How the Missile Defense System should be

How the Missile Defense System should be Held Prime Minister's National Security Council Open Discussion 4th August 19:18

Regarding the way the missile defense system should be, the LDP political council approved the proposal of the study team to prevent attacks within the territory of the other party in order to improve deterrence.

In response to the LDP's proposal, Prime Minister Abe will hold a National Security Council (NSC) on the evening of the 4th to discuss the ideal state of the missile defense system, including an alternative to the new interceptor missile system "Aegis Ashore". did.

Prime Minister Abe stated that he would "deepen the security debate" and emphasized the idea of ​​discussing how the security strategy should be at the NSC = National Security Council.

Following the abandonment of the new interceptor missile system "Aegis Ashore" in both Yamaguchi and Akita prefectures, the LDP's Chairman Onodera Security Research Abe made a proposal on the 4th about the ideal state of the missile defense system in the party. I handed it to the Prime Minister.

In the proposal, as an effort to improve deterrence, based on the idea of ​​monopolistic defense within the scope of the Constitution, including the possession of the ability to prevent ballistic missiles in the other party's territory, we will promptly consider and conclude He said that he should maintain the government policy of the past, such as not possessing aggressive weapons.

In response to this, Prime Minister Abe attended for about 30 minutes after 4 pm, including Deputy Prime Minister Aso and Finance Minister, Chief Cabinet Secretary Suga, Defense Minister Kono, and other relevant ministers. We held a meeting and had discussions on the ideal state of the missile defense system, including alternatives to "Aegis Asshore."

Prime Minister Abe stated that "The mission of the country is to protect the lives of the people and the peaceful life. Based on the recommendations, the government would like to deepen the discussion firmly," and added, "Aegis Asshore He emphasized the idea of ​​discussing the security strategy, including the development of defense capabilities in place of ", at the NSC = National Security Council.

At around 6:30 pm on the 4th, Prime Minister Abe told the reporters, ``Compliance with international law within the constitution and basic roles of Japan and the United States based on the idea of ​​exclusive defense. We have received recommendations that new efforts are needed to improve deterrence while maintaining sharing of responsibility."

In addition, "The role of the government is to protect the lives and peaceful lives of the people. The government is also conducting thorough discussions at the National Security Council. The idea is to launch it and implement it promptly."

Background and significance of LDP proposal

This time, in response to the abandonment of the new interception missile system "Aegis Ashore" to Yamaguchi and Akita prefectures, this June, Prime Minister Abe announced at the NSC = National Security Council that Japan's security The discussion began within the Liberal Democratic Party in response to the announcement that the strategy should be discussed and that a new direction will be set out.

The Liberal Democratic Party, in a proposal submitted to the government three years ago, called for the SDF to begin consideration for the realization of possession of "enemy base counterattack capability" such as cruise missiles as the ability to attack enemy bases. ..

On the other hand, regarding this proposal, a careful opinion such as "If you have the ability to attack the opponent's country, you will increase the tension in the region" in the discussion for the summary, and the launch of the ballistic missile of North Korea, It was pointed out that it became difficult to grasp the target because it started from the mobile launch pad.

For this reason, the expression "enemy base counterattack ability" has been revised and stated as "ability to block ballistic missiles etc. even within the opponent's area."

Also, in order to clarify that under the current constitution, we will consider within the scope of the concept of monopoly defense, when the government considers possessing these capabilities, we will not possess aggressive weapons, such as for self-defense. We urge you to maintain the traditional government policy of limiting to the minimum required.

Former Defense Minister Onodera "Actively Supporting the Government"

Former Defense Minister Onodera, who is chairman of the Liberal Democratic Party's security research, told reporters, "Until now, the government has not consistently expressed its intimidation regarding the impact on the other territory. Missile technology will improve. In the meantime, if it is unavoidable to protect Japan, it is necessary to have such capabilities and stop missiles, and we would like to actively support the government."

Policy that shows a certain direction to the government the end of September prospect

The government response to the fact that the Liberal Democratic Party has submitted a proposal, NSC = is carried out in the National Security Council, to accelerate the discussion of the way of security strategy, our policy is to indicate a certain direction to the prospect of the end of September ..

Within the government, regarding the alternative of "Aegis Ashore" to be examined in this, the deployment to Yamaguchi and Akita prefectures was abandoned due to a technical problem, so "to avoid repeating the same thing, It is necessary to thoroughly consider it."

On the other hand, the Komeito is also discussing how the missile defense system should be, but there is a strong cautious opinion such as "Is it not necessary to change the concept so far?" is.

Masami Motoumi "Content that significantly changes the organization and culture of the Self-Defense Forces"

Regarding this proposal, Yoji Kada, a former commander of the Maritime Self-Defense Force, who was the commander of the Maritime Self-Defense Force, said, "It is a field that the Self-Defense Force has not touched for 70 years since its inception, and it will change the organization and culture of the SDF significantly. When blocking ballistic missiles within the opponent's territory, it is necessary to instantly analyze where, what kind of troops are, what kind of equipment they have, etc., and the current Self-Defense Force does not have that ability. Without it, it would be difficult to achieve, and I don't think it's a high-priority alternative to missile defense alternatives to Aegis Asshore."

In addition, he said, "The aegis-ashore deployment was abandoned, and it suddenly got a close-up, and there is an impression that the state of defense power based on the philosophy of monopoly defense has not been sufficiently discussed. "Shield with the United States" Isn't it necessary to have a comprehensive discussion, such as the division of roles of the "beard" and debates on the constitution?

History of the "enemy base attack" debate

Concerning the ability to attack the opponent's base, which was discussed in the compilation of the proposals, the self-defense that the Constitution recognizes in the legal theory is that the government has no other means to prevent attacks by missiles etc. until now. It has been shown to be possible without deviating from the idea of ​​exclusive defense.

In 1955, Prime Minister Hatoyama at the time replied at the Diet that "it is not considered to be the purpose of the Constitution to sit and wait for self-destruction."

However, under the U.S.-Japan security system, the United States consistently plays the role of a "sword" and Japan as a "shield", and we consider that Japan will have equipment aimed at attacking the opponent's base. I explained that there is no.

Prime Minister Abe also said at the plenary session of the House of Representatives in May last year that "the so-called enemy base attack depends on the impact of the United States on the division of roles between Japan and the United States, and Japan will continue to use this type of policy decision in the future. I don't think about changing the basic division of roles between them," he said, saying he is not thinking about having equipment to attack the opponent's base.

Three years ago, even when the Ministry of Defense announced the introduction of a "long-distance cruise missile" with a long reach that could reach the coasts of North Korea and China, the Diet also said that it had a relationship with the attack capability of the other base. It was argued, but at this time the government explained that it would allow it to be dealt with from outside the threatened area of ​​the opponent, not to attack the base.