Tokyo’s outspoken Gov. Shintaro Ishihara says his country, which suffered history’s only nuclear attack, should build nuclear weapons to counter the threat from fast-rising China.
In my interview with Ishihara, published in The Independent today, Ishihara said Japan could develop nukes within a year and send a strong message to the world. ‘All our enemies: China, North Korea and Russia—all close neighbours—have nuclear weapons. Is there another country in the world in a similar situation?
‘People talk about the cost and other things, but the fact is that diplomatic bargaining power means nuclear weapons. All the members of the (United Nations) Security Council have them.’
Such comments, from the leader of Japan’s second-most powerful political office, come amid concerns about China’s growing military muscle. Beijing announced last week that its 2011 defense budget will be boosted by 12.7 percent to $91.5 billion, up from $81 billion last year. And most experts say that those figures are an underestimate.
China officially overtook Japan as the world’s second-largest economy last month. Despite booming bilateral trade, the relationship has regularly been shaken by disputes over territorial and historical issues. Ties are still struggling to recover from a maritime clash last year over the Senkaku Islands, which are administered by Japan but claimed by China.
Ishihara said the clash, which ended when police released the captain of a Chinese ship accused of ramming Japan’s coastguard vessels, exposed his country’s weakness in Asia. ‘China wouldn’t have dared laid a hand on the Senkakus (if Japan had nuclear weapons).’ The governor added that a nuclear-armed Japan would also win more respect from Russia, which seized four Japanese-owned islands at the end of World War II. And he advised his constitutionally pacifist nation to scrap restrictions on the manufacture and sale of weapons. ‘We should develop sophisticated (yuushuu na) weapons and sell them abroad. Japan made the best tanks in the world before America crushed the industry. We could get that back.’
Ishihara’s right-wing politics and persistent warnings about the rise of China have earned him the sobriquet ‘Japan’s Jean-Marie Le Pen.’ But there are signs that the national consensus has moved closer to his brand of nationalist politics since he took office in 1999. A stunning 78 percent of respondents in the last annual survey on Japanese attitudes toward China said they did ‘not feel friendly’ towards their neighbour, the highest rating since the poll began in 1978.
Conservatives have long demanded that Tokyo ditch its postwar Constitution, which was written during the American occupation of the country and renounces war as a sovereign right. Japan’s so-called non-nuclear principles, produced during the long reign of Prime Minister Minister Eisaku Sato 1964-72, later committed the country to never produce, possess or allow the entry of nuclear weapons. The principles were partly a response to popular revulsion over the deaths of over quarter of a million people, mostly civilians, in the 1945 US bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Ishihara claims that Sato, who won the 1974 Nobel Peace Prize for his opposition to plans for a nuclear-weapons programme, was at the same time secretly approaching the United States for help in developing an atomic bomb. ‘Japan asked the US (Lyndon B.) Johnson administration for help in developing nuclear weapons but America refused. If the Sato administration had unilaterally developed weapons then, for a start North Korea wouldn’t have taken so many of our citizens,’ he said, referring to Pyongyang’s abduction of an unknown number of Japanese people.
Sato had in any case undermined the no-nuke rule by striking a backroom deal with Washington, signed with then-President Richard Nixon in 1969. The pact allowed nuclear-armed US ships and aircraft to traffic anywhere through or over Japanese territory and was confirmed by a senior Japanese Foreign Ministry bureaucrat in 2009.
Ishihara also suggested that US President Barack Obama’s 2009 pledge to rid the world of nuclear weapons wasn't genuine. ‘Obama said “yes we can” when he promised to abolish nuclear weapons, then followed it with “but we don’t.” The US is still making computer simulations of new weapons. Japan should do the same,’ he said.
He added that Japan’s unique history gives it more reason than most to change its non-nuclear stance. ‘Japan is the only country with legitimate reason to hold nuclear weapons because it was the only country attacked by nuclear weapons,’ he said. ‘I have a good journalist friend in Washington and he heard (former US Secretary of State Henry) Kissinger say off record: "We want Japan to have nukes. If Japan had nukes, it would be a favourable era for America." I agree with that.’
