Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Indo-Pacific braces for Trump 2.0

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – November 10 2024

The victory of Donald Trump in the US presidential election is far from unexpected. Yet, the fact that he has won means that many countries across the world will brace for the impact this win will have on them.

This is especially true for countries in Asia – in particular, in the Asia Pacific region – where the Biden administration, despite its flawed plans, appeared willing to invest US resources, both economic and military, to offset China. Although Donald Trump is, in many ways, more anti-China than Joe Biden is, his anti-China geopolitics is confined primarily to one arena: the US-China trade (im)balance.

It means that the Trump administration will be far less interested in extending military and economic assistance to the regional countries than the Biden administration has been in the past four years. On the contrary, his administration is likely to slap heavy tariffs, which will negatively affect Washington’s bilateral trade with regional countries. In such a scenario, regional countries will have one key policy option: turn more towards China to resolve bilateral ties via diplomatic means and reduce their dependence on Washington.

The Aftermath of the Victory

If Trump’s previous four years in office are any guides to the future, Washington’s Indo-Pacific allies, such as Japan and South Korea, are deeply worried. As former officials of the Trump administration, such as the former National Security Adviser John Bolton, revealed later in their memoirs, Trump had plans to withdraw US military forces from South Korea, keep up with his planned rapprochement with North Korea, and demand massive payments from Japan to pay for the American defence role. During his campaign, Trump defended his foreign policy and repeatedly vowed to continue after assuming the presidency.

For Japan, defence payments are, however, only one of the major areas of concern. Trump will hit trade as well. A key Trump campaign pledge is slapping 10- to 20-percent tariffs on all imports to the United States. Trump has also vowed to “absolutely” block Nippon Steel Corp.’s proposed 2-trillion-yen ($13 million) acquisition of US Steel Corp. More importantly, the US-Japan trade gap has widened to the disadvantage of the US – a situation that Trump would like to reset.  According to US official data,

“In 2022, both U.S. exports to Japan and imports from Japan continued to grow for a third year in a row. U.S. exports totaled $80.3 billion, an increase of 7.7% ($5.8 billion), and U.S. imports totaled $148.3 billion, an increase of 10.0% ($13.5 billion). The trade deficit was $68.0 billion, increasing 12.8% ($7.7 billion) from 2021”.

“Our allies have taken advantage of us more than our enemies,” Trump said in a media interview on October 15, referring to the US trade deficit and other issues. With Trump having repeatedly referred to cutting off US support for NATO, Japan’s idea of an ‘Asian NATO’, too, seems in deep trouble. The military pacts Joe Biden made with Japan, South Korea, and Australia are likely to face the same fate. According to Trump, one of the key reasons why the Biden administration entered into these pacts was the pressure the Ukraine conflict generated on these states.

Therefore, he believes, that if he can end the Ukraine conflict – which he promised to end quickly by cutting off US aid to Ukraine – this will allow for the US to divest its sources away from these countries. On the other hand, Trump would not only want South Korea and Japan to spend more on defence but also push them to join him in slapping tariffs on China, thus pushing them into a ‘trade war’ with Beijing. Given South Korea’s and Japan’s trade (im)balance with China, they are bound to suffer from such a policy step because China has the leverage to retaliate. Therefore, they are unlikely to initiate their ‘trade war’. Alternative routes, however, exist.

The Alternative Option

Official Think Tanks in India are already proposing that India should join the China-led Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) Agreement. This policy shift probably speaks volumes about the direction that most regional countries might be willing to take. India is also one country that recently signed an agreement to jointly manage the disputed border. Now, this pact is crucial – not only because it signifies peaceful management of tensions, but also because the India-China border dispute is probably one major issue where China actually fought. This is unlike the South and East China Seas. Therefore, if China is able to diplomatically resolve its tense issues with India, there is little denying that other countries can do the same. There is, thus, a silver lining for countries like Japan, the Philippines, etc. to resolve their issues without relying on the US (or any other external power, such as the EU or NATO).

In some ways, an inward-looking approach, i.e., an approach that does not seek external mediation, would help push external powers permanently out of the region. Knowing that the Trump administration will itself be looking for disengagement, regional countries wouldn’t have to worry about annoying the US too.

For China, it presents an excellent opportunity to capitalise on US disengagement and deepen its ties with countries in the Indo-Pacific. Although China will probably be fighting a ‘trade war’ in the Atlantic, it can still find a major leeway in the Indo-Pacific. Its willingness and openness will only find regional countries ready to jump on the regional bandwagon of free trade for growth and diplomacy for dispute resolution.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.

November 10, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Attack of the Replicons

The Biopharmaceutical Complex’s self-amplifying mRNA assault has already begun

By Nicolas Hulscher, MPH | Courageous Discourse | November 7, 2024

The Biopharmaceutical Complex is preparing for the large-scale deployment of replicon (self-amplifying) mRNA injections. There are currently at least 33 candidates in development.

These products behave like a synthetic virus. The replicon mRNA is designed to encode not only the target antigen but also viral replicase, enabling the mRNA to replicate itself within the target cells. This replication machinery allows for an unknown period of toxic antigen production. Concerningly, none of the clinical trials have addressed the major concern of product shedding.

