Japan will prove a worthy collaborator with AUKUS

Japan has wanted into AUKUS – the three-way defense agreement among the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom – since the beginning. Saying so isn’t in the Japanese nature, but it appears the Americans are recommending Japan for membership – even if not as a full member.

An Australian friend asked me about this the other day.

What do you think of the expected announcement that Japan will join the AUKUS miliary technology-sharing alliance alongside Australia, the US and the UK?

It’s a good thing, and also a logical step for AUKUS.

The announcement is one thing for which there’ll be back-slaps all around. This is really what US government officials of a certain type thrive on: the post-meeting press conference. The test is what the parties actually make of Japan getting involved in AUKUS.

Why is Japanese involvement a logical thing? There’ve always been two parts of AUKUS: the nuclear submarines and broader technology sharing among the three countries. The latter part gets overshadowed by the submarine part of the AUKUS arrangement.

Japan has a lot to contribute in certain areas – say, space technologies and missile technologies, anti-submarine and undersea surveillance technologies, hypersonics and submarine technology, just to name a few – and its advanced manufacturing is world-class.

And don’t forget that Japan has got a lot of money to invest in all this. It’s not as if the British and the Australians were rolling in dough they could invest in defense. Even the Americans claim to be tapped out when it comes to defense spending.

To make this work right, the Americans (in particular) and the English and the Australians ought to have some specific areas where they want Japanese help – and then tell the Japanese. The Japanese are not mind readers. Don’t make them figure out for themselves what might be of interest to the foreigners. When they have something concrete to focus on it helps them organize their thinking and actions – and they’ll do what’s necessary

So if Japan is allowed into AUKUS in some fashion – as an associate member or such like – the other three nations ought to have some specific requests, rather than holding an opening session and each side asking “Whudduyuthink we should do?”

How much of an obstacle are Japan’s substandard (some might say non-existent) classified information protocols? This is a big problem, but manageable. Just compartmentalize the project and impose specific rules and procedures (and systems) for handling the information and for granting access to it. It’s not as if the Japanese didn’t understand the need for secrecy – and practice it sometimes. One also in fairness points out that the AUKUS countries themselves have had plenty of problems protecting their information over the years – despite comprehensive security clearance procedures.

One last bit on AUKUS: It’s ironic that Japan can contribute quite a lot to AUKUS on the submarine technology front. Wonder what they’ll say if asked.

The Japanese presumably will not mention that if the Australians had ordered the Japanese submarines in 2016 they’d already have them on hand. Maybe not nuclear subs, but darned useful subs nonetheless. As it is, it’s going to take a hell of a long time for Australia to get its nuclear subs.

Whoever was responsible for scuppering the Soryu (Japanese) sub deal on the Australian side ought to be horse-whipped – and also receive a Friend of China award from Beijing.

Does it matter that Japan is not a “full” member of AUKUS. It shouldn’t. The Chinese are breathing down all our necks, for crying out loud. Do what’s necessary to get Japan into AUKUS in some fashion. After all, it’s one of the world’s leading democracies and a  technological powerhouse – and also has a decent enough military in certain respects.

Prime Minister Kishida is ramping up defense spending and talking about a “multilayered” alliance structure. Is Japan finally really shedding its post-World War II pacifist stance? Can it be a major defense player finally?

I’d say Japan shed its post-WW2 pacifist stance by about 1960 or so.  Maybe earlier.  Japanese pacifism has always been a strange form of “pacifism.” Build a sizeable military and call it something else other than a military – a “self-defense force.” And then ask the Americans to agree to a deal that requires the United States to exterminate anyone who threatens Japan – while of course not making a similar promise on behalf of the Americans.

That’s a neat trick if you can pull it off. And Japan did for a long time.

Those days are pretty much over – even though parts of Japan’s ruling class like to pretend otherwise. Others in Japan, fortunately, recognized it was a charade and did their best to get Japan ready to at least sort of begin to get ready to defend itself.

Japan has a military – and a good one in certain niche areas such as submarine warfare, anti-submarine warfare, naval surface warfare and surveillance, missile defense and space operations. But it still has plenty of problems, such as inability to conduct effective joint/combined operations – even within JSDF, much less with allies and partners.

Also, JSDF is too small and is having recruitment problems that make expansion problematic. How much is too small? The Maritime SDF and Air SDF need to be doubled in size immediately. The Ground SDF is about the right size.

Can Japan become a major defense player? Not major in the sense of being another USA, but it can certainly become a big enough defense player if it improves JSDF weaknesses and then plays to its strengths as noted above.

It can at least turn JSDF and Japan into something enemies such as China and North Korea and even the Russians don’t want to mess with – especially if tied closely to the US and US military.

Becoming more of a defense player will  of course require exporting some of its more competitive defense technology and hardware with far more aplomb than has been managed to date. The international defense business is a tough one, and Japanese companies haven’t quite sharpened their elbows enough just yet.

Does this mean Japan no longer wants to rely on the US to be its sole protector – wants to step up to the plate itself and take on China, North Korea and Russia? What role will Australia play?

Some Japanese conservatives are irked that Japan has to rely on the US for defense and they want Japan to be able to defend itself, by itself.  This is a pipe dream.

By and large “Japan” and the Japanese are still willing to rely heavily on the United States for defense. But for whatever reasons – a perceived need to hedge its bets, a genuine desire to make a better contribution to the alliance, fear that the Americans might complain Japan isn’t doing enough? – Japan has done a lot in the last five years or so to indicate that it takes defense more seriously.

But still there haven’t been enough concrete improvements in its defense capabilities to improve Japan’s prospects one-on-one against China. Not nearly enough. The Japanese are really not ready to fight a war. One wishes the Americans would tell them specifically what they need to do. Just send along a few good war planners from Hawaii and sit them down with the right Japanese.

As for Japan’s “multi-layered alliance structure” this seems to be done out of a belief that the more friends you have the safer you will be. Japan has signed a lot of defense agreements with other nations in recent times, but put together – especially when considering concrete advantages from these agreements – they aren’t as useful as even a small part of the protection provided by the Seventh Fleet.

The late former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was aware that US protection was essential – even though he resented it – and his successors still understand there’s no substitute for the Americans.

As for Australia? I’m not really sure what exactly Australian defense policy is these days. And I’m not sure the Albanese government or even the Australian Defense Force’s top dogs understand either. I’m not being snide. That’s just how it seems. Seems almost like the current government is trying to dismantle the nations’ defenses. It would be nice if Australia thought more clearly about what it needs to do to defend itself and its interests in the region. That might be a longish wait, however.

In the meantime, the ADF – some of the gamest people on earth – will pitch in where they can, will keep doing things such as sending ships to the Philippines, fighters to Japan, and ground troops to any number of places.

But if the Australian government can’t clear its head about national defense, even a game ADF will take you only so far.