It is really beginning to look like Japan is bringing back its World War 2 era Special Naval Landing Force.
Via Defense News.
Brad Glosserman, executive director of the Pacific Forum, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), said he found recent talk of Japan bolstering its preemptive strike capability worrying.Read the whole thing but I'm amazed at a couple of things.
“CSIS has been conducting discussions on the issue of pre-emptive strike for six years, and in recent months, we have seen resumption of calls to develop this capability resurface. I am concerned about the proliferation of these capabilities because of the potentially destabilizing consequences,” he said.
Japan probably won’t develop a separate marine corps, but it will more likely reinforce its amphibious capability, largely based on the Western Infantry Regiment of the Ground Self-Defense Forces (GSDF) that trained in amphibious warfare as part of the Iron Fist exercises with the US Marine Corps in California, analysts say.
Paul Giarra, president of USbased consulting firm Global Strategies & Transformation, said the language of the policy proposal opens the possibility of the GSDF equipping one or perhaps two regiments with advanced capabilities, including up to four dozen amphibious landing vehicles over the next five years, beyond the four AAV-7A1S vehicles already planned, and a suitable number of Bell-Boeing V-22 tilt-rotor Osprey aircraft.
“I read it more as the [Japan Self-Defense Forces] with some improved amphibious capabilities like vehicles and tilt-rotor aircraft. That is potentially a significant development, but the LDP does not look like it wants to go the whole hog on a marine corps,” said Christopher Hughes, professor of international politics and Japanese studies at Britain’s University of Warwick.
1. The experts are wrong. The Japanese are well on their way to creating a Marine Corps.
2. Japan WILL develop a preemptive defense strategy and quite honestly its probably secretly developing nuclear weapons.
3. You can lay the blame for this at the feet of the Chinese.
My rationale for the above statements is simple. While the US has been importing goods and "making friends/apologizing" for the Chinese, the nations of the Pacific Rim have been bullied, pushed around, had land invaded and been exposed to the real face of China.
China is a bully and a destabilizing force.
India has been involved in an ongoing dispute with China over their line of control (border). China has crossed into India, not allowed Indian troops to properly patrol the border and there have been incursions by Chinese aircraft into Indian airspace.
Japan has seen its territorial waters breached by Chinese warships, its fishing boats harassed and incursions into its airspace by Chinese fighters.
Philippines has experienced the same.
Meanwhile, the US continues to try partnership missions as the response to this provocation against our allies.
In Asia, wisdom is prized, foolishness ridiculed and weakness hated. At the present we're being foolish and weak. Japan is simply being wise.
Offensive is the best defense. I think this is all about Japan giving themselves the ability to plant their flag as expeditiously as possible on the various pieces of disputed rock in their surrounding seas.
ReplyDeleteThat is I see these moves more as an extension of diplomatic than combat power. If you are there first the opposition have to move you, "Possession is nine tenths of the law!" as the saying goes.
I'm not convinced. Because I don't see having an out-and-out Marine Corps helping Japan with a "preemptive defense" strategy vis-a-vis China. Nuclear weapons, that brings obvious and immediate benefits to the table. But Japan having a Marine Corps brings to mind a dedicated force for "storming the beaches" and the like, which I don't see Japan having a preemptive mission for.
ReplyDeletea couple of things .
Deletethere is no such thing as "pre-emptive defense". the very word pre-emptive indicates an offensive capability.
next, the issues in the Pacific revolve around islands, island chains and the ocean between them. a Marine Corps is going to be absolutely necessary to secure them. the equipment set (wishlist) is mimicing what the USMC has. V-22's to transport forces at long range between islands? AAVs to transport troops ashore and to give them mobility once they're on land? that is a dual role force. first it can take back islands that the Chinese have captured and it can take islands before the Chinese get there.