The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) are the primary funders behind this technology to combat ‘Disease X’. This is an extremely high risk ‘vaccine’ platform that should be avoided at all costs. Cellular installation of synthetic replicons requires decades of intense safety testing.

The very first replicon injection for human use received emergency use authorization (EUA) from The Office of the Drugs Controller General of India (DCGI) back in June 2022: Gennova Biopharmaceuticals’ GEMCOVAC-19. This was followed by reckless EUA approval in June 2023 for GEMCOVAC-OM, a replicon booster shot that targets the Omicron strain.

In November 2023, Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (MHLW) fully approved CSL and Arcturus Therapeutics’ replicon shot: KOSTAIVE ARCT-154. Dismissing all concerns, Japan’s MHLW approved the updated booster shot in September 2024 to target the JN.1 lineage of Omicron subvariants.

In the clinical trials for ARCT-154, 5 deaths occurred among the injected in study phase 3b. Injected participants experienced a 90% adverse event rate (74.5% systemic – 15.2% required medical attention) after the first dose in study phases 1, 2, and 3a combined. Many of the authors are full time employees of Arcturus Therapeutics, meaning their conclusions are likely biased.

Meanwhile, the USDA quietly approved an experimental self-amplifying RNA injection for dogs developed by Merck in June 2024: Nobivac NXT Canine Flu H3N2. It appears that Merck is attempting to camouflage the fact that this product is self-amplifying. The primary product description only indicates that it uses “revolutionary RNA particle technology.” However, the novel platform works by RNA particles targeting dendritic cells, where they self-replicate and result in sustained antigen production.

The possibility of product shedding from dogs to humans or other animals was never tested. This injection is currently widely available for online purchase and canine administration. While the Biopharmaceutical Complex struggles to get self-amplifying mRNA injections approved for humans, they seem to have no problem targeting our pets.

Deployment of this experimental platform has continued in September 2024 to target cats: Nobivac NXT FeLV. Nowhere in the product brochure does it mention the RNA self-amplification mechanism of action. They hope that unsuspecting vets won’t think twice about accepting the ‘new and improved’ product. The so-called ‘safety’ data for this product is as follows:

“Demonstrated safety under field conditions” from “Data on file. Merck Animal Health.”

In other words, no public safety data is provided. It’s become abundantly clear that the pharmaceutical industry and captured regulatory agencies have zero regard for the massive safety concerns of undefined synthetic mRNA replication resulting in uncontrolled toxic antigen production. These experimental injections must not receive further regulatory approval for humans or animals if we are to prevent another public health disaster. All self-amplifying mRNA injections currently available for humans and animals should be immediately withdrawn until comprehensive, long-term safety studies are conducted.

November 10, 2024 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

India does not share Japan’s vision of NATO-like alliance in Asia: FM

By Ahmed Adel | October 4, 2024

Japan’s new Prime Minister, Shigeru Ishiba, on October 1 stressed the need to seek deeper ties with allied nations, especially to create a NATO-like organisation in Asia. However, this pursuit is not shared by India, the second most powerful military in Asia, which is also projected to overtake Japan economically in the next few years.

Ishiba has repeatedly called for a more balanced relationship with Washington, including greater oversight of bases in Japan used by the US military, but he has also proposed creating an Asian version of NATO’s collective security group to deter China, an idea that could draw Beijing’s ire and has already been dismissed by a senior US official as hasty, Reuters reported.

On the same day, Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said he does not share Ishiba’s vision of an “Asian NATO.” Jaishankar said at an event at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington that, unlike Japan, India has never been a treaty ally of another country.

“We don’t have that kind of strategic architecture in mind. We have … a different history and different way of approaching,” Jaishankar said when asked about Ishiba’s call.

In addition to the creation of a NATO-like organisation in Asia, the new premier has called for the stationing of Japanese troops on US soil and even shared control of Washington’s nuclear weapons as a deterrent against Japan’s nuclear-armed neighbours, namely China, Russia and North Korea.

“In his victory speech [on September 28], he spoke about the need to beef up Japan’s security after recent territorial incursions by Chinese and Russian military vessels,” Reuters reported.

Since a so-called Asian NATO would also target Russia, India clearly wants to distance itself from any notion of being involved, considering the burgeoning relations the two countries share, which are only growing stronger.

In his address at the 79th United Nations General Assembly on September 28, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov expressed his country’s support for India’s bid for a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, stressing that a “fairer world order” requires the expansion of the representation of the Global South.

“A fairer world order undoubtedly requires the expansion of the representation of the Global South in the UN Security Council. We support our position in favour of the candidacies of Brazil and India, while at the same time taking a positive decision on the well-known initiatives of the African Union,” Lavrov said.

Meanwhile, during his appearance at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Jaishankar answered a question about helping Russia and Ukraine resolve their differences: “I’m glad you used the word communication because I think at the moment perhaps (it) is the best description for what we are currently.”

At the same time, Russia was again the largest crude supplier to India in September, registering an increase of 11.5% to 1.79 million barrels per day against 1.61 million barrels per day in August, data from Vortexa showed. This comes as the two countries continue efforts to conduct trade in their respective currencies rather than the US dollar.

