Tuesday, July 10, 2012

563 Philippines government calls for the rearming of Japan, as a counter to China

Philippines government calls for the rearming of Japan, as a counter to
China

(1) G7 agreed in 1993 that if North Korea acquires nuclear weapons,
Japan will be permitted to develop them too
(2) China conflict & Philippines support mean that Japan will acquire
nuclear weapons soon
(3) - (7) Philippines backs rearmed Japan to 'balance' China
(8) Philippines playing 'troublemaker' in Asia: China Daily editorial
(9) Former U.S. Official: Don't Mistake Support on South China Sea
(10) Philippines Government: We'll Take A Stand, With Or Without US
(11) South Korean Foreign minister fears Japan's "shift toward the right"
(12) Boeing outsources its production to Japan - Eamonn Fingleton (2008)

(1) G7 agreed in 1993 that if North Korea acquires nuclear weapons,
Japan will be permitted to develop them too


{Canberra is the capital of Australia. This letter was published by
Canberra Times, a few days after I wrote it - before the New Year, as I
recall. Perhaps there was a special editor during the holiday period,
because this controversial letter would normally have been rejected. The
letter gives an idea of how long I have been a political researcher and
activist; and is a testament to the record-keeping on my Apple Mac
computers}

Letter to the Editor, The Canberra Times, Canberra, Australia
21 Blair St.,
Watson ACT 2602.
Phone 2475187
27/12/93
Dear Editor,

The real reason for United States concern over North Korea's nuclear
capacity, is that in July this year the Group of Seven Industrial
Nations agreed that if North Korea acquires nuclear weapons, then Japan
will be permitted to develop them too. This was reported in the Canberra
Times of 10th July 1993.

U. S. officials are speculating that North Korea might initiate a war
with its nuclear weapons, attacking a city in South Korea or Japan. The
North Korean Government knows that this would invite massive retaliation
by the United States. Such a scenario is clearly suicidal for the North
Korean leadership.

Much more likely is that the North Korean Government would only use
nuclear weapons as a deterrent to an attack on North Korea aimed at a
forced reunification with the South. A peaceful reunification is hardly
facilitated by the tension being created by United States pressure.

With the ongoing U.S. withdrawal from the region, necessitated by its
economic decline - "imperial overstretch" as Paul Kennedy put it, Japan
is likely to acquire a nuclear capability in any case, if only to
protect itself from its current nuclear neighbours (China and Russia)
and to protect the sea lanes essential to its survival; the only
questions are when and how. It is not worth starting a war with North
Korea to prevent Japan from pursuing this option.

It must be born in mind that, unlike Iraq's Saddam, North Korea has not
initiated war; is the current pressure intended to provoke it to do so,
so as to legitimate an invasion of that country?

Why is not the same pressure applied on other countries with a hidden
nuclear capacity, such as India, Israel, Pakistan etc.? Is there one
rule for allies of the U.S. and another for the rest?

Yours Faithfully,

Peter Myers

(2) China conflict & Philippines support mean that Japan will acquire
nuclear weapons soon

- Peter Myers, December 15, 2012

As item 1 shows, the G7 agreed in 1993 that Japan can acquire nuclear
weapons if North Korea develops them.

Now that North Korea has developed nukes, and delivery rockets too,
Japanese nationalists can be expected to call for development of their
own nuclear weapons.

However the North Korean case is merely an excuse: North Korea would be
obliterated if it initiated a nuclear attack. It is only an excuse; but
it is a GOOD excuse.

A more pressing reason is the territorial conflict with China. China
foolishly alienated many of its neighbours via an aggressive posture in
territorial disputes. Now, rather than being the leader of a united East
Asia - the "central kingdom" or head goose (in the "flying geese model")
- it looks like being faced with its own regional Cold War.

Philippines support for a re-armed Japan is an important event. Although
this support comes from only one country, that country is in the middle
of the North-West Pacific conflict zone. Nor have any other countries
come out against the proposal, except China.

When Japan Inc was on a roll in the late 1980s, its plans for re-arming
inspired fear. But its low profile during the last 20 years has led to
regional acceptance; in contrast, China's swaggering style has given the
impression that it is intent on empire.

Item 3, from Business Insider, has the headline "Japan Could Soon Become
The Newest And Most Voracious Arms Buyer On The Planet"; the implication
being that an arms race in North East Asia will see Japan buying
American weapons.

I think this unlikely. I have been closely following Japanese politics
since 1991, when I campaigned against the Multi-Function Polis (MFP).
More likely, Japan will come out from under the American wing, develop
its own weapons, and export them too. The Philippines is already
importing Japanese military equipment (item 4).

During the last two decades, Japan's civilian manufacturing exports have
declined, as assembly work moved to Thailand then China, and as South
Korea and China developed their own variants of the Japan Model.

Japan still makes key hi-tech components, which are assembled in
products "made" in other countries (China, the US, Thailand etc). In the
wake of the 2011 Japanese tsunami, American car plants had to close down
because Japanese components were delayed.

Eamonn Fingleton says that Boeing has outsourced much of its hi-tech
aviation technology to Japan (item 12).

