Japan considers first strike plan
Japan is debating whether to develop a limited pre-emptive strike capability and buy cruise missiles – ideas that were anathema in the pacifist country before the North Korea missile threat.
With revisions to Japan’s defence plans under way, ruling party hawks are accelerating the moves, and some defence experts say Japan should at least consider them.
A possibility of a pre-emptive strike capability was formally proposed to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe by his party’s missile defence panel in March, prompting parliamentary debate, though it lost steam as Abe apparently avoided the divisive topic after seeing support ratings for his scandalladen government plunge. which he hoped would allow the two sides to de-escalate tensions.
US President Donald Trump had agreed with South Korean President Moon Jae-in to revise a joint treaty capping the
North Korea’s test-firing this week of a missile that flew over Japan and landed in the northern Pacific Ocean has intensified fears and reignited the debate.
Japan has a two-step missile defence system. First, Standard Missile-3 interceptors on Aegis destroyers in the Sea of Japan would shoot down projectiles in flight. If that fails, surface-to-air PAC3s would intercept them from within a 20-kilometre range.
Technically, the setup can handle falling debris or missiles heading to Japan, but it is not good enough for missiles on a high-lofted trajectory or those with multiple warheads, or for simultaneous multiple attacks, experts say.
A pre-emptive strike, by Japanese definition, is a step preceding the two-tier defence. Cruise missiles, such as Tomahawks, fired from Aegis development of the South’s ballistic missiles, Moon’s office said yesterday.
Trump also gave ‘‘conceptual’’ approval to the purchase by the South Korea of billions of dollars destroyers or fighter jets would hit an enemy missile clearly waiting to be fired, or just after blastoff from a North Korean launch site, before it approaches Japan.
Japan’s self-defence-only principle under the country’s warrenouncing constitution prohibits its military from making a first strike, and officials discussing a limited pre-emptive strike are calling it a ‘‘strike back’’ instead.
Some experts are skeptical about how it would work. North Korea’s secretive, diversified and mobile launch system made it extremely difficult to track down and incapacitate the weapons, security expert Ken Jimbo at Keio University said. A pre-emptive strike capability would also require trillions of dollars to set up spy satellites, reconnaissance aircraft and cruise missiles, as well as training special units. of US military hardware, the White House said.
South Korea wants to raise the missile cap to boost its defences against the reclusive North Korea, which is pursuing missile and