Given New Delhi’s traditional and long-held ties with Moscow, it is little surprise that Jaishankar has announced his reservations about Japan’s idea to establish a NATO-like alliance in Asia, which would target not only China but also Russia.

With the US expressing scepticism and India, as Asia’s second power, creating distance, Tokyo has humiliatingly backtracked from immediately pursuing Ishiba’s vision.

Japanese Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya on October 2 described Ishiba’s proposal for a NATO-like alliance in Asia as a “future vision” for longer-term consideration, downplaying the idea to avoid provoking China and Russia.

“It is quite difficult to immediately set up an organisation that would impose mutual defence obligations in Asia,” the 67-year-old former defence minister said during a press conference after Ishiba formed his Cabinet a day before.

“This is an issue to consider in the medium- to long-term, spending some time,” he added.

In an attempt to avoid backlash from Beijing and Moscow, Iwaya claimed that the Asian NATO idea is “not something directed toward any particular country.” However, the Chinese and Russians obviously would not believe this for a moment.

Although some regional states, such as South Korea, would obviously support the formation of such an alliance to oppose China, Ishiba’s idea was put to bed the moment the US and India expressed scepticism. However, the US is highly occupied by events in Ukraine and the Middle East and can very well activate Ishiba’s proposal once these other fronts have been pacified. This would leave India as the only major power without a stake in opposing a NATO-like alliance in Asia.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

October 4, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Biden’s Last QUAD summit: All substance and no real Action

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – September 27, 2024

When Biden hosted the leaders of the Quadrilateral Security Group (QUAD) from India, Australia, and Japan in the US in 2021, they did not directly mention China. Still, the emphasis on “shared security and prosperity” was an unmistakable reference to a joint mechanism to counter Beijing’s influence in the Indo-Pacific, particularly.

One would have expected the Biden administration to leave a legacy of a significantly functional mechanism producing collective security and prosperity at the end of its era in 2024. But, as it turns out, QUAD remains where it was in 2021: a club that hosts little more than tea parties to mean anything. The club, as the Indian Prime Minister remarked after the latest summit, is “here to stay”. The question, however, is: will it, or can it, turn into more than a club for occasional gatherings to talk about abstract geopolitics? It is quite unlikely. Donald Trump’s victory will dampen it even further. If Harris wins, she is unlikely to introduce any major changes from the Biden administration, for obvious reasons (she is currently part of the same administration!).

The Last Summit: What is new?

The last summit is, therefore, no different from the earlier ones insofar as it offers little more than a set of “commitments”, and occasional references to “unity”, “democracy” and certain joint ventures, such as Maritime Initiative for Training in the Indo-Pacific (MAITRI). Apparently a new initiative, MAITRI is backed by little to nothing actionable and concrete. It aims to equip partner countries with “tools” that they will use “to monitor and secure their waters, enforce their laws, and deter unlawful behavior”. Who will fund this initiative? What counts as “unlawful behaviour” and what exact action will be taken against those involved in any unlawful activity are some of the ‘black holes’ that need massive filling before this initiative can qualify to acquire any geostrategic significance. There are other concerns too.

While the joint statement mentions China several times, it does not mention Russia at all. Although it refers to Ukraine, the fact that it does not refer to Russia is due to the nature of Indian ties with Moscow. What does this mean for the future of QUAD? No references to any threats other than those emerging from, or associated with, China leave QUAD a club squarely and singularly focused on China. Is this an advantage or a disadvantage?

The China Factor

Being squarely anti-China means QUAD can never sell itself to the wider region as a framework of security. Had QUAD been a general framework of security, it could have attracted several other countries from the region. However, it is unable to do this because a large number of countries in the region do not wish to gang up against China due to the nature of their ties with Beijing. For instance, there is probably not a single example where a country from this region, which is not a QUAD member, ever endorsed anything QUAD said or did. In other words, QUAD operates in a disconnected regional space as an abstract idea rather than as a force to be reckoned with.

This is despite the fact that the latest QUAD summit categorically said China is “testing us”. Conversely, QUAD is “testing” China, but China’s advantage is that it does not have many real regional rivals. That includes India too.

Now, PM Modi thinks that QUAD is here to stay, but the exact purpose it will serve for him is far from clear to other QUAD members. Consider the bilateral trade volume, for instance. It has already reached US$118 billion in 2024. Despite so-called “tensions”, the overall trade grew by 1.5 per cent in terms of year-on-year growth. More significantly, QUAD downplays the role – and the possibility – of regional countries utilising bilateral channels for dispute resolution. Is QAUD the only mechanism that, for instance, PM Modi might depend upon in the wake of another border clash with China?

Bilateralism Trumps QUAD’s Multilateralism

Let’s see what both India and China have done in the past two years. Instead of relying on QUAD, New Delhi happens to have preferred meetings and regular interaction with China at the Corps Commander level. According to data shared by India’s Ministry of Home Affairs, 21 meetings have been held until February 2024. None of these meetings either involved any third party, nor did New Delhi stress a multilateral approach for ‘effective’ dispute resolution. The Indian readout stressed the friendly and amicable nature of talks.

This is not the only mechanism. Since 2012, the Working Mechanism for Consultation & Coordination (WMCC) on India-China Border Affairs has been another key bilateral avenue of dispute resolution, and it has remained relevant despite the border clashes. On August 29, the WMCC held its 31st meeting. The meeting’s aim was “to narrow down the differences and find early resolution of the outstanding issues”.