China and South Korea can be expected to increaingly produce the hi-tech
components currently imported from Japan; in this way, they move up the
value-added ladder. But as its civilian manufacturing declines, Japan
will step up its military production. The "made in Japan" label is still
unexcelled, and will command high prices. Nor can such military
production be outsourced.

The Japanese election currently under way will probably bring the LDP to
power, under Shinzo Abe, who has promised to "bring Japan back" -
evoking the Japan Inc. of the 1980s.

South Korea is likely to side with China, in the event of a regional
standoff. South Korea has its own territorial issues with Japan, and its
Foreign Minister expressed fear about Japan's likely "shift toward the
right" (item 11)

Will the Western Pacific become a less friendly place as a result? In
some ways, it is more daunting to have one over-arching power than two.
With two, there is always the chance of seeking refuge with one if you
feel threatened by the other.

Where would this scenario leave Australia?

Our Governments have a history of toadying up to would-be colonial
masters - Britain, the United States, Japan and China - such that any
independent-minded Australian feels ashamed. I can't see any advantage
in developing our own nuclear weapons; that just enmeshes us further in
regional conflicts.

Let us instead concentrate on becoming self-sufficient, as we were of
necessity in the second World War and the postwar period. It's more
important to have a manufacturing industry than to have a big military.

One lesson of the Fukushima disaster is that nuclear power stations
would be prime targets during hot war. A direct hit, spreading radiation
over large areas, would cause paralysis and panic. So, if a hot war
develops, one can expect each side to try to take out the other's
nuclear power stations.

Electro-magnetic pulse weapons would also be used in any hot war. These
would disable the other side's satellites and GPS navigation systems.
Computers would cease to work. Trucks and cars, with computerized
engines, would come to a grinding halt, blocking all the highways.
Petrol, diesel and gas supplies, and food, would be unable to be
delivered. Only those living in the bush would be able to survive.
Cities would be unliveable, and the price of city real-estate would
crash to give-away levels.

Who would win?

(3) Philippines to support a rearmed Japan, as a counterweight to
Chinese provocation


http://www.businessinsider.com/japan-could-soon-become-the-newest-and-most-voracious-arms-buyer-on-the-planet-2012-12

Japan Could Soon Become The Newest And Most Voracious Arms Buyer On The
Planet

Agence France Presse | Dec. 10, 2012, 5:52 AM

The Philippines would support Japan dropping its pacifist constitution
to become a fully fledged military force and act as a balance against a
rising China, a government spokesman said Monday.

In an interview with the Financial Times, Foreign Secretary Albert del
Rosario said the Philippines would strongly support a rearmed Japan --
its World War II foe -- as a counterweight to what it sees as Chinese
provocation.

"We are looking for balancing factors in the region and Japan could be a
significant balancing factor," he told the paper amid growing tensions
over the South China Sea, almost all of which is claimed by China.

Foreign department spokesman Raul Hernandez confirmed the government's
view that Japan should upgrade its military from a self defence force so
that it has more freedom to operate in the region.

"(Del Rosario) said we are in favour of Japan's gaining strength,"
Hernandez told AFP.

Japan occupied the Philippines for more than three years from December
1941, during which suspected guerrillas were tortured and executed, and
some local women forced into prostitution to serve the occupying army.

The war claimed at least a million civilian Philippine lives, according
to historians.

The newspaper interview comes shortly before a general election in Japan
where the front-runner, opposition leader Shinzo Abe, has said he wants
to revise the country's pacifist constitution, imposed by the US after
the war.

China claims most of the South China Sea, including waters close to the
shores of its neighbours. These areas include major sea lanes and are
believed to hold vast mineral and oil resources.

China's claim is contested by the Philippines as well as Brunei,
Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam, which have overlapping claims to some or
all of those same areas.

In April, Chinese patrol vessels prevented the Philippine Navy from
arresting a group of Chinese fishermen at the Scarborough Shoal, which
is close to the main Philippine island of Luzon and which Manila says is
part of its territory.

Manila says China has continued to station patrol vessels in the area
even after the Philippines withdrew its vessels and called for a
peaceful resolution to the dispute according to international law.

Earlier this month, the Philippines asked China to clarify press reports
Chinese authorities had authorised its forces to interdict ships
entering what Beijing considers its territorial waters.

China and Japan are also in dispute over islands in the Ea

(4) Philippine government calls for the rearming of Japan

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/dec2012/phil-d14.shtml

By Joseph Santolan

14 December 2012

Philippine Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario told the Financial Times
in a recent interview that the Philippine government would support the
scrapping of the so-called pacifist clause in the Japanese constitution,
which has inhibited Japanese remilitarization. The justification given
for turning Japan into a rearmed imperialist power was the mounting
regional tensions with China. "We are looking for balancing factors in
the region and Japan could be a significant balancing factor," del
Rosario stated.

Del Rosario's comments came but days before the parliamentary election
in Japan. Japanese politicians of all parties are attempting to whip up
nationalist chauvinism in the lead up to the December 16 poll. These
efforts revolve around two issues: the Japanese claim to the disputed
Senkaku/Diaoyu islands in the East China Sea, and the call to change the
constitution to permit the transformation of the "Self Defense Force"
into a regular military force.

