DANGER  OF  GREAT  GLOBAL  DEPRESSION 
AND GROWING  CRISIS  OF  WAR  AND  REVOLUTION  IN  ASIA

by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Japan (Left)



The world capitalist economy is in the deepest crisis since the end of World War II and is on the verge of another great global depression far bigger than that of the 1930s.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the imperialist bourgeoisie carried out a big propaganda campaign against socialism by preaching the “end of communism.” However, the historical decay and decline as well as unsolvable serious contradictions of world capitalism with U.S. imperialism at the center have been brought into the daylight.   It has been also revealed that the conversion into capitalist market economies promoted by the modern revisionists has gone bankrupt in the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and China.

These crises have produced extremely favorable conditions for the international proletariat to launch an ideological counterattack with the banner of truth of Marxism held aloft against the anti-communist and anti-socialist campaign of imperialism.   They have also brought about conditions which are very advantageous to preparation for new worldwide offensives of the proletarian socialist revolutionary movement in the imperialist countries and, as its close ally, the anti-imperialist national-liberation democratic revolutionary movement of the oppressed peoples.

1. Chronic overproduction and huge idle money capital help realize the danger of a great global depression

The prolonged economic and financial crisis in Japan and Asia from last year has triggered a chain reaction of financial crises in Russia and then in Latin America.   They have also rebounded on the markets in Europe and the U.S., thus accelerating their own crises further.   This is a chain reaction of the economic crises in the world after this summer.   It brings the danger of a new great global depression into relief.

The Russian economy marked last year a positive growth of the Gross Domestic Product for the first time after the collapse of the Soviet Union.   Such a growth was actually brought about by the sudden increase in the influx of speculative funds from abroad.   However, under the influence of the Asian monetary crisis, there was seen a sharp decline in international prices of the energy resources which are the main exports of Russia.   As a result, foreign funds standing as the last hope of the Russian economy were withdrawn from the country. This immediately threw Russia into the danger of a financial crisis.   The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank which feared for spread of this crisis promised to provide $22.6 billion loans to Russia, but the securities, the ruble and the bonds declined sharply last August forcing the Russian government to suspend all transactions.

On August 17, the Russian government announced devaluation of the ruble, suspension of repayment of the private foreign debts and conversion of the short-term national bonds into mid- and long-term ones—this is de facto default.   As Russia entirely lost credit, there resulted a sharp reduction of the exchange rate of ruble against dollar to one third and the average prices of stocks to one sixth in comparison with their highest ones in October last year.

The transformation into a capitalist market economy has brought only anarchic devastation to the Russian economy. Privatization has led to the plunder of social assets.   With the speculative investment overheating, foreign funds have flown into a non-productive financial sector aiming at high profits in a short term.   Therefore, direct investment for production is not made.   Most of consumer goods depend on import.   Tax payers by self-assessment occupy only less than one tenth of the working population.   The subsequent shortage of tax revenues was covered by overissuing short-term governmental bonds.   As a result, the interest payment and redemption of national bonds have occupied one forth of the national budgets (last year) or a half (this year). The government is unable to duly provide wages for public employees. This bankruptcy is the direct result of the transformation of the Russian economy into a capitalist market economy, a transformation which has been promoted by the U.S. and European imperialist powers.

The German economy was directly hit by the financial crisis in Russia, because the former is the biggest creditor country against the latter with claims of about $75 billion in both public and private sectors. The index of the average stock prices in Germany dropped by more than 19 percent from the highest one of last July.   The Deutsche mark registered an across-the-board fall in prices against principal currencies.   Stock prices fell sharply also in Hungary, Poland and other Central and East European countries.   Germany had pursued imperialist interests with Russia and Central and Eastern Europe as strategically important markets, so that its economy suffered a heavy blow.   With Germany as the driving force, the other West European imperialist powers had enjoyed “economic expansion” in the process toward the European monetary unification next year, but they also suffered a drastic decline in the stock prices.

The financial crisis in Russia spread to Latin America as another so- called “emerging growth market.” Collapsing prices of major export products in the region caused the deterioration of the international trade balances of those countries. The prices of their dollar-denominated bonds fell sharply.   The stock prices plummeted as seen in 40-percent drop of stock prices in Brazil from the month-earlier level.   Foreign funds flew largely out of those Latin American countries.   All these increase pressure upon those countries into devaluation of their currencies and exert tremendous influence on their nonfinancial sectors of the economy.

