As we have seen in the past in South Korea, the anti-US activists like to use the environmental card to bash the US military with. The Japanese government is getting out in front of this issue by getting this agreement in place that allows them to have personnel on US military bases to monitor environmental issues:
Secretary of Defense Ash Carter listens as Japan’s Minister for Foreign Affairs Fumio Kishida makes brief remarks during a signing ceremony of the “Agreement to Supplement the Japan-U.S. Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) on Environmental Stewardship” at the Pentagon Sept. 24, 2015. GLENN FAWCETT/DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
The U.S. and Japan signed an accord Monday that will permit Japanese access to U.S. military facilities in Japan for environmental surveys.
The agreement – signed at the Pentagon by U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida – supplements the long-standing Japan-U.S. Status of Forces Agreement that allows the United States to maintain military bases in Japan. While this does not officially amend the SOFA, it is the first such bilateral supplement to the agreement since its implementation in 1960, according to a defense official who was speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the matter. [Stars & Stripes]
I would think the Japanese would want the Aegis ships deployed more to collect data on the rocket launch with their radars:
The Japanese government is mulling deploying Aegis destroyers in the East Sea and the East China Sea to intercept a long-range rocket North Korea plans to launch around the 70th anniversary of its ruling Workers’ Party on October 10.
Japan’s Sankei Shimbun daily reported on Sunday that Tokyo is considering deploying the destroyers equipped with sea-based missile defenses to the East Sea and the East China Sea to prevent the North’s rocket or its debris from falling on Japanese territory.
The paper said Japan is also considering deploying the Air Self-Defense Forces’ surface-to-air guided Patriot missiles in the area near the capital city and Okinawa. [KBS World Radio]
I would assume that the South Korean government was expecting this kind of criticism from their political opposition and had a quick response available. There is just no way that the US military would bring Japanese troops on to the peninsula without the direct approval of the ROK government:
South Korea’s Chief Defense Minister Han Min-koo (Yonhap)
South Korea is capable of turning down any U.S. request for the entry of Japanese armed forces onto the Korean Peninsula, Defense Minister Han Min-koo said Monday in his latest efforts to defuse concerns over Japan’s rearmament moves.
Japan passed a package of security bills into law in the wee hours of Saturday, unshackling its previously self defense-only armed forces from limitations imposed after World War II and empowering them to fight in overseas battles.
The rearmament step has sparked concerns here that Japanese forces could join U.S. troops stationed in South Korea unilaterally in the event of a war with North Korea.
Rep. Lee Choon-suk of the main opposition New Politics Alliance for Democracy raised the issue of unwanted Japanese forces during a parliamentary audit, asking Han if the country could turn down the U.S. military’s request for the entry of Japanese forces in the event of a North Korea-waged war. [Korea Times]
It looks like the US and its allies should open a new front with the South China Sea issue and get the name of this body of water officially changed just like the South Koreans have been trying to do for years with the Sea of Japan:
In a rare appearance together, American and Chinese admirals sat alongside one another to present their views on maritime security in the Asia-Pacific region. The audience came to hear about one thing, the South China Sea, and China’s commander was clear: “It belongs to China.”
There was political theater and a few one-liners, as the panel remained cordial and the admirals were all smiles during handshakes before and after. But the tension was real and the messages direct.
“The South China Sea, as the name indicated, is a sea area. It belongs to China,” said Vice Adm. Yuan Yubai, who commands the North Sea Fleet for the People’s Liberation Army Navy. [Defense One]
You can read the whole thing at the link, but what I found most fascinating about the article was how direct these admirals were talking to each other about the issues in the South China Sea.
Both South Korea and Japan are being criticized in an opinion piece in the USA Today by a UN staffer for not allowing in Syrian and other refugees fleeing violence in the Middle East. However,the article seems to be less a criticism of accepting refugees and more a criticism of Korea not wanting to become a multicultural nation. I just do not see how it is in South Korea or Japan’s interest to accept thousands of refugees who cannot speak the language, will be culturally isolated, and will likely become long term wards of the state? South Korea already has the burden of accepting thousands of refugees from North Korea who have their own problems integrating with South Korean society and the UN thinks refugees from the Middle East would do any better?
Japan and South Korea are like estranged fraternal siblings. Both have more in common than they care to admit: an aging population, abysmal birthrates and gender inequality. Both are in danger of losing their workforces unless they open their doors to migrants and refugees. Yet both face resistance from populations that have long taken pride in their ethnic homogeneity and are wary of the outside world.
Whenever a boat overloaded with refugees turns up on other countries’ shores, there are sighs of relief in Seoul and Tokyo that it is happening elsewhere.