The Japanese economy has contracted at 3.5 percent in the past year and
is poised to enter another recession—its fifth in the past 15 years.
Politicians are stirring up nationalism in an attempt to divert from
economic and social crises at home.

The push to change the constitution is driven by the need within the
Japanese ruling class to shore up militarily its weakening status as the
dominant power in the region. This turn has been fueled by the Obama
administration, which is encouraging governments throughout the region
take a tougher line against China.

Philippine President Benigno Aquino has functioned as point man for the
Obama administration in South East Asia in its campaign against China.
His government has adopted an aggressive stance in territorial disputes
with China in the South China Sea on every possible occasion.

Del Rosario's call is striking because of the suffering that was
inflicted throughout South East Asia, and in the Philippines
specifically, by the Japanese imperialist army during the Second World
War. The interests of Japanese imperialism were viciously enforced
throughout the region, through a campaign of repression against the
population and the cooptation of sections of the local elites. President
Aquino's own grandfather was head of KALIBAPI, the sole legal political
party in the Philippines during the Japanese occupation, and dutifully
carried out Japan's diktats.

By giving its blessing to Japanese rearmament, the Philippine government
is performing an important service for the Japanese ruling elite in
overcoming the legacy of hostility throughout the region and in Japan
itself to the wartime atrocities of the Japanese military. Japanese
militarism in the 1930s and 1940s was accompanied by the brutal
suppression of the working class through police-state methods.

The past five years have seen a strengthening of ties between Japan and
the Philippines. In 2008, the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership
Agreement (JPEPA) was signed. It was the first bilateral trade treaty
that the Philippines had signed in 60 years, the last being the trade
agreement with the United States, which granted economic parity rights
as a condition for formal independence. In the wake of JPEPA, Japanese
foreign direct investment (FDI) in the Philippines jumped from 9 percent
of total FDI in 2008 to 58 percent in 2009. It has now stabilized at an
average of 30 percent of total FDI. Japan is by far the primary source
of Official Development Assistance funding in the Philippines.

In September 2011, President Aquino traveled to Japan and met with Prime
Minister Yoshihiko Noda. After four days of meetings they issued a joint
statement calling for a strategic partnership. The agreement called for
"cooperation between coast guards and defense related authorities." This
cooperation would be directed toward the promotion of "shared interests"
to be "advanced and protected in the South China Sea."

Two months later, the Noda government moved to ease the country's de
facto ban on the export of arms, known as the "three principles." The
immediate beneficiary of this change was the Philippines, which in July
2012 confirmed that it was purchasing 12 new patrol ships from Japan for
monitoring the disputed South China Sea.

This purchase was confirmed during a meeting held in Japan by Philippine
Secretary of Defense Voltaire Gazmin and his counterpart, Satoshi
Morimoto. The document that emerged out of their negotiations, the
Statement of Intent, set up "unit-to-unit military exchanges, visits
between the two nations' ships, sharing of defense and security
information, and exchanges of research and education." It laid the
groundwork for joint military exercises, in which China would certainly
figure as the imagined enemy.

All of this has occurred with the encouragement and support of
Washington, which has dramatically stepped up its military and political
presence in the region, in a drive to contain China.

A document released in January 2012 by the Center for a New American
Security, a prominent US think tank, summarized the situation for US
interests in the South China Sea. It stated, "Nationalism in South China
Sea countries such as Vietnam and Indonesia and further afield like
India, Japan and Korea—may be the best basis for stitching together
common interests in a loose, almost invisible network of like-minded and
increasingly capable maritime states that are willing to help deflect
Chinese hegemony." The enthusiastic conclusion was this: "Nationalism is
on the rise."

The drive to militarism and nationalism in Japan, and its support from
the Philippines, emerge in this context.

When a Chinese marine surveillance plane flew over the disputed islands
today, the Japanese government responded by scrambling eight F-15
fighter jets. The sharpening tensions over the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands
and the South China Sea have brought the region to a flashpoint, in
which an apparently isolated and minor event could set off a region-wide
conflict.

(5) Philippines welcomes a re-armed Japan

http://japandailypress.com/philippines-welcomes-a-re-armed-japan-1019587

By Ida Torres / December 10, 2012

Backers of moves to shift Japan from a very pacifist constitution have
found an unlikely supporter in the Philippines. Department of Foreign
Affairs secretary Albert del Rosario said that the country would welcome
a rearmed Japan as a balancing factor in the region.

The statement comes at the head of souring relationships between the
Philippines, as well as several Asian countries, and China, who is
increasingly taking more assertive and aggressive stances in marking its
territories. Just recently, China has started to issue new passports
that include a map of its claims over almost all of the South China Sea,
which includes territories also claimed by Vietnam, Brunei, Indonesia,
and Taiwan. The Philippines refuse to stamp the passports, complaining
that such claims are in gross violation of international law. The
country is also closely watching another territorial spat between China
and Japan.

The Philippines' support for rearming Japan is also well-timed as Japan
gets ready for its general election in a few days. Former Prime Minister
Shinzo Abe, who is once again running for the position, has expressed
his intention to improve Japan's military resources and to shift the
country away from its extremely pacifist path. China has always been
warning about the return of Japanese militarism, but the support of
nations in the region, many of whom have been attacked and colonized by
Japan during World War II, will probably encourage Abe even more to take
the bold step of revising Japan's constitution.

