Japan in NATO?

What has to happen to get Japan in NATO by the 1960s?
I know that's not much to go on, but I've only now became interested in the East and so I'm learning as I go.

I know they have a large population but not much resources, so they could easily be of help to the US in containing communism in Asia.

Japanese fighting in Vietnam? Could this effect the ultimate outcome?

**Also, a side question; how do we stop Japan from having such low birth rates?
 
What has to happen to get Japan in NATO by the 1960s?
I know that's not much to go on, but I've only now became interested in the East and so I'm learning as I go.

I know they have a large population but not much resources, so they could easily be of help to the US in containing communism in Asia.

Japanese fighting in Vietnam? Could this effect the ultimate outcome?

**Also, a side question; how do we stop Japan from having such low birth rates?

I'm no Japan expert, but I'll take a stab at it...

Firstly, Articles 5 and 6 of the North Atlantic Treaty will have to be changed to accommodate any Asian member states.

Secondly, you'll need a larger threat of Communism in mainland Asia to justify a more militarized Japan. Keep in mind this is 20 odd years after WWII, where Japan the aggressor screwed over a lot of Asian countries.

Thirdly, NATO wasn't involved in Vietnam. And if Japan does get involved the outcome would largely be the same - until South Vietnam's government is actually not (too) corrupt and had some semblance of legitimacy it'll eventually fall.

In summary, I would suggest a POD of a less-severe Sino-Soviet split. That, or a more powerful and effective PRC.

Marc A
 
Japanese fighting in Vietnam? Could this effect the ultimate outcome?

**Also, a side question; how do we stop Japan from having such low birth rates?


I can't see the U.S allowing the Japanese to fight in Vietnam unless Vietnam is a front in a wider WWIII. If the U.S was already looked at as the bad guy in Vietnam, I can only imagine how Asia will react to rearming and deploying Japanese troops for an overseas war... in Asia. :eek:

As far as the low birth rates.... honestly I have no clue. In my very, very limited understanding, highly industrialized countries either barely stay above or dip below the # of births needed to keep up population.

Japan's problem is not new to First World Nations. Japan makes it worse, however, by not being open to immigration like the U.S is {in comparison}. Immigration often helps keep population numbers up. Japan's net immigration is extremely low, owing to a large list of reasons, not least of which is racism.
 
For a start you would have to change Japans constitution as it forever renounces Japans right to go to war, which is why the Japanese Army, Navy and Air Force are called self defence forces. Remember it's only a few years ago now that there was hell to pay when the Japanese Maritime Self Defence Force started flying the flag of the olf Imperial Navy, and not just in the surrounding countries but Japan itself. Also as has been said Japan hardley meets the requirements for membership of the NORTH ATLANTIC Treaty Organisation.
 
This wouldn't happen. For many generations, Japan has been dominated by a pragmatic conservative elite. Ever since the Meiji Restoration this groups has generally steered Japan in whatever direction made the most sense for their self-interest. In this vein, the Yoshida Doctrine (the prevailing ideology of the LDP and post-WWII Japan in general) called for a very limited military as a means of ensuring American protection. The logic behind it was this: Japan was in a strategic position in the Cold War. The United States needed it to stay in the Western camp. To do would require either a)Japan to spend money to build up their own armed forces or b) for the United States to ensure the protection of Japan visa-vi their own military. Plan a would require Japan to spend money on the military that it preferred to spend on economic development (they had a highly interventionist economy at the time). So Yoshida chose plan b, as did his successors. Joining NATO would mean compromising Japan's independence and require it to spend money on it's armed foreces.

tl;dr: Japan's brand of political conservatism would not allow Japan to join an organization that would compromise its sovereignty and force it to spend money on its military.
 
Japan might have Joined SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty organization) it was set up by the US during the 1950's as part of an effort to contain the Soviet Union. It is possible tha with more effort it could have been remolded into an organization similar to NATO but concentrated on ASIA.
 
Japan might have Joined SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty organization) it was set up by the US during the 1950's as part of an effort to contain the Soviet Union. It is possible tha with more effort it could have been remolded into an organization similar to NATO but concentrated on ASIA.

Once again, it still goes against the ideological principles of the conservative elites. You would need to see an earlier rise of someone like Yasuhiro Nakasone, an LDP Prime Minister in the 1980s who attempted to bring neoliberalism to Japan (and was largely unsuccessful). Even then, the institutional opposition of the elites to international integration and increased military spending.
 

Cook

Banned
Japan might have Joined SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty organization) it was set up by the US during the 1950's as part of an effort to contain the Soviet Union.
There were only two S.A. Asian members of SEATO, Thailand and The Philippines and neither of them would have been happy to see Japanese troops.
 
Japan might have Joined SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty organization) it was set up by the US during the 1950's as part of an effort to contain the Soviet Union. It is possible tha with more effort it could have been remolded into an organization similar to NATO but concentrated on ASIA.

It would need a LOT more effort, and a fair amount more buy-in from the local members of the group. SEATO was never very much at the best of times, and the Manila Pact was essentially moribund until sometime in the 70s when it was quietly allowed to die.
I also think that there'd be some resistance to the idea of Japanese forces securing southeast Asia - not to put too fine a point on it, Japan isn't a southeast Asian nation, and their most recent experience of Japan acting in that role was hardly one to gladden the hearts of those who live in the region.

We should also think about how this will affect the other north Asian power, China. Their role against the Japanese in WW2 is generally unappreciated but it was a long, bitter, and very bloody struggle. Any sign that Japanese power is on the rise again, and moreover is being assisted and encouraged by the US could make a rapprochement with the West much less likely, pushing them firmly into the Soviet camp.
 
Top