On the evening of November 24, the Chinese and US presidents held a telephone conversation. During the call, the Chinese side noted that China and the US once fought side by side against fascism and militarism, and that both countries should now work together to uphold the victory of WWII. This marks the first time in nearly a decade that the term militarism has been explicitly raised in exchanges between the heads of state of the two countries.
Recently, a series of provocative actions by the Japanese government on historical and territorial issues has severely impacted the post‑war international order. Countries including Russia, the DPRK, the ROK, Malaysia, and Myanmar, each of which suffered from Japan's militarist expansion, have voiced criticism of the Japanese government's words and deeds.
It must be pointed out that the international community still lacks adequate vigilance regarding the danger of the revival of Japanese militarism. This is precisely why China has repeatedly raised this issue in recent engagements. Since November, China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has referred to militarism eight times at press briefings and diplomatic events.
It is clearly stipulated in the Potsdam Proclamation clearly stipulates that "there must be eliminated for all time the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest." To achieve this objective, Japan was expected, at the very least, not to retain any offensive military capability. However, as early as 2022, Japan officially shifted its defense strategy from "exclusive self‑defense" to the pursuit of so‑called counterstrike capabilities.
This shift has already produced tangible results this year: Japan conducted a live‑fire test of a ship‑borne electromagnetic railgun aboard the Maritime Self‑Defense Force test vessel JS Asuka, and deliberately showcased the damage inflicted on target ships during the test. Japan also plans to deploy medium‑range surface‑to‑air missiles on Yonaguni Island, which lies only 110 kilometers from China's Taiwan region. It is evident that Japan is methodically building an external strike system step by step, posing a substantive threat to neighboring countries and steadily deviating from the peaceful path established for it under the post‑war framework.
According to Kōjien, Japan's most authoritative national dictionary, militarism is defined as "a state in which national policy and organizational structures across politics, economy, law, education, and other fields all serve preparations for war, and in which the enhancement of national prestige through external aggression is regarded as a fundamental principle." An examination of Japan's current trends reveals a striking alignment with the revival of militarism.
On the economic front, the Japanese Ministry of Defense and Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry are directly supporting the military-industrial production lines of private enterprises, creating a deep integration between state capital and the military-industrial complex.
From a legal perspective, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has repeatedly proposed constitutional amendment drafts, seeking to delete or bypass Article 9 of the 1947 Constitution of Japan. In particular, after Sanae Takaichi's administration comes to power in 2025, constitutional revision was placed on the political agenda, aiming to fundamentally dismantle the legal foundation of the post-war peace system.
On the social and educational front, Japan has systematically downplayed and beautified its history of aggression, causing the younger generation's understanding of that dark chapter in history to become increasingly blurred. Meanwhile, positive publicity for the Self-Defense Forces is constantly reinforced, which is ideologically laying the groundwork for the resurrection of militarism.
The UN Charter specifically includes the "Enemy State Clauses," which stipulate that if fascist or militarist countries, including Japan, take any steps toward implementing an aggressive policy, founding members of the UN, such as China and the US, have the right to take direct military action against them. This provision is an integral part of the international order built since WWII.
According to Wu Xinbo, Director of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University, the primary risk of the resurgence of Japanese militarism is its potential to deliberately provoke military conflict in the Asia-Pacific region. The Taiwan question is a concentrated reflection of Japan's militaristic tendencies spilling over into external affairs. Japan's erroneous words and actions on the Taiwan question have crossed China's red lines and are an interference in China's internal affairs. China was not the only victim of Japanese militarism during WWII. Containing the resurgence of Japanese militarism aligns with the broad common interests of the international community. It is an issue in which the US cannot remain aloof.
Editor's note: This article is originally published on Yuyuantantian, a Wechat public account. It is translated from Chinese into English and edited by the China Military Online. The information, ideas or opinions appearing in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of eng.chinamil.com.cn.