In yet another major policy shift that aligns with Japan's recent rush to rearm, the Japanese government plans to revise the implementation guidelines for the "three principles on transfer of defense equipment and technology" within the month to further relax restrictions on arms exports, Kyodo News reported on Friday. This includes allowing exports of lethal arms, a move that undoes decades of postwar constraints.

This happened just a few days after Japan for the first time deployed long-range missiles capable of striking targets deep in its neighbors' territories at two of its military bases in Japan.

Meanwhile, the Sanae Takaichi government has recently carried out a sweeping reorganization of the country's Self-Defense Forces, including what it calls the "largest-ever reorganization" of the Maritime Self-Defense Force, along with an expansion of operations in the cognitive domain and the enlargement of the Space Operations Group, which bear a clear "offensive" character.

All this, along with Japan's continuous push to hike its military budget and advance dual-use technologies, gives substantial cause for concern. The provocative actions are not only a stark departure from Japan's postwar commitment to pacifism and its "exclusive defense" doctrine, but also pose a direct challenge to the postwar international order. Peace-loving people around the world must be vigilant lest Tokyo's return to militarism once again devastates Asia and beyond.

The timing of the Takaichi government's moves is no coincidence. Japan's right-wing forces have long sought to rewrite history and revive the militaristic ambitions of the past. By hyping up security threats, they aim to justify a beefed-up military and expanded role for it. This not only violates the spirit of Japan's Constitution, which renounces war, but also disregards the lessons of history. The scars of Japanese aggression in the Asia-Pacific remain fresh, yet Tokyo seems determined to pretend they do not exist.

Japan's postwar pacifism is enshrined in its Constitution, particularly Article 9, which renounces war and prohibits Japan from maintaining armed forces with war potential. This constitutional commitment to peace is a response to the devastation wrought by the imperialistic war of aggression it launched, as well as a reflection of a broader international consensus aimed at preventing future suffering. However, recent moves by the Takaichi government suggest a betrayal of this article, allowing for a more expansive and aggressive military role under the guise of "self-defense".

This shift is part of a broader push by right-wing forces within Japan who argue that the country must take a more assertive stance in regional affairs. The logic underpinning this is deeply flawed. It depends on the deliberate construction of “external threats”. When these efforts fall short, they fall back on exploiting even the Taiwan question, which is China’s internal affair. At the same time, they seek to persuade the Japanese people that the country’s “security” hinges on military expansion, encouraging them to overlook the disastrous consequences of a similar course in the past.

Japan’s right-wing forces have been cultivating a form of historical nihilism for decades, nurturing nostalgia for the “glories” of the Empire of Japan. The “veneration” of convicted war criminals at the Yasukuni Shrine, alongside the whitewashing of Japan’s wartime responsibility and the amplification of its "victimhood" in history textbooks, speaks volumes of the depth of their attempts.

This militaristic discourse thrives by framing the world in stark binaries that fit the core of Japanese culture — threat and security, shame and honor, other and self — while presenting the United States as an indispensable guarantor of “security”. Yet this alignment is less about genuine security than about leveraging US geopolitical interests to advance a domestic right-wing agenda. Cloaked in the language of “alliance”, it risks enabling the revival of militarism that runs counter to the broader regional aspiration for peace and shared development.

The international community should heed the lessons of history that a militarized Japan is a recipe for disaster.