I subscribe to "NHK Plus" so I can watch NHK programs on my computer (free of charge if you pay the subscription fee).

NHK Special "What's Happening in the Taiwan Strait: The U.S.-China "New Cold War" and Japan" can be viewed until January 2.

If you are interested, please watch.

-----

"It was so interesting and scary"

The simulation of the Japanese government's response to a possible Taiwanese emergency was very realistic.

By the way, when we say "simulation", most people think it is computer simulation, and in fact, that is how it is described in the Wiki -- but this is not correct.

Simulation is "an attempt to recreate a hypothetical situation and respond to it in a way that has not been done in reality".

The simulation in this program was "Taiwan Emergency".

People with experience in security-related legislation, former senior officers of the Self-Defense Forces, and current members of the Diet played the roles of the Prime Minister, Defense Minister, and Chief Cabinet Secretary.

The former top official of the Self-Defense Forces has prepared several hypothetical scenarios of a Taiwanese contingency, which were delivered to the situation in real time, and the cabinet members discussed and made decisions on the spot.

There are (as I understand it) two conditions for this simulation

(1) While adhering to the principle of "diplomacy for peaceful resolution through dialogue," invoke the right of self-defense in the event of an emergency.

(2) However, the use of force and other actions (evacuation of residents) must be carried out in accordance with existing laws.

-----

The first stage of the scenario was that an independent president would be born in Taiwan → Chinese forces would begin assault and landing drills + land troops would be assembled in the coastal areas.

Now, at this stage, what can the Japanese nation do?

If China attacks the U.S. military, Japan will be able to enter a combat situation through the "right of collective self-defense".

Now, the question is, at what point do the conditions for triggering "collective self-defense" come into play?

When the U.S. military prepares for battle? When U.S. forces are under attack? When the U.S. military launches a counterattack? When the US forces request the SDF? It is natural to think that there is a time lag between these activation times.

So, the SDF has a plausible argument that since time is needed to move the SDF, joint operations with the U.S. military will be meaningless unless it is clear at what stage the right of collective self-defense can be activated.

-----

As an amateur like me, I apt to think

"Why don't they just move the Self-Defense Forces when the military exercises by the Chinese military start?"

But the Self-Defense Forces is an organization that can only operate under the law -- well, all law-abiding nations under civilian control operate that way, though.

The SDF is tasked with the defense of our country.

From a legal standpoint, the correct stance is to say, 'I don't care what happens to Taiwan.

Because Taiwan is not a military ally of Japan.

Since the right of collective self-defense is activated only when "U.S. forces" are involved, the SDF cannot move even a millimeter when U.S. forces are not doing anything, however,

The real feeling on the ground is that the right of collective self-defense is meaningless.

And this case is also consistent with our common sense in our daily lives.

For example, in a company, if you are working on a project and you don't start working on it until it is approved by the executives, the project will not work.

The normal way of operating a project is to prepare the project until it is just about ready to move, and then wait for approval when it is ready.

This is not to say that the Diet was incompetent.

The use cases of the right of procedural self-defense were discussed in the "Korean Peninsula Emergency" and "Blockade of the Strait of Hormuz".

The "Taiwan contingency" was not in the scope at that time.

-----

The second stage of the scenario was the "blockade of the sea around Yonaguni Island by the Chinese military + launch of an attack on the Taiwanese mainland.

At this stage, joint operations with the U.S. military will become possible, and of course, the Chinese military will also be able to attack the Japanese mainland.

The SDF will not be able to fulfill its mission of self-defense if it does not have a complete interception system in place against an attack from the Chinese military on the Japanese mainland.

Furthermore, they found out that there is "no law" to support the SDF in evacuating residents in response to such a military attack, even though the law must be applied to evacuate residents.

"Why don't they just evacuate them based on the Disaster Relief Act?"

And, like me, some people in ministerial roles thought that this was an unreasonable interpretation of the law.

It was very impressive to see a person playing the role of a cabinet minister, opening a collection of legal texts and discussing them.

I was watching the program, muttering, "I know that feeling".

-----

Conclusion.

I wrote here that I have no idea about the current approach to "programmatic thinking (tekishiko-) education" in programming education.

Perhaps one of the ways to do this is through education using simulations like this one, I think.

However, I also think that this "simulation education" will be difficult to create the subject matter and the method (human or computer) to judge the situation.