In principle, the commitments between the two countries are fulfilled by the two countries.It is clearly stated that the dispute resolution between Japan and South Korea should be resolved through mediation.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
maritime defense Taiwan's defense is the defense of the Senkaku Islands and is synonymous with Japan's.If China maintains its maritime routes from Japan to Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Vietnam, it will not be able to enter the Pacific Ocean and will only be able to develop strategies from the west.
Moon Jae In Korea is pro-China.Even if Korea joins forces with China, China will not actually be able to enter the Pacific Ocean.In this sense, Korea and Taiwan have different strategic meanings on Quad.
With this in mind, Moon Jae In is not flying around like a bat, but is moving in a way that you don't really understand if you don't say you're going to be left behind unless you don't actively participate in Quad.
Whether the debate on the ability to attack enemy bases is a matter of propriety, possession is an issue, or start is an issue - possession is an issue.
What is the point of the ability to attack enemy bases
1956 Ichiro Hatoyama
1999 Yoshinari Norota
2003 Shigeru Ishiba
1969 Cabinet decision
The debate over the ability to attack enemy bases has led to confusion in public opinion regarding whether it is permissible to attack enemy bases, whether it is permissible to possess such weapons, and what stage refers to the initiation of an enemy attack. appear. Looking at the government's views so far, it has consistently been stated that the ability to attack enemy bases falls within the scope of defense, and the government has also made clear its views on launching such attacks. The question is whether or not to actually own it.
Issues regarding the ability to attack enemy bases
[Possibility] Is it okay to attack enemy bases (enemy territory)?
[Initiation] What is the initiation of an attack by an enemy country (activation conditions)?
[Holding] When and what to hold
Regarding the ability to attack enemy bases, Prime Minister Ichiro Hatoyama already answered in 1956 that in the event of a missile attack, ``It is inconceivable that the purpose of the Constitution is to sit back and wait for self-destruction.'' Since then, the Japanese government has continued to interpret it as constitutionally permissible.
1956 Ichiro Hatoyama
The purpose of the Constitution is that if an imminent illegal violation is committed against our country, and if a guided missile or other attack is carried out on our land as a means of such violation, we should sit back and wait for our own destruction. I don't think I can think of it that way. In such cases, take the minimum necessary measures to prevent such attacks, for example, as long as it is recognized that there is no other way to defend against attacks by guided missiles, etc. I believe that hitting bases with guided missiles is legally within the scope of self-defense and should be possible.
In 1999, Defense Agency Director General Norota responded that the Self-Defense Forces would use the necessary force if there was a threat of an armed attack.
1999 Yoshinari Norota
In situations that do not result in an armed attack against our country, police agencies are primarily responsible for dealing with the situation, but in cases where the general police force cannot respond, the Self-Defense Forces respond by dispatching public order, and are not responsible for suppressing the situation. It's possible. Then, if a certain situation corresponds to an armed attack against our country or the possibility of such attack, a defense operation is ordered, and the Self-Defense Forces will use the necessary force to defend our country. That's why .
In 2003, regarding the launch of an attack on Japan, Director-General of the Defense Agency Ishiba announced that he would turn Tokyo into a sea of fire, and stated that if Japan began injecting fuel, this would be considered the start.
2003 Shigeru Ishiba
Now, I have a question from the committee members: There has been a statement that Tokyo will be reduced to a sea of fire, that it will be reduced to ashes, and for that purpose, in order to accomplish that, in order to make it come true. If they started injecting fuel or did something like that, then their intentions would be clear. This is a case where someone says, "I'm going to shoot this thing and reduce Tokyo to ashes," and then they just start pumping fuel, or they start making preparations, and they start taking action. Well, if you do that, wouldn't that be called a start?. That's true, because the intention is clear and that's what it is. Therefore, what I am saying is no different from what the Minister of Foreign Affairs is saying.
On February 16, 2022, Defense Minister Nobuo Kishi spoke at a subcommittee of the House of Representatives Budget Committee regarding the "capability to attack enemy bases" that the government is considering possessing. , stated that they would not rule out the option of bombing military bases, and acknowledged that it falls within the scope of self-defense.
As stated above, the government has already stated that the ability to attack enemy bases is within the scope of the right of self-defense. Regarding the next issue, ``retention'', there was a Cabinet decision in 1969.
