Thread: Japan's military buildup

Hi Disco,

I think stable relations with both China and Japan is good for Australia. I don't think Tony should say anything to upset current Japan relations or as you put it risk the current free trade deal. BUT similarly I don't think he should say something on the subject that is akin to expressing an opinion on the dispute.

Simply, the territorial dispute goes back hundreds if not thousands of years, before Australia had a spot in the G20 or before we allowed women to vote , basically it's territory we know nothing about as it's not part of our history, similarly Hong Kong, Taiwan and Tibet. The US stand on Taiwan is a joke, it flys in the face of the UN and China's permanent seat officially recognised as the Communist Party / PRC. Just because the Nationalist party fled to Taiwan (Chinese territory) and the Communist Party won the civil war, it doesn't mean that Taiwan no longer exists as part of China BUT that's what the US was told by the Nationalists and it took 20 years for the UN to recognise that the Nationalists weren't the representative political party of China. This is the same as Labor whining that that they were unfairly beaten, even though the people didn't support them and then take Canberra by force and then bleat on to all who would listen (such as the ABC) that they are the true voice of the people (well sort of, with a bit of satirical license from my part).

Another reason Australia should stay out of it - China and the US are 'permanent' members of the UN Security Council. They should be big enough and mature enough to work it out diplomatically (although from what I've seen, I have my doubts ) who are we to give an opinion, let alone make a declaration of support for the party that wanted to invade us not very long ago...I can't understand it.

Oh yeh sorry, back to the currency bit, yes printing more money certainly is not good for the whole economy, but the US have no other strategy. It is also not good for those countries that hold debt in US dollars (such as China) as that amount continues to be worth less as more US currency is printed.

I'm no economist or particularly aligned to any political party, but I'm 5th generation Australian and not too pleased with a recent adversary such as Japan rebuilding military strength under the watch of the US who was supposed to be in this area to make sure that DIDN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.

Sometimes the yanks just meddle too much and we don't say, look fellas, stop fighting and get back to doing cool stuff like space travel and cool science FFS.

Phew, end of rant

Originally Posted by Greatsouthernland

Hi Disco,

I think stable relations with both China and Japan is good for Australia. I don't think Tony should say anything to upset current Japan relations or as you put it risk the current free trade deal. BUT similarly I don't think he should say something on the subject that is akin to expressing an opinion on the dispute.

Simply, the territorial dispute goes back hundreds if not thousands of years, before Australia had a spot in the G20 or before we allowed women to vote , basically it's territory we know nothing about as it's not part of our history, similarly Hong Kong, Taiwan and Tibet. The US stand on Taiwan is a joke, it flys in the face of the UN and China's permanent seat officially recognised as the Communist Party / PRC. Just because the Nationalist party fled to Taiwan (Chinese territory) and the Communist Party won the civil war, it doesn't mean that Taiwan no longer exists as part of China BUT that's what the US was told by the Nationalists and it took 20 years for the UN to recognise that the Nationalists weren't the representative political party of China. This is the same as Labor whining that that they were unfairly beaten, even though the people didn't support them and then take Canberra by force and then bleat on to all who would listen (such as the ABC) that they are the true voice of the people (well sort of, with a bit of satirical license from my part).

Another reason Australia should stay out of it - China and the US are 'permanent' members of the UN Security Council. They should be big enough and mature enough to work it out diplomatically (although from what I've seen, I have my doubts ) who are we to give an opinion, let alone make a declaration of support for the party that wanted to invade us not very long ago...I can't understand it.

Oh yeh sorry, back to the currency bit, yes printing more money certainly is not good for the whole economy, but the US have no other strategy. It is also not good for those countries that hold debt in US dollars (such as China) as that amount continues to be worth less as more US currency is printed.

I'm no economist or particularly aligned to any political party, but I'm 5th generation Australian and not too pleased with a recent adversary such as Japan rebuilding military strength under the watch of the US who was supposed to be in this area to make sure that DIDN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.

Sometimes the yanks just meddle too much and we don't say, look fellas, stop fighting and get back to doing cool stuff like space travel and cool science FFS.

