva lot more and will be doing everything they can to be prepared. They will not settle until they have avenged historical grievances. I have never known a more highly motivated nation. Rampant materialism and hell bent on returning China, 'The Middle Kingdom', to its 'rightful' place. The centre of the world.

China is aggressive. They can be very devious too.

Their biggest weapon is their obstinacy and focus on getting what they want.

Japan is rightly concerned.

[Publicus]

They've already practiced illuminating our comsats with lasers, And they have probably have antisat missile capability (comsats are sitting ducks).

So they can blind us anytime.

using the NK's they could combined forces and take SK peninsula in 24 to 48 hours. And there nothing we can do without using nukes, if they take out our carriers.

Then japan is only 100-200 miles across the sea. And we cant see anything they are doing.

Hard to plan air strikes from thousand of miles away without eyes on target.

I'm just playing the devils advocate. I'd be surprised if the Japanese haven't already seen this possible scenario.

Thats why they need to beef up their defensive capability. And we need the long range carrier drones to stay out of the ASBM range.

Just the way I see it.

This is part of the reason the US has re-stocked Guam and Clark and Subic. China doesn't have stealth. They also don't have the ability to move large numbers of troops. NK would never get forces over the border. That has long been planned for. I don't think NK or China are stupid enough to use nukes. If they do, the subs in the water would take them out.

The lasers would be taken out by stealth.

The Japanese would be decades away from developing what the US already has in the water, ready to defend them and the same applies to S. Korea.

The Chinese are decades away from catching up with technology. It's leapfrog. By the time they get anything near to what the US has, the US will have more and better.

The Chinese just tested their first military cargo plane - something badly needed to move troops and supplies. That plane is so small that it would literally fit into the cargo bay of the US's largest cargo plane. If you removed the wings, it would not only fit inside including the wings, but the US's plane could carry the weight.

The Chinese may have 2 million troops more or less, but they have to feed them, equip them (with cold war era equipment such as AK-47's and AK-74's) and they don't have the equipment to move them, and move the supplies for them. Any attempt to move them toward Japan or S. Korea would be shot to pieces.

I know there are a lot of US haters on this forum, but that's no excuse for being blind to what the US can actually do, or how much high tech equipment it has.

How China Got There First: Beijing’s Unique Path to ASBM Development and Deployment

http://www.jamestown.org/regions/chinaasiapacific/single/?tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=40994&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=52&cHash=be0245398129935c04f05d5600d94ffc#.UeGiRp2wpdg

China’s deployment of the world’s first operational anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) has just been confirmed with unprecedented clarity by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD).

On May 6, 2013, DOD published its latest annual report to Congress on China’s military [2]. The report contained the most comprehensive authoritative statement to date concerning the status of China’s DF-21D ASBM. China began deploying the 1,500+ km-range DF-21D (CSS-5) medium-range ballistic missile, with its maneuverable warhead, in 2010. DOD assesses that it “gives the PLA the capability to attack large ships, including aircraft carriers, in the western Pacific Ocean”

DOD’s statements related to the annual reports build on 2013 testimony by other U.S. military officials. On April 9, 2013, Admiral Samuel Locklear, Commander of U.S. Pacific Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee “There are a number of notable examples of China’s improving military capabilities, including five new stealth and conventional aircraft programs and the initial deployment of a new anti-ship ballistic missile that we believe is designed to target U.S. aircraft carriers" [5]. On April 19, 2013, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, stated that China is “augmenting the over 1,200 conventional short-range ballistic missiles deployed opposite Taiwan with a limited but growing number of conventionally armed, medium-range ballistic missiles, including the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile” [6].

China’s ASBM development displays three major dynamics. Heretofore rarely seen, they are likely to become increasingly common in the future as China’s defense industry continues to improve. It offers an example of China developing and deploying a unique weapons system. It also represents an instance of Chinese researchers deemphasizing Soviet/Russian models in favor of U.S. examples. China did so through an eclectic “architectural innovation” approach in which it imported, developed indigenously and combined existing technologies in new ways to produce what might be termed a “Frankenweapon.”

