Japan considers strike against N. Korea

[younggiftedandblack]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060710/...korea_missiles

By MARI YAMAGUCHI, Associated Press Writer

TOKYO - Japan said Monday it was considering whether a pre-emptive strike on the North's missile bases would violate its constitution, signaling a hardening stance ahead of a possible U.N. Security Council vote on Tokyo's proposal for sanctions against the regime.

Japan was badly rattled by North Korea's missile tests last week and several government officials openly discussed whether the country ought to take steps to better defend itself, including setting up the legal framework to allow Tokyo to launch a pre-emptive strike against Northern missile sites.

"If we accept that there is no other option to prevent an attack ... there is the view that attacking the launch base of the guided missiles is within the constitutional right of self-defense. We need to deepen discussion," Chief Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe said.

Japan's constitution currently bars the use of military force in settling international disputes and prohibits Japan from maintaining a military for warfare. Tokyo has interpreted that to mean it can have armed troops to protect itself, allowing the existence of its 240,000-strong Self-Defense Forces.

A Defense Agency spokeswoman, however, said Japan has no attacking weapons such as ballistic missiles that could reach North Korea. Its forces only have ground-to-air missiles and ground-to-vessel missiles, she said on condition of anonymity due to official policy.

Despite resistance from China and Russia, Japan has pushed for a U.N. Security Council resolution that would prohibit nations from procuring missiles or missile-related "items, materials goods and technology" from North Korea. A vote was possible in New York later Monday, but Japan said it would not insist on one.

"It's important for the international community to express a strong will in response to the North Korean missile launches," Abe said. "This resolution is an effective way of expressing that."

China and Russia, both nations with veto power on the council, have voiced opposition to the measure. Kyodo News agency reported Monday, citing unnamed Chinese diplomatic sources, that China may use its veto on the Security Council to block the resolution.

The United States, Britain and France have expressed support for the proposal, while Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso has said there is a possibility that Russia will abstain.

South Korea, not a council member, has not publicly taken a position on the resolution, but on Sunday Seoul rebuked Japan for its outspoken criticism of the tests.

"There is no reason to fuss over this from the break of dawn like Japan, but every reason to do the opposite," a statement from President Roh Moo-hyun's office said, suggesting that Tokyo was contributing to tensions on the Korean Peninsula.

Abe said Monday it was "regrettable" that South Korea had accused Japan of overreacting.

"There is no mistake that the missile launch ... is a threat to Japan and the region. It is only natural for Japan to take measures of risk management against such a threat," Abe said.

Meanwhile, a Chinese delegation including the country's top nuclear envoy — Vice Foreign Minister Wu Dawei — arrived in North Korea on Monday, officially to attend celebrations marking the 45th anniversary of a friendship treaty between the North and China.

The U.S. is urging Beijing to push its communist ally back into six-party nuclear disarmament talks, but the Chinese government has not said whether Wu would bring up the negotiations. A ministry spokeswoman said last week that China was "making assiduous efforts" in pushing for the talks to resume.

Talks have been deadlocked since November because of a boycott by Pyongyang in protest of a crackdown by Washington on the regime's alleged money-laundering and other financial crimes.

Beijing has suggested an informal gathering of the six nations, which could allow the North to technically stand by its boycott, but at the same time meet with the other five parties — South Korea, China, the U.S., Japan and Russia. The U.S. has backed the idea and said Washington could meet with the North on the sidelines of such a meeting.

Still, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill questioned just how influential Beijing was with the enigmatic regime.

"I must say the issue of China's influence on DPRK is one that concerns us," Hill told reporters in Tokyo. "China said to the DPRK, 'Don't fire those missiles,' but the DPRK fired them. So I think everybody, especially the Chinese, are a little bit worried about it."

The DPRK refers to the North's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Hill is touring the region to coordinate strategy on North Korea. He has emphasized the need for countries involved to present a united front.

"We want to make it very clear that we all speak in one voice on this provocative action by the North Koreans to launch missiles in all shapes and sizes," Hill said. "We want to make it clear to North Korea that what it did was really unacceptable."

[VV o n g B a]

hey thats strange, when i first saw this story, i specifically remember reading a passage from the anonymous spokeswoman that said japanese fighter planes could fly to nk and bomb it but they wouldn't have enuf fuel for the return trip. it would be suicide she said.

that kinda stuck in my head b/c, well u know it's japan and they used to do that kinda thing. i can't find the reference anywhere now. on the google pages i lookup, it says the word suicide only appears as reference in the link to the page. i wonder if this is an ap screwup that was corrected or if she actually said that.

[SunWuKong]

so is North Korea going to consider a pre-emptive strike against Japan's consideration of a pre-emptive strike?