The spread of crises from Russia to Latin America brought huge losses to the U.S. financial institutions which had colossal claims in these emerging growth markets.   These institutions are composed of not only the hedge funds which make a killing in speculative financial dealings, but also general commercial banks and investment banks.   As a consequence, the U.S. economy itself deepened the danger of “bursting of economic bubbles.” The Dow Jones industrial average in the New York Stock Exchange nose-dived from the highest level of $9,000 last July to the 7,000-dollar level, registering continuously the third and second largest drops in its history.   This was a plummet of 20 percent. After this, the Dow Jones industrial average has been fluctuating violently.

The stock prices of the high-tech companies, banks and securities firms which played a central role in the  “long economic expansion” for eight years after the early 1990s also showed a drastic decline, even much bigger than the average drop of all the stock prices.   This is a reflection of the fact that the performances of the enterprises in the U.S. have been deteriorating. 
In the second quarter of 1998, the average growth rate of profits of the major 500 companies in the U.S. remained only a single-figure number even less than 5 percent, consecutively from the previous quarter.   This was for the first time from 1992.   Those companies in the high-tech sector have also their profits reduced in the settlement of their accounts in two consecutive quarters in the first half of this year.

U.S. imperialism has used the dominant power of the dollar and the advantage of the information and telecommunications industries and the financial sector to get every corner of the world as its capitalist market.   This has been its strategy while at home it has reduced production costs at the expense of workers through large-scale restructuring and “rationalization” drives and carried out the flexible labor policy to enormously increase the number of the low-paid and underemployed workers.   At the same time, it has expanded a world market of new industrial sectors with the multimedia at the center. 

With the aim of getting profits from this new market, investment and speculation have been concentrated in the U.S.   Its “economic boom” was a result of these policies.

It is true that the unemployment rate in the U.S. is the lowest in the past 20 years or more.   This is, however, a result of the increase in the number of low-paid and underemployed workers in service industry and so on.   The gap between the rich and the poor has expanded unprecedentedly.   The average real wages of the workers and other toiling people have fallen into a level of the mid-1960s.   In comparison with the 1970s, the lowest group of the workers (when they are divided into five groups according to their wages) has suffered a 20 percent fall in their real wages.   Only a mere handful of ruling class get fat on their income, while the overwhelming majority of the workers and other toiling people become poorer.   This is a reality of the “economic boom” in the U.S.

The U.S. stock prices which have continued to renew a record high are a consequence of the inflow of speculative funds from various parts of the world and are just an economic bubble far separated from the substantial economy.

In the first place, the U.S. is the world’s biggest “debtor country” with the net foreign debts of $1,322.5 billion as of the end of 1997, equivalent to 15 percent of its GDP (according to the U.S. Department of Commerce).   The dollar has lost endorsement by the gold, but it still has a dominant power as the key currency.   With this as a base, the U.S. economy has been supported by the inflow of funds from other countries, particularly Japan as the biggest creditor nation with net foreign claims equivalent to about 70 percent of the U.S. net foreign debts. The U.S. has also produced a very gambling “fictitious prosperity” of world capitalism with a huge amount of dollars floated by itself, a prosperity in which not money for international trade but speculative funds occupy an overwhelming majority of dealings in the foreign exchange markets in the world amounting to $1.4 trillion a day.

As a consequence, last year’s financial crisis in Japan and other Asian countries spread to Russia and Latin America recently in a way like chain reaction and thus rebounded upon the economy of the U.S. itself, which cannot be an “ace in the hole” any more to put on the brakes to the spread of the crisis.

A major U.S. hedge fund Long-Term Capital Management verged on bankruptcy, marking a great loss of 44 percent of its working funds in August alone. Big U.S. financial institutions immediately decided to supply over $ 3.5 billion in order to bail out the LTCM under the leadership of the New York Federal Reserve Bank.   That was because the LTCM had borrowed $ 125 billion from major financial institutions on the security of $ 2.2 billion of its original funds raised from investors, bought bonds with the borrowed money, and invested in derivative dealings with these bonds as mortgage.   As a result, its total contractual amount of these investments reached as much as $ 1,250 billion.   The George Soros-led Quantum Fund suffered a $ 2 billion loss due to its failure in the speculation in Russia.   Setbacks of hedge funds including the LTCM will inevitably lead to bankruptcies not only among hedge funds but also major financial institutions which have lent these funds a huge amount of money and suffered big losses in their own speculation in newly emerging markets.   The U.S. economy can not play the role of a “last breakwater” against the economic crisis anymore, but sees itself falling into another crisis.