[ via CNBC ]

(6) Philippines backs rearmed Japan to 'balance' China

http://globalnation.inquirer.net/59185/ph-backs-rearmed-japan-to-balance-china

PH backs rearmed Japan to 'balance' China

Cebu Daily News

from Agence France-Presse

3:17 pm | Monday, December 10th, 2012

MANILA, Philippines – The Philippines would support Japan dropping its
pacifist constitution to become a fully-fledged military force and act
as a balance against a rising China, a government spokesman said Monday.

In an interview with the Financial Times, Foreign Secretary Albert del
Rosario said the Philippines would strongly support a rearmed Japan –
its World War II foe – as a counterweight to what it sees as Chinese
provocation.

"We are looking for balancing factors in the region and Japan could be a
significant balancing factor," he told the paper amid growing tensions
over the South China Sea, almost all of which is claimed by China.

Foreign department spokesman Raul Hernandez confirmed the government's
view that Japan should upgrade its military from a self-defense force so
that it has more freedom to operate in the region.

"(Del Rosario) said we are in favor of Japan's gaining strength,"
Hernandez told AFP.

Japan occupied the Philippines for more than three years from December
1941, during which suspected guerrillas were tortured and executed, and
some local women forced into prostitution to serve the occupying army.

The war claimed at least a million civilian Philippine lives, according
to historians.

The newspaper interview come shortly before a general election in Japan
where the front-runner, opposition leader Shinzo Abe, has said he wants
to revise the country's pacifist constitution, imposed by the US after
the war.

China claims most of the South China Sea, including waters close to the
shores of its neighbours. These areas include major sea lanes and are
believed to hold vast mineral and oil resources.

China's claim is contested by the Philippines as well as Brunei,
Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam, which have overlapping claims to some or
all of those same areas.

In April, Chinese patrol vessels prevented the Philippine Navy from
arresting a group of Chinese fishermen at the Scarborough Shoal, which
is close to the main Philippine island of Luzon and which Manila says is
part of its territory.

Manila says China has continued to station patrol vessels in the area
even after the Philippines withdrew its vessels and called for a
peaceful resolution to the dispute according to international law.

Earlier this month, the Philippines asked China to clarify press reports
Chinese authorities had authorised its forces to interdict ships
entering what Beijing considers its territorial waters.

(7) Philippines sees Japan as balance to China ambitions

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/10/us-philippines-southchinasea-idUSBRE8B908U20121210

By Manuel Mogato

MANILA | Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:37am EST

(Reuters) - A stronger Japan would act as a counterbalance to the
military rise of China, something that is worrying smaller Asian nations
as tensions grow over conflicting territorial claims in the region, the
Philippines said on Monday.

Rivals claims to the South China Sea, and its likely oil and gas wealth,
have made it Asia's biggest potential flashpoint. China claims the
largest area, putting it at loggerheads in particular in recent months
with Vietnam and the Philippines.

Other claimants are Taiwan, Brunei and Malaysia.

"(We are looking for Japan) to support the peaceful process of resolving
the issues here and to be one of the partners as far as security
alliances and partnership is concerned," Foreign Ministry spokesman Raul
Hernandez said in a statement.

He said no one country has the capacity to address the security
requirements of the region, and it is in the Philippines' interest to
have stronger alliances.

The comments echo those of Foreign Minister Albert del Rosario in an
interview with the Financial Times newspaper published on Monday, when
he said that Japan "could be a significant balancing factor."

The dispute is testing the unity of the 10-nation Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and also dragged the United States into
the debate just as it is pushing to raise an already strong military
profile in the region.

On Tuesday, the Philippines will hold strategic talks with the United
States, its closest security ally, on ways to strengthen their alliance,
including increasing rotational presence of U.S. forces in its former
colony.

Carlos Sorreta, foreign ministry assistant secretary for American
affairs, said the increased U.S. presence in Asia and Pacific region
"sends the right signal that states must behave in a reasonable and
lawful way".

Last week, Vietnam claimed that Chinese fishing boats sabotaged one of
its oil and gas research vessels, while the Philippines and China were
involved in a two-month-long standoff earlier this year at Scarborough
Shoal near the Philippine coast.

Adding to tension, authorities in China's Hainan island have passed laws
allowing police to search vessels deemed to be operating illegally in
what it considers its Hainan's waters, drawing protests from its
neighbours and concern from the United States.

Asked about the Philippine comments on Japan as a balancing force,
China's foreign ministry said the idea of "containment" was out of date.

"Now it's no longer the era of the Cold War. The issue of one country
containing another one does not exist," spokesman Hong Lei told a
regular briefing.

Another Philippine foreign ministry official said Manila does not share
the concerns of some others in the region of Japan's military past
because it has shown in the years since World War Two that it has become
a democratic and responsible member of the international community.

Japan will hold a general election on December 16 that is expected to be
won by the opposition Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). LDP leader Shinzo
Abe has promised to loosen limits on the military in Japan's pacifist
constitution and stand up to China over disputed isles in the East China
Sea.