Now, the emphasis on narrowing down existing differences not only signals success, but also the willingness to remain nonviolent in their approaches to conflict resolution. Nonviolence directly implies the irrelevance of the securitised approach of the QUAD vis-à-vis China’s position in the Indo-Pacific.

There is, in simple words, a lesson for countries in the region. Many countries in Southeast Asia, for instance, have concerns about China’s dominance in the South and East China seas. Should they opt for a military approach considering that India, a much bigger military power than any country in Southeast Asia, is itself following dialogue and diplomacy to resolve disputes? The lesson, in other words, is to emphasise bilateral approach and talk directly to China.

All of these factors combine to produce the utter inability of QUAD to evolve, since its establishment in 2004, as a significant military or economic alliance. Much to Washington’s disappointment, it still does not have a regional mechanism to ‘contain’ China.

Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.

September 27, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Japan’s Mistakes at Pearl Harbor

Tales of the American Empire | September 12, 2024

The December 7, 1941 Japanese attack on Hawaii was a key moment for the American empire. This channel produced four tales explaining how this attack was provoked by American President Franklin Roosevelt who allowed it to happen. See the playlist linked in the description. While the Japanese attack was successful, it was cautious and could have caused far more damage. Should the Japanese have launched their planned third aerial attack wave? Should their six aircraft carriers have searched for the two missing American carriers? Should they have landed ground troops to invade Hawaii?

_____________________________________________________

“Japanese Invasion of Pearl Harbor”; Navy Matters; April 22, 2019; https://navy-matters.blogspot.com/201…

“The Hawaiian Islands Under Imperial Japan – 1942 Japanese Military Invasion”; John Bond; Ewa Field; September 11, 2019; https://ewafield.blogspot.com/2019/09…

Related Tale: “Treachery by US Army Generals in World War II”;    • Treachery by US Army Generals in Worl…  

“Harbor Defense of Pearl Harbor”; Wikipedia; http://www.fortwiki.com/Category:Harb…

Related Tales: “The Attack on Pearl Harbor”;    • The Attack on Pearl Harbor  

September 15, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

Typhon Missile Deployment is Part of US Plans to Maintain ‘Primacy Over the Planet’

Sputnik -10.09.2024

Having previously deployed the medium-range Typhon missile systems – a weapon banned under the now-obsolete INF Treaty – in the Philippines, the United States now moves to station them in Japan in relatively close proximity to China and North Korea.

Washington’s plans to deploy these weapons in Asia are “part of a much wider long-running US strategy to encircle and contain China,” with this move itself being “part of a global post-Cold War strategy to eliminate any peer or near-peer competitor and maintain US primacy over the planet,” geopolitical analyst and former US Marine Brian Berletic tells Sputnik.

The US plans to deploy Typhon missile systems in Europe are also “part of a wider strategy to encircle and contain Russia,” Berletic adds.

According to him, the deployment of these weapons “reveals several important factors regarding US foreign, policy including continuity of agenda.”

For one, Berletic notes, the US pulled out from the INF Treaty during Donald Trump’s presidency, but the deployment of the Typhon missiles in various corners of the globe takes place with Joe Biden at the helm.

“The process of withdrawing from a treaty, developing, and then deploying such systems took place over the course of two presidential administrations, serving one single agenda, regardless of who sat in the White House,” he says.

“The Typhon’s deployment also reveals the true nature of US foreign policy and its disruptive nature for supposed US ‘allies’,” Berletic remarks.

Though both the Philippines and Japan “count China as their largest trade partner,” they both end up hosting US missiles aimed squarely at Beijing, which does little to improve their relations.

“This is just the latest in a long line of provocations complicating what would otherwise be increasingly constructive relations with China,” Berletic explains, arguing that the Philippines and Japan’s willingness to enable such US provocations “reveals the absence of agency in terms of either nations’ foreign policy.”

“It is very clear that this policy of hosting US forces seeking to encircle and contain China is a policy determined in Washington, not Manila or Tokyo, and is a policy serving US interests at the expense of the Philippines and Japan,” he states.

Berletic also deemed ironic the fact that the United States claims that its deployment of weapon systems around the world “is necessary to ensure global peace and stability,” even as the US “consistently demonstrates that it itself is the greatest threat to both.”

September 10, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | 1 Comment

PM Kishida Who Militarized Japan at US’ Behest to Resign

By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 14.08.2024

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has announced he will quit as leader of the country’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), amid his sinking approval rating resulting from the LDP-related corruption scandal, rising living costs, and a slumping yen.

Under Kishida, Japan pledged to double its defense spending up to the NATO standard of two percent of gross domestic product by 2027, in a US-encouraged U-turn from decades of strict pacifism.

Public support for Fumio Kishida’s Cabinet plummeted to 15.5% last month, another low since the LDP returned to power in Japan in December 2012.

Apart from his poor domestic strategy, what developments have marked Kishida’s foreign policy?