With the suspension of the U.S. dollar’s conversion to the gold in 1971 and the simultaneous global depression in the mid-1970s, world capitalism has entered upon a stage of its structural crisis featured by chronic “overproduction.”
This crisis was brought about when the fundamental contradiction between the socialization of production and the private appropriation of production means and products by the monopoly bourgeoisie under the capitalist mode of production had been accumulated and aggravated in the U.S.-dominated world capitalist economy.

Nevertheless, the U.S. and other imperialist countries changed their industrial structures from the labor- and resource-intensive industries to knowledge-intensive processing and assembly industries and then to high-tech industries with the aim of intensifying the exploitation through “rationalization drives” in all industrial sectors and creating new markets.   At the same time, they invested “surplus” capital in the “developing” countries to extend the capitalist market and unlimitedly increased capitalist credit and speculation through financial liberalization.   As a result, the “overproduction” became more serious on a world scale, leading to global overproduction crises in 1980 and 1990.   The same grounds now draw near the danger of a catastrophic financial crisis under the existence of a huge amount of idle money capital.

2. Acceleration of economic and financial crisis in Japan and Asia

The swift expansion of the financial crisis from Russia to Central and Latin America and the sharp decline in the U.S. and European stock markets have further accelerated the economic crisis in Japan and Asia.

The Nikkei average in the Tokyo Stock Exchange renewed its lowest record of August, 1992 after the collapse of the “bubble economy,” and dropped below the level of Y14,000 for the first time after March, 1986. In addition, this decline was led by the fall of the stocks of big banks and the so-called international superior stocks of high-tech companies. This indicates a sharpening vicious spiral of the crisis of the substantial economy and that of the financial economy.

As a result, almost all big banks are plagued with “latent losses” of their stock holdings and are forced to reduce their lendable funds for improvement of their capital-asset ratio.   This invites, however, more serious credit crunch and makes sharper the economic crisis which has hit Japan since the spring of last year.

The Japan’s GDP marked a minus 0.7 percent growth in fiscal year 1997, the biggest drop in the postwar period. The first quarter (April-June period) of fiscal year 1998 also registered a minus growth, that is, the third straight quarter of economic contraction. It is for the first time since the end of World War II. Among others, the growth rate of investment in plants and equipment in this period recorded minus 5.5 percent over the last quarter, the biggest fall in 33 years.   The mining and manufacturing production index showed the first fall in the past 23 years from 1975, while the retail sales index recorded the first 16-month minus growth from the start of the statistics as compared with the corresponding period of the previous year.
In the half-year accounts last September, the ordinary profits of the companies whose stocks are listed on the stock exchange are expected to drop considerably by more than 27 percent from the year-ago level. 

Hitachi, Japan’s biggest general electric machine maker, is estimated to go into a large deficit in the next half-year term for the first time. 

Thus, it announced a mass reduction of 3,000 to 4,000 workers.   Due to large-scale restructuring and “rationalization” drives or a series of big bankruptcies in rapid succession, the complete unemployment rate has reached 4.3 percent, while unemployment has exceeded three millions, the worst record since the start of the present statistics in 1953 (With the unlisted permanent unemployment included, the jobless rate exceeds 5 percent and 700,000 workers have been dismissed in the manufacturing industry alone over last year).

Moreover, the prices of products in steel, petrochemical and some other industrial sectors renew consecutively the record lows.   This brigs closer a crisis very much like the Great Depression in 1930’s, which was intricately linked to reduction in demand, investment and production, increase in unemployment, and decline in wages and prices (or with the so-called deflationary spiral).

The new Obuchi government gives top priority to financial and economic reforms, by stressing that it would “take whatever measures necessary to prevent Japan from starting a worldwide financial meltdown and an ensuing depression.”   The government asserted introduction of the so-called bridge bank system and 6-trillion-yen permanent tax cuts, but it has already suffered a setback in its efforts to use public funds for relief and merger of the Long-Term Credit Bank of Japan.   This spring, the government tried to carry out policies for the stabilization of the financial system, among others, through allocating public funds to deal with the bad debts.   In spite of such efforts, the Japan Long- Term Credit Bank has rekindled its management crisis.   In addition, other big banks are also in a similar crisis.   On one hand, the Obuchi government, is strongly pressed for “quick response” and “use of public funds” by the U.S. government which fears that Japan’s economic and financial crisis would trigger another great world depression.   On the other hand, it is undecided in the negotiation with the opposition parties standing “against the use of public funds.”

As far as the economies of Asian countries linked closely with Japan are concerned, Thailand, south Korea and Indonesia, which have accepted the “structural reform program” of the IMF, have turned into the black in their current balances.  These countries, however, are faced with scale-down of their economic activities and rising unemployment.   The GDP in south Korea recorded minus 6.6 percent growth while its unemployment rate reached 8.6 percent or renewed the worst record.   In Malaysia, the GDP marked minus 6.8 percent, and Hong Kong experienced the first minus growth since the start of the present statistics.   A chain of worldwide falls in stock prices triggered a big plunge also in the stock markets of Asian countries.   In this context, the Malaysian government adopted heavier regulations on the outflow of foreign currency and a fixed exchange rate system for defending its own currency and stock prices.

The economies of the Asian countries rely on import of basic parts of industrial goods from Japan.   Therefore, they have a common structural dependency under which the more manufactured products they export, the far more goods they should import this—increases their trade deficits. The overproduction in those countries has become enormous in every industrial section including auto, electric and chemical ones.   The expansion of bubble economy through inflow of short-term speculative foreign money accelerated this overproduction and brought the crisis to the surface.   Thus those speculative funds flew out and this immediately invited a deep economic and financial crisis with the currency crisis as a trigger.

This economic crisis has also affected the economy of China which has promoted the market economy with its reliance on exports and foreign capital. The country suffers a decline in exports and direct investment as well as difficulties in raising money in foreign markets. The decline in its economic growth further pushes up unemployment, which has been already at a high level due to the “reform of state-run companies.” It is producing fierce social unrest.   In order to keep the capitalist economic growth, the Chinese government does not devaluate the yuan, by enjoying as support a large trade surplus and some 140 billion dollars of foreign exchange reserves, which were yielded at the sacrifice of local workers paid with fiercely low wages. 

However, if China is forced to devalue the yuan, the whole Asian economy will inevitably experience a much deeper crisis.

3. Aggravating basic contradictions of the world and  isolation of U.S. imperialism

As the global capitalist economy brings closer the danger of a catastrophic great depression, it is severely aggravating the fundamental contradictions in the world between imperialism and socialism, between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, between imperialism and the oppressed peoples and among imperialist powers and monopoly capitalist groups.   These increase unemployment and poverty among the proletariat and toiling people and the danger of another imperialist war on a global scale, and create conditions for new social revolutions.

A large-scale reorganization is going on beyond the national boundaries in the fields of car, communications, energy, aviation and finance.  That sharpens the scramble among monopoly capitalists who shift all the burden unto the backs of the working class.

Against such a background, the working class in the U.S. and European imperialist countries rise up in struggle, while social class contradictions are aggravating rapidly in the states of the oppressed nations.

The imperialist powers scramble by force for the market and spheres of influence in the world.   The contradiction between imperialism and the oppressed peoples has become extremely acute.   These create conditions for a new development of the anti-imperialist national-liberation revolution.

The U.S. has attached importance to Japan and other Asian countries as new markets.   But the economic crisis in these countries brings closer the danger of a great global depression and even shakes the U.S. political and military rule there.   The rivalry among the U.S., Japanese and European imperialist powers escalates for a giant market in China and other markets and spheres of influence in Asia.   There have emerged conditions for advancing again the revolutionary armed struggle which suffered temporary setbacks in the Asian countries except for the Philippines because of the degeneration of China.

U.S. imperialism shows its ambition for world domination openly at a time: when Russia and Eastern Europe are plagued with a deepening economic and social turmoil; when the U.S. and European imperialist powers sharpen their confrontation over the unification of Europe and the natural resources in the Middle East and Central Asia; and when nations and peoples in the world increase their opposition to the U.S. imperialist invasion.

