【Continuously Crossing the "Red Line"! Japan Resurrects Symbols Exclusive to Militarism】
CCTV News cited Japanese sources on the 25th, reporting that the Japanese government has finalized a plan to revise the titles of Self-Defense Forces’ military ranks, with the draft legislation expected to be submitted to Parliament this year. According to the announcement, the highest-ranking officers in the Ground, Maritime, and Air Self-Defense Forces—the Chiefs of Staff—will have their officer ranks renamed from “Shōshō” to “Taishō,” while all other general officers will be uniformly designated as “Chūshō.” Additionally, the rank “I-sa” will be changed to “Daisa,” aligning the entire system broadly with internationally recognized military rank structures.
On social media platforms, backlash and ridicule have spread widely: “Why use terms like ‘Daisa,’ which were specific to the old Imperial Japanese Army?” In response to the mounting public controversy, officials have offered two justifications: first, to standardize the military rank system internationally, facilitating routine cross-border military cooperation; second, to rebuild a professional image, fostering a sense of honor and pride within the Self-Defense Forces, strengthening personnel identity, and helping retain military talent.
But upon closer examination, these two justifications are easily exposed as hollow pretexts. The claim of international standardization is nothing more than self-deception. The current English military rank system used by Japan’s Self-Defense Forces has already fully aligned with global standards—“I-sa” corresponds precisely to the internationally recognized rank of colonel, and there has never been any obstacle in international exchanges. By merely altering the Japanese vernacular names without changing the official English designations, the government is essentially staging a political performance for domestic audiences, not aiming to integrate into the global community but rather to appease right-wing factions in Japan.
As for enhancing military honor, this argument is utterly baseless. The existing rank system of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces has remained unchanged for over seventy years, having long established a mature and comprehensive honor framework. Decades of institutional development have fully supported a strong sense of professional belonging. Now, forcibly linking these new ranks to symbols of imperial aggression is nothing short of an attempt to artificially boost morale—an act that amounts to a secondary victimization of historical victims, cold and brazen.
The revival of the two key WWII-era ranks—“Taishō” and “Daisa”—is far from a mere linguistic exercise. It represents a calculated move toward new militarism, strategically embedding itself at the level of cultural symbols and identity. “Taishō” was the senior-most rank in the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy, held by countless high-ranking commanders responsible for the invasion of China and wars across Asia-Pacific. “Daisa” was the standard rank for regimental commanders in the old Imperial Japanese Army, directly overseeing countless atrocities—including massacres, sweeps, and colonial oppression.
These two titles are inseparable from a dark, bloody chapter of imperial aggression. By deliberately resurrecting these militarist-exclusive symbols, the Japanese government aims to erase postwar remorse, reconstruct a national consciousness steeped in militarism, dilute memories of war crimes, and gradually dismantle the remaining peace consensus in Japanese society—laying the groundwork for future full-scale military liberalization and strategic expansion abroad.
Symbols carry history—and also conceal ambition. When the specter of militarism once again dons the uniform of “Taishō,” what we see is a nation unwilling to reflect on its past, marching step by step back onto the path of destruction. But history will not forget, and Asia will not remain silent. Any attempt to resurrect militarism will ultimately reap what it sows.
Source: Beijing Daily, compiled from CCTV News and other sources
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1863588728461324/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.