[snailpoo]

Originally Posted by VV o n g B a

hey thats strange, when i first saw this story, i specifically remember reading a passage from the anonymous spokeswoman that said japanese fighter planes could fly to nk and bomb it but they wouldn't have enuf fuel for the return trip. it would be suicide she said.

that kinda stuck in my head b/c, well u know it's japan and they used to do that kinda thing. i can't find the reference anywhere now. on the google pages i lookup, it says the word suicide only appears as reference in the link to the page. i wonder if this is an ap screwup that was corrected or if she actually said that.

Yep, the passage is gone. It now reads:

A Defense Agency spokeswoman, however, said Japan has no offensive weapons such as ballistic missiles that could reach North Korea.

Japanese fighter jets and pilots are not capable of carrying out such an attack, a military analyst said.

“Japan’s air force is top class in defending the nation’s airspace, but attacking another country is almost impossible,” said analyst Kazuhisa Ogawa. “Japan has no capacity to wage war.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13775754/

[yoMAMA]

Originally Posted by younggiftedandblack

TOKYO - Japan said Monday it was considering whether a pre-emptive strike on the North's missile bases would violate its constitution

or they can just hire John Yoo from berkeley law, he'll fix any constitution problems for ya.

[mr. x]

geeze, don't they use our equipment? I know they don't have the carriers they used to or the mid-air refuelers but cmon now...

[Player 0]

Posturing and sabre rattling, you'll find that other than the NKoreans, the primary producers of noise are the US and Japan.

[Irezumi Kiss]

^ yeah, but scary thing is, we'll actually go and DO something...with or without anyone else's permission.

[Dei Wong]

If this keeps up Japan will use it technology and arm up.

[Player 0]

Dei and Ire

If either JApan or the US attack NKorea, they will cause serious instability in the Korean peninsula, with very serious reprecusions in the surrounding region, bound to have a serious affect on local economies and peoples, not that either the US or Japan would care since neither actually share a border with NKorea.

[Chad]

yeah but would China tolerate a pre-emptive strike against their neighbor? I don't think so.

[SunWuKong]

Originally Posted by Player 0

not that either the US or Japan would care since neither actually share a border with NKorea.

yes, but North Korea can hit Japan and Alaska - we don't really need Alaska, but still, it's the principle of it.

Originally Posted by Chad

yeah but would China tolerate a pre-emptive strike against their neighbor? I don't think so.

if China is smart, it should actually team up with Japan and the US. the Chinese government doesn't really care about North Korea. it just wants stability.

so what's a better fight for China? fight against Japan and US? or fight with Japan and the US, and possibly even get a piece of North Korea? the Chinese government isn't going to do shit to save North Korea in case of military strikes against it, because doing so would be too costly in terms of regional stability, international relations, and the Chinese economy.

[VV o n g B a]

Originally Posted by Chad

yeah but would China tolerate a pre-emptive strike against their neighbor? I don't think so.

it would for the right incentives. the chinese are against actions which destabilize nk b/c they don't want a flood of refugees.

maybe if the UN made some guarantee to provide shelter, food and transportation out of china for the refugees, china would agree to a preemptive strike.

i don't think china or japan really like the idea of a unified korea, but they prolly like the idea of kim tossing missiles around and creating tension in the region even less.

[Dei Wong]

Originally Posted by Player 0

Dei and Ire

If either JApan or the US attack NKorea, they will cause serious instability in the Korean peninsula, with very serious reprecusions in the surrounding region, bound to have a serious affect on local economies and peoples, not that either the US or Japan would care since neither actually share a border with NKorea.

I never said anything about attacking anyone. I doubt Kim Jong Il is stupid enough to fire on the US. He doesn't want to fight he knows he can't win. Give him some credit and the US won't attack him unless he attacks the US first or some extreme situation.

When I say Japan will arm up. I mean it will be the start of a hot bed so to say in that region. Everyone will be on pins and needles a cold war type scenario. If this situation is not defused you will see numerous people starting to arm up out of caution.

[Player 0]

Originally Posted by SunWuKong

if China is smart, it should actually team up with Japan and the US. the Chinese government doesn't really care about North Korea. it just wants stability.

so what's a better fight for China? fight against Japan and US? or fight with Japan and the US, and possibly even get a piece of North Korea? the Chinese government isn't going to do shit to save North Korea in case of military strikes against it, because doing so would be too costly in terms of regional stability, international relations, and the Chinese economy.

China would most likely be neutral in the conflict, i honestly don't see why China would want to get involved in a such a quagmire, and it's extremely doubtful that China would want more territory as there's nothing to really gain in NKorea, of course i'm sure China will send a peace keeping force like the UN or NATO, surely as a gesture of good relations with the Korean people for the future, seeing as if the US does a preemtive strike on NKorea, it would seriously damage relations with SKorea, a perfect oppertunity for China to capitalize on this, warm up relations with Korea and force the US off of the peninsula.