U.S. imperialism made public its reviewed global military strategy, namely the Report of the Quadrennial Defense Review in May, 1997, its revised nuclear policy through a Presidential Decision Directive in November, 1997 and its new war scheme in the Annual Report of the U.S. Department of Defense this February.   The first feature of these military policies is that the Clinton administration unilaterally defines that the U.S. national interests are threatened by a “menace of weapons of mass destruction” and the “danger of terrorism” which are brought about by states and forces opposing U.S. dictates such as Iraq, Iran and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea)—the U.S. has labelled them as “rogue states,” and classifies them as main targets of its military attacks.   The second feature is that the Annual Defense Report openly expresses a sense of danger regarding the Chinese threat.  It says that there is the possibility that a regional great power or global peer competitor (which is able to counter the U.S.) may emerge at the beginning of the 21st century.   In this context, the Report also asserts establishment of military readiness to fight and win simultaneously two “Major Theater Wars,” supposedly, in the Middle East and East Asia.   The Clinton administration officially recognized in its new nuclear policy that the modernized nuclear weapons regarded as a decisive factor in the U.S. military strategy can be preemptively used against non-nuclear powers.

The U.S. has exposed its aggressive and brutal character by practically pushing forward with this new war scheme for global domination.   It, however, has been faced with people’s counterattacks in various parts of the world, reached an impasse and found itself more isolated.

The U.S. planned military attacks against Iraq at the beginning of this year.   But this plan was frustrated by people’s protests in many countries including Arab countries and the U.S. itself.   There are growing contradictions between the U.S. and other powers like France, Russia and China over the oil resources.

The U.S., moreover, resorted to an unprecedented violence by launching as many as 100 missiles at Sudan and Afghanistan under the pretext of “retaliation” for terrorist bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.   In protest against this, the League of Arab States issued a strong statement while militant demonstrations were organized in various countries.

The peace process in the Middle East which the U.S. has tried to handle at its own initiative has come to a standstill.
The U.S. and European countries intervene in the conflict in Kosovo, aggravating the fight for leadership among them.   They have aimed to disintegrate new Yugoslavia by means of subversive activities of the “Kosovo Liberation Army” and bourgeois nationalists as well as large- scale threatening military exercises with NATO forces as main.   But the KLA does not comply with the U.S. dictates and suffers setbacks from the counterattacks of the Serbian armed forces.

In the meantime, the U.S. military and political rule over Asia was shaken because of the crisis as seen in the collapse of the Suharto regime in Indonesia and the nuclear tests by India and Pakistan.   The “launching test of an artificial satellite” by North Korea had an impact upon the U.S. Fanning the so-called “threat of ballistic missiles of North Korea,” the U.S. tries to accelerate cooperative research with Japan on the Theater Ballistic Missile Defense system along the new Guidelines and spur Japan to establish a total mobilization footing for logistical regional support to the U.S. forces according to a law on emergent situations surrounding Japan.

The political roots of the issue in the Korean Peninsula, however, consist in: division of the Korean nation and military occupation of south Korea by U.S. imperialism for 50 years; unilateral deployment of U.S. forces to Japan and the Asian region on presupposition of a preemptive nuclear attack against North Korea; and the “status of belligerency” which has been imposed even after the ceasefire (in 1953) of the Korean War up to now.   U.S. president Clinton openly declared that the U.S. would erase North Korea by nuclear attacks if the latter would not accept the former’s demand.   The U.S. provoked an explosive situation in the spring of 1994 with its military threat including the use of nuclear bombs.   The U.S.-south Korea Forces Joint Headquarters dared to make public the “New Operation Plan 5027” which was aimed to bring North Korea under control with one rush, by committing in a concentrated way U.S. troops including ones from the mainland and Japan.
The objectives of such a war scheme of the U.S. are to subjugate the North Korean government opposing the U.S. imperialist rule, in order to place the whole Korean Peninsula under its control and absorb the northern part into the capitalist market economy, and to gain a vast market in China, by preventing it from emerging as a “new threat” on the basis of the U.S. strategy of  “Engagement and Enlargement.”