(Additional reporting by Sui-Lee Wee in BEIJING,; Writing by Jonathan
Standing,; Editing by Jonathan Thatcher)

(8) Philippines playing 'troublemaker' in Asia: China Daily editorial

http://www.todayonline.com/World/EDC121213-0000028/Philippines-playing-troublemaker-in-Asia--China-Daily-editorial

04:45 AM Dec 13, 2012

BEIJING - The Philippines has played the role of "troublemaker" in Asia,
using "one trick after another" in seeking confrontation with China
while coveting territorial waters it is not entitled to, the China Daily
newspaper said in an editorial yesterday.

Recent comments by Philippines Foreign Minister Albert del Rosario in
support of Japan rearming itself were a "pathetic" bid to provoke China,
the Beijing-based newspaper said, adding that the Philippines has
resorted to "opportunism" to balance "big powers" and will have to
shoulder the consequences if it goes too far.

The Philippines and other countries have seen tensions with China rise
over its maritime claims in the disputed South China Sea.

Meanwhile, United States and Philippine officials, who met yesterday in
Manila, are expected to agree on an increase in the number of US
military ships, aircraft and troops rotating through the Philippines.
"What we are discussing right now is increasing the rotational presence
of US forces," said Mr Carlos Sorreta, the foreign ministry's Assistant
Secretary for American Affairs. A five-year joint US-Philippine military
exercise plan would be approved this week, he added.

Officials say there is no plan to revive permanent US military bases in
the Philippines - the last ones were closed in 1992 - and that the
increased presence would help provide relief during disasters, such as a
deadly typhoon last week. AGENCIES

(9) Former U.S. Official: Don't Mistake Support on South China Sea

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2012/12/14/former-u-s-official-philippines-mistaken-on-south-china-sea-support/

December 14, 2012, 6:41 PM

A former senior U.S. defense official viewed as a possible successor to
Leon Panetta as defense secretary said the Philippines has recently
mistaken U.S. renewed engagement in the region as an opportunity to more
assertively pursue territorial claims against China.

Michèle Flournoy, who served as undersecretary for defense policy until
February 2012, said last month while the U.S. needed to send clear
signals of support for its allies in the region, it also needed to
ensure that support didn't lead allies to act provocatively.

Naming the Philippines specifically, she said there was a risk of Manila
"mistaking U.S. support for an opportunity to be much more assertive in
staking their claims. I think we have to be careful that we don't feed
that dynamic."

The comments by Ms. Flournoy came during a question-and-answer session
at Australian National University on Nov. 29. Video of the remarks was
posted on YouTube this week.

"I do think there is a danger of some of our friends occasionally
misreading, or miscalculating, in terms of the support that they have
from the United States," Ms. Flournoy added.

Tensions between China and the Philippines escalated rapidly this year
over longstanding territorial disputes in the South China Sea. Many
feared a prolonged spring standoff between Chinese and Philippine
government vessels in the sea's disputed Scarborough Shoal would trigger
conflict.

The standoff eventually drew down peacefully, but revived questions over
what the U.S. would do in the event of an armed China-Philippines clash.
The U.S. is obligated to protect the Philippines by a 1951
mutual-defense pact. It remains unclear, however, whether a conflict in
disputed territory would trigger the U.S. to act in defense of its Asian
ally.

The U.S. has repeatedly said it doesn't take sides in territorial
disputes, a point Ms. Flournoy reiterated during her Australia comments.

The sea is claimed in whole or in part by China, Taiwan, the
Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei. It's home to critical
shipping lanes and is also believed to hold rich oil-and-gas deposits.
Estimates on resource deposits vary widely, anywhere from 28 billion
barrels of oil or less to as much as 213 billion barrels, according to
some accounts. The ongoing tensions, however, have stunted resource
development in the South China Sea.

–Brian Spegele. Follow him on Twitter @bspegele.

(10) Philippines Government: We'll Take A Stand, With Or Without US

http://www.mb.com.ph/articles/385460/ph-we-ll-take-a-stand-with-or-without-us#.UMvLhEbFfY8

PH: We'll Take A Stand, With Or Without US

By ROY C. MABASA

Manila Bulletin, December 12, 2012, 7:24pm

MANILA, Philippines --- With or without the Americans, the Philippines
will take a stand on the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) row.

This fact was made clear by the Philippine government when its military
officials met with their United States counterparts during their last
Mutual Defense Board (MDB) meeting held in Honolulu, Hawaii.

This developed as United Kingdom Foreign Office Minister Hugo Swire said
the Philippines should help calm down some of the rhetoric with regards
to the West Philippine Sea dispute.

"As soon as we sat down, we asked them (US military officials) if we can
just talk freely and that's what happened," Philippine Navy Flag Officer
in Command Alexander Pama told Manila Bulletin in an interview as he
explained that prior to the MDB dialogue he told then Armed Forces of
the Philippines (AFP) Chief of Staff General Eduardo Oban Jr. "to do
away with the agenda of the meeting" and be frank with their
counterparts. "We told them 'lets not talk about the wish list. We are
not looking at Santa Claus. This is where we are coming from and we just
want to know if you are onboard'."