  • Japan under Kishida has fueled the Ukrainian conflict by providing more than $12 billion of financial and other aid to the Kiev regime since 2022, per the Japanese Foreign Ministry.
  • Japan embarked on the path of militarization, issuing in 2022 a new national security doctrine aimed at doubling the country’s defense spending within the next five years.
  • The same year, Japan’s parliament did not think twice before approving a deal to spend $8.6 billion over five years to host American military personnel on Japanese soil.
  • Tokyo continues to take part in the annual US-led RIMPAC, the world’s largest maritime military drills described by Chinese experts as “demonstration of America’s hegemony” in the region.
  • The US currently has about 56,000 active-duty service members in Japan, more than in any other country, according to Pentagon data.
  • Last month, Japan agreed on establishing a Joint Operations Command (JJOC) with the US on its territory by next March.
  • What’s more, Tokyo and Washington reportedly discussed “extended deterrence”, which stipulated for the use of nuclear weapons in US protection of Japan.
  • The US is now pushing for Japan to be included in Pillar II of the AUKUS agreement. China has repeatedly castigated the arrangement as part of America’s “new Cold War” antagonism aimed at containing Beijing by fueling the militarization of the Asia-Pacific region.

August 14, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | 1 Comment

US Military Exports Skyrocketing as Washington Continues to Fuel Global Conflicts

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 09.08.2024

The US’ arms exports have risen dramatically since 2022 and may top $100 billion by the year’s end, according to the Pentagon.

In fiscal year (FY) 2022, sales through the US government’s Foreign Military Sales (FMS) system jumped to $49.7 billion from $34.8 billion in FY2021; in FY2023, this number rose again to around $66.2 billion.

So far, FMS sales are already above $80 billion for FY2024, as per the Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

Still, the total value of transferred weapons, services and security cooperation activities conducted under the Foreign Military Sales system in FY2023 was $80.9 billion, representing a 55.9% increase from a total of $51.9 billion in FY2022.

In 2024, the US State Department unveiled government-to-government FMS sales for FY2023, which required congressional notification:
Poland:

  • AH-64E Apache Helicopters – $12 billion;
  • High mobility artillery rocket systems (HIMARS) – $10 billion;
  • Integrated air and missile defense (IAMD) battle command systems (IBCS) – $4 billion;
  • M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks – $3.75 billion.

Germany:

  • CH-47F Chinook helicopters – $8.5 billion;
  • AIM-120C-8 advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles (AMRAAM) – $2.9 billion.

Norway:

  • Defense articles and services related to the MH-60R multi-mission helicopters – $1 billion.

Czech Republic:

  • F-35 aircraft and munitions – $5.62 billion.

Bulgaria:

  • Stryker vehicles – $1.5 billion.

Australia:

  • C-130J-30 aircraft – $6.35 billion.

Canada:

  • P-8A aircraft – $5.9 billion.

South Korea:

  • F-35 aircraft – $5.06 billion;
  • CH-47F Chinook helicopters – $1.5 billion.

Japan:

  • E-2D advanced Hawkeye (AHE) airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft – $1.381 billion.

Kuwait:

  • National advanced surface-to-air missile system (NASAMS) medium range air defense systems (MRADS) – $3 billion;
  • Follow-up technical support – $1.8 billion.

Qatar:

  • Fixed site-low, slow, small unmanned aircraft system integrated defeat system (FS-LIDS) – $1 billion.

In addition to that, direct commercial sales (DCS) between foreign nations and US defense contractors jumped from $153.6 billion in FY2022 to $157.5 billion for FY2023. These sales included unspecified military hardware, services and technical data.

The US State Department provided a glimpse on what major DCS Congressional Notifications included in FY2023:

  • Italy – For the manufacturing of F-35 wing assemblies and sub-assemblies – $2.8 billion;
  • India – For the manufacturing of GE F414-INS6 engine hardware – $1.8 billion;
  • Singapore – F100 propulsion system and spare parts – $1.2 billion;
  • South Korea – F100 propulsion system and spare parts – $1.2 billion;
  • Norway, Ukraine – National advanced surface to air missile systems (NASAMS) – $1.2 billion;
  • Saudi Arabia – Patriot guided missile – $1 billion.

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) highlights that arms exports by the US rose by 17% between 2014–18 and 2019–23. The US share of total global arms exports increased from 34% to 42%. Between 2019 and 2023, the US delivered major arms to 107 states, which was more than the next two biggest exporters combined, as per SIPRI.

The largest share of US arms went to the Middle East (38%), mostly to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and Israel.

US arms exports to states in Asia and Oceania increased by 14% between 2014–18 and 2019–23; 31% of all US arms exports in 2019–23 went to the region with Japan, South Korea and Australia being the largest buyers.

Europe purchased a total of 28% of US arms exports in 2019–23. US arms exports to the region increased by over 200% between the 2014–18 and 2019–23 periods. Ukraine accounted for 4.7% of all US arms exports and 17% of those to Europe.

The institute projects that the US will continue to ramp up military sales in 2024 and beyond, with the focus on combat aircraft, tanks and other armored vehicles, artillery, SAM systems and warships.

August 9, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Okinawa on Fire: Division Brewing in Japan Over US Militarizing & Nuclearizing

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 31.07.2024

The US and Japan have made further steps towards closer military integration and an extension of Washington’s nuclear umbrella over its ally. Their increased military buildup in the Asia-Pacific region means a greater risk for war, particularly nuclear war, warns Okinawan rights activist Rob Kajiwara.

