you have totally deflected the question, the question is not about japs' will.
China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread
- Thread starter peace_lover
- Start date
you have totally deflected the question, the question is not about japs' will.
Actually, it is about will. Because the absolute full capability of any country is unknown, it depends on their situation. Imagine if the world is under attack by aliens whom everyone on earth start to realize that wants nothing but annihilate the human race, countries in the world will act very very differently from how they act right now.
For example, can the Japanese not develop an stealth fighter, if their very existence depends on it? I believe of course they can, because if such situation happens, the entire nation will go into a state that could be very different from what they are right now. They could turn into a total work-to-death totalitarian structure. They could forfeit all material comfort and put all resources into military, all but necessary sustenance.
But, right now, they have been working on a stealth fighter for 2 decades now, yet haven't produced much results. This does not mean that the current Japanese teams, government, industry, or the people are half-hearted about their efforts. It's just that they are simple not as driven to produce the that result, because they don't really feel a dire need. That can all change, let say, if a god appears and say to them: "produce one now, I will come back every month to see if you guys have produced one, and every time you don't have one, I kill 500,000 people."
Last edited:
He is mistaken or he is a liar.
No, Japan does not have the capability. It is impossible without technology that has yet to be demonstrated to transform the plutonium waste of a civilian nuclear reactor into weapons-grade plutonium.
possible if japan see herself as the tip of spear for the US. also what should not ber discounted is the psychological enemity between the chinese and japanese mind. Japan see themselves as superior than the chinese as a race ever since their industrialised era as has remains so that way, esp when they rose so fast into a developed nation post ww2. china lost all 3 major wars with japan. So when China's industrial output surpassed Japan's in 2009, it triggered a line within the Japanese mindset. Call it envy, jealousy. For the Chinese, losing all 3 major wars to Japan has cast a mental shadow onto them. At some point, China will have to 修理 Japan to be free from their Century of Humiliation shadow.
Well, the Japanese has NOT been known to have done that. Japan, in fact, has always been a very opportunistic and self-serving country. This is neither praise nor criticism. In fact, it is good for China that Japan behaves rationally, and is cool headed in their narrow-minded pursuit of self-interest. The Japanese are NOT part of the West in the terms of culture. They don't have a evangelist zealotry. What they do have is hunger for resources and self preservation.
The West might be impossible to deal with, because they could see China's rise as the end of their supremacy. They could hold their supremacy so dearly, that they would consider it the end of their existence once that supremacy is lost. Japan, not so much. Japanese culture is used to not being the overlord of the region (or of the world). In fact, Japan culture has much more experience being a great power in a region (or the world) where they deal with a superpower. Japan is actually much better at this game, than they are at being no. 1 in the region (or the world).
Of course, being opportunistic is also their downfall, in a sense that they are in fact always observing and waiting for an opportunity. Right now, China, Russia and the US are all strong. Japan, being in the middle, will try to stay as neutral as they could, in order not to become cannon fodder of the quarrels between the big three. However, if situation changes, and the big three are no longer strong and overreaching, the Japanese will take the opportunity to expand and invade.
In conclusion, one thing I have always believe about the Japanese is that eventhough they are somewhat strategically short-sighted and opportunistic, they are not a irrational people. In fact, they are perfectly ration and self-serving. This kind of country is actually very easy to get along with.
As a Chinese, I can see why other Chinese people might have this irrationally dislike, animosity or even fear of the Japanese. I don't think Japan deserve any of these attitudes resulting from irrationality. Yes, you may hold your attitude towards Japan anyway you see fit. But please let this attitude be examined and tested under reason and rationality.
Japanese are NOT taiwanese nor HKer, nor are they falun gong. They don't consider the West and Western Values their god. They only treat their own gods as gods. This is good. This is also why at the height of the Cold War, companies like Toshiba would sell high end CNC machine tools to the Soviet Union, allowing the USSR to produce silent submarine propellers, to the wrath and even retaliation of the USA. This is because Japan has no interest of serving as dogs and tools of the USA. Japan will serve their own interest.
