Japan should raise defense capabilities to counter assertive China: expert

And by defensive capabilities they should mean missiles. Lots and lots of missiles.

Nothing deters conflict like an arms race built on paranoia.

MarkToday 06:56 am JST

Nothing deters conflict like an arms race built on paranoia.

Seems to have worked with North Korea. Not saying Japan should go that far, but it works.

Seems to have worked with North Korea.

I sometimes wonder how many defense contracts have been signed — and how many fortunes made — thanks to the eternal ‘threat’ of the Kims conveniently never going away.

And, in the end, they’re always appeased with a much more affordable shipment of good whisky.

MarkToday 07:34 am JST

And, in the end, they’re always appeased with a much more affordable shipment of good whisky.

I mean, they're not really appeased as they continue to focus exclusively on the military. They could have been like Singapore if they wanted to.

I mean, they're not really appeased

Any deadly attacks by NK since 2010?

You got to.have missile loaded with GPS coordinates ready to launch,if not your missile are useless

Watanabe, also an adjunct fellow for the CSIS

That would be the CSIS which has accepted $4+ million dollars in recent years from Pentagon contractors. Imagine that.

https://quincyinst.org/research/big-ideas-and-big-money-think-tank-funding-in-america/#recommendations-for-media

The war machine is hungry for our tax !!!

In a perfect world, there would be no playground bullies. As well, in a perfect world, countries would respect one another without the use of violence. Unfortunately, the only way to keep a bully at bay is by being able to inflict a black eye, a bloody nose or some other possible humiliation. Otherwise, a bully, especially one from a bad household, will only throw their weight around more and more with increased arrogance.

Yeah go on JPN!! Take more money and social services away from your elderly. A total waste an unnecessary waste of tax payers money!.

Any deadly attacks by NK since 2010?

I do not disagreed but also, it may have been the same situation with Ukraine post russia war.

Japan have US boots on the ground,why this warmongering from some peace foundation than?

why to worry guys?

How to deter a mad dog? - stay strong.

China has not been to war in decades,they got ample supply of weapons in not like the US has squandered theirs on lost cause,China would launch a decapitation strike on Tokyo leadership, Japan do not have a line of succession likes the US

Without massive support from China Putin would not be able to maintain his attempted land grab in Ukraine. Supporting someone who believes in taking land through force shows that Xi is OK with doing the same thing to his neighbors.

There is no choice but to be prepared for war, for those countries which do not want to be conquered by China.

Of course, everyone wishes that Putin and Xi would be friendly neighbors, but what we wish for, and reality, are two very different things.

China attacks Japan? Give me a break.

Chinese investors already own land, real estate, and businesses across the country — and Japan welcomed tons of Chinese.

Who opened the door? Abe.

Who follows his line? Takaichi, his sidekick.

The arsonist’s now playing firefighter.

Total clown show.

1gleen,when has the US won a war against the practice squad

...an international relations expert said recently before parliament chooses a new prime minister.

Japanese govt has much more pressing social net spending issues needing to be adressed and would be well advised to ignore such " international relations expert" advice. Many observers in the know are aware that many experts receive "research grants" and such from certain parties which benefit from increased military spending.

"A certain level of defense capabilities is needed for peace and stability in the region because China might use or threaten to use military force if they think they can beat other countries easily," said Tsuneo Watanabe, a senior research fellow at the Sasakawa Peace Foundation in Tokyo, in an interview with Kyodo News."

It's not rocket science, it's called peace through strength.

China could beat Japan.in 5 minutes,by striking Tokyo leadership,who will be in.charge sarcastic

Nothing deters conflict like an arms race built on paranoia.

Seems to have worked with North Korea.

Was NK on the verge of attacking Japan and stopped suddenly in its tracks by the previous increase in Japanese govt military budget? Fascinating, do tell more details.

Pity the Baby Boomers. Born into a world recovering from global conflict and now preparing to leave it in the shadow of it all happening again. Eighty wasted years

It's not rocket science, it's called peace through strength.

Unless you think Japan can increase their defense abilities by orders or magnitude this makes no sense at all.

Japan could double or triple their military spending and it would not put it in the same league as China, the whole argument falls down when the "certain level" that Japan would need to reach in order to defend itself if China decides to attack is for all realistic purposes impossible to reach.

Peace through strength do not apply when one of the countries involved is significantly weaker.

