Allow Japan to increase the size of their Navy!

Allow Japan to increase the size of their Navy!

Remove the Naval post WWII restrictions.

Let them purchase/lease, update, equip, and man as many retired US warships as they can into their Navy.

Japan should be allowed to increase their Naval fleet for deterrence and God forbid defense.

Why? CHINA!

After the unconditional surrender of Japan to the Allies on August 14th, 1945, the U.S. occupied and administered rule over Japan. The assumed conditions were until we felt safe and had no fear of the possibility of further actions of the WW2 war period players, actions and mentality.

In 1947 the US created and imposed the constitution of Japan and required the Japanese government to adhere to its articles.

3 treaties were created by the US and Japan during the 1950s.

1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty

1951 Security Treaty

Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security

Based on the Security Treaty, Japan retained the right to self-defense under Chapter VII, Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. However, Japan also renounced war as a sovereign right under Article IX of its new constitution, written by the United States during the postwar occupation.

Japan and the United States signed the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security, which allowed U.S. forces to retain bases in Japan after Japan regained sovereignty. However, the first version of the treaty included no obligation for the United States to defend Japan.

As Cold War tensions in Asia intensified in the aftermath of the Korean War, the two governments revised the bilateral security treaty in 1960.

The revised treaty enshrined the U.S. commitment to defend Japan in Article V in return for permission to retain bases in Japan “for the maintenance of international peace and security in the Far East,” captured in Article VI. The United States also retained control of Okinawa until 1972. This was the broad strategic bargain that remains the foundation of the U.S.-Japan alliance to this day.

Since 1947 the U.S. has imposed rules upon Japan’s constitution and its people. It is time we acknowledged things have changed from the dark days of WW2.

Japan since 1947 has proven itself to be in the greatest of allies and its peoples drive for peace with democracy has absolutely proven their right to complete self-rule.

We propose a resolution (e.g., a CR) that we do not object to Japan repealing Article IX of its Constitution that we created.

With China’s ongoing and increasing threat to both of our countries we know a stronger Japan is a greater deterrent from their aggression.

This resolution should be a celebration of our two countries’ people’s willingness to set aside the past for a greater future and a freely unbreakable alliance between our two great countries.

Reference material

The Evolution of the U.S.-Japan Security Partnership

This proposal is based up regional need for strong allies in the region that strengthen our ability to deterrent the aggression of China and its players.

Never been to Japan or have an affixation with its people. To me it’s all about our ability with allied help for peace.

Suggested resolution:

“The USA knowledges we imposed these implied rules of Article IX upon your constitution when we created it. In the decades after WW2 our fears have changed to friendship and the greatest of allies. With China’s emerging aggression in the region and worldwide, please disregard the past implied restrictions and we do not object to Japan repealing or changing Article IX of its Constitution that we created.”

1 Like

Unless you can show me otherwise I’m pretty sure this isn’t in America’s hands, it would be something for the Japanese to figure out on their own.

Japan - on an America-First Policies.site.
“increase their navy” - in PEACE category.
Shall be flagged, if not removed completely

Japan after WWII was not allowed to have a Navy until 1954 when the US allowed them to create a small defense Naval force only. In the last 15 ish years the US has been helping them create a larger defense fleet with ships from our own retired fleet. They are not allowed an offence Navy since WWII.

1 Like

Strong defensive allies in a heavily contested region is America fist. They can defend themselves and not require our Naval fleets in harm’s way every day. They can come to our defense in times of need. We don’t need as many Naval ships in operation (less defense budget for region that can be used for interior good). Great training partners and a show of strong allied forces is a great deterrent (proven throughout resent history). = Peace!

We are all here with ideas to help our country. =Peace!

Let us not be too hasty. There is one key question that should be answered before issuing any such challenge to the validity of this proposal: “Is the United States party to any Treaty that binds Japan against the expansion of their Navy?” If the answer is no, then you may have a case. However, if the answer is yes (and the language of the original post seems to imply that it is), then this proposal should be treated as a call for the Trump administration to release Japan from said Treaty, and is therefore a perfectly legitimate proposal.

2 Likes

Regarding my reply to the challenge against your topic, are you aware of a specific treaty to that effect? If so, would you please clarify the identity of this treaty? This would not only help resolve the challenge, but would also provide more context for anyone viewing this proposal.

That seems like a good idea to me. As someone suggested, a good wording might be to release Japan from any treaty bonds keeping them from increasing their navy, but I think it’s clear that’s what you were getting at. It makes sense to let our allies strengthen and help us protect them.

Something that might be a hindrance to this idea though is that Japan is right next to China and Russia who we aren’t real friendly with. If Japan builds up it’s navy, then breaks alliance with us or is conquered in a war, that navy could be used against us.

Someone with more detailed knowledge of the situation is going to need to evaluate all the pros and cons, but it’s a good proposal.

Revised original post

1 Like

In my opinion China fears and is very cautious from over 1000s Ish years of military conflicts with Japan. it’s also a logical assumption they traditionally fear Japan more than the USA.

With Japan & the Philippines signing a Pac its highly improbable they would also alliance with China and its players.

A great deterrent!

1 Like

I agree, and would include in one or more of the “Whereas” statements in said Congressional Resolution the relevant history so as to establish why this non-objection to such a move by Japan is of actual importance. This relevant history is also the reason why, although the restriction on Japan’s Navy being part of their Constitution rather than a Treaty is a circumstance in favor of Serge’s challenge, said challenge should ultimately fail: the fact that we imposed Article IX (along with the rest of the 1947 Constitution) upon Japan tips the balance in favor of this being a matter of legitimate concern to our own government, the proposed Congressional Resolution being an appropriate remedy to the observed problem given the circumstances. At that point, it would be up to the Japanese Government to decide whether to act on our non-objection.

2 Likes

I agree, with cgwhite4 reply.

I will address suggested wording to my post and have an edit soon ish.

checking in as much as possible during working all weekend. I am doing my best to pay attention to this post and make revisions during the slow times. Thanks

yet…
https://nationalinterest.org/print/blog/reboot/japans-navy-lot-more-powerful-you-realize-189542
… and the limits OF USE, as far as I understand, are in Japan Constitution, not in U.S.’s “will and power”.

do not disagree with the article, it enforces the need for Japan to have a doctrine change within there government. China has a fast-growing Navy with no site of it slowing down production or military pressure on surrounding countries. If Japan’s Navy in its current stance provides defense protection for them and the regional allies why does the US have to maintain bases and fleets in the region.