Japan affirms fighter jet cooperation with British foreign secretary

The US defense industry, until now lucrative, will be seeing a big loss in business if the Trump policies are allowed to continue. Another article says Sweden's industry is going gang-busters thanks the very recent geopolitical shift. European and Japanese contractors can produce weapons systems that are usually better suited to a battlefield like Ukraine than their US contractors can.

Good. Now we won’t have to pay extra for the rights to control it. The uk paid 400 million just for the rights to control the data for the F35 and that just shows you , when they control the data they’ve got you over a barrel. Good to see the UK building its own again. We built the jaguar, the tornado, the harrier (poo pooed, originally by the U.S.) eurofighter. So we can do this. We’ve seen how the French, and Sweds can win export orders, maintain independence and support jobs and be cost effective. Time to give the U.S. a pass. Just don’t decide to cancel it half way through.

they, and Italy, have been 'agreeing-to-agree' on this, over and over again, for the last couple of years.... how comforting. （⌒▽⌒）

Lammy has to be the most dense Foreign Secretary in the history of the UK.

and shared the view that the security of Europe and the Indo-Pacific region is "inseparable,

A pathetic excuse to promote warmongering

I bet the MAGA vultures will want to interfere so that they are the only ones asked to make those jets.

Strategically situated on either end of the Eurasian continent, the two countries can do a lot to help each other and avoid buying exorbitantly priced and often defective US made weapons.

Nakatani san looks pleased that he's dealing with an equal and not with an alcoholic, underqualified oaf.

Lammy has to be the most dense Foreign Secretary in the history of the UK.

Liz Truss held that position.

So, no.

Good for Japan, good for the UK.

Defence cooperation between two strong, friendly democracies is always a good thing. Diversifying away from US Military technology is another positive.

One of the benefits of Trump's actions is that the rest of the world now knows that that the post-war model of the US backstop for defence has gone. It is now in the same camp as Russia and North Korea - as could be seen by its bizarre UN vote.

European and Japanese defence manufacturers can step up production and become self-reliant. The US is now allied to Russia and cannot be considered an ally in areas that genuinely matter.

In little over six weeks, a century of alliances have been shattered.

In little over six weeks, a century of alliances have been shattered.

And worse, it has been by design.

A new win for trump, yeah. MAGA, do you feel great now?

They should be pushing this forward as fast as they can. Both Japan and Britain have a long history of excellent aircraft engineering and have the capacity to produce something world class.

National security is no joke, and countries simply cannot rely on parties that are unreliable, unstable or opportunistic. Monopolies are never good.

As a resident of Japan, I want this country to pull as far away from the US as is reasonable at this point.

Lammy has to be the most dense Foreign Secretary in the history of the UK.

Most of the Labour cabinet, including Starmer, should be in the Tory party. They are thick enough, corrupt enough, and have the same principals.

The lack of people standing up for ordinary folks pushes them toward Reform. Just as the same in the US pushed people toward Trump.

Increased defense cooperation with other partners is key for Japan. Even before Trump, the US could not manufacture all the equipment needed to meet its commitments around the world, and now that the US will be completely unreliable for the next four years (and may have changed for good: we don't know yet), Japan must ramp up cooperation with others.

In fact, Japan has been wisely doing this since at least the first Trump administration, working more with Australia, India, the Philippines, etc. The Japanese government gets a lot of hate on JT (some of it certainly deserved), but it is very savvy in the international arena, and much of its work flies -- correctly -- under the radar.

The two also agreed to deepen bilateral cooperation as "each other's closest partners in Asia and Europe"

I doubt Japan should look to the UK as its closest European partner under the current Labour government, given that it has gone soft on China. In opposition, Labour vowed to class the Xinjiang atrocities as a genocide but backed down, despite being led by a former human rights lawyer in Keir Starmer:

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uk-labour-drops-plan-accuse-china-genocide-over-uyghur-treatment

And canceled a trip by Tsai Ing-wen to avoid offending China:

https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/news/5951141

These are not the actions of a strong partner for Asia.

TokyoLivingToday 07:44 am JST

A pathetic excuse to promote warmongering

A sensible way to prevent warmongering.

Great news. The whole world should move away from America. They are now unreliable and unpredictable. Boycott America!

Hopefully they focus on unmanned aircraft, as far greater cost performance moving forward, save taxpayers money and get more combat capability = Smart!

Be careful UK .. the new Mitsubishi FX is reported to be costing $180 million per plane. The Russian and US equivalents are under $30 million.

Abe234 Today 07:04 am JST

Good. Now we won’t have to pay extra for the rights to control it. The uk paid 400 million just for the rights to control the data for the F35 and that just shows you , when they control the data they’ve got you over a barrel. Good to see the UK building its own again. We built the jaguar, the tornado, the harrier (poo pooed, originally by the U.S.) eurofighter.

The Harrier would actually been a good Close-Air Support fighter for Japan, since Japan is a mountainous region with multiple islands. Stationing a couple of these on Senkaku would have been a good deterrent. Don't even need a runway.

KiplingToday  12:29 pm JST

Be careful UK .. the new Mitsubishi FX is reported to be costing $180 million per plane. The Russian and US equivalents are under $30 million.

this is always a worry but the work, and the people will be employed in the countries developing it. The F35 is priced at 100 million dollars per plane. So I’m not sure what the equivalency is? The Russian Su 57 5generation is 50 million per plane.However this jet is 6th generation. The modern planes today’s are older now. 5th gen. I always think of it this way. The Planes flying today has been in development for a decade or so and will be older tech. So they work on the next one. But with inflation all new planes will be more expensive.

WesleyToday  12:43 pm JS

The Harrier would actually been a good Close-Air Support fighter for Japan, since Japan is a mountainous region with multiple islands. Stationing a couple of these on Senkaku would have been a good deterrent. Don't even need a runway.

it’s ironic that we just got rid of all the harriers in the air force and navy at a time when we need more. Then we got two carriers with an incomplete complement of F35s. And they went for the vtol version instead of the cheaper catapult version to save a few quid. So I wonder would two smaller carriers similar to the previous carriers have been better since they decided to scrap the catapult version as originally procured.

and it makes me wonder if we’ve got the F35 that can do the same trick as the Harrier. Surely the boffins at BAe and RR could have done a stealthy version of the harrier. Especially since most missions are not done at supersonic speeds. (That’s was confirmed in vietnam in combat) hence the need to go Mach 2 was a waste of time.

But along with this and the French , German, Spanish Future combat plane hopefully we can stop buying American.

HopeSpringsEternalToday  11:27 am JST

Hopefully they focus on unmanned aircraft, as far greater cost performance moving forward, save taxpayers money and get more combat capability = Smart!

the new fighters will be able to do both. I’d personally ignore the taxpayer money part. It’s always an excuse to cancel the project and then they spend even more buying stuff off the shelf from someone else. Then that’s a 100% cost sink.Better to build what is needed for the next 20 years.otherwise you’ll end up with nothing and end up starting again. TSR (1960s) and the agile combat aircraft 1970/80s are good examples. The later changing to the euro fighter.

its like the UK building HS2. If you gonna build it, build it. If not, don’t. But don’t start then half way cancel it and still expect everyone to think your great.and then restart again in20 years time when inflation has made it even more expensive, and someone says it’s a white elephant, waste of money, and can we get value for money. That’s a sure way to lose money. Japans Shinkansen system is second to none, and the UK hasn’t even got a decent High speed railway. And how old is the Shinkansen now.

David BrentToday  07:39 am JST

Lammy has to be the most dense Foreign Secretary in the history of the UK.

Not so many weeks back, in a bilateral meeting not so different to the one mentioned in second last sentence of article, Lammy amazed (or puzzled) everyone present with the following statement:

"A thousand years ago, Kiev princesses married British princes, our partnership is about hundreds and thousands of years."

No joke, he is on camera saying this.

The Russian S-500 will eat it for lunch and the S-550 in development will do so easier.

Aircraft carriers are fine for launching raids against part time goat herders in Afghanistan but make a very big and expensive target for Russia, China or the US. Building to fight the last war?

Mr KiplingToday 02:23 pm JST

The Russian S-500 will eat it for lunch and the S-550 in development will do so easier.

Interesting that you're so certain of the capabilities of aircraft that haven't been built yet, and of Russia's battered industrial base, that you can predict the future.

Clearly a very considered, objective opinion there.

Time for EU, Japan, Canada to unite. The Trump regime makes China look like a good guy

The Russian S-500 will eat it for lunch and the S-550 in development will do so easier.

Aircraft carriers are fine for launching raids against part time goat herders in Afghanistan but make a very big and expensive target for Russia, China or the US. Building to fight the last war?

I'm certain you'd also claim Russian cars are far superior to Japanese.

Give it a rest on the pro-Russian farce, comrade. No one is buying it.