Phew, end of rant

Bloody good answer mate,some good info in there.I also was told that part of the Japanese surrender was it was only allowed to build up a Defence force for self protection not to project force and the USA had a presence there to enforce and oversee these happenings.Japan is walking a fine line in that regard.

It seems funny how the very country(USA) that was supposed to keep watch was selling them some of their military hardware and making a tidy profit along the way.Whatever happens i hope Australia is kept well out of it but we have a history of following America into war.

It seems America is hell bent on a war somewhere,i guess it makes sense they have made huge money over the years from war.

Originally Posted by disco man

Bloody good answer mate,some good info in there.I also was told that part of the Japanese surrender was it was only allowed to build up a Defence force for self protection not to project force and the USA had a presence there to enforce and oversee these happenings.Japan is walking a fine line in that regard.



It seems funny how the very country(USA) that was supposed to keep watch was selling them some of their military hardware and making a tidy profit along the way.Whatever happens i hope Australia is kept well out of it but we have a history of following America into war.



It seems America is hell bent on a war somewhere,i guess it makes sense they have made huge money over the years from war.

IIRC, a major factor in this "build-up" (which I see more as a change in others' perceptions rather than a change in their likely actions) can be laid squarely at the feet of countries like the US and Australia.

We were adamant that they should get more heavily involved in various overseas campaigns that we were engaged in. Albeit in less aggressive roles, but they were there all the same. This flew in the face of their existing policies at the time and it was fought by many. But we kept on pushing. Lo and behold, we now see the fruits of our labours.

Speaking of which, Japan's role as adversary in WWII is also a fruit of our labours. They were so poorly treated by the allies following their aid in WWI that we should have expected nothing less.

Yep, no reason we should take sides in any China vs Japan conflict. Japan is our ally now, but in WWII it was the Chinese on our side against the Japanese. Allied planes flew many missions out of China against Japanese forces in SE Asia and helped to stop the Japanese from invading India through Thailand and Burma.
Hopefully they won't risk conflict over a group of useless islands anyway. Would China be dumb enough to go to war against a country such as Japan, which has invested so much money and skills in building up Japanese factories in China?

On the submarines, I don't know much, but the obvious question could be, if the Collins is now so good, why not continue to improve it and build a Collins II? I assume it would cost more than importing an off the shelf foreign design, but there must be an export market for the world's best diesel submarine, surely?

When will we put in the hard yards needed to build up manufacturing exports, instead of just going for the cheaper import option every time.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Yep, no reason we should take sides in any China vs Japan conflict. Japan is our ally now, but in WWII it was the Chinese on our side against the Japanese. Allied planes flew many missions out of China against Japanese forces in SE Asia and helped to stop the Japanese from invading India through Thailand and Burma.
Hopefully they won't risk conflict over a group of useless islands anyway. Would China be dumb enough to go to war against a country such as Japan, which has invested so much money and skills in building up Japanese factories in China?
.

...Hopefully they won't risk conflict over a group of useless islands anyway. Would China be dumb enough to go to war against a country such as Japan...

From Wikipedia - as someone who does a lot of business with China and checks the facts before believing the one-sided pro-American media, Wikipedia has been an enlightening source to me, especially on "The Rape of Nanking", Taiwan & Tibet, the latter originally a province of China since the Yuan Dynasty (1271–1368) albeit when the Mongols ruled supreme

Japan[edit]
Main article: Sino-Japanese relations
Japan has been by far the most important to China of the developed nations. Among the reasons for this are geographical proximity and historical and cultural ties, China's perception of Japan as a possible resurgent threat, Japan's close relations with the United States since the end of World War II, and Japan's role as the second-ranked industrialized power in the world. Japan's invasion and occupation of parts of China in the 1930s was a major component of the devastation China underwent during the "century of shame and humiliation." After 1949 Chinese relations with Japan changed several times, from hostility and an absence of contact to cordiality and extremely close cooperation in many fields. One recurring Chinese concern in Sino-Japanese relations has been the potential remilitarization of Japan.[1]

