Japan’s Nihon Keizai Shimbun recently reported that Japan and the US were going to consult one another on drawing up joint operation plans to prevent China from using military force to seize the disputed Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台), known as the Senkaku Islands in Japan.
If the report is true, this development not only upsets the “balance of terror” that has existed between China and Japan since last year, but also dismantles the “dual deterrence” strategy that forms part of the US policy of rebalancing toward Asia.
Following the dispute between China and Japan over the Diaoyutais, the two countries got stuck in a deadlock in the form of a “balance of terror.” For its part, the US has adopted a dual deterrence strategy over the dispute. The US does not want Japan to do anything that could escalate military conflict, but it is also strengthening the US-Japan alliance so as to deter China from taking further military action. Evidently, dual deterrence has become an important element in the US policy of rebalancing toward Asia.
Although Japan would like to break out of its confrontation and deadlock with China by getting the US involved in the Diaoyutai dispute, the US has stuck to its dual deterrence strategy by neither intervening or taking sides.
However, recently cracks have been appearing in the “balance of terror” deadlock between China and Japan, and this is causing the US’ dual deterrence strategy to disintegrate.
In January, a Chinese navy ship allegedly locked its fire-control radar onto a Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force corvette. This action signaled a departure from what was originally a non-military confrontation between China and Japan, and it gives the impression that seizing the Diaoyutai Islands by force has become part of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s rules of engagement.
This development has made the US anxious and left it no option but to strengthen the US-Japan alliance by switching from the preventive deterrence to targeted deterrence.
The decision by Japan and the US to formulate joint operation plans with regard to the Diaoyutai Islands has two military implications.
First is that the defensive scope of the US-Japan alliance has been elevated from covering incidents arising in Japan’s periphery to including those that could occur in Japan itself.
Whereas previous operational plans were mostly concerned with peripheral areas such as the Taiwan Strait, this would be the first operational plan to be directly concerned with an attack on a specific area of Japanese territory.
If military conflict breaks out between China and Japan in the vicinity of the Diaoyutai islands, the US would be obliged to engage in joint operations with Japan.
The second implication is that the role of the Japan Self-Defense Forces is changing from logistical support to the use of armed force. Under the framework of the US-Japan alliance, the Japan Self-Defense Forces have in the past generally played a logistical support role, but this time they could engage in joint military operations with US armed forces.
When Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe took office, he made a call to amend Article 9 of Japan’s constitution to allow Japan to engage in collective defense. The reason he gave for this was that Japan does not have a first-strike counterstrike ability, so if it suffers an external attack on its territory, the US armed forces would have to intervene militarily. However, the joint operations plan currently under consideration shows that the US has long since had its hands tied by Japan.
Tsai Zheng-jia is division head of the Second Research Division at the Institute of International Relations at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS