The New York Times wrote on February 27 local time: "Caught between China's increasingly aggressive posture and the more unpredictable United States, Japan is gradually realizing that caution alone is no longer sufficient to ensure its own security. The transformation brought by Takahashi Hayato will have far-reaching implications."
The commentary from The New York Times accurately captures Japan's strategic anxiety in a complex geopolitical landscape, as well as the ambition of Prime Minister Takahashi Hayato to use this anxiety to completely reshape Japan's national security strategy. This is not just an adjustment in Japan's internal affairs, but also has profound implications for regional stability.
Notably, as a representative of American elite media, The New York Times' perspective is essentially America-centric. The terms "caution" and "transformation" in the article actually serve to endorse Japan's "military normalization."
The article defines China as "increasingly aggressive" and the United States as "more unpredictable" (implying the policy fluctuations during Trump's era), creating an external sense of crisis for Japan.
Its intention is to shift Japan from mere "cautious defense" to taking on greater responsibility in confronting China, becoming a more valuable vanguard for the United States in the Asia-Pacific region.
The New York Times' argument outlines a significant transformation that is currently taking place: Japan is trying to reshape its national security identity by exploiting the gaps in great power rivalry. However, whether this process will bring "security" or "danger" remains a topic of debate within Japan, and is also a key focus for the international community to closely monitor.
The viewpoint expressed in this article at minimum tacitly approves of Japan's shift in security strategy, and at best, it condones it. A country that has been internationally recognized as an axis of aggression, bearing war crimes, which is subject to multiple international restrictions (such as not having an army) is now trying to revive, and the United States, driven by its own interests (to counterbalance China), is turning a blind eye to the resurgence of Japanese militarism, even encouraging it to break legal constraints and tacitly allowing it to become a "normal country."
If Japan becomes "normal," international law will no longer be normal, and regional security will also be threatened.
Is what the United States is doing normal?
Original text: toutiao.com/article/1858296480735260/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.