According to Pama, they told the US delegates that if they will not be
"onboard" with the Philippines, "we will have to do it alone, because,
in the first place, its ours."

"The question there is, "how will they look in the international
community if you are not a reliable partner?" he emphasized.

Pama further stressed that "whether we like it or not, the issues on
sovereignty and the challenges will remain there."

"That (West Philippine Sea) is ours," he said, "We just want to get out
of (that) room (where the meeting took place) having the mutual feeling
that we are both reliable partners."

Subsequently, the US government agreed to the Philippine military's
"wish list." Pama said, "because those are the things that we need for
us to be a reliable partner in whatever challenges that will exist."

"But of course, they have to go back to their usual party line that they
don't have any position non territorial disputes," he pointed out. "But
what is important there is our military to military relationship."

If the Philippines request was turned down, Pama said they can "agree to
disagree without being disagreeable but at the very least we understand
each other."

"You have your interest we have our interest we have a common interest,
we work together well and good, that's what we told them (their US
counterparts)," he said. "Beyond that we are still friends."

"When we leave the table we can shout with each other after that there's
nothing personal, these are just issues," Pama added. "With other
countries, we have to balance. That's where the diplomatic side should
come in."

And with the signing this week of Republic Act No. 10349 that initially
earmarks P75 billion to boost the capability upgrade program of the
military for the first five years, Pama is optimistic that by 2020 "we
shall be a strong and credible navy that this maritime nation can be
proud of."

"We are 7,107 islands and with the longest shoreline, it's only fitting
that we have a strong and credible navy," Pama remarked.

US Military personnel are currently in the Philippines to attend a
planning conference for Balikatan 13 –the largest annual US-Philippines
military exercise, which will focus on humanitarian assistance and
disaster relief operations.

However, they were redirected to assist with the response efforts in the
aftermath of typhoon "Pablo."

In addition, the US military is providing air transport and other
assistance in coordination with the Armed Forces of the Philippines
through the US Department of Defense Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster,
and Civic Aid (OHDACA) Program to support the relief effort led by the
Philippines government.

Also, US Marine Forces Pacific Command has sent personnel and supplies
to transport loads of humanitarian assistance and disaster relief
supplies via C-130 planes.

In a televised interview, Swire stated that the Philippine government
should "talk to their colleagues and to work with other players in the
area to try and get some agreement" on how to best resolve the ongoing
territorial dispute with China.

The UK foreign office minister noted that Japan, which also has an
ongoing territorial dispute with China, as well as South Korea will soon
have their national election.

"So this seems to be a good time for ASEAN (Association of Southeast
Asian Nations) to engage, try to dampen down some of the rhetoric that
has been going on surrounding the South China Sea issues," said Swire.

Meanwhile, the US embassy in Manila announced that the USS Emory S Land
(AS-39), a submarine tender, will arrive in Subic Bay on Sunday for a
routine port call that highlights the strong historic, community, and
military connections between the US and the Philippines.

According to the US embassy, this visit will allow the ship to replenish
supplies as well as give the crew an opportunity for rest and relaxation.

The USS Emory S Land is part of the US Pacific Fleet and is homeported
in Diego Garcia.

The US embassy said that while in Subic, the ship's crew will continue
to work with the Philippine Navy on engineering subject matter
exchanges, as well as basic sailor skill building activities such as
shipboard damage control and fire fighting.

The crew will also engage in several community relations projects,
including a Christmas-themed event with the Children's Recovery Unit in
Olangapo City, as well as sports activities with local youth.

(11) South Korean Foreign minister fears Japan's "shift toward the right"

http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=050000&biid=2012112329538

Foreign minister: Korea to closely watch Japan's right-wing shift

NOVEMBER 23, 2012 04:17

Foreign Minister Kim Sung-hwan said Thursday that Korea is closely
watching Japan's "shift toward the right" in the wake of Koreans' fears
over the right-wing election pledges made by the Liberal Democratic
Party of Japan.

"Japan has taken an extremely conservative and offensive approach over
territorial disputes and other matters, and we have to maintain
vigilance," Kim told a forum hosted by the Korea Employers Federation in
Seoul.

On Wednesday, Shinzo Abe, who is favored to become Japan's next prime
minister, announced the Japanese party's pledges for the Dec. 16 general
elections, including plans to rearm Japan, denial of wartime atrocities,
and strengthening of territorial claims over Dokdo, Korea's easternmost
islets.

Kim said, "In our relations with Japan, issues on history and territory
are non-negotiable," adding, "The (political) situation in Japan is
changing, so we're closely watching it and preparing responses." On if
Abe's party will implement its pledges, the minister said the party will
have to readjust its promises if it takes power. "(In that case), we can
lead (policy) to the direction we want," Kim said,

Foreign Ministry spokesman Cho Tae-young also told a regular news
briefing that Seoul expects Tokyo to play its role as an important
member of the international community to make the world a better place
to live in. On Abe's promise to "bring back Japan," Cho said, "We will
closely watch what kind of a nation that certain forces in Japan will
try to bring back."

