From: fester@island.COM (Mike Fester)
Subject: Re: America Doesn't have a Chance (was: DOES AMERICA SAY YES TO JAPAN?)
Organization: /usr/local/rn/organization
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 18:25:50 GMT

In article <1992Dec28.191630.28985@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> cthorne@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Charles E Thorne) writes:
>In article <thomasd.41.724958695@tps.COM> thomasd@tps.COM (Thomas W. Day) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec19.004520.29380@leland.Stanford.EDU> strange@leland.Stanford.EDU (Mike Strange) writes:
>>

>For a fairly complete discussion of this issue I would suggest "The Coming
>War with Japan".  The authors discuss Japan's rise as a power, including their
>war with Russia and their invasion of other countries to locate raw materials.
>When the U.S. cut oil exports to Japan they felt they needed to obtain oil
>without incurring U.S. wrath and so bombed Pearl Harbor.

We did discuss this book a while ago. IMO, pretty alarmist for no real reason.
And they conclude with the line reading roughly "this may be the first of 
several wars between the US and Japan".

>After the war, both Germany and Japan were in essentially starvation situations
>and there were those who would have kept them that way.  When North Korea
>invaded South Korea in 1950 the U.S. was the only country with much of a
>military or economic capability.  The U.S. urged Japan to rebuild to have an
>ally in the Far East.  Now that the Soviet Union is not a power house that it
>was, the U.S. no longer needs to support German or Japanese economics.  The
>authors contend that in order to protect it's imports, Japan will create a
>military that will be a powerhouse in the Far East.

China, Korea, and Russia might have megatons of disapproval for that. The world 
is a very different place than it was 50-odd years ago. To become a military
power, it would require at least the passive acceptance of those nations, plus
the US. Not to mention that a) all that would be against the Japanese Constitu-
tion and b) the Japanese just announced a proposed CUT in defense spending, 
hardly the way to go if one is intent on building a military.

>Likewise, Germany could well be as powerful as they were during WW II as they
>reunite with the areas they controlled at that time.  One issue keeping the
>EC from finishing its Union is the distrust of Germany by Britain and France.

Actually, France was one of Germany's most vocal advocates during the reunifi-
cation and in the EC negotiations. It has been Britain's reluctance to tie
its currency to the EC dollar that has been one of the major stumbling blocks.
And of course, in the various recent referenda, the EC treaty has won 
endorsement by very slim margins. It was actually POLAND who objected most
strenuously to German power, and they demended assurances that Germany would
give up all claims to land lost as a result of WWII.

>In neither of these cases is the Soviet Union available to counter Japanese or
>German interests.  With regard to the East, the question of which countries
>Japan allies itself with may determine what happens in that area.

See 'megatons' argument above. A very real consideration for any nation wishing
to expand its influence militarily these days. In the case of Germany, substi-
tute France and Great Britain for China and Korea. So far as Japanese alliances
are concerned, they have yet to demonstrate the diplomatic ability to forge
them with anyone but the US.

And of course, that is not even taking into account that both Germany and Japan
have found the current peace/alliance with the US to be very profitable indeed.

Mike
-- 
Disclaimer - These opinions are not so much opinions, as pearls of wisdom. Any-
one disagreeing is obviously either a) a snivelling, whining, mentally-
deficient, weak-willed, inconsequential, namby-pamby tool of some vague but
conveniently defined conspiracy, or b) my wife.