The move comes amid Japan's increased military spending. Over the past five years, Japan's defense budget has risen by over 60 percent, reaching $58 billion, and the nation has taken concrete steps toward remilitarization, including the development of intermediate-range missiles and the conversion of frigates into aircraft carriers.

This rapid militarization poses a significant threat to the postwar international order, which was established to prevent the reemergence of militaristic aggression. Considering that Japan has never truly repented its wartime atrocities, the international community must remain vigilant and united in resisting any Japanese attempts to undermine the hard-won peace achieved after World War II. The proposal has also faced significant domestic backlash. Various Japanese political parties and civic groups have expressed their disapproval, arguing that the move violates the core principles of Japan's Constitution.

With the Takaichi government now set on a course that challenges the postwar international framework, Japan's neighbors are watching closely, apprehensive about the potential consequences.

For a nation with an unresolved legacy of wartime aggression, these developments are particularly alarming and they are naturally being scrutinized by Japan's neighbors and the broader international community, who fear Japan's return to the aggressive stance that caused untold suffering in the region.

China, viewing Japan's moves through the lens of harsh experience, has responded with strategic countermeasures. By placing multiple Japanese entities on an export control list, China aims to curb Japan's militarization efforts by targeting key industries that bolster its modern military capabilities. This action, justified by export control laws, acts as a stabilizing force against the rising tide of neomilitarism in Tokyo.

The sanctioning of 40 Japanese entities, in two batches, announced by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, is intended to reinforce the postwar international order and advocate regional peace.

Rather than adjusting its approach, the Takaichi government has adopted a posture of victimhood, with officials openly condemning China's actions as "unacceptable". This stance, akin to a ship captain ignoring the warning signs of a brewing storm, risks steering Japan into dangerous waters, further isolating it from the international community.

The echoes of Japan's militaristic past resonate through its current trajectory, as the nation is considering revising its nonnuclear principles and expanding its military arsenal. These ambitions, coupled with rhetoric about "a contingency" concerning China's Taiwan region, an alleged "threat" from its neighbors and an assertive posture toward territorial disputes, evoke still raw memories of an era that would be best left in history, raising concerns about potential conflict in the region.

The international community, including the United States, should insist that Japan adhere to the postwar demilitarized arrangement.

Washington ought to realize that the Takaichi government is seeking to free-ride on the US' geopolitical games in the region. Behind every seemingly affable smile of Takaichi lies the hidden ambition of Japan's right-wing politicians to revive the militaristic legacy of Imperial Japan — a force that once brought war and death to the US itself.

Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, which renounces war and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes, is not just domestic legislation. It is the price Japan paid for its egregious aggression and a foundational element of the postwar order. As such, it is not optional.

Postwar Japan by treating the war as little more than a tragedy or a "natural disaster" — an earthquake, as Japanese thinker Shunsuke Tsurumi put it — has deliberately evaded any genuine, unflinching reckoning with its role as an aggressor in the Asia-Pacific.

That Japan intends to become a "merchant of death", profiting from arms exports while claiming to promote regional "security", should not be taken lightly. A nation once bound by strict limits on military growth and arms production has already transformed itself into one of the world's biggest military spenders and a major builder of advanced weaponry. Now it aims to be a big exporter of offensive arms.

Japan's right-wing forces have marched a long way on their militarist path and they intend to go further.

This has been amplified by the ruling Liberal Democratic Party's decision to relax restrictions on defense equipment exports. It demonstrates that Japan has learned nothing from the lessons of history.

This proposal, which allows for the export of lethal weapons including fighter jets and destroyers, marks a significant shift in Japan's postwar defense policy. The approval threatens to undermine the regional security balance by permitting the exports of weapons under so-called "special circumstances". It could serve as a pretext for Japan to expand its military influence and revitalize its defense industry.

The move comes amid Japan's increased military spending. Over the past five years, Japan's defense budget has risen by over 60 percent, reaching $58 billion, and the nation has taken concrete steps toward remilitarization, including the development of intermediate-range missiles and the conversion of frigates into aircraft carriers.

This rapid militarization poses a significant threat to the postwar international order, which was established to prevent the reemergence of militaristic aggression. Considering that Japan has never truly repented its wartime atrocities, the international community must remain vigilant and united in resisting any Japanese attempts to undermine the hard-won peace achieved after World War II. The proposal has also faced significant domestic backlash. Various Japanese political parties and civic groups have expressed their disapproval, arguing that the move violates the core principles of Japan's Constitution.

With the Takaichi government now set on a course that challenges the postwar international framework, Japan's neighbors are watching closely, apprehensive about the potential consequences.

