Retaining “counterattack capability” against China’s missile attack, it is easy to say, but it is difficult to do It is impossible to hit enemy bases with “cruise missiles” alone (1/4) | JBpress (JBpress)

It is impossible to hit enemy bases with ‘cruise missiles’ alone

Chinese troops conduct military exercises near Taiwan. Tensions are rising, including the launch of ballistic missiles (Photo: Xinhua/Aflo)

On August 5, LDP Chairman Itsunori Onodera, chairman of the Security Research Council, said at a joint meeting of the National Defense Subcommittee and others that China’s ballistic missiles had fallen into Japan’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ). I want the government to decide on a policy as soon as possible regarding the maintenance of counterattack capability (attack capability against enemy bases).”

Counterattack capability is not necessary if Japan’s missile defense (MD) is perfect, but the appearance of difficult-to-detect and difficult-to-intercept missiles such as China’s hypersonic missiles is one of the reasons behind the rush to maintain counterattack capability. .

Hypersonic missiles fly at speeds exceeding five times the speed of sound (approximately 6,000 km/h). There are Hypersonic Cruise Missiles (HCMs), which have engines, and Hypersonic Glide Vehicles (HGVs), which only glide after being launched.

Even if attacked, do you “sit and wait for self-destruction”?

On February 29, 1956, then Prime Minister Ichiro Hatoyama made the following statement at the Cabinet Committee of the House of Representatives regarding the LDP’s policy of maintaining its ability to counterattack.

“In the event that an imminent and unlawful infringement is carried out against our country, and as a means of that infringement, our land is attacked by means of guided missiles, etc., the purpose of the constitution is that we should sit back and wait for self-destruction. I don’t think it’s possible to think of it that way.

In such a case, take the necessary minimum necessary measures to prevent such attacks. For example, guided missiles, etc. It is legally within the scope of self-defense and possible to attack the base of

(Read on behalf of Defense Agency Commissioner Funada), and clarified that counterattacking was within the scope of the Constitution.

On the other hand, the current Prime Minister Kishida, starting with a policy speech in December 2021, has repeatedly stated in the Diet, “We will realistically consider all options, including the ability to attack enemy bases, without excluding them.” It is said that the possession of the ability to strike enemy bases will be included in the planned “National Security Strategy”.

Furthermore, in late April 2022, the Liberal Democratic Party changed the name of “enemy base attack capability” to “counterattack capability” in preparation for the revision of the National Security Strategy. Furthermore, he submitted to the prime minister a proposal to the government that includes expanding the scope of “counterattacks” not only to “enemy bases” but also to “command and control functions, etc.”

In response, Kenta Izumi, chairman of the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan, said at a press conference in April that it clearly stated that it “includes command and control functions.” We have a responsibility to clarify,” he added.

Furthermore, Tomoko Tamura, chairman of the Japanese Communist Party’s policy committee, said at a press conference in April, “Even if we change the name (from enemy base attack capability to counterattack capability), it is the same. The intent to change Article 9 is now clearly visible.”

The author is in favor of retaining the ability to counterattack. We must not “sit and wait for self-destruction” under attack from the enemy without fighting back. However, there are several problems with the “counterattack capability” assumed by the Japanese government.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.