Meaning Japan should buy a lot more weapons, a lot lot more

 Jiang said, urging Tokyo to "reflect on its history of aggression and respect the security concerns of its Asian neighbors and the rest of the international community."

In other words, eternally kowtow to your new overlords who will do what they want, to whom, wherever and whenever they like. The new boss men of the region, the CCP who they themselves have actively scrubbed a large section of their own history and culture, not to mention the actual details of the war that they constantly bring up and obsess over. Who actually fought the Japanese maybe a good place to revisit.

If this blind belligerency didn’t exist, Japan wouldn’t be having to spend trillions of dollars on defense, preparing for this ridiculous conflict. None of us would.

Ricky Kaminski13

Today 01:05 pm JST

Jiang said, urging Tokyo to "reflect on its history of aggression and respect the security concerns of its Asian neighbors and the rest of the international community."

> In other words, eternally kowtow to your new overlords who will do what they want, to whom, wherever and whenever they like.

Japan doesn't have a new overlord, it's still the USA they eternally kowtow to

Japan have US boots on the ground,why this warmongering from some peace foundation than?

why to worry guys?

Yes, why must we worry when the US leader is pro-russia and unwilling to defend the small against the bully.

Where is the "leader" of the free world?

Meaning Japan should buy a lot more weapons, a lot lot more

Do not buy from the US, see what happening with their F22?

Build your weapons.

"Now that we don't know how America will turn out, Europe and Japan should talk, maintain a reasonable relationship with China, reassure America, and make sure America doesn't head in the wrong direction," Watanabe said.

That's the most sensible thing I've heard from a Japanese politician in a long time. America is already headed in the wrong direction due to Trump and his croonies. He'll hang you out to dry like he did Ukraine. You can expect a "quid pro quo" / a favor as soon as you are in trouble.

You had better reverse the JPY to USD as soon as possible if you want America to respect you.

A highly foolish, shortsighted, and unrealistic idea. Even if Japan increases its defense budget to 5% of its GDP, it would still be negligible compared to China's defense spending. In fact, leaving aside the entirety of China, the combined GDP of just two eastern provinces and one city—Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Shanghai—is expected to surpass Japan's this year, with their per capita GDP reaching over 70% of Japan's. In the near future, a single Chinese province is likely to exceed Japan's entire national GDP. Therefore, the only prudent path for Japan lies in pursuing peace and cooperation with China.

"Unless you think Japan can increase their defense abilities by orders or magnitude this makes no sense at all.

Japan could double or triple their military spending and it would not put it in the same league as China, the whole argument falls down when the "certain level" that Japan would need to reach in order to defend itself if China decides to attack is for all realistic purposes impossible to reach.

Peace through strength do not apply when one of the countries involved is significantly weaker."

Too much nonsensical verbiage.

"China has invested a considerable amount of capital in Japan and would face massive losses if it were to launch a war." Well said.

North Korea deters the US. So can Japan deter China.

Too much nonsensical verbiage.

It makes perfect sense, in fact so much that you could not refute anything written so you make an appeal to your own incapacity to understand a simple argument to excuse yourself from addressing it.

"Peace through strength" is irrelevant when the (would be) aggressor is in a level so much higher than slight increases are meaningless.

Iran had no problem whatsoever piercing the Iron Dome, even with their older missiles. Israel had to call it off after twelve days because they had little left in reserve. Since that's what you get from a vast fortune on spent on tech, whether by Israel itself or by the US taxpayer, I would invest in diplomacy.

I would expect the "experts" as Sasagawa be on a level with those at the Institute of Economic Affairs, who crashed the UK economy in days under Liz Truss. Be very wary of lobbyists posing as experts.

We've got to defend ourselves against this enemy!!! Meanwhile selling off our land and property to their citizens.....makes sense doesn't it?

We’ve had enough of our tax money being wasted in the name of “national defense.”

Stop paying billions for U.S. bases and outdated American weapons. Japan deserves better.

I respectfully disagree with you. If you want peace, you need to prepare for war! For decades now, Americans have sacrificed their lives to protect the Land of the Rising Sun ( Japan ). The Marines, Navy, Air Force, and Army have endured the vitriol and displayed an unbreakable sense of honor while you continue to smite them.

However, this is not free. You have to pay! And if anything, the men and women who serve, who wear that uniform, who make the sacrifice, DESERVE BETTER!!!

You sleep well at night because of America. It would behove you not to forget that.