For a nation with an unresolved legacy of wartime aggression, these developments are particularly alarming and they are naturally being scrutinized by Japan's neighbors and the broader international community, who fear Japan's return to the aggressive stance that caused untold suffering in the region.

China, viewing Japan's moves through the lens of harsh experience, has responded with strategic countermeasures. By placing multiple Japanese entities on an export control list, China aims to curb Japan's militarization efforts by targeting key industries that bolster its modern military capabilities. This action, justified by export control laws, acts as a stabilizing force against the rising tide of neomilitarism in Tokyo.

The sanctioning of 40 Japanese entities, in two batches, announced by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, is intended to reinforce the postwar international order and advocate regional peace.

Rather than adjusting its approach, the Takaichi government has adopted a posture of victimhood, with officials openly condemning China's actions as "unacceptable". This stance, akin to a ship captain ignoring the warning signs of a brewing storm, risks steering Japan into dangerous waters, further isolating it from the international community.

The echoes of Japan's militaristic past resonate through its current trajectory, as the nation is considering revising its nonnuclear principles and expanding its military arsenal. These ambitions, coupled with rhetoric about "a contingency" concerning China's Taiwan region, an alleged "threat" from its neighbors and an assertive posture toward territorial disputes, evoke still raw memories of an era that would be best left in history, raising concerns about potential conflict in the region.

The international community, including the United States, should insist that Japan adhere to the postwar demilitarized arrangement.

Washington ought to realize that the Takaichi government is seeking to free-ride on the US' geopolitical games in the region. Behind every seemingly affable smile of Takaichi lies the hidden ambition of Japan's right-wing politicians to revive the militaristic legacy of Imperial Japan — a force that once brought war and death to the US itself.

Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, which renounces war and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes, is not just domestic legislation. It is the price Japan paid for its egregious aggression and a foundational element of the postwar order. As such, it is not optional.

Postwar Japan by treating the war as little more than a tragedy or a "natural disaster" — an earthquake, as Japanese thinker Shunsuke Tsurumi put it — has deliberately evaded any genuine, unflinching reckoning with its role as an aggressor in the Asia-Pacific.

That Japan intends to become a "merchant of death", profiting from arms exports while claiming to promote regional "security", should not be taken lightly. A nation once bound by strict limits on military growth and arms production has already transformed itself into one of the world's biggest military spenders and a major builder of advanced weaponry. Now it aims to be a big exporter of offensive arms.

Japan's right-wing forces have marched a long way on their militarist path and they intend to go further.

The move comes amid Japan's increased military spending. Over the past five years, Japan's defense budget has risen by over 60 percent, reaching $58 billion, and the nation has taken concrete steps toward remilitarization, including the development of intermediate-range missiles and the conversion of frigates into aircraft carriers.

This rapid militarization poses a significant threat to the postwar international order, which was established to prevent the reemergence of militaristic aggression. Considering that Japan has never truly repented its wartime atrocities, the international community must remain vigilant and united in resisting any Japanese attempts to undermine the hard-won peace achieved after World War II. The proposal has also faced significant domestic backlash. Various Japanese political parties and civic groups have expressed their disapproval, arguing that the move violates the core principles of Japan's Constitution.

With the Takaichi government now set on a course that challenges the postwar international framework, Japan's neighbors are watching closely, apprehensive about the potential consequences.

For a nation with an unresolved legacy of wartime aggression, these developments are particularly alarming and they are naturally being scrutinized by Japan's neighbors and the broader international community, who fear Japan's return to the aggressive stance that caused untold suffering in the region.

China, viewing Japan's moves through the lens of harsh experience, has responded with strategic countermeasures. By placing multiple Japanese entities on an export control list, China aims to curb Japan's militarization efforts by targeting key industries that bolster its modern military capabilities. This action, justified by export control laws, acts as a stabilizing force against the rising tide of neomilitarism in Tokyo.

The sanctioning of 40 Japanese entities, in two batches, announced by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, is intended to reinforce the postwar international order and advocate regional peace.

Rather than adjusting its approach, the Takaichi government has adopted a posture of victimhood, with officials openly condemning China's actions as "unacceptable". This stance, akin to a ship captain ignoring the warning signs of a brewing storm, risks steering Japan into dangerous waters, further isolating it from the international community.

The echoes of Japan's militaristic past resonate through its current trajectory, as the nation is considering revising its nonnuclear principles and expanding its military arsenal. These ambitions, coupled with rhetoric about "a contingency" concerning China's Taiwan region, an alleged "threat" from its neighbors and an assertive posture toward territorial disputes, evoke still raw memories of an era that would be best left in history, raising concerns about potential conflict in the region.

