Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe met with President Barack Obama on Tuesday at Pearl Harbor, 75 years after Japanese airstrikes killed thousands of American sailors and marines. The two laid down wreaths and peace flowers, and spoke of the horrors of war on a memorial atop the USS Arizona, the battleship that was blown to bits on December 7, 1941. The attack catalyzed the U.S. entrance into World War II.

“I offer my sincere and everlasting condolences to the souls of those who lost their lives here, as well as to the spirits of all the brave men and women whose lives were taken by a war that commenced in this very place, and also to the souls of the countless innocent people who became victims of the war,” said Abe, who did not apologize for the episode, but added: “We must never repeat the horrors of war again.”

When Abe announced his visit to Pearl Harbor earlier this month, Japan’s foreign ministry labeled it as an unprecedented trip by a Japanese leader. Soon after, reports came in that Abe was not actually the first Japanese prime minister to visit Pearl Harbor, but potentially the fourth. On Monday, Japanese officials clarified that Abe would be “the first to express remorse” at the memorial, as the other visits were quiet, low-profile affairs.

The bombing of Pearl Harbor, a preemptive strike in what the Japanese saw as an inevitable conflict, precipitated the U.S. entry into the war and, nearly five years later, the atomic destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Abe’s visit comes about six months after Obama became the first sitting U.S. president to visit the Hiroshima memorial, though like Abe on Tuesday, he did not apologize for his country’s actions.

In his speech on Tuesday, Obama seemed to nod at the populist tides that are rising in the U.S. and elsewhere. “Even when hatred burns hottest and the tug of tribalism is at the most primal, we must resist the urge to turn in,” he said. “We must resist the urge to demonize those who are different. The sacrifice made here, the angst of war, reminds us to seek the divine spark that is common to all humanity.”

Obama’s successor, President-elect Donald Trump, has said Japan and South Korea should think about expanding their nuclear capacities in the face of growing threats from China and North Korea. Trump, who met with Abe soon after winning the election in November, has also suggested the U.S. pays too much to defend Japan. During Obama’s tenure, Abe has managed to forge close diplomatic and economic ties with the U.S., and after his meeting with Trump, he expressed confidence that the relationship would continue.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Shinzo Abe Offers Condolences to “Victims of the War” During Pearl Harbor Visit appeared first on Law Street.

A few minutes past six o’clock on Wednesday evening, halfway across the Sea of Japan, a missile launched from North Korea toward Japan plummeted from the sky into the water below. The intermediate-range ballistic missile was the fifth such test launch by North Korea since April. In fact, Wednesday saw two test launches within roughly two hours of each other. The first disintegrated mid-air 95 miles off the coast of Wonsan, an eastern port city in North Korea, and the second traveled 250 miles east toward Japan and reached an altitude of 620 miles.

From its nuclear tests and more recently, its missile launches, Pyongyang continues to disregard U.N. imposed mandates and sanctions aimed to stifle its nuclear program. The second launch, according to Japan’s Defense Minister, indicated progress and said, “the threat to Japan is intensifying.” It is unclear what Kim Jong Un, supreme leader of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, aims to accomplish with the repeated and often poorly concealed missile tests–perhaps leverage with China and the international community, perhaps actual destruction.

Jeffrey Lewis, a nonproliferation expert with the Middlebury Institute of International Studies told Reuters the “failed” missile launches are hardly failures, and “worked perfectly”: “Had [the second launch] been fired at its normal angle, it would have flown to its full range,” he said. “If North Korea continues testing, eventually its missileers will use the same technology in a missile that can threaten the United States.”

In an interview with Law Street, Lewis compared North Korea’s missile tests to students who might not achieve perfect scores, “but that doesn’t mean they aren’t learning.” He said because of the Korean Peninsula’s location and size, North Korea launches its missiles at more vertical trajectories because it is hard for them “to get a clean shot without flying over somebody,” like Japan. Lewis sees the tests–which have drastically amped up under the current rule–as part political maneuvering, and part technical experiment.

