Obsessed with the Australian nuclear submarine issue, what does Japan want to do? _Sina News

Original title: Obsessed with Australia’s nuclear submarine issue, what does Japan want to do?

At this point, it is difficult to hide that some people in Japan want to hide their ears and steal the bell to obtain nuclear weapons!

Text | Haike

“I want to ask about Australian nuclear submarines. Yesterday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed its opposition to Australia’s development of nuclear submarines. But as far as I know, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army also has many nuclear submarines. Does the Ministry of Foreign Affairs mean that China will not build new nuclear submarines in the future? “

Guess who asked this question?

Yesterday (September 23) at the regular press conference of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, a reporter from Kyodo News Agency of Japan asked this question.

Indeed, the issue of Australia and nuclear submarines has become a major focus of international news this week. And Uncle Hai wants to say that after Zhao Lijian had answered three related questions the day before, the Kyodo News reporter picked up the question again and mixed the question of Australia’s nuclear submarine with China’s nuclear submarine. There was a purpose behind it. .

　　01

May wish to look at Zhao Lijian’s clear answer again.

Zhao Lijian first said, “I remember that I answered three questions yesterday. China’s position is very clear.” Looking back at the press conference on September 22, Zhao Lijian successively answered relevant questions from reporters from Australia and Asia Satellite TV, “Macao Monthly”, and “China Daily”, and clarified China’s position. Uncle Hai believes that it is particularly noteworthy that Zhao Lijian mentioned that “the United States, Britain, and Australia should abandon the cold war zero-sum mentality and narrow geopolitical concepts, conform to the trend of the times of peace and development, and stop engaging in small groups and small circles.” Of course, it also mentioned that “the international community generally believes that cooperation between the United States, Britain and Australia has a serious risk of nuclear proliferation and violates the spirit of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.”

After Zhao Lijian gave a more in-depth answer, the Japanese reporter asked another question on September 23. Zhao Lijian had to continue to answer. In the eyes of Uncle Hai, Zhao Lijian’s answer on the 23rd was more concise and concise.

Australia is a non-nuclear-weapon signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and a signatory to the South Pacific Nuclear-Free Zone Treaty. Australia has introduced nuclear submarine technology with strategic military value. The international community, including China, has reason to question Australia’s sincerity in abiding by its nuclear non-proliferation commitments. As a nuclear-weapon state stipulated in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, whether China will build a new nuclear submarine is a question of a different nature from Australia.

This is no longer clearer.

Uncle Hai understands that Australia does not have the legal status of possessing nuclear weapons. If it dares to introduce nuclear weapons, it is a thief.

As for China, it is a nuclear-weapon state under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

The Japanese reporter’s question, Uncle Hai personally understands, it does have the meaning of confusing concepts and instigating right and wrong!

　　02

So why do Japanese journalists do this? Is it really just because Japan is the only country in the world that has survived an atomic bomb in actual combat, and is it extremely sensitive to nuclear weapons? In the eyes of Uncle Hai, this is not the case at all! Japanese reporters have their special intentions to ask such questions.

After Japan was defeated, the Allied troops stationed in Japan. Originally, there should have been troops stationed in Japan from the four countries of the United States, Britain, China and the Soviet Union. Only because of changes in the international situation, after the start of the Cold War, the concept of Allied troops stationed in Japan gradually changed to the US troops stationed in Japan. In the 1950s, the US military, which had stolen the concept, hoped to deploy nuclear weapons in Japan. Although the United States did not do so later, according to the declassified files of the University of Ryukyu in May this year, the US military deployed nuclear weapons on Okinawa, which belongs to the Ryukyu Islands.

The U.S. military deploys nuclear weapons like this. Does Japan dare to say a word? Not only dare not to say, the Japanese government has to keep secrets for the US military.

Of course, Japan acquiesced that the US military placed nuclear weapons on Ryukyu, which also proved that the Ryukyu Islands, where the US military occupied and established the Ryukyu Civil Government at that time, were not considered Japan’s mainland at all. Ryukyu was not under the rule of Japan until the United States privately granted the rule of Ryukyu to Japan in the 1970s and Japan re-established the so-called “Okinawa Prefecture”.

At present, it is worth noting that when Japanese reporters asked Zhao Lijian, Yoshihide Suga, who was about to step down as Prime Minister of Japan, was flying from Tokyo to the United States on a special plane from the Japanese government to make his last foreign visit during his tenure as Prime Minister.

Yoshihide Suga claims to go to the United States to participate in the “Quadruple Security Dialogue” (QUAD) between the United States, Australia, Japan and India.

Uncle Hai noticed that on September 22, in a talk show in Japanese media, Yoichi Takahashi, who was once the Cabinet Secretary of Suga Yoshihide, once said: “Suga Yoshihide went to the United States, what if he secretly suggested that nuclear submarines be brought to Japan? , It will be very interesting.”

From this, it is not difficult to understand the question raised by Kyodo News reporters-it means a lot of opposition to the Chinese army. The meaning is nothing more than-since China has nuclear submarines, it doesn’t matter whether Australia has nuclear submarines, or whether Japan has nuclear submarines in the future.

At this point, it is difficult to hide that some people in Japan want to hide their ears and steal the bell to obtain nuclear weapons!

　　03

The United States and Britain are the sponsors of the “Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty”. On July 1, 1968, the treaty was opened for signature in Moscow, London, and Washington. At that time, 59 countries signed up to join. Although China did not formally accede to the treaty until the 1990s, China has always advocated the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons, and pursued a policy of not advocating, encouraging or engaging in the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and not helping other countries develop nuclear weapons.

Australia and Japan are both parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Since the contract is concluded in the name of the country, it can be fulfilled in the name of the country. Otherwise, what is the difference with the ruthless market lunatic?

After Australia announced that it would introduce nuclear submarines, it was met with dissatisfaction from neighboring countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, and New Zealand. I don’t know if Japan also wants to provoke such a show. As for whether to get a nuclear submarine, hehe, Uncle Hai feels that it is really not a simple matter.

Editor in charge: Zhu Xuesen SN240