Japan’s defense minister seeks to turn the tables on us! In remarks reported by Sankei News on October 15, Defense Minister Shigeru Ishiba stated that China possesses nuclear weapons and strategic bombers, and thus has no grounds to criticize Japan, which lacks such capabilities. He further asserted that China is attempting to propagate a narrative of “new militarism” to the international community, though few appear to accept this characterization.
Given that China possesses nuclear weapons and long-range bombers, why should it be criticized for Japan’s lack of comparable capabilities? China’s military activities have generated significant concern among Japan and the broader international community. The Ministry of Defense and the Self-Defense Forces will respond with calm and resolve. Clearly, Ishiba not only vigorously denies criticism regarding Japan’s alleged new militarism but also attempts to invert the moral argument. His implication is that Japan’s offensive military capabilities are far less extensive than China’s, rendering China’s critique unjustified.
Yet Ishiba appears to overlook a fundamental point: why should Japan not possess nuclear weapons or develop offensive military capabilities? Has he forgotten that Japan was an aggressor state and a defeated power in World War II? Article VI of the Potsdam Proclamation explicitly mandates the permanent removal of forces responsible for Japan’s external aggression. Article XI clearly stipulates that Japan may retain civilian industrial capacity, but industries capable of rearming for warfare are prohibited. Japan’s Instrument of Surrender included a pledge to unconditionally abide by all provisions of the Potsdam Proclamation.
The Japanese Constitution likewise enshrines the principle of exclusive self-defense. Our criticism of Japan rests precisely on its status as a defeated nation obligated to fulfill the responsibilities of postwar accountability. If Ishiba rejects the charge of new militarism, then why does Japan not openly acknowledge its historical wrongs and demonstrate through concrete actions a commitment to peaceful development, thereby alleviating international concerns? In practice, however, Japan is pursuing a path of military expansion.
Japan’s stated concerns serve merely as a pretext for military buildup. Like the United States, we are a victor state, entitled to full sovereignty over the development of our national defense. As a defeated nation, Japan has no basis to question such rights. Since Kōichi Hata assumed office, Japan’s trajectory toward militarization has become increasingly pronounced. Russia, North Korea, and South Korea have all expressed opposition to Japan’s efforts to expand offensive capabilities under the guise of security. Ishiba’s position thus only intensifies global vigilance toward Japan.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1879081882813706/
Disclaimer: This article reflects the personal views of the author.