Submarines and sea-based drones the best 'deterrent' $bet, as anything on land with hypersonic capabilities, can be easily destroyed rapidly, as China's not far away

Not necessary..

Japan needs to invest in its own people first, nor in war or weapons..

This is the false rethoric of US to stay in the region with its farce of warmongering trying to hold its decadent hegemony..

Japan must be nearer to the rest of Asian countries included China, be friends and trade together for a better Asia without tricky western interventionism..

 For decades now, Americans have sacrificed their lives to protect the Land of the Rising Sun ( Japan ).

How many american soldiers do you believe have lost their lives in combat "in defense" of Japan?

Of course fantasy movies don't count.

Also it would be good to read the article and realize that the opinion of the expert completely ignores the US and tries to argue how Japan should apparently defend itself against the much more powerful China never explaining how this can be realistically achieved. If anything, and since Watanabe gives no importance to diplomacy, it would follow that the US is irrelevant in his opinion.

Japan's buildup has gone beyond its defense-oriented policy, Jiang said, urging Tokyo to "reflect on its history of aggression and respect the security concerns of its Asian neighbors and the rest of the international community."

Japan's aggression ended in 1945. China's continues right now.

China has no right to preach to others on aggression and security concerns.

Watanabe, also an adjunct fellow for the CSIS, said Tokyo cannot simply take Beijing at its word

Absolutely. The CCP cannot be trusted in any way, and Japan must prepare for the worst.

China has invested a considerable amount of capital in Japan and would face massive losses if it were to launch a war.

True, but belligerent dictatorships tend to prize ideology, land grabs, shows of strength etc. above rational economics.

Xi has shown time and time again that he will put himself, his ideology, and the CCP above the good of the country. cf his COVID cover-up then brutal lockdowns, his tech crackdown, his economic coercion and alienation of trading partners, his attacks on peaceful Philippines, India, etc.

There's every chance he will do so again.

MarkToday 06:56 am JST

Nothing deters conflict like an arms race built on paranoia.

China's military build-up, and belligerence in various regions isn't "paranoia."

It's reality, and Japan's government is wisely dealing with it.

deanzaZZRToday 08:12 am JST

That would be the CSIS

1) He is hardly the only one saying this.

2) Even if he is from the CSIS, that doesn't negate what he is saying.

You are -- as ever -- shooting the messenger and dismissing the message.

AlongfortherideToday 08:35 am JST

A total waste an unnecessary waste of tax payers money!.

Protecting the country is not "an unnecessary waste of tax payers money."

orange geniusToday 08:42 am JST

why this warmongering from some peace foundation than?

There is nothing "warmongering" about protecting the country.

YrralToday 09:08 am JST

China has not been to war in decades

1) That doesn't mean it won't in the future.

2) China causes plenty of aggression that is not full-scale "war:" attacking Indian troops and occupying Indian territory; attacking Philippine ships; stealing Bhutanese land; illegally militarizing the South China Sea, etc. etc. etc.

You don't need to start a formal "war" to be a threat.

NyanToday 09:28 am JST

China attacks Japan? Give me a break.

The defense spending is to ensure it never happens. There is similarly no need for China to attack the Philippines or India, or steal Bhutanese land, or militarize the South China Sea. But China does.

Belligerent dictatorships like China have a habit of attacking others without reason, so Japan needs to be prepared.

okinawaridesToday 10:47 am JST

Japanese govt has much more pressing social net spending issues needing to be adressed

Defending the country is also a pressing issue.

Both need to be addressed, and they are not mutually exclusive.

virusrexToday 12:53 pm JST

Unless you think Japan can increase their defense abilities by orders or magnitude this makes no sense at all.

Japan could double or triple their military spending and it would not put it in the same league as China, the whole argument falls down when the "certain level" that Japan would need to reach in order to defend itself if China decides to attack is for all realistic purposes impossible to reach.

Peace through strength do not apply when one of the countries involved is significantly weaker.

Misguided for at least four reasons I can think of immediately:

1) Japan isn't aiming to "beat" China, or "fully defend" against everything China has. It is aiming to raise the cost of aggression sufficiently to dissuade China from starting anything. If China knows that aggression will result in huge losses (including on the mainland from counter-strike capabilities), it will be less likely to attack.

I (and the Japanese government) believe the "certain level" for this is attainable for Japan; and even if you don't, it's still the case that an increase in capabilities drives a decrease in the chance of China attacking. Therefore, it's not true that it "makes no sense at all."