China has been thrown into a deeper economic crisis and social disorder since its revisionist leadership called the Fifth Congress of the Communist Party of China last year to adopt a policy of incorporating the state-run firms on a full scale and accelerating the capitalization of the Chinese economy.   The U.S.-Chinese relations develop in the direction of a deepening strategic confrontation in spite of a facade of “cooperation.”   Especially, regarding the Taiwan issue, the Chinese government openly asserts that it does not allow tendency for division of the country and interference by some foreign forces and can not promise to abandon the use of force along the policy of “one China” and “peaceful reunification and two systems in one country.”   We have to pay attention to the U.S.-Chinese relations which, also in connection with the domestic crisis in China, may exert decisive influence on the whole Asian situation.

What is important is that U.S. imperialism consolidates the “military iron links” in Asia, by strengthening its military alliances with south Korea, Australia and Southeast Asian countries with the “Japan-U.S. Security Treaty” as main.   This can be seen in enforcement of the new Guidelines for Japan-U.S. Defense Cooperation, deployment of U.S. Marine units in dealing with an emergency in Indonesia and attempts to turn the whole territory of the Philippines into a U.S. base through the “Visiting Forces Agreement” and construction of a big airport in Mindanao island.   This way, U.S. imperialism pushes forward at a high pace with its new war scheme for invasion and control of the Korean Peninsula and China and for oppression of the anti-imperialist national- liberation struggles in Asia.   This new war scheme is also aimed to suppress the Japanese people’s socialist revolutionary movement for overthrow of Japanese and U.S. imperialist rule.

4. U.S.-initiated “chain of military iron links” in Asia with the Japan- U.S. alliance as key

Southeast Asian countries have increased their military budgets in the last decade in order to cope with the sharpening national and class contradictions.   However, all of them are now forced to reduce drastically their war expenditure by the serious economic crisis continuing from last year.

Against such a background, there is a growing tendency for the governments of these countries to depend on the U.S. military strength in suppressing the people’s revolutionary movement although they are increasing contradictions with the U.S.   They have this tendency because the people’s discontent is rising at home, so that political control is unstable and the conditions for people’s war are growing. Needless to say, it takes a certain period of time for the people’s war to be waged against U.S. and Japanese imperialism and IMF in the Southeast Asian countries.   In the first place, it is required to reestablish strong vanguard parties which arm themselves with Marxism- Leninism, inherit the positive and negative lessons of the people’s war and link up with the broad masses.   Nevertheless, the conditions for people’s war are steadily growing.   This is for the first time since the 1970s when the Communist Party of China submitted to the Nixon Doctrine and turned to a pro-U.S. line and when the communist parties in the Southeast Asian countries and the armed forces under their leadership collapsed except for some in the Philippines and others.   In the Philippines, the communist party and the people’s army have recovered mass bases lost in the 1980s because of “left” opportunism. 

This was achieved through the rectification movement under the circumstances of rising anti-U.S. feeling, wavering political control and growing conditions for people’s war.   Under the guidance of the Communist Party of the Philippines, the New People’s Army has undertaken tactical offensives in correct proportion to the built or rebuilt mass base and scared U.S. and Japanese imperialism and the Estrada government.

The U.S. Marine Corps trained Thai troops in the street fighting in the last year’s exercise code-named “Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training” (CARAT) which was joined by the armed forces of Southeast Asian countries.   U.S. military policemen practiced a drill for putting down anti-U.S. demonstrations in January this year in the U.S. military base Camp Carol in south Korea.   These exercises show that the U.S. has adopted a military program of intervening by force to suppress revolutionary movements and attacking the footholds and bases of revolutionary forces to annihilate them.   The spokesman of a U.S. 

Marine Corps battle institute said, “We will surely wage street fightings whether we like them or not.    We will put ourselves in the utmost readiness to accomplish our tasks in case of such a situation.”

