WI: Japanese fleet in NATO?

What if the communists won all of Korea and in response the United States deployed nuclear missiles in Taiwan, leading to closer cooperation between Moscow and Beijing and thus preventing a Sino-Soviet split from ever occurring. Could this lead to Japan's constitutional Article 9 being amended to allow a proper military force and foreign deployment, but only when part of collective "peacekeeping" efforts? And would the US be willing to build up a Japanese fleet in the Pacific to be a check on a more built up PRC navy and Soviet Eastern Fleet (perhaps with the Japanese NATO fleet being to the US missile base on Taiwan what the British Army on the Rhine is to NATO missile bases in Western Europe?)?

And what effects might having a proper army, if only under the auspices of NATO, have on post-war Japanese society? Might it radicalize certain elements even further and create a terrorist problem that results in West German style police special forces unit being formed for counter-terrorism purposes?

What might India and other democracies in that part of the world have to say about the Japanese NATO fleet?
 
1) obviously not "Nato", as it's not a "North Atlantic" group if Japan is in it. OTL, the US set up a whole series of pacts, of which NATO is the most important, and maybe the only one which survived. SEATO (South East Asia) and ??? in south west asia were two others.

2) Having Japanese troops, or probably even sailors, being part of the US-led forces would likely be a HORRIBLE propaganda blow against that US alliance. The Japanese were hated throughout the region, for good reason. (except in Taiwan, so much).
 
Both the Bundeswehr and the JSDF were formed in the mid 50's in response to the growing poer of the USSR, so it's possible that the JSDF could become something similar in Asia to what the German armed forces are in Europe, (in fact I started a thread on such a thing years ago), however Japan would need to embark on the same type of national image repair that Germany did. That would need a major shift in Japanese attitudes but it could be done with enough arm twisting from the Americans.

As to Japan joining NATO there's to real barrier. NATO is the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, signing the North Atlantic Treaty just means you've signed a piece of papaer called that, it doesn't mean you have to be in the North Atlantic.
 

HJ Tulp

Donor
Both the Bundeswehr and the JSDF were formed in the mid 50's in response to the growing poer of the USSR, so it's possible that the JSDF could become something similar in Asia to what the German armed forces are in Europe, (in fact I started a thread on such a thing years ago), however Japan would need to embark on the same type of national image repair that Germany did. That would need a major shift in Japanese attitudes but it could be done with enough arm twisting from the Americans.

As to Japan joining NATO there's to real barrier. NATO is the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, signing the North Atlantic Treaty just means you've signed a piece of papaer called that, it doesn't mean you have to be in the North Atlantic.


rticle 6

[1]For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:

  • on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France [2], on the territory of or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;

  • on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.

So yes, Japan could join. But the other NATO members would not be obliged to help Japan if it's attacked while vica versa that would be the case.
 
So yes, Japan could join. But the other NATO members would not be obliged to help Japan if it's attacked while vica versa that would be the case.

I don't consider that your quote from the NATO treary shows Japan could be a member of NATO. Ths NATO treaty was written when many European nations and the USA had territories, colonies and bases throughout the world. It sounds like the clauses you cite refer to the obvious fact that an attack on French territory outside of the North Atlantic theatre (Algeria) would be considered as much an attack on France as if a missile hit Paris. I'm sure that today, an attack on Hawaii would trigger NATO involvement. I doubt if this clause is interpreted today to give Algeria potential membership in NATO.

If the situation posited in this thread occurred, It is possible the NATO treaty could be restructured and renamed to become a broad "Democratic" alliance against the Sino-Soviets, maybe called something like the Free World Treaty Organization. More likely, however, you would see the more successful rise of the other US-centered anti-communist alliance systems such as CENTO and SEATO, which were relatvely usuccessful in OTL. Japan's membership in SEATO could become quite possible.
 
I really do not see Japan becoming part of NATO as it on the other side of the World. The US and Japan currently have a Mutual Security Pact with one another. There is also a Security Pact between the US and Australia and New Zealand.
In the 1950's the US tried to create SEATO as another link in the effort to contain The Communist Bloc. It is possible that a new Alliance system could be created Say Pacific Alliance Treaty Organization based around the US, Japan, Australia,New Zealand , South Korea, Singapore, Philippines and perhaps Taiwan. Another canidate might be Thailand.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Actually, the NATO rules are specific in their limitations. The member states MAY act in concert with other states outside of the North Atlantic region but there is no requirement.

A good example is 1982 Falklands. That attack didn't set off the Alliance.
I don't consider that your quote from the NATO treary shows Japan could be a member of NATO. Ths NATO treaty was written when many European nations and the USA had territories, colonies and bases throughout the world. It sounds like the clauses you cite refer to the obvious fact that an attack on French territory outside of the North Atlantic theatre (Algeria) would be considered as much an attack on France as if a missile hit Paris. I'm sure that today, an attack on Hawaii would trigger NATO involvement. I doubt if this clause is interpreted today to give Algeria potential membership in NATO.

If the situation posited in this thread occurred, It is possible the NATO treaty could be restructured and renamed to become a broad "Democratic" alliance against the Sino-Soviets, maybe called something like the Free World Treaty Organization. More likely, however, you would see the more successful rise of the other US-centered anti-communist alliance systems such as CENTO and SEATO, which were relatvely usuccessful in OTL. Japan's membership in SEATO could become quite possible.
 
Top