In Wake of F-22 Ban, Japan Forging Ties with Europe (With a Warning to America)

Japan is a major US ally, and is free to choose whatever weaponry works for them. However, this “warning” by Mr. Mizokami is meaningless. The only country that will support Japan militarily and logistically in any shooting-war with China is the US. The European Union will choose its profitable ties with China over Japan any day. This is because China allows European manufacturing plants to exist on its home soil and sell products to its population very profitably. And, where such enterprises exist they can then be held at risk by the Chinese. On the other hand, the Japanese will not do the same to European trade interests if they decide to stay neutral.

On the other hand, the strategic interests of the US in the Pacific region supersede any short term economic loss forced upon it by a similar situation, with its own Chinese manufacturing interests. Therefore the only nation that would be willing to re-supply Japan with advanced weaponry during a shooting war, would be the US. The US is also the only nation that CAN re-supply Japan. Where is the mighty European pacific fleet? Air Force and Air Tankers? How about long range nuclear attack sub fleet? How do the Europeans propose to protect their lines of supply to Japan? Will they go to war to do so? The fact is, logistically speaking Europe is a paper tiger that can barely produce enough weaponry to defend itself, cannot self-deploy outside of its region, and is not willing to go out on a limb for a country on the other side of the planet. Consider that if China was victorious over Japan, Europe would easily continue profitable relations with the new Chinese “co-prosperity sphere”.

Finally, there is the small matter of the advanced weaponry being offered by a parsimonious US. The F-35, whatever Mr Mikozami thinks of it, is already in Low Rate Initial Production, is being thoroughly tested, and is far more advanced than any of the European fighters, bar none. It is also the only one with full-aspect stealth. The F-35 also comes in the “B” vertical take-off version being used by the US Marine Corps. This version would turn Japan’s helicopter carriers (such as Hyuga), into full-fledged pocket aircraft carriers that can carry out offensive strike operations. No European aircraft in production can do this. Japan also gets Patriot anti-missile systems, AEGIS anti-ballistic missile systems for it destroyers, smart munitions, and access to US satellite intelligence. If the Japanese are upset because they are not getting F-22 technology. Too bad. The US also does not share Trident missile technology, nuclear attack sub technology, intelligence satellite technology, stealth drone technology, stealth bomber technology — the list is endless — and Japan does likewise with it’s tech. As stated earlier, Japan can choose whatever weaponry it wants, however it had better choose wisely because one day it may actually need it.

KYLE MIZOKAMI says: “The warning in the article refers to the possibility that Japan may be forced into domestic arms production that could eventually compete with the United States on the export market. The tactical mistake would be the loss to the U.S. defense industry of the Japanese market, the strategic mistake would be to turn Japan into a competitor.”.

It is true, the US could be creating a competitor by doing so. But I believe it is not likely for three reasons. The first is the negative Japanese public sentiment over arms exports to other countries. This may change over time, but not for the foreseeable future. The second, and related, is the Japanese aversion to providing additional munitions to a customer nation embroiled in a shooting war with a third party. This in fact was one of the main objections brought up in Japan when they did not want to give export permission for SM3 Missile technology they co-developed with the US, to third parties. The third reason, is that these high-end systems require dozens if not hundreds of billions of dollars to develop. Given the fact that the domestic Japanese defense market is not big enough to defray these costs (it is arguable if even the US domestic market is), Japan would be “competing” to lose a significant amount of money (think France and the Rafale). Japan’s money would be better spent on developing (for example) smart munitions to domestically supply their needs for these critical items during wartime.

” that could, optimistically, carry less than ten B models. That is, if they fit on the elevators and they harden the flight deck. For $1.9 billion, or the cost of 2 Soryu SSKs. I’m not sure that Japan is dumb enough to put 1,000 people at sea just to put ten fighters in the air. That has a track record of working out poorly for them”

The Hyuga class is a well-built ship, maybe even overbuilt. 1.9 billion is a standard cost for any high-end vessel today (Arleigh Burke, Kongo Class, San Antonio Class, Virginia Class etc.), anyway a Soryu cannot provide air cover, and high end war is expensive. Regardless, even the US Navy is going to have to reinforce and modify its Wasp and America class LHD’s to take the stress of the F-35b. I would argue that a Hyuga class vessel with eight stealth capable F35-B models, fully armed with smart munitions, would be quite formidable. It would give Japan an excellent way to exercise persistent airpower, for air supremacy and ground attack missions. Especially now, that Japan may be embroiled in contests with China over who owns what island, where China has an aircraft carrier (or more) and Japan does not. Finally, the Hyuga has a complement of approximately 380 operating crew. If you are generous and add another 80 crew to this complement to fly and care for the F-35b air wing, we are now at 460 crew (not 1000). These 460 would however be providing effective ground attack and air cover services for thousands of Japanese Marines. The poor prior Japanese track record regarding aircraft carriers had more to do with bad leadership decisions, and not the quality of the Japanese aircraft, vessels, or crew. Remember they were fighting another deeply experienced Pacific maritime power.

“Yes, but none of that technology was previously shared and then pulled back. Remember when Menachem Begin said that a country that had the F-15 no longer resembled a country that didn’t? We were in a standoff with the Soviets then, who would have loved F-15 technology. And yet we sold the F-15 abroad right away. Now that we’re facing the Chinese with the F-22, what’s changed?”

In this area, I think both you and I would be prognosticating, since neither of us actually knows why F-22 was not offered. From my readings, my take is the following; At the time, the US has spent more money on the F-22 and its systems than any aircraft in the history of man kind (even after adjusting for inflation). They drew on all of the best learnings of the Lockheed-Martin Skunkworks including the B2 program — radar evading coatings & shaping, advanced radars, etc. This was so cutting-edge at the time, that even though Lockheed was trying to sell this aircraft to Japan, someone in the US government said “no, these are our technological crown jewels, and no one is getting them” (not the Japanese, not the Australians, not the Israelis, and not the Europeans). Essentially, the US paid dearly for this capabllity, and did not want it used against them. Remember the saying “nations have interests not friends”? Well I do not like to think so, I think two peoples can be friends, however real perils lie in changes of governments, and these cannot be foreseen.

“Actually it can’t. F-22.”

Who knows, if China keeps antagonizing everyone in the neighborhood (like the Soviet Union did), maybe that will change. Either way, F35 is formidable indeed.