The Korean government is closely watching the situation in Japan,
expecting Tokyo's relations with Seoul and Beijing to worsen after
Japan's general elections next month. "Seoul's diplomacy will be tested
once again if Tokyo implements several of the announcements in the first
half of next year," a Korean official said, adding that Korea is
considering a number of issues including responding to an unstable
situation in Northeast Asia due to a territorial rows between China and
Japan over the disputed Senkaku Islands.

Nevertheless, Seoul will continue seeking bilateral and multilateral
cooperation with Tokyo separately from the latter's right-wing shift.

(12) Boeing outsources its production to Japan - Eamonn Fingleton (2008)

Boeing, Boeing,….Gone: An article revisited

Posted on November 24, 2008 by Eamonn Fingleton

http://www.fingleton.net/boeing-boeing-gone-an-article-revisited-2/

In a cover story in the American Conservative in January 2005, I
documented the remarkable degree to which East Asian governments have
been persuading the Boeing corporation to transfer proprietary American
aerospace technology. Soon afterwards Unsustainable.org crashed and it
was intimated to me, by someone who seemed to know, that the problem had
been instigated by political interests offended by my article. I am
re-posting it now as its message is more relevant than ever. (To read
the article in the original click here.)

One evening a generation ago, several up-and-coming aerospace executives
gathered to commune with the Boeing aircraft company’s chief executive
Thornton Wilson. The discussion turned to Boeing’s vaunted expertise in
making aircraft wings. Wilson evidently came across as boastful—so much
so that a young General Electric executive named Harry Stonecipher
suggested that Boeing was arrogant. “And rightly so,” came Wilson’s
serene reply.

The exchange, which was recorded in Fortune magazine a few years ago, is
worth recalling partly for what has happened to Stonecipher in the
meantime—and partly for what has happened to Boeing.

In a remarkable twist of fate, Stonecipher now fills Wilson’s old job at
Boeing. But whereas the Boeing that Wilson led in the 1970s utterly
dominated the skies, today’s Boeing is another matter. Its once
masterful technological leadership is gone and, in an orgy of
indiscriminate outsourcing, Stonecipher is presiding over the
destruction of what remains of Boeing’s erstwhile manufacturing
greatness—not least the world-beating wing business that was the apple
of Wilson’s eye.

As the American press has latterly come to realize, Boeing is an
embattled company. But while the media has focused on a defense
contracting scandal that has recently engulfed the company, this is a
tempest in a teacup compared to the real story: the unpublicized tragedy
of Boeing’s rapidly declining competitiveness. After decades of
short-sighted management, Boeing has become so hollowed out that the
impact is clearly visible in America’s rapidly worsening trade deficits.
Indeed, respected experts fear Boeing is already so enfeebled that it
may be forced to exit its core business in commercial airliners within a
decade. This in turn would undermine its defense business, with
distinctly ominous implications for America’s long-term security. Just
how important that business is can be judged from the fact that, after
decades of industry consolidation, the Boeing group now subsumes most of
the contractors that executed the Apollo moon project.

Part of the problem is that Airbus, a puny also-ran in Wilson’s time,
has recently leapfrogged to global leadership in airliner sales. But a
larger part is a sea change in Boeing’s concept of itself. In a
philosophical metamorphosis whose significance has been lost on the
American press, Boeing is now pleased to call itself a “systems
integrator.” An unfortunate echo of the New Economy bubble, this
self-description effectively reduces America’s most Olympian
manufacturer to the level of a thousand catch-as-catch-can software
consultancies. Boeing’s top management has presided over one of the most
lamentable downsizing programs in American corporate history. Not only
has the Boeing group cut 100,000 jobs in the last seven years, but it
has more or less throttled its research and development department. All
this while spending $10 billion to “enhance shareholder value” in a
buy-back of one-sixth of its outstanding stock.

The key to the new Boeing is a Faustian bargain with Japan. In a rerun
of earlier American industrial implosions, Boeing has come to rely more
and more on Japanese contractors for its most advanced engineering and
manufacturing. Heavily subsidized by the Tokyo government, Boeing’s
Japanese partners are delighted to lowball their contract prices and
spend heavily on the sort of advanced research and development that in
happier times Boeing would have eagerly—indeed jealously—reserved for
itself.

All this powerfully props up Boeing’s short-term profits. But what’s in
it for Japan? Plenty. Not only have Boeing’s orders long kept Japanese
factories nicely ticking, but recently, in a stunning move that has
hitherto gone virtually unnoticed in the United States, Tokyo has
prevailed on Boeing to transfer large quantities of previously secret
American aerospace know-how to a government-funded Japanese aerospace
consortium. Adding salt to the American economy’s wounds is that much of
this expertise was built with subsidies from U.S. taxpayers. ...

Just how far Boeing has fallen will be extensively documented later this
year when the aerospace experts David Pritchard and Alan MacPherson
publish a scholarly analysis of Boeing’s “systems integration” policy.
Their paper, which will appear in the UK-based journal R&D Management,
is likely to cause a firestorm in Washington. Here, based on an advance
look at their draft, are some of the points they make:

* More of the 7E7, Boeing’s major new plane due for launch in 2008, will
probably be built in Japan than in the United States.

* In total, nearly 70 percent of the 7E7's manufacturing content will
come from foreign sources. This compares with foreign content of just 2
percent in the Boeing 727, which was launched in the 1960s.