At present, North Korea’s missile cache is believed to contain 30 Musudan missiles–engineered by North Korea, modeled after the Soviet-era Scud–which can travel over 1,800 miles, far enough to affect Japan, South Korea, and Guam, a U.S. territory. NATO, South Korea, and Japan all condemned Wednesday’s ballistic missile launches. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the “provocative actions” could “undermine international security and dialogue.”

South Korean President Park Geun-hye said Kim Jong Un “must realize that complete isolation and self-destruction await at the end of reckless provocation.” North Korea and its souther, democratic neighbor are still technically at war. The Korean War–which stretched from 1950-53–ended in an armistice, not a peace treaty, which means the conflict is frozen, locked in a temporary truce, not a permanent peace.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post North Korea Amps Up Missile Testing with Two Launches Over Two Hours appeared first on Law Street.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the United States Congress today. The speech was much anticipated after weeks of political back and forth regarding the invitation extended to Netanyahu by Speaker of the House John Boehner; however, Netanyahu did end up giving his speech as planned, and it focused heavily on Iran and the ongoing American-Iranian talks over nuclear power. That being said, in some ways the speech is less interesting from an international politics standpoint as it is from a domestic policy window.

The controversy leading up to the speech was, to put it bluntly, a total mess. It all started with House Speaker John Boehner extending an invitation to Netanyahu to speak in front of Congress. However, the White House was not consulted in this matter. Democrats called that a slap in the face to President Obama, given that it’s highly unusual for the legislative branch of one nation to interact with the head of state of another. Democrats argue that it undermines the President’s autonomy when it comes for foreign policy decisions.

The Obama Administration–including Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, and President Obama himself–refused to meet with Netanyahu. The official reason given centered on a concern that Obama didn’t want to interfere with Israeli politics in the period of time leading up to the imminent Israeli elections.

For a very long time, Israel has been one of the few bipartisan issues in the United States. Almost ever politician, regardless of party, has at some point declared his or her commitment to Israel. Americans in general have a consistent history of supporting the country. We as a nation have given Israel more than $121 billion in foreign aid since 1948. A Gallup poll found a plurality–42 percent of Americans–thought Israeli actions against Hamas were justified this summer. Moreover, 62 percent of Americans sympathized with the Israelis. The United States and Israel have long had a close relationship, regardless of which American political party is holding office.

That being said, in today’s toxic political environment, no issue can every really truly be bipartisan. The scuffle over Netanyahu’s appearance today shows that. Obama refusing to meet with Netanyahu was just the beginning–many other prominent Democrats who are actually members of Congress refused to attend the speech as well. Seven senators, all Democrats (with the exception of Senator Bernie Sanders, an Independent), sat out the speech. A pretty long list of House members, again all Democrats, didn’t attend either.

In addition, Obama spoke about what Netanyahu said. While he didn’t necessarily criticize it, he basically lamented “same old, same old” about Netanyahu’s concerns over the U.S.-Iran nuclear talks. According to NPR:

Obama, speaking at the White House, said, ‘as far as I can tell, there was nothing new’ in Netanyahu’s speech, adding, ‘the prime minister didn’t offer any viable alternatives.’ He said he didn’t watch the speech because it coincided with a video conference with European leaders.

Other Democrats had more overt reactions. Representative Nancy Pelosi stated:

I was near tears throughout the Prime Minister’s speech—saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5 +1 nations, and saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran and our broader commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation.

I think what we saw today can be best described as a low-key game of political chicken. Republicans took one of the few sort of bipartisan issues and made Obama pick a political side. Had he gone along with the Republican Congress’ power play he would have kowtowed to his political rivals. Yet openly slamming them or Netanyahu could anger an American populace that has consistently supported a friendly relationship with Israel. In a lot of ways, it was a lose-lose situation. While Obama has said that he’s more than willing to keep working with Netanyahu if he wins the upcoming Israeli elections, the relationship may be more frayed moving forward.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Netanyahu’s Speech Shows Israel Isn’t Always a Bipartisan Issue appeared first on Law Street.