In the wake of their Security Consultative Committee (“2+2”) July 28 meeting in Tokyo, the US and Japan announced the strengthening of military ties and upgrading of the US Forces Japan (USFJ) to a warfighting command.

“The US and Japan are increasing the threat of war in the region,” Robert Kajiwara, an Okinawan rights activist and founder of the Peace For Okinawa Coalition, told Sputnik, stressing that the military buildup has nothing to do with Japan’s security and national interests.

Actually, the US is using Japan as a bulwark against Russia, China and North Korea in a bid to maintain its dominance in the Asia Pacific region, according to the pundit. “The world is seeking to become multipolar, but the US is intent on doing whatever it can to maintain hegemony,” he noted.

The American and Japanese delegations also discussed extending the US nuclear umbrella over Japan. While the US and Japan have coordinated on the issue since 2010 within the framework of the Extended Deterrence Dialogue (EDD), most recently the US has doubled down on its nuclear umbrella in the region.

It is expected that this year the US and Japan will specify under what conditions the US will use its nukes to “protect” Japan, according to Newsweek.

For its part, Chinese media believes Washington is planning to deploy nuclear weapons in their military bases in Japan, again. The “extended deterrence” means nothing but the US intent to use Japan as an outpost to strengthen its nuclear deterrence in Northeast Asia, according to Global Times.

Between 1954 and 1972, the US bases on Okinawa hosted a staggering 19 types of nuclear arms. In 2015, the US government officially admitted the fact that it stored hundreds of nuclear warheads in Japan during the Cold War. At the height of the Vietnam War, around 1,200 nuclear weapons were stationed in Okinawa.

“If there’s any country that should be against nuclear arms, it should be Japan, given the use of nuclear weapons against the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Japan should be strongly against the storing of nuclear weapons in its territory. Unfortunately, Japan hasn’t learned anything from World War II and appears destined to repeat its past mistakes,” the pundit argued.

Why Okinawa is Important for the US

Okinawa, which is part of the Ryukyu island chain, is of utmost strategic importance for the US as it serves as a stronghold for the Pentagon’s operations in the Western Pacific and deployment of troops directly to the Taiwan Straits and to the Korean Peninsula.

The US military installations in the region – which American troops have occupied since the late 1940s – were crucial for Washington’s invasions of Vietnam and North Korea in the past.

The US air and naval bases on Okinawa are located in close proximity to China’s mainland and even closer to Taiwan Island. Furthermore, the Ryukyu island chain presents a natural “wall”, allowing the US military to “control” China’s passage into the Pacific Ocean.

While Tokyo and Washington name Russia, China and North Korea as potential “threats” to the region’s stability, a considerable chunk of Japanese citizens think otherwise, Kajiwara said, referring to Okinawa Prefecture, a home to numerous US military bases and facilities – over 70% of their total number in Japan.

“The overwhelming majority (somewhere between 70-90%) of Ryukyuans [another name for Okinawans] do not consider Russia, China, or North Korea to be military threats,” the activist stressed.

Okinawans Oppose US Bases and Japan’s Militarization

Ryukyuans have opposed the US militarization of the island for decades, citing security and environmental issues, as well as repeated criminal acts committed by US troops against local residents.

In September 1995, three US soldiers kidnapped and raped a 12-year-old girl in Okinawa, prompting prefecture-wide rallies which brought together 92,000 protesters. This year, two rape cases committed by US soldiers against an Okinawan minor and a woman came to light in June. The first occurred in December 2023 and remained muted by the US military for almost six months.

“The US and [Japan’s central government] covered this up until after Okinawa Prefecture’s recent election,” said Kajiwara. “They wanted to avoid negative publicity before or during the election in order to prevent the [ruling] Liberal Democratic Party from losing votes. Is this democracy? Can the US and Japan rightly call this democratic?”

In another snub of Okinawans’ democratic freedoms, Japan’s central government overruled the Okinawan authorities’ ban on building a new US military base at Henoko-Oura Bay near Nago in 2023. In September last year, Okinawa Gov. Denny Tamaki sought international backing at a UN session, arguing that the concentration of the US military forces in the prefecture threatens peace.

“My petition against the construction of the military base at Henoko received over 212,000 signatures,” Kajiwara said. “The 2019 Referendum in Okinawa resulted in over 70% of Okinawans voting against the Henoko base. In spite of all this, the US and Japan continually ignore the voices of Ryukyuans.”

Who are Okinawans and Why Do They Differ From Japanese

Okinawa was previously an independent Ryukyu kingdom, which was conquered and annexed by Japan at the end of the 19th century, the expert pointed out.

Ryukyuans have our own history, culture, languages, values, and identity. According to Kajiwara, Ryukyu has a tradition of being a “bridge of nations” with the focus on mutually-beneficial trade and diplomacy. “Whereas Japan has a long history of warfare and samurai bushido culture, Ryukyu banned the public carrying of weapons during the 15th century in order to promote peace,” the pundit remarked.

