Japanese Troops Deploy to South Sudan Risking First Overseas Conflict Since World War 2

screen-shot-2016-11-21-at-10-10-41-am

The re-miliarization of Japan has been on my radar and caused me much concern in recent years. I’ve covered the topic on several occasions, with the most recent example published over the summer in the post, Japanese Government Shifts Further Toward Authoritarianism and Militarism. Here are the first few paragraphs:

One of the most discomforting aspects of Neil Howe and William Strauss’ seminal work on generational cycles, The Fourth Turning (1997), is the fact that as far as American history is concerned, they all climax and end with massive wars.

To be more specific, the first “fourth turning” in American history culminated with the Revolutionary War (1775-1783), the second culminated with the Civil War (1861-1865), while the third ended with the bloodiest war in world history, World War II (1939-1945). The number of years between the end of the Revolutionary War and the start of the Civil War was 78 years, and the number of years between the end of the Civil War and the start of World War II was 74 years (76 years if you use America’s entry into the war as your starting date). Therefore, if Howe & Strauss’ theory holds any water, and I think it does, we’re due for a major conflict somewhere around 75 years from the end of World War II. That brings us to 2020.

The more I look around, the more signs appear everywhere that the world is headed into another major conflict. From an unnecessary resurgence of a Cold War with Russia, to increased tensions in the South China Sea and complete chaos and destruction in the Middle East, the world is a gigantic tinderbox. All it will take to transform these already existing conflict zones into a major conflagration is another severe global economic downturn, something I fully expect to happen within the next 1-2 years. Frighteningly, this puts on a perfect collision course with the 2020 area.

Although I felt World War 3 was a virtual lock under Hillary Clinton, the election of Trump does not negate historical cycles or current geopolitical trends, and the world continues to move in a very dangerous direction.

While the below snippet from a Reuters article published today may not seem like a big deal, it’s just a small part of a much larger trend.

Via Reuters:

A contingent of Japanese troops landed in South Sudan on Monday, an official said – a mission that critics say could see them embroiled in their country’s first overseas fighting since World War Two.

The soldiers will join U.N. peacekeepers and help build infrastructure in the landlocked and impoverished country torn apart by years of civil war.

But, under new powers granted by their government last year, they will be allowed to respond to urgent calls for help from U.N. staff and aid workers. There are also plans to let them guard U.N. bases, which have been attacked during the fighting.

The deployment of 350 soldiers is in line with Japanese security legislation to expand the military’s role overseas. Critics in Japan have said the move risks pulling the troops into conflict for the first time in more than seven decades.

All it would take is a sharp global economic downturn to push world “leaders” towards overseas conflict in order to distract from problems at home. The risk is very real.

For prior articles on the trend toward militarization in Japan, see:

Unusually Massive Protests Erupt in Japan Against Forthcoming “War Legislation”

Video of the Day – Brawl Breaks Out in Japanese Parliament Over “War Bill”

How Japan’s “Stealth Constitution” Destroys Civil Rights and Sets the Stage for Dictatorship

In Liberty,
Michael Krieger

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

6 thoughts on “Japanese Troops Deploy to South Sudan Risking First Overseas Conflict Since World War 2”

  1. The Japanese right has long chafed under postwar restrictions on the military. To eliminate these restrictions, PM Abe and his people are working hard to amend the constitution, specifically Article 9. Still, in light of gradual developments over the postwar decades, such an amendment would be mostly cosmetic, as Article 9 unequivocally bars Japan from having any kind of military force at all. Despite Article 9, Japan has one of the best-equipped military forces in the world. I think that eliminating Article 9 is meant to unleash and accelerate military buildup efforts, which has been slow due to the need for “reinterpreting” Article 9. Watch for a close partnership between the US and Japan in WW3. Recall that former PM Nakasone referred to Japan as an “unsinkable aircraft carrier.” Although his remark was condemned, it is indicative of Japan’s future likely role.

    At the same time, Japan could very well be forced into making some kind of concessions to Russia in the north and China in the south. Recent Japanese efforts toward rapprochement with Russia indicate that the Japanese are realistic about this, and are trying to guide the process.

    Great blog! Keep up the good work.

    Reply
  2. If the U.S. can stop Japan being an American protectorate, then Japanese rearmament is a good thing. No worries about them running around crazy like WWII. China will keep them much constrained as well as an aging Japanese population.

    Reply
  3. As the elites intend, our schools do not teach the lessons from our history; so we are manipulated by them repeatedly to repeat the cycles.

    Reply
  4. The Japanese have every right to a military. Had the US not been pushing them with blockades, they wouldnt have attacked Pearl Harbor…
    Aaah. But that was required to join the war in Europe for the bankers and bolsheviks.

    I’d much rather side with the Japanese than the Chinese any day. A much more noble people.

    It seems they are now trying to eliminate them as well with even more radioactivity. Very sad.

    Reply
  5. Since you are reading up on Steve Bannon, here’s an article I came across that you might find interesting:
    http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/11/the-right-wing-group-behind-donald-trumps-rise-aims-to-keep-fear-alive/

    I don’t know enough about Steve Bannon yet to know if I agree with the article or not, but this I found the news-link on one of the alternative media news sources (Jesse’s Café Americain) that I do trust in general. The owner of the alternative news source Jesse is a good guy and he is anti-status-quo, but I would say that he is more in the camp of Occupy Wallstreet and less in the camp of the libertarians.

    Reply
  6. Acting as if we are due for a major conflict because a certain number of years have passed has to be most ridiculous way to predict a conflict.

    Reply

Leave a Reply