Wording in the DOD report suggests that China may develop ASBMs with different ranges from the DF-21D, including longer-ranges: “Beijing is investing in military programs and weapons designed to improve extended-range power projection… Key systems that have been either deployed or in development include ballistic missiles (including anti-ship variants)….” Now that the initial challenge of deploying an operational ASBM is completed, China has the option of developing other variants with different, likely complementary, characteristics. As China slowly builds the intelligence infrastructure to guide ASBMs toward their targets, future variants can be integrated more quickly into the force at higher levels of readiness. The advanced nature of ASBM development may become less the exception than the rule for future Chinese weapons programs.

Japan Plans Military Shift to Focus More on China

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/13/world/asia/13japan.html?_r=0

TOKYO — In a sweeping overhaul of its cold war-era defense strategy, Japan is realigning its military forces to reduce its heavy armored and artillery forces pointed north toward Russia in favor of creating more mobile units that could respond to China’s growing presence near its southernmost islands, Japanese newspapers reported Sunday.

The realignment comes as the United States is making new calls for Japan to increase its military role in eastern Asia in response to recent provocations by North Korea as well as China’s more assertive stance in the region.

The new defense strategy includes greater integration of Japan’s armed forces with the United States military, the reports said. The reports did not give a source, but the fact that major newspapers carried the same information suggested they were based on a background briefing by government officials.

The new guidelines also call for acquiring new submarines and fighter jets, the reports said, and creating ground units that can be moved quickly by air in order to defend the southern islands, including disputed islands in the East China Sea that are also claimed by China and Taiwan. These disputed islands are known as the Senkakus in Japanese and the Diaoyu in Chinese.

China Deploys Pugilistic Foreign Policy with New Vigor

http://www.jamestown.org/regions/chinaasiapacific/single/?tx_ttnews%5Bpointer%5D=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%

5D=39525&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=665&cHash=d0b3dc91e46fc734ad6c971eefc03bb9#.UeGqC52wpdg

Fretting concern seems to be behind an article in the Global Times last week entitled “Why Has China’s Global Environment Become More Severe?” In this thought-provoking piece, Wang Jisi, a respected international relations expert at Peking University, argued that “while the global balance of powers has demonstrated the trend of ‘the East rising and the West declining’, China’s international situation has not improved.”

Among the numerous domestic and foreign factors that Wang analyzed were Chinese neighbors’ reactions to the country’s more assertive power projection. “In the course of China’s boosting its national defense capability, its neighbors and the U.S. not only cast doubt on [beijing’s] peaceful-development intentions but they also strengthen defensive measures that target China, in addition to coordinating their China-related strategies,” Wang wrote, “All these have put bigger pressure on China’s national security (Global Times, June 13).

Edited July 13, 2013 by Publicus

[Publicus]

The time is ripe and the US is ready to do the pickins. All of this is made in China.

An Asian Power Web Emerges

http://thediplomat.com/2013/06/14/an-asian-power-web-emerges/?all=true

When President Obama met his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping in California last week, it is doubtful that either leader focused on the growing ties among countries like Singapore, India, South Korea and Vietnam. Perhaps they should have. Burgeoning security cooperation among such nations represents the untold story of a region on the move.

Asia has undergone decades of economic deepening, complemented by years of diplomatic integration. Now, countries across the region are building on this foundation and engaging in unprecedented forms of military cooperation.

This emerging power web will have deep implications across the Indo-Pacific region. It should also affect American strategy – because, played correctly, the United States is poised to be a leading beneficiary of the growing network of relationships.

The network is marked by a proliferation of government-to-government security agreements, including recent pacts inked between Singapore and Vietnam, Japan and Australia, and India and South Korea. Variable in scope, these accords promote the ability of Asian nations to train and operate together, conduct joint research and development, and service each other’s ships and aircraft. To be sure, these are not mutual defense treaties, but they point to ever-closer military cooperation among key countries in the region.