At the time of the founding of the People's Republic, Japan was defeated and Japanese military power dismantled, but China continued to view Japan as a potential threat because of the United States presence there. The Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Alliance, and Mutual Assistance included the provision that each side would protect the other from an attack by "Japan or any state allied with it", and China undoubtedly viewed with alarm Japan's role as the principal United States base during the Korean War. At the same time, however, China in the 1950s began a policy of attempting to influence Japan through trade, "people's diplomacy", contacts with Japanese opposition political parties, and through applying pressure on Tokyo to sever ties with Taipei. Relations deteriorated in the late 1950s when Chinese pressure tactics escalated. After the Sino-Soviet break, economic necessity caused China to reconsider and revitalize trade ties with Japan.

Sino-Japanese ties declined again during the Cultural Revolution, and the decline was further exacerbated by Japan's growing strength and independence from the United States in the late 1960s. China was especially concerned that Japan might remilitarize to compensate for the reduced United States military presence in Asia brought about under President Nixon. After the beginning of Sino-American rapprochement in 1971, however, China's policy toward Japan immediately became more flexible. By 1972 Japan and China had established diplomatic relations and agreed to conclude a separate peace treaty. The negotiations for the peace treaty were protracted and, by the time it was concluded in 1978, China's preoccupation with the Soviet threat led to the inclusion of an "anti-hegemony" statement. In fewer than three decades, China had signed an explicitly anti-Japanese treaty with the Soviet Union and a treaty having an anti-Soviet component with Japan.

From the 1970s into the 1980s, economic relations were the centerpiece of relations between China and Japan. Japan has been China's top trading partner since the 1960s. Despite concern in the late 1980s over a trade imbalance, the volume of Sino-Japanese trade showed no sign of declining. Relations suffered a setback in 1979 and 1980, when China canceled or modified overly ambitious plans made in the late 1970s to import large quantities of Japanese technology, the best-known example involving the Baoshan iron and steel complex in Shanghai. Lower expectations on both sides seemed to have created a more realistic economic and technological partnership by the late 1980s.

Chinese relations with Japan during the 1980s were generally close and cordial. Tension erupted periodically, however, over trade and technology issues, Chinese concern over potential Japanese military resurgence, and controversy regarding Japan's relations with Taiwan, especially Beijing's concern that Tokyo was pursuing a "two Chinas" policy. China joined other Asian nations in criticizing Japanese history textbooks that deemphasized past Japanese aggression, claiming that the distortion was evidence of the rise of militarism in Japan. By the late 1980s, despite occasional outbreaks of tension, the two governments held regular consultations, high-level leaders frequently exchanged visits, Chinese and Japanese military leaders had begun contacts, and many Chinese and Japanese students and tourists traveled back and forth.

........we'll done if you got this far ...

The whole thing will depend on what America decides is in it's own best interest.
Then it will inflame and corrupt the situation to achieve its own goals.

We best stay out of it.

But if they want to resume bombing them nips it's fine with me.

More likely to depend on if the Chinese military think they can grab a few islands without Japan going to war, in the same way Putin has grabbed Crimea without war. Judging from the Crimea experience, the answer is yes, they probably can.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

More likely to depend on if the Chinese military think they can grab a few islands without Japan going to war, in the same way Putin has grabbed Crimea without war. Judging from the Crimea experience, the answer is yes, they probably can.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

A grab is one way to label it, hold onto the group is another...

Check out the map in the article from "the Economist" magazine and tell me Japan's Air Defence Zone isn't just a bit intimidating, not only to China, but also to South Korea, who feel just as nervous as the Chinese about Japan - but need the US to keep Nth Korea in line

China, Japan and America: Face-off | The Economist

It's gonna be hard to stay out of if the you know what hits the fan, Japan and China will never see eye to eye on anything, Japan writes it's own history anyway and chooses not to mention it's war crimes and role in WW2, I could see how this annoys the Chinese (especially every year when Jap PM visits shrines of convicted war criminals ).

Ahh and we thought the Middle East had its problems