By Hai Ning

In recent years, Japan has significantly adjusted its security policies, increased its defense budgets year by year, and constantly relaxed restrictions on arms exports. The country's ulterior ambitions and motives behind these actions deserve high vigilance from the international community.

Violation of post-war restrictions and "exclusively defense-oriented" policy

Since the end of World War II, the Three Principles on Arms Exports  issued by the Japanese government has become a cornerstone of its "exclusively defense-oriented" policy. However, after the Cold War, Japan constantly discarded these principles by repeatedly seeking to revise relevant legal provisions, attempting to expand the scope and scale of arms export.

In 2014, the Japanese government endorsed the replacement of the Three Principles on Arms Exports with the Three Principles on Transfer of Defense Equipment and Technology . In written text, the words "Defense Equipment" and "Transfer" have respectively superseded "Arms" and "Export" in a bid to reduce the sensitivity of the policy, but the constraints on the export of weaponry and related technologies have been extensively loosened virtually.

In 2017, the National Diet of Japan amended the Self-Defense Forces Act  to allow transferring the used equipment of the forces (JSDF) to other countries for free or at low costs. Thereafter, Japan is able to sell patrol boats to Vietnam, facilities and air defense radar systems to the Philippines, and "unicorn" communications systems to India.

After the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Tokyo urgently revised the Three Principles on Transfer of Defense Equipment and Technology and the relevant Implementation Guidelines in violation of the provisions therein involving not providing defense equipment to the parties to a conflict, to grant approval for sending non-lethal equipment such as helmets and bulletproof vests to Ukraine. In April 2023, the Kishida cabinet adopted the Official Security Assistance (OSA) implementation policy, formally establishing a new mechanism for providing military assistance to the so-called "like-minded" countries.

According to Japanese media reports, Tokyo recently reviewed and approved the new version of the Three Principles on Transfer of Defense Equipment and Technology and relevant Implementation Guidelines, permitting exporting the finished weapons produced and assembled in the country to its designated authorized countries with a production permit. Furthermore, with the prior consent of Japan, these finished weapons may also be transferred to other third countries via the authorized states, excluding those currently regarded to be engaged in combat.

Multiple concealed intentions in pursuit of military deregulation

To promote the development of the defense industry. Due to long-standing restrictions on arms export and limited demand from the JSDF, Japan's defense industry has seen serious overcapacity, high costs, low efficiency, and inadequate international competitiveness. The Japanese government spends huge subsidies to maintain its own research and development and production capacities every year. Once the export restrictions are relaxed, Japan can unleash the weaponry production potentials of domestic enterprises, dilute the research and development and procurement costs, seek to secure a share in the international defense trade market, and boost the domestic economy with arms export orders.

To accelerate military deregulation process. To break through the post-war mechanism and realize the so-called national normalization, Japan had designedly expanded and deepened overseas military cooperation in the past years. Through this policy revision, Japan can not only transfer dormant weapons to other countries, but also provide foreign assistance with the active and even newly developed weapons of the JSDF, so as to gain more diplomatic leverage. Meanwhile, Japan can more easily develop weapons and equipment jointly with other countries to enhance the weaponry capabilities of the JSDF.

To seek profits by relying on the US. In recent years, the US has pushed for the upgrading and transformation of its alliance with Japan and connived at the latter's lifting of restrictions on exporting military equipment with the aim to echo its major power competition strategy. While following the US in building an Indo-Pacific encirclement, Japan also took the opportunity to elevate its international influence. It is worth noting that Japan's revision of arms export policy coincided with the particular time when the US and Europe had been struggling to fulfill the weaponry demands from Ukraine and Israel as hindered by bottlenecks in arms production capacity, obviously aiming at addressing and accommodating the growing weapon export needs of the US.

Deviation from path of peace and disruption of regional security and stability

Japan exhibits more evident outward and offensive inclinations in the military sector. The JSDF has been equipped with light aircraft carriers, F-35 fighters, Aegis warships, and other advanced weapons and equipment. The recently passed FY2024 government budget draft of the country registered a defense budget of about 7.9 trillion yen, an increase of more than 16% year on year. The easing of restrictions on arms export is the latest move by Japan to deviate from the path of peaceful development after World War II. The administration's various actions to flout the Pacifist Constitution and the "exclusively defense-oriented" policy have aroused widespread criticism from the international community and strong opposition from the domestic public.

Moreover, the Kishida government vigorously hypes up the so-called neighborhood threats and treats countries around the South China Sea as key targets for arms and equipment cooperation, in the name of maintaining the security of seaways. Such moves not only undermine regional security and stability, but also create geopolitical conflict risks. As the arms export policies are continuously relaxed, Japan is highly likely to make more provocative moves.

The Japanese government needs to fully understand that acting as a spoiler in regional security will only exacerbate its own security and development dilemmas. The authority should earnestly respect the security concerns of neighboring countries, deeply reflect on its aggression history, stick to the path of peaceful development, and take concrete actions to win trust from its Asian neighbors and the international community.