Similarly, there is an upsurge in joint military training. Japan and India conducted their first bilateral maritime exercise in 2012, the same year that saw joint field exercises between India and Singapore, Australia and South Korea, and Japan and Singapore. The intra-Asian arms trade is also heating up like never before, and even a country like Japan, which has long placed stringent restrictions on the export of weapons, is taking steps toward supplying Asian nations.

[Sing_Sling]

1. anti US people have got no idea of the realities that the US deal with as per this thread.

Their biggest weapon is their obstinacy and focus on getting what they want.

Japan is rightly concerned.

Well, you oversimplify the issue in your first point - if you live in a 'with us or against us' world then you are the loser in this while game because there shades of gray and only an imbecile accepts everything carte blanche

Your second point here (my apologies that I cut the sentences between the two) is so very spot on. Obstinate is a very, very apt description. Very apt.

I've been in China possibly 20 times on business and my brother and his wife both worked for embassies in Beijing . . . and though it can be quite an interesting place . . . in the end you just want to leave.

[SinglePot]

I'll let Publicus get the story and the facts right.

I work on old fashioned gut feel.

[SinglePot]

PS. No shades of grey in China.

[boomerangutang]

Even if all were peaches and cream, Japan still gets hundreds of tons of waste from China. It gets smog from the prevailing winds, and probably gets loads of plastic trash floating around its islands.

[SinglePot]

Even if all were peaches and cream, Japan still gets hundreds of tons of waste from China. It gets smog from the prevailing winds, and probably gets loads of plastic trash floating around its islands.

Yep. Beijing is the only city in the world that I have lived in where I never saw any birds or butterflies.

Odd. Worryingly odd.

Sometimes you think maybe its not the pollution, maybe the birds and butterflies just don't like the feel of the place. Sinister?

[Sing_Sling]

Even if all were peaches and cream, Japan still gets hundreds of tons of waste from China. It gets smog from the prevailing winds, and probably gets loads of plastic trash floating around its islands.

Yep. Beijing is the only city in the world that I have lived in where I never saw any birds or butterflies.

Odd. Worryingly odd.

Sometimes you think maybe its not the pollution, maybe the birds and butterflies just don't like the feel of the place. Sinister?

Umm, perhaps they don't like it because of the pollution . . . just a thought.

Having said that I m guessing you never went to any park or the summer palace or Beihei park. . . hardly places devoid of butterflies and birds

But I agree with you - embassy staff are given two long week-ends a month to 'get out of town' for health reasons.

Again, been there and see no need to ever go again, whether it is Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Xian etc . . . (well, except this part I saw recently on a BBC documentary . . . beautiful and not many tourists)

[SinglePot]

yep. messages understood.

Company I worked for the staff were lucky to get a weekend off Ever.

I kid you not.

[jamhar]

Looks like the pissing contest between Japan and China is heating up,

China media accuses Japan PM of dangerous politics

"BEIJING/TOKYO (Reuters) - Two of China's top newspapers accused Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Thursday of dangerous politics that could threaten regional security, as Tokyo warned Beijing not to expand gas exploration in disputed waters of the East China Sea."

....

"Abe wants to revise Japan's constitution, drafted by the United States after World War Two, to formalize the country's right to have a military. Critics say his plan could return Japan to a socially conservative, authoritarian past."

http://news.yahoo.com/china-media-accuses-japan-pm-dangerous-politics-054215335.html

[boomerangutang]

Looks like the pissing contest between Japan and China is heating up,

China media accuses Japan PM of dangerous politics

"BEIJING/TOKYO (Reuters) - Two of China's top newspapers accused Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Thursday of dangerous politics that could threaten regional security, as Tokyo warned Beijing not to expand gas exploration in disputed waters of the East China Sea."

....

"Abe wants to revise Japan's constitution, drafted by the United States after World War Two, to formalize the country's right to have a military. Critics say his plan could return Japan to a socially conservative, authoritarian past."

http://news.yahoo.com/china-media-accuses-japan-pm-dangerous-politics-054215335.html

Japan should have a military, even considering the dramatic events of 70 years ago. Indeed, all of China's neighbors should not only have military preparedness, but pacts among themselves - to show cohesion, in case China puts its military power behind its elbowing bluster.

Edited July 18, 2013 by boomerangutang

[SinglePot]

I checked in last night to a pretty rough hotel on Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Bit of a cock up on Agoda.

The woman owner was muttering something about 'getting the Japanese room ready'.

Conflict is all over the newspapers and television.

They will not be happy until they have avenged historical grievances with the British and Japanese...and anybody else they feel did them an injustice in the past.

I find China a very unsettling place as a farang.

[SinglePot]

It's no different this morning either.

[Publicus]

A core component of CCP indoctrination and domestic propaganda is to fill the PRChinese with vengeance for what it continually teaches in the schools, and in their media, was the "Century of Shame" when the European powers and Japan ravaged a China that had stagnated since the 15th century. The so-called Century of Shame is roughly 1830 to Mao's victory in the civil war in 1949, which is a bit more than a century, but the Chinese (until recently) have the habit of thinking in centuries (they now think in decades).

There's a long list of countries the CCP has earmarked for vengeance, but Japan is right up there among the top two, the United States being number one simply because it continues to dominate the world, tho less so since the turn of the 21st century. The historical Chinese hate of Japan is a thousand times worse than any historical European rivalry, such as England and France, or Germany and France. It's a flaming passion.

The list however is long, as we've seen in Beijing's recent aggressive territorial assertions against Japan, its claim of sovereignty over the entire South China Sea, which anyway needs to be renamed the South East Asia Sea - only 3100 km of the South China Sea touch the shores of the PRC while 130,000 km are on the shores of Asean countries, so there is continuing conflict between Beijing and Asean. Beijing claims India's northernmost province, claims all of Siberia and so much else against almost every country of the Indo-Pacific region of the world. The CCP-PRC in this region of the world has become the Neighbor From Hell, a grotesque bully.

Much of this is to get the nationalism up of the PRChinese people so they can see the CCP as the champion of a resurgent CCP-PRC which is going to resume its rightful place as rulers of the world, which always has been a Chinese fantasy since the first emperor Qin more than 2000 years ago (pron: Chin, hence China due to its English pronunciation shift).

The Chinese, who continue to clutch irrevocably to their ancient idea of dictatorship as the one and only natural and normal form of government, think and believe they are the normal people of the modern - and ancient - world.

[canman]

This makes no sense at all. The US just re-opened Clark and Subic in The Philippines. Subic is sized to fit Nimitz-class carrier groups.

The amount of money that Japan and Germany spend on military is tiny, and Germany isn't even on the list of the main spenders so yes it does need protection per the treaty. So does Japan.

Enemies like the US? You mean like the London train bombing or the bombing of the Aussie Embassy in Jakarta, both since 9/11?

You need to get it that terrorists are everyone's enemy and they believe that all infidels must die. Do you think I care that terrorists consider the US an enemy, or that I believe that anything the US does would prevent a soldier from getting hacked to death in London?

Here's your list of military spending, and Japan is pathetic and Germany isn't on the list. Why doesn't anyone screw with them? Treaties with the US.

"This makes no sense at all. The US just re-opened Clark and Subic in The Philippines."

. . . what is this in reference to? Japan? Germany? You are confused.

"The amount of money that Japan and Germany spend on military is tiny, and Germany isn't even on the list of the main spenders so yes it does need protection per the treaty. So does Japan."

Either you can't read or you refuse to . . . Japan is in fourth, Germany in ninth place and to mention that their military expenditure is fallacious at best, simply idiocy at worst. Please take a look at economies of scale and requirements, or perceived requirements.

Who is threatening Germany? Have you ever heard of NATO? The US presence is no longer required, quite simple - the cold war is over

"Enemies like the US? You mean like the London train bombing or the bombing of the Aussie Embassy in Jakarta, both since 9/11?"

