Ghosts of the Akagi!

[Fritz]

http://dynamic.washtimes.com/print_s...2-104212-6831r

Warships suggest discarded pacifism
By Richard Halloran
Published July 13, 2003

HONOLULU — The Japanese navy is preparing to build two small aircraft carriers, the first in more than 60 years, Japanese and U.S. officials said.
The plan for the warships is further evidence that Japan is gradually shedding the pacifist cocoon in which it has wrapped itself since its devastating defeat in World War II.
The two warships will be capable of carrying STOVL (short takeoff, vertical landing) aircraft, sometimes called "jump jets," which can fly as fighters or bombers, as well as armed helicopters.
The ships will displace 13,500 tons, about 16,000 tons when fully loaded, and will sail at speeds above 30 knots. Their size will approach Spain's 16,700-ton Principe De Asturias, which carries 17 planes, but they will be larger than Thailand's 11,500-ton Chakri Nareubet with its 12 planes.
The Japanese carriers, however, will not come close to the newly commissioned U.S. leviathan, the 98,000-ton Ronald Reagan with its 80 warplanes.
The Japanese carriers can be deployed as command ships to give the Maritime Self-Defense Force, as the Japanese navy is called, a modest ability to project power into the sea lanes that are vital to Japan's economy.
That capability is likely to draw protests from China, North Korea and South Korea, all of which experienced Japanese invasion before and during World War II. Beijing, Pyongyang and Seoul routinely criticize any attempt to enhance Japan's security.
In contrast, U.S. political leaders, beginning with President Carter's administration in the late 1970s, have encouraged Japan to do more for its own defense.
Tokyo has been reluctant until recently, when many Japanese began to perceive an immediate threat from North Korea and a longer-term threat from China. In its 2003 White Paper on defense, published last week, the Self-Defense Agency asserted that the nation must build up its fundamental defense capabilities to ensure its independence.
In that respect, Japan is on the verge of building a missile defense and dispatching troops to Iraq for reconstruction and has just launched a second pair of intelligence satellites to watch North Korea.
Tokyo recently passed laws giving the Self-Defense Forces wider latitude in defending their homeland, which other nations would consider the normal duties of their armed forces.
Funds for the first small carrier have been included in Japan's defense budget for fiscal year 2004, beginning April 1. The second carrier is scheduled for fiscal year 2005.
The first ship is to be commissioned in 2008, the second in 2009. Two more may be built later.
The plan calls for equipping the carriers with new SH-60 Seahawk helicopters, which are designed to patrol the ocean, detect submarines and protect the fleet. They are made in Japan on license from Sikorsky, a U.S. company.
Japanese naval officers call the new ships "destroyers" instead of "aircraft carriers" in an effort to dampen opposition within Japan from critics who are against enhanced defense and from China and the two Koreas.
Yet drawings of the warship show the flat deck of an aircraft carrier and an "island," or command structure, at the starboard or right edge of the deck.

[Swaggs]

Interesting article.

I would think aircraft carrier would sound more benign to the anti-military segment than destroyer does.

[sachmo71]

They sound like they will be used mainly to detect submarines. Maybe if S/VTOL aircraft become more efficient in the future, these ships could be construed as a large threat. Right now, they sound more like defense ships to me. *shrug*

[scooper]

I'm no political, economic or military expert, so I'm not sure if I am on track here, but I think with the Japanese reliance on our economy and vice-versa, there is little threat here. I think we are pretty much permanent allies. An increased carrier presence, even a small one, in that region probably is good for our interests.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally posted by scooper
I'm no political, economic or military expert, so I'm not sure if I am on track here, but I think with the Japanese reliance on our economy and vice-versa, there is little threat here. I think we are pretty much permanent allies. An increased carrier presence, even a small one, in that region probably is good for our interests.

Agreed. There's no way Japan could become a serious military threat (without nuclear arms) anytime soon - not after we have a 50 year head start since the end of WWII.

[Swaggs]

I think more along those lines, it may be in our interests to assist them in developing a military, so that they may act as an ally in our future endeavors.

[Fritz]

I don't there is any issue about the Japanese threatening the US. (At least for the foreseable future).

The issues here are:

Japanese remilitarization
Japanese bearing more of the burden for their own defence
Regional (Pacific Rim) security
Japanese role in regional and global politics.

[scooper]

Originally posted by Fritz


Japanese remilitarization

Japanese role in regional and global politics.

I guess that was partly my point. Aren't we closely allied enough that both of these can be seen as beneficial to our interests? I can understand concerns from China and North Korea, but their interests are not exactly our own.

[Anrhydeddu]

Same thing with China and the economic ties (is there anything not made in China?). Keep your friends close but your enemies closer (unless they are fanatic about destroying you).

[Fritz]

Originally posted by scooper
I guess that was partly my point. Aren't we closely allied enough that both of these can be seen as beneficial to our interests? I can understand concerns from China and North Korea, but their interests are not exactly our own.

As long as Japans foreign policy is an extension of ours, then yes.

A few things to consider. Japan is an island nation, and so relies on shipping for exports and imports. Maritime security should be an important concern of theirs.

China has a policy objective of bringing Taiwan back under their political control, by arms if neccisary. The US has pledged to defend Taiwan against Chinese agression. Early on, this support would be naval.

In support of the Taiwan policy the Chinese have developed a submarine force to combat a hostile navy. While this force is considered poor, the Chinese have been making efforts to improve equipment, training, and morale.

One of the most effective weapons to use against merchant ships are submarines. So you can begin to see how all of this twists together.

[scooper]

I figured the Taiwan situation comes into play somehow. I was aware of China's desires and our promise of defense, but I was not aware of China's submarine developments. I think this furthers my point that Japanese carriers are in our best interest.

[tucker342]

Originally posted by scooper
I'm no political, economic or military expert, so I'm not sure if I am on track here, but I think with the Japanese reliance on our economy and vice-versa, there is little threat here. I think we are pretty much permanent allies. An increased carrier presence, even a small one, in that region probably is good for our interests.

I agree