’All our enemies: China, North Korea and Russia—all close neighbours have nukes. One kidnaps hundreds of our people. Another snatched the Northern Territories from us after the war. And another lays claims to our island (The Senkakus). In this day and age is there any other country in the world in a similar situation? The people of this country are very uneasy about what’s going on.’
Ishihara is expected to step down this year after 12 years governing the capital of 13 million people, though he’s not obliged to declare his candidacy until March 11, the final session of the city’s government. His term in office has been marked by a string of controversial bon mots and often harsh criticism of his political contemporaries. In his latest interview, Ishihara called former Prime Minister Hatoyama Yukio ‘an idiot’ for pinning his diplomatic strategy toward Beijing on the philosophy of yuai, or ‘fraternity.’
‘Of course all countries prefer to be friends with other countries. But Hatoyama was an idiot. He didn’t understand power politics. He’s just a sentimentalist. There’s no point in even discussing him. It’s a sign of Japan’s weakness that he was elected.’
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Johnny
It’s a crazy idea but I have to admitted that Shintaro Ishihara is correct! China can not be trust and they are an immediate and long term threat Japan and Asean. Japan can not reply on our commitment defend Japan and our allies in the pacific. Nuclear is the first option for Australia, Indonesia, and Vietnam as well. Military and strategic alliances formation like NATO around China is the next second option. Believe me China will have second thought about bullying any of its neighbors without risking a total destruction on its Middle Kingdom.
Mike Burke
Not only would this idea harm Japan by pouring gallons of fuel onto the anti-Japanese nationalist propaganda issued by North Korea and China, it would also alienate Japan from her natural allies in Europe and North America, not to mention incur trade punitive trade measure which would have massive implications for Japan’s export based economy.
What a load of nonsense.
PeterDownUnder
‘All our enemies: China, North Korea and Russia—all close neighbours—have nuclear weapons. Is there another country in the world in a similar situation?
Yes, Germany. For a good reason too.
John Chan
@Johnny, USA is the only nation that nuked Japan twice; killed and maimed more than half million Japanese. As “eye for eye, teeth for teeth” Japan is most likely to return the favour to the USA plus interests, nuke LA, NY, Dallas and Pearl Harbour.
Nuclear is the first option for Canada, Cuba, Mexico, Nicaragua, Colombia and Venezuela as well. Military and strategic alliances formation like NATO around the US is the next second option. Believe me USA will have second thought about bullying any of its neighbors without risking a total destruction on its imperial USA.
JD
Go Japan Go.USA may have been the First to Nuke you but it may not be the last one.
Grant
In re. to John Chan: Apparently you’ve forgotten all the Americans (including Japanese Americans) who died in the war, not to mention all of the ones who died in the surprise attack that led the U.S into the war in the first place. If we start bringing revenge into this then we aren’t going to get anywhere.
In any case it’s probably the reaching the heights of ridiculousness to think that Japan would ever feel a need to use nuclear weapons on the U.S (assuming they could even make missiles that could go that far), particularly since your knowledge of geography appears to have missed the fact that New York is on the other side of the country from Los Angeles. When we talk about the threat of a nuclear Iran we don’t actually mean that Iran could hit the United States. They don’t have missiles that could go that distance. We’re worried about Iran using them in the Middle East.
Of course there is always the possibility of a nation using so many that most of the enemy continent (if not the world) would die from the nuclear winter, but that would probably kill anyone stupid enough to use the weapons as well.
Following that you appear to be resorting to the standard arguments of an ‘imperial’ United States and American nations entering a military alliance (that most of them have no interest in) against the U.S even though it’s been decades since the U.S overthrew a South American government or supported South American guerrillas. In addition I have no idea why you mentioned Canada, the U.S and Canada have no serious issues and our generals trust Canada so much that we have no plans for hostilities with Canada. Only a handful of other nations can claim that they have that trust.
I also notice that you left out Brazil, which is undeniably the strongest of the South American states. Are they presenting a problem to your argument because Brazil manages to be on relatively good terms with the U.S?
