By Ding Duo
On May 6, Japan fired Type 88 in the joint military exercise “Balikatan” between the U.S. and the Philippines, the first time Japan launched offensive missiles overseas after World War II.
More troubling still, the Japanese government took advantage of the joint drill as cover to formally revise its “three principles on transfer of defense equipment and technology” and their implementation guidelines, dramatically loosening restrictions on arms exports to the point where, in principle, nearly all defense equipment can now be transferred overseas.
Cloaked in rhetoric about a “severe security environment” and “mutual support among partner countries,” the move effectively hollowed out Japan’s longstanding limits on weapons exports.
Recently, the Japanese government also convened its first expert panel meeting to discuss revisions to the three key security documents. At the meeting, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi went so far as to claim that revising the documents was work that would determine the future of the Japanese nation, calling on Japan to prepare for “new ways of warfare” and even for “protracted warfare.”
Such remarks completely stripped away the facade of Japan’s so-called “exclusively defense-oriented policy” and laid bare the adventurist ambitions of what can only be described as a “neo-militarism.”
These dangerous developments once again show that Japan’s right-wing forces are accelerating the country’s remilitarization process. The push toward “neo-militarism” is no isolated phenomenon. Rather, it is part of a deliberate and organized effort to break through the postwar peace framework, with potentially grave consequences.
First, these actions undermine the postwar international order.
The UN Charter and Article 9 of Japan’s constitution both impose clear constraints on Japan’s military development. Yet today, Japan is steadily dismantling those restraints and reducing them to little more than empty words. The international community must remain vigilant: will Japan repeat its historical mistakes and once again become a source of instability in East Asia?
Second, Japan’s military adventurism is emboldening right-wing forces.
As the country continues down this path, rational anti-war voices are increasingly sidelined while militarist thinking resurfaces. This trend poses a deep and lasting threat to regional peace. As thoughtful voices within Japan have warned, “to forget the wounds of war is to plant the seeds of future disasters.”
Third, Japan’s actions are undermining regional peace and stability.
Japan has repeatedly deepened military coordination with certain regional countries while expanding cross-regional cooperation with NATO. In doing so, it continues to inject instability into East Asia, raising the risks of confrontation and conflict and seriously damaging the broader environment for regional peace.
At the core of these developments lies Japan’s persistent regression in its understanding of history. Recently, Takaichi sent a ritual offering to the Yasukuni Shrine in the name of “prime minister,” where 14 convicted Class-A war criminals of World War II are enshrined. The act openly defied the shared understanding of the international community regarding Japan’s wartime aggression and once again exposed the deeply entrenched distortions in the historical outlook of some Japanese politicians. A country unwilling to face its history honestly can hardly be trusted to genuinely safeguard peace.
The intertwining of historical revisionism and military expansionism has made Japan’s accelerating remilitarization a reality, posing a tangible threat to peace and stability across the Asia-Pacific. All countries that value regional peace must remain highly alert. The hard-won peace of the region must never be sacrificed to Japan’s dangerous militaristic adventurism.
(Ding Duo is director of the Research Center for International and Regional Issues at the National Institute for South China Sea Studies.)