2) If China did attack, it wouldn't use all its assets (thus leaving places like the Indian border undefended), whereas Japan would throw pretty much everything at China, bringing the numbers closer (even if still not the same).

3) Defending is much easier for Japan than attacking for China, meaning China would need a lot more assets to win.

4) And, most importantly: Japan wouldn't be fighting alone. An attack by China would bring in the US. A well-prepared Japan, along with the US, would stop (and ideally, deter) an attack from China.

“A certain level of defense capabilities,” the expert says. Sure. And I suppose a certain level of paranoia is also patriotic now.

Let’s be honest: Japan hasn’t seen a military conflict on its soil since the Emperor waved the white flag in 1945.

It must be so exhausting to enjoy peace for so long without conscription, or war, or any of those messy inconveniences. It’s almost as if the current arrangement… works.

That’s the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty doing its job. You want to talk about defense? Try gratitude first. The American taxpayer has footed the bill for Japan’s security umbrella for decades, while Japan built bullet trains and perfected vending machines that sell neckties and cup noodles and played video games all day long.

I didn’t say you’re not paying anything. You cover housing, schools, and infrastructure for U.S. personnel but do not cover full operational costs. They are here for your but you’re not even covering half half. I heard it was less that 40%.

quercetumToday 09:19 pm JST

Let’s be honest: Japan hasn’t seen a military conflict on its soil since the Emperor waved the white flag in 1945.

Let's be honest: the CCP has been belligerent right from the very start, and still is now.

Right through the civil war, Tibet annexation, Korean War, Sino-Indian War and other CCP-instigated border conflicts, Vietnam War, Sino-Vietnamese War, and continuous aggression against Taiwan.

And that's exactly why Japan must prepare for the worst.

Jiang said, urging Tokyo to "reflect on its history of aggression and respect the security concerns of its Asian neighbors and the rest of the international community."

China needs to reflect on it's current policy of aggression and respect the security concerns of it's Asian neighbors and the rest of the international community.

That failure is exactly why all of Asia is in an arms race.

Japan isn't aiming to "beat" China, or "fully defend" against everything China has. It is aiming to raise the cost of aggression sufficiently to dissuade China from starting anything.

At the current difference in levels? that would take much more than what is realistically possible to invest.

If China knows that aggression will result in huge losses (including on the mainland from counter-strike capabilities), it will be less likely to attack.

Which is not something that will realistically happen with a modest (for the military spending) increase, meanwhile the money is a much more important portion of what is necessary for urgent national matters.

I (and the Japanese government) believe the "certain level" for this is attainable for Japan

Yet neither can make a realistic argument of this actually being the case, no actual national capacity that could make Japan mount a significative defense without depending on the US completely.

If China did attack, it wouldn't use all its assets (thus leaving places like the Indian border undefended), whereas Japan would throw pretty much everything at China, bringing the numbers closer (even if still not the same).

The difference is not that small, it is not like the difference is a mere percentage.

https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.php?form=form&country1=china&country2=japan

China don't need to invest all its forces to easily surpass anything Japan could have even at the max level of funding demanded. At the end increasing the capacity of Japan makes no significative difference.

Defending is much easier for Japan than attacking for China, meaning China would need a lot more assets to win.

An excellent argument against increasing the spending, after all it changes little (if anything) and there are urgent priorities that don't depend on China doing something or not.

And, most importantly: Japan wouldn't be fighting alone.

Again, a perfectly good argument to not increase anything. If the SDF represent only a tiny fraction of what is necessary for defending against a theoretical attack by China, then there is no point in focusing in this tiny part and instead the priority would be to focus on what would be actually effective.

virusrexToday 10:15 pm JST

At the current difference in levels? that would take much more than what is realistically possible to invest.

How exactly are you measuring this? By what metrics? Or is it just your own personal assessment?

As I have said, the Japanese government thinks it's attainable, and it certainly won't just leave things as they are and allow capabilities to atrophy. It will wisely continue to invest in Japan's capabilities, raising the cost of aggression for China.

If you think this "makes no sense at all" and is not "realistically possible" that's your opinion. But it is thankfully not the Japanese government's.

Which is not something that will realistically happen with a modest (for the military spending) increase

You cannot know this without knowing Xi's calculations, and none of us knows that.

But again, I will wager that the Japanese government has a much better idea than you or anyone else on this board.

An excellent argument against increasing the spending

It isn't at all.