The Clinton administration concluded the Acquisition and Cross- Servicing Agreement (ACSA) with the Japanese government in April, 1996, issued subsequently the “Japan-U.S. Joint Declaration on Security” and reviewed the “Guidelines for Japan-U.S Defense Cooperation” in September, 1997.   It has designed a new war scheme that is the reviewed Guidelines.   It urges the Japanese government to enact a package of bills on Japan’s logistic support for the U.S. forces in emergencies around Japan, or establish the wartime legislation, in the coming session of the Diet (Japanese National Parliament).   The ACSA of 1996 is expected to be altered into a wartime ACSA.   U.S. imperialism forms a “chain of military iron links” in Asia by combining the Japan-U.S. military alliance based on the bilateral security treaty with other military alliances with south Korea, Southeast Asian countries and Australia.   It conducts bilateral and multilateral military exercises in various parts of the Asia-Pacific region.

The main military agreements which remain in force in Asia-Pacific are: the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty; the U.S.-South Korea Mutual Defense Treaty; the Pacific Security Pact or ANZUS (New Zealand seceded practically from it in 1986); the U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty; the Southeast Asia Treaty (Its organization SEATO was dissolved in 1977 and it exists merely as a treaty); and the agreement on U.S.- Pakistan cooperation.   Other military agreements in which the U.S. is not involved directly are the defense agreement among the U.K., Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Malaysia and the security agreement between Australia and Indonesia.

Among these countries in the Asia-Pacific region, it is only Japan and south Korea where U.S. military bases are located (45,500 and 36,400 military personnel respectively).   So, the U.S. has concluded the Visiting Forces Agreement with the Philippines which allows the entry into any Philippine port of U.S. warships to embark and disembark armed troops, civilian personnel, military aircraft, equipment and supplies for joint military exercises and other activities.   The U.S. uses the ACSA in place of military bases to form practically a collective military support network which enables it to receive logistic support, military supplies and services whenever and wherever it needs for its operations.   Actually, the U.S. has signed the ACSA with Japan, south Korea, Australia, Thailand, Malaysia and the Philippines.   This is a part of the entire world-wide network of the ACSA which the U.S. has established with nearly 20 countries.

In addition, the U.S. has made agreements with its allies on access to military facilities, joint exercises and prepositioning.
After the U.S. was compelled to give up its military bases in the Philippines, it made agreements with the Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia on access to airports, seaports and other facilities.   It also signed with Singapore a “memorandum  on the use of Singaporean military facilities by the U.S. forces” in November, 1990. 

On the basis of this memorandum, the U.S. Navy has been able to redeploy its supply units, formerly stationed in the Subic base in the Philippines, to Singapore and repair and supply its warships there. 

The U.S. made another agreement with Singapore in January this year, an agreement that allows the U.S. warships including aircraft carriers to enter the new Changi naval base in the east of the city which is under construction and will be completed in 2000.   A new bilateral agreement was signed in March, according to which the Singaporean forces can receive training in the U.S. in handling refueling tanker aircraft. 

The U.S. and Malaysia have a forum for bilateral drill and consultation which was established in 1984.   They have carried out their mutual military cooperation through this forum, and concluded an agreement on joint military exercises of land and sea forces in January, 1997.

The U.S. has established the prepositioning system.   It means that heavy weapons like tanks or missiles, drinking water, food and ammunition which require much time for transportation are previously loaded on the marine prepositioning ships and are sent directly on the spot in case of emergency to join with marines who are airlifted later. 

Used as “mobile arsenals” in place of military bases, these Marine prepositioning ships are stationed in Saipan (western Pacific), Diego Garcia (Indian Ocean) and Singapore.

This is a “chain of military iron links” formed by U.S. imperialism. 

The Japan-U.S. military alliance based on the mutual security treaty, as well as the U.S. bases in Japan which are the military core in the alliance play the key role in this chain.   The U.S. and Japanese imperialists take new steps to strengthen their bilateral alliance and build up the U.S. bases in Japan in connection with the military situation in the whole Asia.

The U.S. naval base in Sasebo, Nagasaki prefecture, for example, has become the home port of a U.S. amphibious assault ship Belleau Wood, while the U.S. naval base in Yokosuka is used as the home port of 11 main warships of the U.S. Naval Seventh Fleet including aircraft carrier Independence.   The Yokosuka base contains the headquarters of attack nuclear submarines of the U.S. Naval Fifth Fleet which cover the Persian Gulf and escort Independence.   The U.S. base in Hiroshima is composed of three armories in Kawakami, Akizuki and Hiro which belong to the Akizuki U.S. weapons battalion.   This base has the biggest storage capacity in the East.   The headquarters of the U.S. Armed Forces in Japan is placed in the U.S. base in Yokota, Tokyo metropolis which also works as transportation center of the U.S. forces in the Asia-Pacific region.   Big transport planes fly regularly twice a month from the Yokota base to Diego Garcia where prepositioning ships are on the sea.