As for Sino-Japanese relations, as long as Japan realizes that they can not stop China's rise, nor can they match or exceed China's military power; they will try to be as neutral and as non-offending to China as they can. This is because they do not want to be on the receiving end of China's superior fire power. Again, the Japanese are not stupid. They are smart, rational, self-preserving, and non-evangelistic. Especially now that the US has soured their relationship with China, Japan has no reason, nor interest to turn China's spearheads from the US onto Japan.
Except for that a great chunk of Japanese policy is surely steered by American interests. Take the recent Japanese government initiative in offering support for decoupling. Sure no Japanese business seems to have taken the offer yet but at the very least some lip-service is paid to Washington + Wall street gang. It's possible for east Asia to move on from past bitterness but China's "Communism" or authoritarianism is marketed successfully as an insurmountable institutional obstacle. In reality this is not the case and good trade relations between the four (S.Korea, Japan, China, Taiwan) proves this. At most North Korea is the real east Asian problem, one that the US is keen to keep around for as long as possible. China throwing its weight around against Korea and Japan is a secondary worry for them. I'd also be concerned seeing how CCP isn't a stranger to coercion.
Edit. I notice this isn't the economics thread and it seems we have gone quite far off topic now
Edit. I notice this isn't the economics thread and it seems we have gone quite far off topic now
Japan do not really have sovereignty over their own foreign policy post WW2, Tokyo require nod from Washington before the go ahead.Except for that a great chunk of Japanese policy is surely steered by American interests. Take the recent Japanese government initiative in offering support for decoupling. Sure no Japanese business seems to have taken the offer yet but at the very least some lip-service is paid to Washington + Wall street gang. It's possible for east Asia to move on from past bitterness but China's "Communism" or authoritarianism is marketed successfully as an insurmountable institutional obstacle. In reality this is not the case and good trade relations between the four (S.Korea, Japan, China, Taiwan) proves this. At most North Korea is the real east Asian problem, one that the US is keen to keep around for as long as possible. China throwing its weight around against Korea and Japan is a secondary worry for them. I'd also be concerned seeing how CCP isn't a stranger to coercion.
Edit. I notice this isn't the economics thread and it seems we have gone quite far off topic now
That's true. We all know that Japan (or South Korea) is not really an independent country. US forces stations there, They are "protected" by US military, in the sense that they lack many necessary elements in their own military and therefore can not complete the task of national defense without US protection. This is why they will certainly be deeply influenced or even forced to take heed to US demands. However, this does not mean that countries like Japan and SK do not any degree of freedom in dealing with their own national or international relations. They are at least not "full colonies" of the US. The more economically stronger and integrated with China as they become, the more power they will have on the negotiating table with the US for their own interest.Except for that a great chunk of Japanese policy is surely steered by American interests. Take the recent Japanese government initiative in offering support for decoupling. Sure no Japanese business seems to have taken the offer yet but at the very least some lip-service is paid to Washington + Wall street gang. It's possible for east Asia to move on from past bitterness but China's "Communism" or authoritarianism is marketed successfully as an insurmountable institutional obstacle. In reality this is not the case and good trade relations between the four (S.Korea, Japan, China, Taiwan) proves this. At most North Korea is the real east Asian problem, one that the US is keen to keep around for as long as possible. China throwing its weight around against Korea and Japan is a secondary worry for them. I'd also be concerned seeing how CCP isn't a stranger to coercion.
Edit. I notice this isn't the economics thread and it seems we have gone quite far off topic now
You must know that nothing is as simplistic and absolute as you perceive. North Korea is both a liability and an asset for both side of the pacific.
Again, what you are saying certainly has some truth to it. But international relations is never as clear cut and simplistic as you are saying. I have already used the Toshiba CNC sale to the USSR as an example. Remember that happened during the height of the Cold War, back when Japan faces a much more dire and dangerous national security threat (which means that they needed the US back then much more than they do right now, this implies that they were in a much weaker position to object to US demand than right now).