Again, a perfectly good argument to not increase anything.

Again, it isn't.

The idea of forcing an opponent to overspend or exhaust resources is embedded in the broader philosophy of indirect warfare and strategic manipulation. Xi subdues the enemy without fighting and this is obvious. Economic Warfare.

Provoke so that your opponent may reveal himself. Provocation can lead to overextension—military or financial. In boxing the big swing leaves one vulnerable. In the context of China, the most effective defense lies in the measured stance exemplified by Nyan’s post. By contrast, the pro spending cacophonous voices align with Beijing and serve only to further drain Japan’s strength.

quercetumToday 10:39 pm JST

Xi subdues the enemy without fighting and this is obvious.

So obvious that he physically attacks India and the Philippines. Just like the CCP has physically attacked many other countries in its history.

You can try the ludicrous "Sun Tzu ancient Chinese wisdom" card all you want. The fact is that the CCP is, was, and possibly always will be, a belligerent menace.

By contrast, the pro spending cacophonous voices align with Beijing and serve only to further drain Japan’s strength.

Total nonsense.

Not necessary.. 

Japan needs to invest in its own people first, nor in war or weapons.

Then you can make that same argument for China as well.

This is the false rethoric of US to stay in the region with its farce of warmongering trying to hold its decadent hegemony.. 

Yeah, so then why would China be opposed to Japan acquiring nukes when the Chinese have them? Even if US troops weren't stationed there the Chinese would still oppose the Japanese acquiring nukes. Now why would they oppose a sovereign like Japan to have them when the Chinese have them?

Japan must be nearer to the rest of Asian countries included China, be friends and trade together for a better Asia without tricky western interventionism..

Yeah, that's not going to happen, bet on that.

@Redtail Swift

Ever since Japan lost WWII, we’ve been living under Washington’s thumb. Winners write stories. The fact that Japan built the Shinkansen has nothing to do with being a U.S. colony. What’s not fair is how much of our national budget keeps being poured into outdated American weapons.

Japan’s current five-year agreement to host U.S. forces is about ¥1.06 trillion (≈ US$8.6 billion) over five years, or around ¥211 billion per year.

In recent years Japan approved a U.S. weapons sale for US$900 million for anti-air missiles.

A potential sale of air-to-air missiles and related equipment to Japan was approved at around US$3.6 billion.

Italy, Germany, and the Philippines don’t spend anywhere near this much. Has Japan basically become America’s ATM?

NED deployment confirmed.

That failure is exactly why all of Asia is in an arms race.

Meanwhile ...

Trump, Hegseth promise record $1 trillion Pentagon budget

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/07/hegseth-trump-1-trillion-defense-budget-00007147

How exactly are you measuring this? By what metrics? Or is it just your own personal assessment?

A reference is being provided, what is the point of pretending is not there just so you can have something to say? that only makes it obvious you have no real argument.

As I have said, the Japanese government thinks it's attainable

Or thinks the population will not notice it is not attainable and can be fooled into wasting money that will not benefit the country in a significant way (but some limited number of involved people will greatly profit from it). Reapeating it, neither the government nor you give any actual argument (with numbers) how the increase would actually matter.

 It will wisely continue to invest in Japan's capabilities, raising the cost of aggression for China.

Just not in a way that makes any difference. The only thing that is a real deterrent is completely independent of spending more or not in defense.

You cannot know this without knowing Xi's calculations, and none of us knows that.

Again, the difference in military spending, assets, etc. is not about some percentage but in many ways a few times over, it would be naive to think an increase has any meaning, in reality what does have a meaning remains exactly the same even if Japan keeps spending the same. You don't have to be a mentalist to know without a doubt that without the US Japan is for all practical purposes defenseless, and increasing spending would not change that in any way.

But again, I will wager that the Japanese government has a much better idea than you or anyone else on this board.

Meaningless wagers from anonymous accounts on the internet are not arguments, the own government can't explain how an increase would make things different in any way compared with not increasing it, just say so, trusting politicians to be honest about their intentions is not a sign of a rational mind.

It isn't at all.

Of course it is, after all you could not come up with any counter argument and you have been forced to just "say" something is not an argument without refuting it first, that amounts to conceding it is a quite strong argument against what you are trying to claim.

Again, it isn't.

Yet, again you could not refute it with any argument of your own, which means it was such a good argument to avoid increasing the spending you could not find any flaw in it.