1969 Cabinet decision
Possessing so-called offensive weapons, whose performance is exclusively used for catastrophic destruction of the enemy country's homeland, immediately goes beyond the minimum necessary range for self-defense. Therefore, it is not allowed under any circumstances. For example, the possession of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), long-range strategic bombers, and attack aircraft carriers is not allowed.
This is the current argument for ``possession'' of the ability to attack enemy bases. In other words, the debate is whether it is a minimal weapon for self-defense or whether it exceeds it.
Since the current government opinion has interpreted it as falling within the scope of the right of self-defense, it does not fall under "offensive weapons used only for catastrophic destruction" and can be interpreted as something that can be possessed. . Until now, the government's position has consistently been that possessing the ability to attack enemy bases is within the scope of the right of self-defense, but it has not actually possessed it and has kept it ambiguous. All that's happening now is an effort to actually own it. Possession of the ability to attack enemy bases has already been deemed constitutional, and the launch of an attack by the enemy has been defined, so it would be unreasonable to now say that we are opposed to actually having the ability to attack enemy bases. The premise of the argument seems to be different.
The cabinet decision defines weapons as those used only for the catastrophic destruction of the enemy's homeland, so it is clear that this does not apply to weapons used within the scope of the right of self-defense.
The sealed Greater East Asia War, what is the original meaning of the word Hakko Ichiu?
There are some words that were banned by GHQ after the war. Typical examples include the words Greater East Asia War and Hakko Kazuu.
The Greater East Asia War became known as the Pacific War, or World War II, and many Japanese people have probably never heard of Kazuu Hakko. What exactly was the Greater East Asia War? It would be best to think of it as a war based on Japan's Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere concept.
Starting with India, Asian countries were colonized by the West one after another over hundreds of years. The countries that were invading these countries were mainly Western maritime nations: Great Britain, France, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain. In fact, not a single country in Asia was able to resist this and surrendered its country. In the end, almost all of the vast Asian region became a Western colony, and even China, which was once called a great power, went through the Opium War and the Arrow War, and its major cities were leased out one after another, resulting in a state of divide-and-rule.
It was clear that the opening of the Suez Canal would greatly shorten the sea route that had previously reached Asia via the southernmost tip of Africa, accelerating the division of Asia.
Russia was lagging behind in colonial policy in Europe. The Russian coast freezes over in winter, making it impossible to navigate. Even if sailing is possible during the season, they will have to pass through the narrow strait between present-day Denmark and Sweden, enter the North Sea, and then travel through the English Channel. Even going out into the Atlantic Ocean was influenced by other countries, and Russia was only able to acquire some areas such as Alaska regarding its colonial policy in the Americas.
Russia planned to colonize Asia by land. This is the Trans-Siberian Railway. They used this railway to send soldiers and weapons, colonize Northeast Asia, and transport the supplies they obtained to St. Petersburg. With the completion of this colonial infrastructure, it was clear that colonial policy in Northeast Asia would accelerate. The Trans-Siberian Railway was opened in 1904, and at the same time information was received that the Baltic Fleet, said to be the strongest fleet at the time, was heading for Vladivostok, the terminal station of the Trans-Siberian Railway.
What was the Baltic Fleet planning to do now that it was able to receive supplies from Vladivostok? China? Korea? Of course, it is natural to acquire those areas, but if it is a continent, it will be a land strategy, so do we need a fleet for land routes? In other words, it is clear that the purpose of these ships was to subdue Japan. The Baltic Fleet sank the ship in the Sea of Japan before entering Vladivostok during the Russo-Japanese War and the Battle of the Sea of Japan. In the end, Japan won, and Russia's plans suffered a major setback. The Russo-Japanese War was from 1904 to 1905, and the Trans-Siberian Railway was completed during this war.
Even among Japanese people, there are many who say that Japan waged a reckless war. Is it really reckless? In fact, Japan has defeated all European countries such as Britain, France, and the Netherlands, including in Southeast Asia. If anything was reckless, it could be said that it was the start of war with the United States. Next, there are those who say that Japan invaded Asia. Now let's think about where we invaded. Thailand was the only independent nation in Asia west of China. In other words, the Asian countries that Japan invaded no longer existed in Asia at the time, in the sense that they were self-governing. They were Western colonies, so Japan invaded Britain and the Netherlands. If I had to say it, if we think of the Sino-Japanese War as an invasion of China, then we can say of the Asian countries that they invaded China.