“In 1879, Japan invaded Ryukyu as the first of its colonial conquests… From 1879 until 1945, Ryukyu had to deal with imperial Japanese militarism,” he said. “During World War II, Japan deliberately placed a heavy amount of military presence in Ryukyu with the intent of sacrificing Ryukyuans in order to ‘save Japan’.”

This resulted in the Battle of Okinawa in 1945, which amounted to nothing short of the Ryukyuan genocide, according to the activist.

“At least 123,000 Uchinaanchu (Native Okinawans) were killed during a time frame lasting only around three months, which was around one-third of the population at the time. Japanese soldiers deliberately killed Ryukyuan men, women, children, and elderly, claiming they were ‘Chinese spies,’ using them as human shields, and forcing thousands to commit suicide. It is said that every Okinawan family lost someone during the battle. Many of my own relatives were also killed,” Kajiwara continued.

Those who survived were sent to concentration camps by the US occupation forces. During the period from the end of 1945 to 1947 locals returned to their land to find many of their homes and farms bulldozed flat and turned into US military facilities. According to some estimates, at least 40,000 Okinawan landowners lost their land and were not compensated for the loss. The 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty signed between Japan and the Allies “legitimized” the US occupation of Okinawa.

“From 1945 until 1972 Ryukyu was under direct US military rule. Since 1972 Ryukyu has been under joint US and Japanese rule. This, of course, has caused great hardship for Ryukyuans, such as economic deprivation, environmental destruction, water poisoning, military accidents, and crime,” he said.

Currently, Ryukyuans fear that the US-Japanese military buildup will invite another devastating war to their land, as per the expert.

“As we speak, Japan is continuing the construction of a new airfield at Henoko, paving over the coral reef in order to build it. The Okinawan dugong, an endangered creature, is being driven into extinction by this. This airfield, along with missiles being stationed around Ryukyu, poses a direct threat to Russia, China, and North Korea. So you see, the US and Japan really have no intention of decreasing Ryukyu’s military burden at all.”

Kajiwara emphasized that he and his team are continuing to raise awareness about the risks of the US-Japanese growing militarization, adding that Okinawans remain hostages to Tokyo’s warmongering. “We discuss all these things in our upcoming documentary film, ‘Occupied Okinawa.’ The film will be entered into international film festivals around the world starting in September,” the pundit concluded.

July 31, 2024 Posted by | Film Review, Illegal Occupation, Militarism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

US Creating Logistic Centers in Black Sea to Speed Up Arms Supplies to Ukraine – Kremlin Aide

Sputnik – 25.07.2024

MOSCOW – The United States wants to create logistics centers in the Black Sea region to speed up arms supplies to Ukraine and deploy long-range weapons, Russian presidential aide Nikolai Patrushev said on Thursday.

“In the countries of the Black Sea region, the United States intends to create logistics centers to accelerate the supply of weapons to Ukraine, as well as to deploy modern long-range weapons,” Patrushev said.

At the Washington summit, NATO demonstrated plans to increase its military presence and intensify confrontation in the Black Sea, the official added.

There can be no talk of unhindered passage to the ports of the Sea of Azov by ships of Western countries supporting Kiev, the aide noted.

“Given the aggressive nature of Western countries that directly support the Kiev regime in conducting military and terrorist actions against Russia, currently any unhindered passage of their ships to the ports of Azov is out of the question,” he emphasized.

Last month, the countries that signed a joint communique following the Swiss-hosted summit on Ukraine have called for providing access to sea ports in the Black and Azov seas to ensure global food security.

The number of joint exercises between the Japanese navy and NATO countries and other military allies of Washington in 2024 has already increased 30 times compared to last year, Patrushev added.

July 25, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | 1 Comment

Ministry of Truth: Japan’s Communications Ministry Proposes Disinformation Law

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | July 19, 2024

Only recently, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), an influential Washington think tank, outlined how the US and Japan could bolster their cooperation in “combating misinformation.”

In a report, CSIS noted almost in passing that Japan has in general fallen behind in this activity, but also that the group’s representatives had meetings with officials in Tokyo.

Coincidentally or not, news out of Japan this week says that the country’s Internal Affairs and Communications Ministry is looking at introducing new “anti-disinformation measures.” And, a draft report notes that here, “efforts are not sufficient” while transparency and accountability (ostensibly on the part of internet companies) have not been “adequate.”

That would suggest yet another “Ministry of Truth” and “disinformation law” are in the making somewhere in the world, these taking shape as a draft report details possible measures that social media companies would have to adhere to, going forward.

The report, which notably comes from the Interior Ministry (also in charge of Communications), speaks about the necessity of companies behind social platforms setting up “counter-disinformation systems” themselves, that would deal with what is deemed to be “disinformation” by deleting this content, but also, stepping up “screening of advertisers.”

And once again, time seems to be of the essence, because the report states that the reaction would have to be “prompt.”

The next step is for the draft to become subject to some form of public debate, after which the local press says it will become “official;” and the following step will be making it into law.

The situation reads almost like Japan wasn’t aware it had a “misinformation” problem of a magnitude that requires new and stringent rules, but is now just realizing that, and is almost mimicking the tone and language that’s been present around the topic for years already, in many parts of the world.

Thus, there are some vague and broad “definitions” – the content to be promptly dealt with is that which “contains obvious errors, infringes on the rights of others or is illegal (including disinformation).”

