This is the third installment of a series examining the issues the Japan-U.S. alliance will face in the years ahead.
The Japan-U.S. defense alliance is characterized as a role sharing of "shield and spears," meaning that Japan concentrates on defending itself while the U.S. shoulders the burden for striking enemy territory.
In fact, the United States' overwhelming strike capabilities, including its nuclear weapons, have worked to deter attacks on Japan.
But fears are arising that the conventional thinking on deterrence no longer works when it comes to China.
Adm. Philip Davidson, commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, said on Sept. 17 in an online seminar held by a Virginia-based research institute that although China maintains a global presence, any confrontation would probably be on a regional level -- a level that will not reach the U.S. standard for deterrence with nuclear weapons.
The large number of intermediate-range missiles (about 4,000 kilometers) in the Chinese arsenal is seen as being effective in a conflict with the United States using conventional weapons. Though the United States has been strengthening its missile defense, it is impossible to repel all missile attacks. To discourage a Chinese attack, possessing striking capabilities that assure an equivalent level of mutual damage is effective.
However, the United States had been prohibited from possessing ground-based intermediate-range missiles under the U.S.-Russia Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, until it lapsed in August last year. Currently, the United States has no intermediate-range missiles deployed.
"The U.S. military lacks a strike capability commensurate with a Chinese attack of intermediate-range missiles," a senior official of the Foreign Ministry said. "It is possible that Beijing may consider it has the military advantage and that it has room to make provocative actions."
To fill this gap, the United States expressed an intention to deploy ground-based intermediate-range missiles in Asia.
In the September seminar, Davidson said that in terms of ballistic and ground-based cruise missile capabilities, China has well surpassed the United States, and emphasized that the United States must join the race to develop offensive missiles.
As a practical measure, Davidson said that the U.S. has conducted tests on making interceptor missiles usable for attack purposes, and suggested the Aegis Ashore ground-based missile defense system, to be deployed in Guam, could also be utilized for attacks.
The United States has searched for a way to deploy intermediate-range missiles in Japan, but the move has waned recently.
The Japanese government, in the wake of the June decision to abandon a plan to deploy the Aegis Ashore system, has also begun discussions over whether Japan should have the capability to attack enemy bases.
On Sept. 11, just before former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe stepped down, he issued an official statement in which he encouraged the government to present "a new policy on national security regarding the interception of missiles" by the end of this year.
From the point of view of strengthening deterrence against China, the United States "welcomes Japan's discussions on possessing strike capabilities and remains hopeful," said a senior official of the Defense Ministry.
The government maintains that the Constitution allows Japan to attack enemy bases if the enemy has clearly begun preparations to attack Japan with missiles. Still, Japan has not possessed the capability to attack enemy bases because of a government policy decision that it is better to rely on the United States' strike power.
However, changes in the military power balance between the United States and China have shown that there are shortcomings in the U.S. "spears."
In addition, in present-day military battles, longer missile ranges and other factors have made it unrealistic to think of offensive and defensive actions as being separate.
Masashi Murano, the Japan chair fellow at the Hudson Institute and an expert on the Japan-U.S. security alliance, gives a modified view of the role sharing of "shields and spears" between the two countries.
"It is more accurate to say that [Japan] relies on the United States for strategic strike capabilities that can catastrophically damage an opponent, such as with nuclear weapons, while other aspects are jointly handled by Japan and the United States," he said.
He also pointed out that if Japan has the capability to attack enemy missile installations and runways with conventional weapons, it can lead to a strengthening of the security alliance within the range of the role-sharing framework.
Furthermore, "We should stop using the expression 'shields and spears,'" he said. "It makes it easy to oversimplify that shields are only for defense and spears are only for offense."
Actually establishing strike capabilities is no simple matter. China and North Korea are capable of launching missiles from transporter erector launchers (TELs). To target these, it is necessary to have surveillance capabilities to detect TEL's launch points in advance using satellites or drones, and electronic warfare capabilities to neutralize enemy's air defense systems.
For Japan to introduce this on its own, vast costs and time are needed.
Sugio Takahashi, head of the Defense Policy Division of the National Institute for Defense Studies, said that Japan should leave difficult attack targets to U.S. forces and gradually upgrade its own capabilities.
"The Self-Defense Forces should start from building strike capabilities for fixed targets such as enemy missile bases, radar installations and command headquarters," he said.
With the change in administration from Abe to Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga, some see discussions on having strike capabilities as now having a lower priority. The question will be what stance Suga will take to keep the Japan-U.S. alliance firm.
Read more from The Japan News at https://japannews.yomiuri.co.jp/