Storming beaches isn't really part of modern amphibious warfare for all but the US. Imagine a group of islands whose ownership is disputed. The islands are uninhabited. Imagine around those islands there have been a few weeks of the shenanigans similar to those we have witnessed in the South China Sea over the last year or so. Japan decides to take decisive action and using her new amphibious capabilities sends a reinforced battalion ashore which digs in. Having amphibious capabilities allows them to do this quickly perhaps even before China realises what is happening. Or even they do catch on having a landing capability means the Japanese have presented them with a near fait accompli. Even having an ARG in the island's vicinity will send out a signal to the opposition. Landing may be provocative, but history will judge the aggressor to be who ever opened fire first. Remember to dislodge a force it takes 3 to 4 times as many troops. Lastly an amphibious capability will allow the Japanese to re-enforce sovereignty of those islands that most of the international community recognises as Japanese but other's may dispute that claim. Specifically those to their north which the Russians claim. As I said this is more about forceful diplomacy.
Deletegotta disagree with you too Steve. amphibious operations have gone out of style for European nations (well not even there...consider what France, Italy and the UK are doing...if anything they're strengthening their amphibious capability) but when you look at the Pacific you're seeing a whole new kettle of fish.
DeleteS. Korea has a robust Marine Corps. so does Thailand, the Philippines, China and a few other nations i'm forgetting about. additionally you can talk about landing on an island being in essence a fait accompli but i beg to differ. if that was the case then China would already have done so. they haven't and the countries there are gearing up to either prevent them from doing so or pushing them back into the sea if they do land.
and last you're looking at outdated metrics when you say that an invading force has to outnumber defenders.
that went out the window during the fighting for Hue City. and quite honestly it hasn't been true in the modern era for at least 40 years.
Perhaps. But we are talking about Japan that hasn't got a marine corps. It would take them 5 years at least to build a force of full size LPD. That's why I think this is a more nuanced moved. Concentrating their efforts on escort and submarines to cause greater attritio , and then having the option to land a re-enforced battalion across the beach using their LST's and Hyūga's. Perhaps once the 19000t are in service the Hyūga's could be moved full time to an amphib role? But that would be a bit of compromise. Perhaps they could do something for Asian détente and ask the Koreans for the plans to the Dokdo? Perhaps build one at home and one in Korea?
DeleteMy only other thought is that the Japanese are running out of time. I think if "it" is going to happen it will be sooner rather than later. And as we both know you can't magic ships out of thin air.
We shall see.
Sorry, Sol. I will disagree with you, hands down, if you say that the Philippines has a "robust" Marine Corps.
DeletePhilippine Marines doesn't have anything in inventory to take back an island that is mildly defended. WW2 LST & LCI in various states of condition and disrepair, about ten LVTP-5, no air support. It'll be like shooting fish in a barrel.
It is a matter of years until the Japanese Diet changes the Constitution to eliminate the empty pacifism it delineates.
ReplyDeleteWhether they call the "Western Infantry Regiment" or a Marine Corps or a Special Naval Landing Force, it will function like a Marine unit. It is just about the right size for a European-type commando unit a la the Royal Marines.
The larger question is whether we can channel Japanese assertiveness into something like an alliance with South Korea and the US or whether it goes off the deep end and goes nationalist. Japan already has a problem with big mouth politicians rationalizing Japanese war crimes e.g. those dumbass Mayors they have in Nagoya and Osaka. We have to remind the Japanese that if they go full retard on the nationalism tip, they will lose allies as opposed to gaining more of them. How well would denying the Bataan death march go over with VFW?
it's a good thing the South Korea and Japanese Defense ministers are meeting in Washington in June.
1. I think there is a plausible connection that the JMSDF wants to acquire the capability to re-take or defend real estate like islands. The AAV acquisition and the fact that they are the only operators of the LCAC besides the US Navy gives insight.
ReplyDelete2. With deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, Japan has been experimenting with expeditionary capabilities.
3. Whether they be Marines. Naval Infantry, or units with amphibious capability I do think they will credibly add to their ability to project force and defend territory with multiple claims.