The Japanese plan states that once “a request” comes from a governmental agency, “the operators should make a prompt decision and provide notification as to whether they will delete the information or not.”

What about freedom of expression? The report’s authors seem to think this will do the trick: “The draft also requests that the administrative agency disclose information such as the contents of the request.”

One target is repeat offenders accused of peddling “illegal disinformation,” who will have their content deleted and accounts suspended.

July 19, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Will the US-Japan military alliance make any difference?

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – 15.07.2024

The ongoing upgrades to the US-Japan military cooperation signals new regional developments. In reality, however, this upgrade is a continuation of the US strategy in the Pacific to build military outposts so that China can be deterred and tackled. On the one hand, it is militarizing Japan. On the other hand, the sale of weapons keeps bringing money to the US military-industrial complex. Ultimately, this alliance will do little to serve the purpose of ‘containing’ China. Most of the equipment the US is providing is outdated, basically getting rid of the scrap. The modern equipment, on the other hand, is unreliable. Still, Trump’s arrival in the White House could change the dynamics of military cooperation, making things worse.

The Upgrades:

Following the announcements made during the Biden-Kishida summit in April regarding big upgrades to the US-Japan alliance, the upgrade has finally arrived. On the 3rd of July, the Pentagon announced that the US was going to upgrade “tactical aircraft laydown across multiple military installations in Japan”. This so-called “modernization plan” is worth US$ 10 billion that will “bolster regional deterrence, and strengthen peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region”. According to the announcement, the US will replace 48 F-15C/D with 36 F-15EX fighters at Kadena Air Base. The US Air Force will also replace 36 F-16 aircraft with 48 F-35A aircraft at Misawa Air Base. Overall, the plan to “station the Joint Force’s most advanced tactical aircraft in Japan demonstrates the ironclad U.S. commitment to the defence of Japan and both countries’ shared vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific region”. In addition to these new deployments, NATO is also in the middle of releasing its new policy documents outlining its new lines of cooperation with countries like Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea. There seems to be momentum, but it will soon run into problems that it may not be able to recover from.

Can US-Japan-NATO Counter China?

While the F-15EX seems like a significant upgrade from the outdated F-15C/Ds, they are still no match against China’s growing fleet of stealth fighter jets. It means that were Japan to use these fighters in an offensive against China, they would prove useless since they lack stealth features and would be unable to penetrate a heavily guarded airspace.

While the deployment of F-35 jets does mark a significant upgrade, there are serious questions about its operational and logistic utility, compromising its ability to tackle China’s J-20s. In 2023, according to one estimate, China produced 100 J-20. If China can maintain the same rate, it will have 1,000 J-20s by 2035. The US has less than F-22s, and its F-35 programme continues to run into problems.

The 2023 Annual Report by the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation made some startling observations, saying,

“The F-35 program development cycle continues to experience delays due to immature and deficient Block 4 mission systems software and avionics stability problems with the new Technology Refresh 3 (TR-3) hardware going into Lot 15 production aircraft. As a result, deliveries of production Lot 15 aircraft in the TR-3 configuration are on hold until more testing can be completed and the avionics issues resolved. Additionally, these delays prevented the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) from adequately planning and programming for hardware modifications for OT of the upgraded hardware configuration”.

As a result of these delays and difficulties, only 32 out of 205 baseline DT flights were conducted. The US is now stationing the F-35s in Japan, which basically relies on the assumption that these delays will ultimately be resolved and that Washington will not have to move these F-35s to a different location to meet the recurring shortages. But the reality is that, as the report concludes, “The operational suitability of the F-35 fleet remains below Service expectations and requirements”, which means that, according to the report, out of 628 aircraft produced until now, a majority of them remain “unavailable” for active service throughout most of the year.  In fact, 2023 had fewer available aircraft than 2022. What this ‘upgrade’ will do to Japan’s security is, therefore, not hard to imagine. In the end, other than creating a false sense of security, it might not add any value to Japan’s offensive and defensive capabilities, compromising the politics of ‘China containment’.

The Trump Factor

Former US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House next year is already making Washington’s European allies extremely uneasy. Whereas Trump has thus far signalled that his administration will ideally continue to follow the Biden administration’s policy towards Japan and China, Trump has also assured his voters of the continuation of his “America First” and “Make America Great Again” policies, which also involve, among other things, military disengagements.

Therefore, the existing rhetoric of reassurance notwithstanding, Trump’s politics and/or his geopolitical vision has not seen any change in the recent past. Reports in the US media indicate that “a second Trump administration is likely to be far more disruptive for Asia than the first one was”. What it implies is that, with Trump forcing the US military footprint to reduce worldwide, countries like Japan will need to find ways to become self-reliant. So, instead of depending upon the actual supply and availability of otherwise “unavailable” fifth-generation jets, Tokyo will need to develop an alternative, more reliable strategy – a strategy that should not exclude the possibility of dialogue with China to sort out any existing issues without any external interference.

In fact, since Trump is likely to target China and push the US away from Japan’s military build-up, he is likely to antagonise both states. There is, therefore, an incentive for both Asian giants to collaborate and find peace.

Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.

July 15, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries