Does it surprise you that the narcissist in chief visited Obama, Japan?
"Obama can use his visit to set the stage for a revitalized relationship by focusing on two issues that are priorities for him and for Japan's new leadership: global warming and getting rid of nuclear weapons," says David Arase, an expert in East Asian security relations at Pomona College in Claremont, Calif. Not only would that reduce the focus on bilateral military issues, he adds, but it would also make both sides feel that Japan is part of Obama's international agenda.
"The Japanese would love it," Mr. Arase says, "and Obama could leave Japan pretty happy."
I think it's bunk. The Japanese are starting to realize what the Israelis, the French, the Honduras, and NATO is: they are on their own with this absentee president.
On the point about global warming, the Japanese are going to do just as our European allies did: ratify any agreement and then refuse to implement it. Which is fine by me, because the evidence is slowly mounting that many folks misjudged this whole global warming thing. (Or at least that the policies favored by the Left are inconsistent with our liberties and solving the problem, assuming there is one.)
On the point about nukes, well, they started it. There would have been no Nagasaki or Hiroshima had there not been a Nanking, a Pearl Harbor, or a Bataan Death March. My sympathies go out to the Japanese people, who were the victims of their failed military government. The fact is that many of them backed that government is almost never mentioned, of course and the fact that dropping the bomb saved more Japanese lives is likewise ignored.
But this is not 1945. Japan is our ally and a good democratic ally at that. I say let them have nukes, let them contend against the real North Korean threat, and stand up for themselves in this world. Why should America continue to subsidize their defense?
Still I feel a lot of trepidation after hearing Obama equivocate on whether or not we should have bombed Nagasaki or Hiroshima. The Iranians are probably laughing at us because they know we have a failed, weakling for a president. If not, just listen to this.
4 comments:
The story that the USA has with Japan include more than just the A bombs or even civil/dual use of technology that the USA is wary of. Interesting ground level view of old wounds in Okinawa - the sort of thing that must be addressed for progress...
http://www.counterpunch.com/mitchell11132009.html
... but is Obama aware of such grievances? Is he able to act at all? Where will the troops go if they are asked to leave?
America continues to subsidize Japan's defense because Japan's constitution (essentially written by Americans after the war) forbids an offensive military. All they are allowed is a defense force. And after the Japanese government murdered their own people in Okinawa it's no wonder that a revised constitution allowing a military hasn't been approved.
And also, it's not us that's telling them not to have nukes, it's them that don't want to have nukes. The Japanese are the ones trying to get rid of them. They won't even let us have nuclear powered submarines at their docks.
1. I'm aware of that constitution. My grandfather was stationed there after the war and I've read McArthur's papers. In addition, I've read Richard Rhodes' fantastic book, titled "The Making of the Atomic Bomb."
2. The U.S. pays 21.5-billion yen (US$256-million) rent and wages to locals annually but the Japanese government pays the Pentagon about 54 billion yen to support the U.S. presence on Okinawa.” Yes, support to get the U.S. to leave is high, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will happen for the simple reason the that U.S. military continues to be a leading employer there.
3. The Japanese worry about a rising China. In a poll taken in 2006, fully 93 percent of the country said that a rising China was bad for Japan. While you are correct that a majority favors keeping Article 9, there is a lot of wiggle room to be had there and there are more and more people that favor abolishing Article 9. Majorities of the new coalition favor a partial constitutional revision excluding Article 9. I'd be willing to bet that more people would support it, if they knew that the U.S. wouldn't be their policemen. (http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20090809a5.html)
Indeed part of the success of the DJP has been running against the status quo vis a vis military policy.
You're right about the nuclear submarines, but that's changed a lot in recent years. This fall, the U.S. aircraft carrier, the George Washington, which is nuclear powered, became the first carrier to be based in Japan. Yokosuka’s mayor, Ryoichi Kabaya, said that while the Japanese had felt some initial reluctance about hosting a nuclear-powered ship in the port city, they had eventually concluded that the George Washington posed no safety threat. Oh, and about them trying to get rid of nukes, early in 2006, they gave their support to the U.S.-India nuclear deal.
Study up and get back to me.
Post a Comment