South Korea and Japan are both signatories to the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention, which obliges them to protect and provide refugees with basic rights and social services. Even so, their records of accepting asylum seekers are appallingly low. Last year, South Korea granted refugee status to 94 asylum seekers — a bump from 57 in 2013 — out of some 2,900 applicants from Asia, Africa and the Middle East (this doesn’t include North Korean defectors, who are considered South Korean citizens by law). [USA Today]
This may seem insignificant, but I think it is another small step towards improving relations between the two countries that strategically have more to gain by working together instead of bickering for internal domestic political reasons:
This year will be the first time in 13 years that South Korea has dispatched a vessel to the review
For the first time in 13 years, the South Korean navy will dispatch a vessel to the international fleet review hosted by the Japanese navy. “The South Korean navy is planning to have one vessel participate in the international fleet review hosted by Japan‘s Maritime Self-Defense Forces on Oct. 18. The two navies are currently working out the details,” South Korea’s Defense Ministry said in a statement on Sep. 7. A fleet review is a kind of maritime naval parade in which various military vessels are inspected together. South Korea agreed to participate in Japan’s fleet review during the meeting of the two countries’ defense ministers this May. During the meeting, the two ministers agreed that South Korea would take part in the review in the interest of strengthening bilateral defense cooperation. The last time that South Korea sent a ship to join a naval review hosted by Japan was 2002. Japan deployed vessels to fleet reviews hosted by South Korea in 1998 and 2008. The countries participating in the fleet review, which is being held at Yokosuka Harbor, Japan, include the US, Australia, India, and France. [Hankyoreh]
With all the negative press that Japan constantly gets beaten with over historical issues it is actually a bit surprising that Japan is not only the most favorably viewed nation in Asia by other Asian nations, but by a wide margin over #2 China. I was surprised to see China at #2 considering the various territorial land grab schemes they have going on with various neighboring countries:
The coming decades promise to be the Asian Century, when the most populous region, with some of the world’s fastest growing economies, is likely to become the global nexus of commercial, cultural and geopolitical activity. For this reason, how people in the Asia-Pacific region, including Australia, see each other and their leaders is of growing importance.
Overall, despite historical and territorial frictions, Asia-Pacific publics tend to view their regional neighbors in a positive light, with Japan judged most favorably. But these same publics also express limited confidence in the region’s most prominent national leaders when it comes to their handling of international issues. These are some of the findings from a new Pew Research Center survey of 15,313 people in 10 Asia-Pacific nations and the U.S. conducted from April 6 to May 27, 2015.
No Leader Has Majority’s ConfidenceA median of 71% in the region have a favorable view of Japan, with positive views exceeding negative sentiment by more than five-to-one.1 A median of 57% voice a favorable opinion of China. Roughly half (51%) see India in a positive light. And just under half (47%) give South Korea a thumbs-up, in part due to a higher proportion of those surveyed who express no opinion. Nevertheless, favorable views of South Korea outweigh negative sentiment by two-to-one. [Pew Research Center]
You can read more at the link, but something else of interest from the poll is that 61% of South Koreans have a favorable view of China and only 25% have a favorable view of Japan. This shows the power the media and the political class have had in South Korea in shaping public opinion about Japan. China is the nation with its own territorial squabble with South Korea, tried by military force to destroy the Republic of Korea, responsible for the killing of more Koreans during the Korean War than Imperial Japan ever committed, continues to enable the Kim regime committed to destroying the ROK, interferes in ROK internal affairs, and maintains a modern day comfort women system of Korean women. This is all overlooked by the ROK public because of the constant sensationalism given to Dokdo and historical issues with Japan that pail in comparison to what the Chinese have done to Korea more recently.
I think it is pretty clear that the Japanese are keeping their options open with their new “destroyer”:
Japan on Thursday launched the helicopter destroyer Kaga, the second version of the largest ship the nation has produced since World War II.
Kaga’s completion at Japan Marine United’s Yokohama Isogo plant gives Japan’s Maritime Self-Defense Force two Izumo-class helicopter destroyers, alongside two smaller Hyuga-class destroyers.
None of those vessels looks anything like the Navy’s Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
The flat-top ships more closely resemble aircraft carriers, though they aren’t equipped with arresting wires, ski-jump ramps or other features used to launch fighter jets. The anti-war clause of Japan’s constitution has long been interpreted to bar weapons deemed offensive in nature, which includes aircraft carriers. [Stars & Stripes]
You can read the rest at the link, but the deck on this ship is large enough to support both V-22 Ospreys and F-35B vertical take off fighters. It will be interesting if these ships will be offered up for future Joint training with the US Marine Corps.
