Pages

Thursday, January 04, 2007

Japan, US mull planning for intervention in China Invasion

The Japan Times reports on Japan-US cooperation in the event of a Chinese move to annex Taiwan by force:

But while U.S. officials and the Foreign Ministry in Tokyo are considering a plan focused only on an outbreak of hostilities between China and Taiwan, the Defense Agency hopes to draw up a comprehensive plan that would include military action on Japanese or Japanese controlled territory, including Okinawa and the disputed Senkaku Islands.

The move is expected to draw criticism from China, which views military planning involving Taiwan as interference in its internal affairs. Beijing considers the self-governing island a renegade province.

The joint plan is also likely to be contentious in Japan. Tokyo has remained vague over whether Taiwan is located in an "area surrounding Japan," in which military action might be deemed lawful under the country's pacifist Constitution.

The plan aims to flesh out the "common strategic objectives" drawn up by Tokyo and Washington in a joint statement in February 2005, in which the two sides agreed to "encourage the peaceful resolution" of the Taiwan issue while maintaining the "capability to address (crisis) contingencies affecting the United States and Japan."

The scenarios to be studied include a declaration of independence by Taiwan or a move by China to take the island by force, according to the government sources.

More on that in a moment.... Further down the article recognizes the tilt of the Abe government towards Taiwan, the inevitable result of China's move to become a regional hegemon.

Tokyo and Washington agreed in October to discuss military cooperation in the event of a confrontation involving Taiwan. Japan's decision to go ahead with the study highlights the pro-Taiwan stance of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, sources said.

Pro-Taiwan stances among world leaders are rare artifacts and should be savored when they appear...of course, the next Japanese leader may well decide that a policy of confrontation with Beijing is a bad idea....meanwhile the author of the article makes a common error in discussing the US:

The United States is obliged to provide Taipei with "arms of a defensive character" under the Taiwan Relations Act. The law also calls for "appropriate action" by Washington in response to any threat or danger to the island's security, and Washington has long sought Japan's assistance in helping it defend Taiwan, should it become necessary.

The TRA obligates the US to do nothing. Decisions made to arm or defend Taiwan are left entirely up to the US President in consultation with Congress. The TRA offers no mechanism for including Taiwan in the decisionmaking process either.

The curious thing here is the idea to study for the scenario of a declaration of independence. The implication is that there is some possibility that the US and Japan would not sit idly by even if the Chinese invasion is a response to a declaration of formal independence by Taiwan. It's hard to know how to read such fleeting references, and probably refers only to how they would keep the conflict from spreading, but....

(Hat tip to Sponge Bear.)

5 comments:

  1. If America gets sucked into Iran in 2007, Taiwan is in big trouble. Why? Because the US won't have the money, troops or willpower to keep China away. America is busted financially. Japan is not in any real position to help if the USA backs out. The olympics can be postponed or be damned.

    I've been here for many years and I think now there is a real possibility that China will ramp up the pressure and make a move on Taiwan. It doesn't look good with Cheney, Bush and Aipac in charge.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Quite frankly, if Taiwan unilaterally declares independence without prior proximate provocation from China, then both the U.S. and Japan, because of the one-China position, are legally barred from any action.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The "One China" position does not "legally" prevent the US from doing anything, since it is not US law.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm confused; then what is the TRA?

    ReplyDelete
  5. The Taiwan Relations Act has nothing legally binding to say on the issue.

    Michael

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.