So why is it said that Japan invaded Asian countries? That's probably why the term Greater East Asia War was banned. At that time, the world was about to be divided into European maritime nations. All of the Americas are colonies. What about Australia? What about the African continent? Europe's maritime nations will acquire all of this. Is Asia different? There's no reason for that. Japan is the only Asian nation that has resisted this global colonial policy.
The Greater East Asia Conference was held in 1943. Participants included representatives from Burma, Manchukuo, the Republic of China, Japan, the Kingdom of Thailand, the Philippines, and India. I would like to introduce the Greater East Asia Joint Declaration that was adopted here.
The countries of Greater East Asia will work together to ensure stability in Greater East Asia and build an order of coexistence and mutual prosperity based on morality. The countries of Greater East Asia will respect each other's independence and independence, bear the fruits of mutual aid and harmony, and establish affinity in Greater East Asia. The countries of Greater East Asia will mutually respect their traditions, develop the creativity of each ethnic group, and enhance the culture of Greater East Asia. The countries of Greater East Asia will cooperate closely with each other on a basis of mutual benefit, plan their economic development, and increase the prosperity of Greater East Asia. The countries of Greater East Asia will deepen relations with all countries, eliminate racial discrimination, widely exchange cultures, and contribute to the advancement of the world by willingly opening up their resources.
This is a declaration issued by representatives from various regions of Asia. The ideas common to each statement are the coexistence and co-prosperity of Asian countries, mutual respect, and the elimination of racial discrimination. Was there ever an example of such an agreement between countries in that era? Britain and other countries gained wealth through the slave trade from Africa, which was reflected in the industrial form of producing goods in the Americas using cheap labor and exporting them to Europe. In Manchukuo, the Five Tribes of Harmony was actually sung, and the idea was that all ethnic groups living in Manchuria would build a nation on an equal footing. In other words, Manchukuo advocated the most advanced ideology in the world at the time, and the Greater East Asia Joint Declaration was pioneering in its content, calling for Asian countries to coexist and prosper together and eliminate discrimination. This underlying idea is the spirit of Kazuu Hakko. Hakko Ichiu is the idea of living in peace with the world as one home, centered on His Majesty the Emperor, without discrimination of race, ethnicity, religion, etc. It may seem unreasonable based on current values for countries other than Japan to have the Emperor at the center, but although there are 56 member countries in the British Commonwealth of Nations, the so-called Commonwealth is made up of 56 countries. is the current King of England, Charles III. The original meaning of Hakko Ichiu is found in the latter part, and it can be said that it is also expressed in the Greater East Asia Joint Declaration.
So, where in Asia did Japan invade? In order to cover up all of this, the words Greater East Asia War and Hakko Ichiu were banned. The purpose, of course, was to justify war and colonial policies for the West, and the story was changed to one in which Japan suddenly went crazy and invaded Asian countries.
Japan's struggle against Western colonial policy is a well-known hist
How many natural resources are there in the waters near Japan? Possibility of Japan including EEZ.
Trauma of Japan, a country without resources
Japan's area is not small
Is Japan 52.4% of mainland China?
Rare earths, oil, these are just the beginning
Cabinet Secretariat “The Future of the Sea”
Are undersea resources a treasure trove to save Japan?
Japan is in a state where it can be said that marine resource development is almost untouched. As a country lacking in natural resources, it relies on foreign sources for many natural resources, including oil. During World War II, Japan was surrounded by ABCD as a country with no natural resources, and was in a situation similar to a food raid. They lost the war due to America's overwhelming amount of supplies. One cannot help but wonder why marine resource development did not progress after the war. Since we lost the war because we didn't have the resources, there may be many people who argue that searching for resources means starting another war, but this is a completely different story.
Japan's land area is 380,000 km2, ranking it 62nd out of 196 countries in the world. Japanese people tend to think of Japan as a small country because they tend to focus on top-tier countries such as the United States, China, and Russia, but Germany, Finland, and Poland are smaller in area. However, Japan is a maritime nation. When looking at the total of territorial sea, contiguous zone, and EEZ, Japan ranks 6th in the world in terms of ocean area with 4.47 million km2. And if you add the extended continental shelf, it is 4.65 million km2. If Japan's land area is added to this, the area that Japan can independently mine is 5.03 million km2.
