Presidential Candidate Donald Trump thinks that it might be OK for Japan and South Korea to develop their own nuclear weapons despite the fact the U.S. has given the two countries the protection of the U.S. nuclear arsenal specifically to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons in Asia. Now a report from the Department of Defense Office of Net Assessment (ONA) has been issued that discusses the possibilities for Japan to develop their own nuclear weapons if the U.S. withdraws its protection and what might happen in a nuclear exchange between China and Japan.
The ONA was created in 1973 by the Nixon administration to serve as the Pentagon's internal think tank. It is charged with the task of look a few decades into the future and, with the help of outside contractors, producing reports of their studies to aid Pentagon decision makers.
The new report predicts that Japan could develop its own nuclear weapons within a ten years period because it has already advanced nuclear infrastructure. In addition, they will have the land based missiles and submarine launched missiles to deliver their nuclear warheads. Their most likely enemy in a nuclear confrontation would be China.
Despite having a nuclear arsenal of their own, Japan would not be able to survive a nuclear war with China. One major problem is the fact that Japan is tiny compared to China. Japan might kill thirty million Chinese with nuclear strikes. This is between two and three percent of the population of China. China is a huge country so although a Japanese nuclear attack would be very destructive to the targets, it could only affect a very small area of China.
A direct Chinese nuclear attack on Tokyo would probably kill at least thirty four million people which represents about a quarter of the Japanese population. It would devastate a significant part of the Japanese archipelago. Exact projects of casualties are difficultbecause there is disagreement on whether the nuclear warheads would cause firestorms that would increase deaths.
The study detailed in the report was prompted by the increasing tensions between China and Japan. Their navies and air forces have carried on low level hostilities for years around an island chain claimed by both countries, which is known as the Senkaku chain by the Japanese.
Japan's constitution which was drafted after World War II with the help of the United States contains Article 9 which prohibits Japan from using war to settle international disputes. The article says that Japan will not maintain armed forces with the ability to wage war on another country.
The report also said that lately Japan has been building up its military and has reinterpreted the language of Article 9 to allow for a wider range of weaponry and military activity. A few months ago, a representative of the current Japanese government said the Japanese constitution does not specifically prohibit Japan from building and possessing nuclear weapons. Recently Japan has begun to fear that the U.S. nuclear umbrella may be unable to provide security against the expansion and modernization of the conventional and nuclear forces of China and Russia.
The ONA has been criticized for producing questionable reports that have been attacked as just "make work" for contractors and think tanks. One report analyzed the cultural antecedents of the current U.S. society with respect to international belligerence. Another recent report analyzed the facial expression and body language of Chinese and Russian leaders in order to predict their decision making. A third report tried to analyze Chinese culture through studies of Chinese propaganda films. A forth report studied the differences in attitudes between the urban "elites" and the less educated but more "patriotic" citizens of the U.S. as a possible cause of future civil disturbances.
Back in the middle of 2015, the U.S. Secretary of Defense sent a memo to the ONA which said “The Office of Net Assessment has long been my predecessors’ source of independent, long term, deep thinking about our future. That is the legacy I expect you to maintain and upon which I expect you to build,” the memo reads. The Secretary went on to say that analyzing the future of warfare should not come at the expense of up-to-date informed advice on current pressing policy issues for the secretary of defense.
