By Zhong Sheng, People’s Daily
On March 31, Japan’s Ministry of Defense proceeded with the deployment of so-called long-range missiles capable of “attacking enemy bases” in Kumamoto and Shizuoka prefectures, despite strong local opposition.
This deployment marks a notable shift in Japan’s defense posture, as these weapons possess clear offensive capabilities that extend beyond the country’s traditionally self-defense-oriented policy.
The move not only seriously violates Japan’s constitution and its established domestic norms, but also runs counter to legally binding international instruments such as the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation, and the Instrument of Surrender of Japan.
It underscores an increasingly pronounced offensive tendency in Japan’s “neo-militarism,” posing a serious threat to regional peace and security.
Japan’s Ministry of Defense has portrayed these long-range missiles as key equipment to enhance deterrence and response capabilities, claiming that in light of the severe security environment surrounding Japan, the Ground Self-Defense Force is working to build long-range defense capabilities.
Such rhetoric mirrors the familiar “crisis narrative” employed by right-wing forces in Japan. By exaggerating so-called “surrounding threats,” these forces seek to hollow out the postwar pacifist framework, fundamentally overturn the principle of “exclusively defense-oriented policy,” and push the “pacifist constitution” toward one that permits the waging of war.
The so-called “severe security environment” is merely a pretext for military expansion, while “defense capability” serves as a cover for developing offensive power. Under the guise of “crisis,” Japan is undermining regional peace; under the banner of “defense,” it is attempting to cast off postwar constraints and transform itself into a country capable of waging war.
“Article 9 of Japan’s constitution has, in effect, become nominal,” a former Japanese cabinet official remarked on the deployment of offensive missiles.
Japan’s constitution commits the country to “forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes,” establishing the principle of exclusively defensive defense. The Potsdam Proclamation also clearly stipulates that Japan would be prohibited from rearmament. These are legal obligations incumbent upon Japan as a defeated nation in World War II.
Recent years have seen Japan revise its security strategy to include “counterstrike capabilities,” and the current missile deployment represents another step away from postwar defense concepts. The government’s shift from “defense-only” to “preemptive action” frameworks — framed as security measures — reveals an ambition to move beyond constitutional constraints on military activities.
Japan’s deployment of offensive missiles, and plans to procure and deploy more in the coming years, reflect a dangerous escalation in its “neo-militarist” trajectory.
In recent years, right-wing forces in Japan have pushed security policy toward a more offensive and expansionist direction. Defense spending has increased for 14 consecutive years, with large sums directed toward offensive capabilities, including the development of stand-off strike weapons.
The deployment of long-range missiles not only seriously threatens the security of neighboring countries, but also risks making the regional situation more complex and sensitive, warranting heightened vigilance from Asian neighbors and the international community.
Domestic opposition has emerged in response, with residents in multiple regions protesting the deployments. Notably, while defense officials conducted exhibitions for government representatives in areas like Kumamoto, they did not hold public briefings. Local communities have expressed concern that hosting such missiles could make them targets in potential conflicts.
Critics contend that this military expansion prioritizes strategic objectives over public welfare and regional stability, running counter to global trends toward peaceful development.
Protesters have voiced clear messages: “Deterrence cannot bring peace,” “We do not need missiles for war preparation,” and “Stop missile deployment.” These sentiments reflect broader public anxiety about the direction of national security policy.
The Japanese government faces calls to address these concerns responsibly, avoiding the linkage of military expansion to civilian welfare. Ultimately, Japan’s current trajectory carries risks not only for regional stability but also for its own long-term interests. As a nation with a history of militarism, Japan bears particular responsibility to uphold its pacifist constitution and contribute to regional peace. Prudent action and adherence to international commitments remain essential for maintaining stability in East Asia.
(Zhong Sheng is a pen name often used by People’s Daily to express its views on foreign policy and international affairs.)