Lastly, are we supposed to believe that the nations you mentioned have the technological capacity to actually create and maintain the missiles needed to reach the U.S? Not only are nuclear weapons expensive but any missiles used probably wouldn’t be able to reach North America. Your suggestion would be more likely to doom South America.
On the main article: Where exactly is Mr. Ishihara suggesting that Japan find the money to pay for these nuclear weapons? As Ukraine realized, they aren’t cheap to maintain and Japan sinks a huge amount of money into the country.
After that I find it hard to believe that a nuclear deterrent would really have stopped North Korea from doing anything. Strategic weapons like those aren’t much good for stopping covert operations. Look at the case of Israel, Pakistan and India for evidence of that.
Finally, are we really supposed to believe that an arch-realist like Kissinger (or indeed any major American politician ever) would express a desire for a nuclear Japan? That just beggars belief. It’s bad enough that China has them and that Taiwan once expressed interest in them, the U.S really doesn’t need the additional complication of a nuclear Japan.
Curse of Westphalia
@Grant – John Chan is just being sarcastic and making fun of Ishihara. Don’t take him too seriously. I do agree that Ishihara is out of his mind. Japan right now is actually mending its ties with South Korea because they both perceive the China threat. If it wants to end that immediately, then developing nuclear weapons is the way to go. Plus, Japan will never survive a nuclear exchange – all the countries around it that are nuclear-armed will sterilize its four main isles and then some, making them so radioactive that no human habitation is possible for a long time. Drawing on Martin Jacques, Japan, if it wants to reduce tensions in Asia, should return to Asia instead of constantly looking to the West. It separated itself from Asia during the Meiji Reforms. Asia was backward, so that was a farsighted move. 150 years later, things have changed. Now, Asia is back in the game, and Japan, like many other countries and empires before it, finds that the chickens have come home to roost, that what they did and didn’t do in the past is generating real consequences for it, many of which are now detrimental to its well-being. Of course, being an island nation, it will always be somewhat detached from Asia, but now, it should seek to mend fences with its immediate neighbors. Although Japan may seem strong and friendly with other small Asian nations, that is because those relations are for convenience, specifically out of fear of China. If China were to manage to allay those fears and to build better relations with those nations, then Japan may find itself receiving much cooler responses from their supposed close allies. Of course, nationalism on all sides must be temped down, and past grievances be examined impartially and then forgiven, because what is past is past, and those that come after cannot change it. This, then, can result in greater integration among the nations in the region, with the framework built upon trust and, if not friendship, then at least guarantees that no aggression will ever be committed again amongst members. The bottom line is, a war and a state of constant anticipation of it does nobody in the region any good. The rest of the world will just laugh their way to the bank.
John Chan
@Grant, you blamed the wrong guy, John Chan is only the messenger, he is merely to show how ludicrous Johnny is, Johnny is inciting nuclear holocaust in Asia.
Jeff
Grant: What you said all seems to be like a Charlie Sheen WINNING speak. Yes some of the stuff in the article was “off” But I would agree that Japan does need Nuclear weapons. China is and will be a threat to Japan AND Taiwan. North Korea WOULD have thought twice about a few of the things they have done. I was not reading the same thing you were I guess. Where does it say that anything about the possiblity of Japan using the “nukes” on us?
Grant
@ John Chan: Sorry, I took your comment seriously. Mea culpa.
Kaptain Kanuck
@John Chan — Canada-USA are allies, these two countries share an extremely deep/common bond that you have yet to understand. Hence, Canada doesn’t need nukes and if they had nukes I can guarantee you that they would NOT be pointed at the U.S.A.
Grant
In re. to Jeff: I don’t have the faintest idea who Charlie Sheen is, except that he is apparently some kind of celebrity, and frankly I couldn’t care less about him.
As for Japan using nuclear weapons, I was actually responding to a comment by John Chan (which I apparently mistook for being serious when it was actually sarcastic).
In re. to Kaptain Kanuck: As far as I can tell John Chan was actually being sarcastic when they wrote that in response to ‘Johnny’.