And did you see wither country go ape-shi! afterwards, invading other countries unrelated to the events, losing thousands more lives and murdering hundreds of thousands of innocents like the US did after 11/9.

"You need to get it that terrorists are everyone's enemy and they believe that all infidels must die"

You need to 'get it' that FOX shouldn't be your only source of information

Why doesn't anyone screw with them? Treaties with the US.

Partly, yes, of course . . . fat lot of good that is doing with China and Korea's aggressive stance and actions . . . and who is screwing or would want to screw with Germany???

Added to which, treaties are there for a reason - they are effective - just have a look at how WWI started for the opposite - though for this exercise we'll say they are useful, because they are, but they don't require soldiers on the ground

Clark and Subic are within easy striking distance for Japan, and Japan doesn't have the facilities of Subic or Clark. There's your relevancy.

Place them wherever you want, Japan and Germany's military spending is tiny. They also don't have nukes.

Only 5 countries have nukes, and that includes Russia and China. NO one has the defense or delivery capability of the US. NATO? They need backup from the US.

I can see you are a US hater but the next time you are threatened, you'll be hollering for help.

America

Russia

China

UK

France

India

Pakistan

Israel

All have nukes

[SinglePot]

China. The meaning of the word is 'The Middle Kingdom.'

the mentality pervades and endures.

[jamhar]

A core component of CCP indoctrination and domestic propaganda is to fill the PRChinese with vengeance for what it continually teaches in the schools, and in their media, was the "Century of Shame" when the European powers and Japan ravaged a China that had stagnated since the 15th century. The so-called Century of Shame is roughly 1830 to Mao's victory in the civil war in 1949, which is

a bit more than a century, but the Chinese (until recently) have the habit of thinking in centuries (they now think in decades).

There's a long list of countries the CCP has earmarked for vengeance, but Japan is right up there among the top two, the United States being number one simply because it continues to dominate the world, tho less so since the turn of the 21st century. The historical Chinese hate of Japan is a thousand times worse than any historical European rivalry, such as England and France, or Germany and France. It's a flaming passion.

The list however is long, as we've seen in Beijing's recent aggressive territorial assertions against Japan, its claim of sovereignty over the entire South China Sea, which anyway needs to be renamed the South East Asia Sea - only 3100 km of the South China Sea touch the shores of the PRC while 130,000 km are on the shores of Asean countries, so there is continuing conflict between Beijing and Asean. Beijing claims India's northernmost province, claims all of Siberia and so much else against almost every country of the Indo-Pacific region of the world. The CCP-PRC in this region of the world has become the Neighbor From Hell, a grotesque bully.

Much of this is to get the nationalism up of the PRChinese people so they can see the CCP as the champion of a resurgent CCP-PRC which is going to resume its rightful place as rulers of the world, which always has been a Chinese fantasy since the first emperor Qin more than 2000 years ago (pron: Chin, hence China due to its English pronunciation shift).

The Chinese, who continue to clutch irrevocably to their ancient idea of dictatorship as the only form of government, think and believe they are the normal people of the modern - and ancient - world.

width=18 alt=w00t.gif>

The notion that the chinese dislike the US, I actually found hard to believe.

Every chinese national i've met abroad, have always been very nice and favorable to myself and the US in conversation.

Maybe its a case of, "keep you friends close, but your enemys closer".

It goes without saying that we remain unpopular in a few places. Here are the 10 nations with the least favorable impression of the U.S., according to Pew:

1. Pakistan (percentage with a favorable view of the United States: 11%)

2. Jordan (14%)

3. Palestinian territories (16%)

4. Egypt (16%)

5. Turkey (21%)

6. Greece (39%)

7. China (40%)

8. Argentina (41%)

9. Tunisia (42%)

10. Lebanon (47%)

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/10-countries-love-hate-america-most-163930019.html

#6 is Greece? <deleted> did we ever do the the Greeks?

And surprisingly, Japan isnt on the list of the countries with the most favorable impression of the US.

Edited July 19, 2013 by jamhar