Based on this new, less restrictive policy on weapons exports Japan has
concluded two major deals. The first is to supply surface-to-air missile parts
to the US and the second to conduct joint research on air-to-air missiles with
the United Kingdom. The proposed Australian submarine deal
would eclipse both of these in terms of scale and significance.
Japan is yet to respond to the Australian
government’s announcement that there would be a ‘competitive evaluation
process’ to build Australia’s next submarine. But the Japanese Minister for
Defense, Gen Nakatani, expressed a wish to hold talks with the Australian
government regarding the matter. The Japanese government now
understands that the submarine procurement issue is intertwined with
Australia’s domestic politics and ‘is keeping a close eye on Abbott’.
Despite critical commentary
in the Japanese press on the Australian government’s policy backflip, speculation
continues that Japan’s Soryu-class submarines are the most likely
candidate to replace Australia’s ageing Collins-class submarines. The
expectation is that cooperation with Japan will continue because Australian companies
are ‘incapable of building submarines on their own’.
In early January 2015, the Japanese press reported
that the Ministry of Defense (MOD) had proposed joint development and
production of the submarine with Australia. Instead of exporting a completed Soryu-class
submarine, the proposal suggested joint development of new technology for
material that absorbs sound waves and special steel that would be used to
manufacture the hull.
Japan would be in charge of producing the main parts of the hull and
assembling the submarines, while Australia would be in charge of producing some
of the parts as well as the final building and maintenance. A Japanese MOD official noted
that assembling the submarines in Australia would lead to higher costs and
might affect the quality and safety of the product.
Other reports point
to Japanese caution about completely handing over its submarine technology to
Australia. Submarines are categorised as
the ‘most sensitive of all sensitive information’. For this reason the Japanese
military, and especially the Maritime Self-Defense Force (MSDF) whose
cooperation will be essential if the deal goes ahead, has major reservations
about the deal. MSDF officers ‘don’t tell colleagues, let alone family members,
where a submarine is headed after it leaves port’. Japan and the US, which
share some information gathered by submarines, do not share the location or
ability of each submarine.
But the Abe government judged that sharing
Japan’s submarine technology with Australia would lead to a strengthening of
the production capacity of Japan’s domestic enterprises. The fact that Prime
Minister Abe decided to examine the provision of Soryu-class submarine
technology to Australia despite opposition from the MOD was regarded as proof
that he considers Australia to be a ‘quasi-ally’.
The Abe administration is
gradually putting in place the necessary policy, institutional and financial
support framework to enable Japan’s defence industries to become significant
players in the international weapons and defence technology market. In 2015,
the Japanese government will launch a Defence Equipment Agency in the MOD. The new agency will have
centralised control over defence equipment development, acquisition and
exports. It will lead the expansion of weapons exports and is part of the so-called ‘Abe line’
that links the development of defence enterprises with the government’s growth
strategy.
The MOD’s 2014 Strategy on Defense
Production and Technological Bases includes financial assistance for
the overseas expansion of defence enterprises and funding to research
institutions that work on developing technology that can be used in weapons and
equipment. A new executive panel for promoting weapons exports and joint
development was also appointed to the MOD in December 2014. It will help the
ministry to respond to the many requests for a
framework to support the private enterprises involved and establish a system to
determine the needs and technological standards of partner countries.
While the government has
given the green light to weapons sales, companies that manufacture defence
equipment are more mindful of the difficult
practicalities of particular deals and the need to gain real profits.
Some have strong reservations about the Australian submarine deal. An executive of Kawasaki Heavy
Industries remarked ‘there is no way Australia will be able to look after
the submarines properly even if we give it to them’. But at this stage it is ‘almost impossible’
for a private company to become even partially involved in the operations of
the Australian Navy.
If the agreement goes ahead
this deal could signal an inseparable security
relationship between Australia, Japan and the US with both Japan and
the US supplying their relevant technology to Australia and cooperating in
Australia’s submarine development.
For Prime Minister Abe,
weapons exports are a key element in a broader
strategy of building a network of ‘quasi-alliances’, which includes
Australia, India and Southeast Asian countries, with the Japan–US alliance
maintained as the strategic ‘trump card’.
Aurelia George Mulgan is a
Professor at the University of New South Wales, Canberra.
No comments:
Post a Comment