michaelr

US sponsored military partnership in the Far East and the Pacific Rim

by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

Global Research, May 10, 2007
- 2005-10-05



Although Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea and Japan are not formally members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), they are linked through military partnerships, affiliated government agreements, a network of partnerships, and bilateral military agreements with the United States and Britain.

The creation of a parallel NATO-like organization in the Far East and the Pacific Rim is part of the international brinkmanship of creating a unified global military alliance. Ellen Bork, deputy executive director of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and Gary Schmitt, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, have advocated the creation of a military network in Asia similar to NATO in a paper on South Korea written in December of 2006. The PNAC is a U.S. think-tank whose members include Dick Cheney, George W. Bush Jr., Richard Perle, Lewis Libby, Karl Rove, Zalmay Khalilzhad, Richard Armitage, and Paul Wolfowitz.

The Militarization of Japan
“Japan and the NATO allies are facing the same threats.” (Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, NATO Secretary-General)
Japan has gradually been amalgamating and harmonizing its military policies with those of the U.S. and NATO. Japan is deeply linked bilaterally and multilaterally to the U.S. military. Japan was controlled by the U.S. military for several years after the Second World War. In 1951 the Japanese government signed the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty. This arrangement was expanded on January 19, 1960 with another bilateral treaty between Japan and the U.S. government.

Japan and South Korea are also both part of a grand U.S. military project involving the global stationing of missile systems and rapid military forces, as envisioned during the Reagan Administration. The global military project has been endorsed in Asia as a means to counter the alleged threat of a North Korean missile attack. China has also been identified as a justification for the development of a broad military alliance, involving an integrated military network in the Far East, Southeast Asia and the Pacific Rim.

The Japanese government has also signed its second ever bilateral security treaty with Australia to deepen security and military links. Australia, under the Howard Government, is also heavily involved in military projects in the Asia-Pacific region and more specifically, in the context of a policy of encirclement, in the militarization of China’s eastern borders.

In January 2007, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe made a visit to NATO Headquarters in Brussels, and made subsequent visits, meeting with the leaders of Germany and Britain. In essence, this was a visit to NATO as a whole and to the two separate and defining core branches of NATO, the Franco-German entente largely represented by Germany and the Anglo-American alliance, represented by Britain and the US. During the first trip by a Japanese leader to NATO Headquarters, the Japanese Prime Minister also pledged that Japan would work closely with NATO in Afghanistan. The continuation of an E.U. weapons embargo against China was also discussed. Additionally, Japan already has military cooperation agreements with NATO.

In 1999, at a time of NATO enlargement and at the onslaught of NATO’s war against Yugoslavia, Japan and the U.S. launched the joint missile defense research program. The Japanese government has also upgraded its Defence Agency into a full-fledged ministry constituting another breach of the Japanese Constitution. The Japanese government is also funding the deployment of the Patriot PAC-3 and the Aegis Standard Missile-3 (SM-3). Japan also allowed its territory to host U.S. military radar facilities linked to the global missile shield project.
Japanese officials also want to revise the Japanese Constitution to allow Japan to formally join military alliances, such as NATO. The U.S., Australia, and NATO have been widely supportive of the Tokyo government’s resolve to militarize Japan.
The Japanese government is candidly in violation of Article 9 of the country's Constitution, which stipulates that Japan cannot have a military force. In this regard, the Japanese government has initiated a process to amend the Japanese Constitution, which would pave the way for the formal formation of a military force in Japan. Japan has already started developing its military capabilities and armed forces. These legislative moves are designed merely as a step to legalize the underlying initiative.
The Japanese government has pushed forward its militarization agenda despite the fact that the majority of Japanese citizens are opposed to the militarization of their country. Legislation is now being passed through the Japanese Parliament that will allow the Japanese government to rewrite the Japanese Constitution. According to the Japanese Prime Minister this will allow Japan to “remove its limits on collective self-defence and on helping allies under attack.”
The rest of the article can and will be found here.

Advertising

ChadMcDude

actually we had closer military ties and a history of interaction with our Asian allies then with our European........Thailand, South Korea, Australia, New Zeeland all fought with us in Vietnam. Our alliances go back to right after WW2....AND many of these Asian allies have very strong militaries, South Korea and Thailand posess 2 of the world's best armies.

mdmx96

Is there a point here? Are you trying to elicit positive or negative feedback here? Personnally, I am all for an Asian type NATO.

michaelr

Well you might be but I doubt the Russians are very happy about it.

ChadMcDude

are they ever? look my point is it already exists, has for decades now, no matter what the Chinese or Russians think.

mdmx96

I don't actually care if the Russians don't like it. When they finally get their shit straight, mabye the region can start to relax and there won't be a need for such things.