Japanese deterrence fails – no potential for land power
Logan 12 (Justin, director of foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, Cato Institute, “What Would a Japanese Remilitarization Mean for the Asian Power Dynamic?” published December 4th, 2012, https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/what-would-japanese-remilitarization-mean-asian-power-dynamic, accessed 7/17/19, JME.)
Historically, the U.S. foreign-policy establishment’s response to suggestions that Japan should develop a more robust and independent defense policy has been to stoke fears of Japanese imperialism. As former policy planning director Anne-Marie Slaughter opaquely put it, Japan is “neither psychologically ready nor suitable for historical reasons” to play a larger role in providing for its own security. The concern is that Japan’s remilitarization would produce dangerous arms racing with China, poisoning Japan-China relations and possibly Japan-US relations. These fears are overblown. Whatever importance one ascribes to Japanese ideology or the visits of Japanese officials to the Yasukuni shrine, the fact remains that Japan does not (and will not) have the ability to project power on land. This is the upside of Japan’s demographic problem. Even if Tokyo were to re-arm, no one should fear a replay of the 1930s, because Japan simply doesn’t have the fighting age population to project power without wrecking its economy. On the other hand, Japan’s existing naval prowess requires relatively less labor than would ground forces, and does not directly threaten Japan’s neighbors. To suggest an analogy with the invasion of Manchuria is to overlook the material constraints Japan faces.
Share with your friends: |