I'm certain you'd also claim Russian cars are far superior to Japanese.

Not at all, but why aren't those "wonder weapon" F16s gifted to the Ukrainians going anywhere near the range of Russian anti air? You could also ask the same about the Russians being very timid to fly close to Patriot or the old S-300 range.

Russia cars are not so good but their anti air is the best.

India is looking for such partners for its future jet fighters. They have the money for it so why not include them to reduce the burden on the other three and have more equipment they are not indebted to Russia for. It would strengthen QUAD.

I think many of us now understand the back stop of US guarantees is over. Now, the biggest worrying thing about this is, IF WE ALL KNOW IT, the CHINESE, and Russians know it now.

and if at the flick of a switch, the U.S government defence department see anyone go against their geopolitical interests, they can just disable all that tech. Charles de ghaul was right. We must have total independence in defence. Even the UK had to fight for the right to have its OWN independent nuclear deterrent while the French, developed, built and controlled every thing they have.If we have woken up WE CAN BE SURE THE CHINESE AND RUSSIANS HAVE.

KiplingToday  02:23 pm JST

The Russian S-500 will eat it for lunch and the S-550 in development will do so easier.

Aircraft carriers are fine for launching raids against part time goat herders in Afghanistan but make a very big and expensive target for Russia, China or the US. Building to fight the last war?

Sometimes carriers are there to project an exclusion zone very similar to the Falklands and the Cuban missile crisis to keep the other fleet as far away as a possible. They allow you to project air power anywhere without long range bombers. Carriers don’t work on their own. China is building 3 or 4 along with some very big helicopter carriers. And they have one job. To keep the U.S. pacific fleet back from Taiwan. They know the U.S. voters won’t accept the lose of a carrier, but the CCP on the other hand will be able to accept such loses as they don’t have an electorate to answer too. One things for sure, we can’t give up a carrier force if the enemy is building up their fleet. Otherwise they’ll take out your destroyers frigates cruisers and submarines.

Hopefully they focus on unmanned aircraft, as far greater cost performance moving forward, save taxpayers money and get more combat capability = Smart!

A well equipped air force needs both manned and unmanned aircraft operating together as a team. The manned aircraft control the unmanned aircraft that accompany them. There isn't enough satellite bandwidth to operate all the unmanned aircraft remotely from land bases and those satellites are vulnerable to attack and jamming. So the key for air forces, naval forces and land forces will be manned-unmanned teaming.

During WW2, Japan produced its own planes, war ships, tanks, etc. And now it has to produce weapons in partnerships with European colonial powers and the U.S.

Be careful UK .. the new Mitsubishi FX is reported to be costing $180 million per plane. The Russian and US equivalents are under $30 million.

Where does this come from? F-35s run upwards of $100 million each depending on the variant and the proposed NGAD 6th gen fighter was projected to cost as much as $300 million each before the Chair Force took a step back to re-evaluate the program.

The Russian stuff isn't even in the same state much less the same ballpark as F-22 and F-35. The electronics are what make those airplanes but the Russian stuff doesn't even fully hide the compressor blades from radar. Kludge.

he Russian S-500 will eat it for lunch and the S-550 in development will do so easier.

SM-6 and SM-3 Block II have much longer ranges than anything the Russians have ever tested.

Aircraft carriers are fine for launching raids against part time goat herders in Afghanistan but make a very big and expensive target for Russia, China or the US. Building to fight the last war?

Lololol. Good luck finding the US Navy's aircraft carriers or other ships in an actual shooting war. You have never been to sea in a carrier strike group. I have. You can go dark and disappear. Radars don't have to emit to have nearly full situational awareness. Air operations can be conducted in radio silence using data links and light signals. Ships communicate with signal lights and flags, or very low power radios that can't be DF'ed (the US Navy was doing that as far back as 1940). Weather can mask your presence from satellites. You can mix your force in among merchant traffic and then it becomes exceedingly difficult for an adversary to pick your warships out from the numerous merchant ships they are operating among. There are a raft of deception techniques that can be employed. Offboard sensors like Triton, AWACS and satellites can broadcast data to the carrier strike group without revealing anything about its whereabouts. And with aircraft like the F-35 and weapons like LRASM and Maritime Strike Tomahawk the US Navy can strike naval targets without revealing their presence.

Mr KiplingMar. 7 02:23 pm JST

The Russian S-500 will eat it for lunch and the S-550 in development will do so easier.

Just like the S-400 worked so well in defending Syria and Iran from Israel?