China is covered by countries such as Japan and Taiwan, and there are few oceans that China occupies. That's why they dream of expanding into the ocean, but China's land area is 9.6 million km2, and in fact, including the sea, Japan has about 52.4% of mainland China. is. Because China has a large land area, natural resources and oil are mined. However, Japan's seabed resources are still unknown.
In 2018, researchers from Waseda University and Tokyo University discovered that hundreds of years' worth of global demand for rare earths, which are essential for manufacturing precision equipment, is found on the ocean floor around Minamitorishima in the Ogasawara Islands. This was discovered through the team's investigation. A research team from Ibaraki University and Hokkaido University has announced that one of the world's largest oil fields may lie dormant off the coast of Ibaraki Prefecture's Goura coast in 2020.
Cabinet Secretariat Ocean Policy Headquarters Secretariat “The Future of the Sea” Excerpt
The Basic Law on Ocean Policy was enacted in April 2007 and came into effect in July of the same year. The Basic Law on Ocean Policy outlines the basic philosophy of harmonizing the development and use of the ocean with the conservation of the marine environment, as well as the responsibilities of the national and local governments. It also stipulates that a Basic Ocean Policy Plan be established approximately every five years, and that the Ocean Policy Headquarters, headed by the Prime Minister, be established in the Cabinet. The current Basic Plan on Ocean Policy, which was approved by the Cabinet in April 2013, clarifies ``the vision of Japan as a maritime nation'' and sets out initiatives that should be prioritized in light of changes in the social situation regarding the ocean. and indicates the direction of ocean-related measures. It also specifically describes the efforts that the government should comprehensively and systematically implement over a period of approximately five years in the 12 areas specified as "basic measures" in the Basic Act on Ocean Policy. The existence of energy and mineral resources such as oil, natural gas, methane hydrate, and submarine hydrothermal deposits has been confirmed in Japan's territorial waters, EEZ, and continental shelf, and the possibility of Japan becoming a resource superpower is hidden.
The 2007 Basic Law on Ocean Policy was formulated during the first Abe Cabinet, and Japan's exploration of seabed resources went into full swing. What if Japan becomes a resource-rich nation? I would never have thought of that. Because Japan is a small country... No. There is a high possibility that there will be a breakthrough in undersea exploration. There may come a time when Japanese people don't have to work so hard.
Is the party ticket issue the result of a sound whistleblower? In Japan, a spy paradise, you can do whatever you want.
The public prosecutor's office is said to be looking into the party ticket issue, but the main concern is the source of the leak. The original story is an article in the Japan Communist Party's Red Flag Newspaper dated November 6, 2022, but it feels strange that a specific group is being hit in a domino pattern like this. We have seen a pattern in the past in which scandals are discovered one after another within the administration, resulting in a decline in approval ratings. I always wonder who is leaking this.
Japan is said to be a spy paradise, but how many spies are there in Nagatacho? I have no idea how many people are from which country or from which country. Since GHQ was involved in the central government of Japan under trusteeship, some people say that by extension it has a thorough understanding of the system, and that the CIA and others continue to infiltrate and collect information. This is not to say that whenever problems occur in Japan, it is the work of spies, but rather that they could easily do it if they wanted to.
If another country is in charge of a scandal involving a Japanese politician, and it becomes inconvenient, should we leak it?
In China, I sometimes hear people say that Xi Jinping is a smart leader because he advocates eradicating corruption, but this is ridiculous. It can be said that the anti-corruption movement is what created Xi Jinping's dictatorship. Xi Jinping has monopolized real power by eliminating political opponents one after another on the grounds of corruption. In addition, no one can say anything because they have the public security thoroughly investigate corruption by all Communist Party members, have evidence gathered, and arrest any strange behavior. Corruption-free cases in China are rare, so it's like almost everyone is threatened.
From the perspective of these countries, it seems easy to infiltrate Japanese politicians' personal secretaries, public secretaries, accountants, etc. with intelligence agents. Is Japan already so suppressed in various areas that it cannot even enact an anti-espionage law? At the very least, there is no doubt that corruption is a no-no, but if espionage from other countries is allowed to do whatever it wants, it would be as if Japanese members of Congress were also held hostage.
It is necessary to solve the problem of political funding fraud, but if information management is sloppy, there will be no problem.