* The Boeing 777—the most advanced Boeing so far launched–contains about
30 percent foreign content. There is no domestic production for the
plane’s center wing box or its aft and forward fuselage sections. ...

In outsourcing the 7E7's wings, Boeing is crossing an economic Rubicon.
Apart from the Boeing 717, which was not a true-born Boeing, no Boeing
plane has ever flown on foreign wings. (The 717 is a souped-up DC9, and
its presence in the Boeing catalog reflects Boeing’s takeover of
McDonnell Douglas in 1997. McDonnell Douglas, it should be added,
pioneered many of the eat-the-seed-corn tactics Boeing has now embraced.)

In the past, Boeing has always maintained a tight grip on the
wing-making process. Whereas in the 1980s and 1990s it let Japan make an
increasing array of wing sub-components, these were merely assorted
“widgets” churned out to Boeing designs. Now a Japanese aerospace
consortium will have full design control and will make its own decisions
about which contractors and subcontractors make the myriad widgets. If
past is prologue, Boeing will never again regain control of wing-making.
For one thing, the Japanese suppliers will have the advantage henceforth
of more modern tools and a generally more advanced understanding of the
technology. ...

In truth, the challenges entailed in designing and machining wings for
large passenger jets are far more daunting than lay observers might
imagine. To come up with an aerodynamically efficient shape, engineers
must spend thousands of hours testing endless possibilities in huge
600-miles-per-hour wind tunnels. Then the challenge is to make the final
design both strong and light, a delicate balancing act that is not made
any easier by a further requirement: everything must be machined to
tolerances measured in thousandths of an inch. The slightest dimensional
error can produce disproportionate aeronautical consequences. Just how
disproportionate can be gauged from a well-known law of aeronautics: air
resistance increases with the square of an object’s speed. Thus the
resistance encountered at 500 miles per hour is fully 100 times greater
than at 50 miles per hour.

It is therefore hardly overstating things to say that the wings are to a
plane what the sound box is to a violin—its defining feature. Just as a
violin is not a Stradivarius without a sound box made in Cremona by
Antonio Stradivari, a plane can hardly be considered a Boeing without
wings made in the United States by the Boeing company.

Perhaps the best indicator of the challenges involved in making airliner
wings is that, apart from the United States, only one nation, Britain,
boasts a serious record in the field. British Aerospace’s wing-making
capability is one of Britain’s few remaining world-class manufacturing
businesses. Its technology in turn has been a key driver of the success
of Airbus, which is backed by the governments of France, Germany, Spain,
and, of course, Britain.

Wing-making is one of the most advanced sub-sectors of one of the
world’s most advanced manufacturing industries. But since the United
States has been in general retreat from advanced manufacturing for three
decades, why should we care what happens to what remains of America’s
manufacturing heritage? Manufacturing matters for three key reasons:

1. Manufacturing jobs generally provide better wages than equivalent
service jobs because worker productivity is generally leveraged by more
capital and more proprietary know-how.
2. Manufacturing provides an abundance of jobs for people of ordinary
ability as opposed to the Ph.D. types who get many of the jobs at, say,
Microsoft. It thus closely matches the job-creation needs of society.
3. Manufacturing companies are big exporters. In my book In Praise of
Hard Industries, I calculated that per unit of output American
manufacturing businesses export about eleven times as much as service
businesses.

Few manufacturing businesses score better on these three criteria than
the airliner industry. Even if it were not so closely intertwined with
America’s national defense, the industry would still be of pivotal
geopolitical importance. The point is that it has long been America’s
biggest export earner. Unfortunately, America’s imports of aircraft and
aircraft parts now equal 45 percent of its exports, up from just 5
percent in the 1960s.

Boeing’s resort to outsourcing explains much of the increase—and it
comes at a time when Americans are rediscovering the importance of
trade. For a while in the 1990s, it became fashionable to say that “the
trade deficits don’t matter” and that the United States could with
impunity allow its export industries to die on the vine, but this is now
becoming widely recognized as a self-serving canard of the foreign-trade
lobby. Certainly the Bush administration can hardly feel secure in the
knowledge that the only thing standing between the dollar and total
collapse is a massive support operation by the Japanese and Chinese.

As Jack Davis, a prominent advocate of an American manufacturing
revival, points out, the ramifications of Boeing’s decline extend way
beyond aerospace. “We’re not just losing the airliner industry, but all
the scientific, engineering and technological know-how that goes with
it,” says Davis. “We are talking here about advanced composites, glass,
aluminum, titanium materials technology, the castings and foundry
industries, precision tooling and machining, not to mention avionics.
And since these technologies are used in jet fighters, bombers, tankers
and space vehicles, we’re hitting the defense industry as well as the
commercial aerospace industry.”

Perhaps the most devastating aspect of Boeing’s implosion is what it
says about America’s overall economic strategy. A principal element of
that strategy has been free trade. And for proponents of free trade,
Boeing has long been Exhibit A—supposedly unimpeachable evidence that
advanced American manufacturers have little to fear and much to gain
from the globalists’ New World Order. ...

No comments:

Post a Comment