The Military Sealift Command (MSC) is one of the U.S. Navy Commands. It is responsible for sealifting all war materials of the Department of Defense.   It supplies the worldwide-deployed U.S forces with equipment, ammunition, fuel and daily necessities.   More than 95 percent of what they need in the wartime depend on marine transportation.   Under the MSC, the world is divided into four regions (IP(J Pacific, Atlantic, Far East and Europe.   The MSC has its headquarters in every region.   The Far Eastern headquarters (MSCFE) is based at Yokohama North Dock and has offices in Okinawa, south Korea, Diego Garcia and Guam.   The U.S. Navy shifted the home port of a vessel transporting war materials to Diego Garcia, a supply and relay station to the Middle East, from Guam to Yokohama North Dock in January, 1997.   This proves that the U.S. military started to center its marine transportation on Japan in order to turn Japan to a transportation base in advance of the new Guidelines.

The new Guidelines is carried out also through buildup of the U.S. bases in Japan and U.S. military equipment, and their closer cooperation and integration with the bases of Japan’s Self-Defense Forces.

For example, there have been schemes of building a new U.S. on-sea military heliport in Okinawa and extending the U.S. base in Iwakuni on a large scale.   In the case of Iwakuni, the project is already under way to extend the base by 1.4 times through reclamation and construct a long runway and such a huge pier as an aircraft carrier can come alongside.

New and powerful warships and warplanes were deployed in March this year to the SDF bases as follows: amphibious assault ship Osumi with landing-craft air-cushion (LCAC) aboard and minesweeper tender Bungo to the Maritime SDF Kure base, Hiroshima prefecture; AEGIS missile-guided destroyer Choukai to the Sasebo base as the fourth one for the MSDF; and two airborne warning and command system (AWACS) planes to the Air SDF base in Hamamatsu, Sizuoka prefecture for the first time in the history of the SDF.   Both of the AEGIS warships and the AWACS planes called “flying command” are needed for the Theater Ballistic Missile Defense system which the U.S. is pushing and are directly linked to the U.S. military information and communications network.

The Japanese government announced in June this year that it would not make any reduction in its “consideration fund” for paying part of the cost of stationing the U.S. troops in Japan, by appropriating about 250 billion yen in the budget for fiscal 1999, almost the same amount as the previous year.   If we add to this amount the expenses that the Japanese government should shoulder as obligation stemming from the bilateral security treaty, it already spends more than 64 billion yen (as of fiscal 1997) for the cost of the U.S. forces stationed in Japan. 

Japan’s payment for the cost of supporting the U.S. military activities will increase because the new Guidelines will increase use of the SDF bases by the U.S. forces, obligate the SDF to transport them and allow them to utilize civilian facilities like airports, seaports, docks and so on.

A Japan-south Korea consultation on security policy was held in Seoul in June this year for the first time.   It was designed to strengthen the military collaboration among the U.S, Japan and south Korea along the new Guidelines.   The U.S. steps up the combination between its forces stationed in south Korea and the local forces.   The command of the U.S. Army VIII Corps stationed in south Korea was changed into the field army-type Army Structure Corps Command (ASCC) same as the III Corps in the U.S. mainland and the VII Corps in Europe, in order to increase the effectiveness of the combat power and the operation capability in case of emergencies.   In correspondence with this, the south Korean armed forces have taken measures to make joint operations with the U.S. forces more efficiently.   The south Korean Defense Ministry revealed a five-year program of defense reforms in July this year.   One of the important reforms is to consolidate the three armies into two and the tree commands of the land, sea and air forces into one, and centralize the intelligence.

This is the “chain of military iron links” which the U.S. has formed and tries to strengthen in Asia with its military alliance with Japan as key.

There are sharpening contradictions and fights between U.S. imperialism and peoples in the Asian counties while the danger of another war is deepening.   In Asia, it is an important task to build solidarity and joint struggles among peoples in Japan and other countries against the domination and war scheme of U.S. imperialism on the basis of proletarian internationalism.   #