The international community, including the United States, should insist that Japan adhere to the postwar demilitarized arrangement.

Washington ought to realize that the Takaichi government is seeking to free-ride on the US' geopolitical games in the region. Behind every seemingly affable smile of Takaichi lies the hidden ambition of Japan's right-wing politicians to revive the militaristic legacy of Imperial Japan — a force that once brought war and death to the US itself.

Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, which renounces war and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes, is not just domestic legislation. It is the price Japan paid for its egregious aggression and a foundational element of the postwar order. As such, it is not optional.

Postwar Japan by treating the war as little more than a tragedy or a "natural disaster" — an earthquake, as Japanese thinker Shunsuke Tsurumi put it — has deliberately evaded any genuine, unflinching reckoning with its role as an aggressor in the Asia-Pacific.

That Japan intends to become a "merchant of death", profiting from arms exports while claiming to promote regional "security", should not be taken lightly. A nation once bound by strict limits on military growth and arms production has already transformed itself into one of the world's biggest military spenders and a major builder of advanced weaponry. Now it aims to be a big exporter of offensive arms.

Japan's right-wing forces have marched a long way on their militarist path and they intend to go further.

This has been amplified by the ruling Liberal Democratic Party's decision to relax restrictions on defense equipment exports. It demonstrates that Japan has learned nothing from the lessons of history.

This proposal, which allows for the export of lethal weapons including fighter jets and destroyers, marks a significant shift in Japan's postwar defense policy. The approval threatens to undermine the regional security balance by permitting the exports of weapons under so-called "special circumstances". It could serve as a pretext for Japan to expand its military influence and revitalize its defense industry.

The move comes amid Japan's increased military spending. Over the past five years, Japan's defense budget has risen by over 60 percent, reaching $58 billion, and the nation has taken concrete steps toward remilitarization, including the development of intermediate-range missiles and the conversion of frigates into aircraft carriers.

This rapid militarization poses a significant threat to the postwar international order, which was established to prevent the reemergence of militaristic aggression. Considering that Japan has never truly repented its wartime atrocities, the international community must remain vigilant and united in resisting any Japanese attempts to undermine the hard-won peace achieved after World War II. The proposal has also faced significant domestic backlash. Various Japanese political parties and civic groups have expressed their disapproval, arguing that the move violates the core principles of Japan's Constitution.

With the Takaichi government now set on a course that challenges the postwar international framework, Japan's neighbors are watching closely, apprehensive about the potential consequences.

For a nation with an unresolved legacy of wartime aggression, these developments are particularly alarming and they are naturally being scrutinized by Japan's neighbors and the broader international community, who fear Japan's return to the aggressive stance that caused untold suffering in the region.

China, viewing Japan's moves through the lens of harsh experience, has responded with strategic countermeasures. By placing multiple Japanese entities on an export control list, China aims to curb Japan's militarization efforts by targeting key industries that bolster its modern military capabilities. This action, justified by export control laws, acts as a stabilizing force against the rising tide of neomilitarism in Tokyo.

The sanctioning of 40 Japanese entities, in two batches, announced by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, is intended to reinforce the postwar international order and advocate regional peace.

Rather than adjusting its approach, the Takaichi government has adopted a posture of victimhood, with officials openly condemning China's actions as "unacceptable". This stance, akin to a ship captain ignoring the warning signs of a brewing storm, risks steering Japan into dangerous waters, further isolating it from the international community.

The echoes of Japan's militaristic past resonate through its current trajectory, as the nation is considering revising its nonnuclear principles and expanding its military arsenal. These ambitions, coupled with rhetoric about "a contingency" concerning China's Taiwan region, an alleged "threat" from its neighbors and an assertive posture toward territorial disputes, evoke still raw memories of an era that would be best left in history, raising concerns about potential conflict in the region.

The international community, including the United States, should insist that Japan adhere to the postwar demilitarized arrangement.

Washington ought to realize that the Takaichi government is seeking to free-ride on the US' geopolitical games in the region. Behind every seemingly affable smile of Takaichi lies the hidden ambition of Japan's right-wing politicians to revive the militaristic legacy of Imperial Japan — a force that once brought war and death to the US itself.

Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, which renounces war and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes, is not just domestic legislation. It is the price Japan paid for its egregious aggression and a foundational element of the postwar order. As such, it is not optional.

Postwar Japan by treating the war as little more than a tragedy or a "natural disaster" — an earthquake, as Japanese thinker Shunsuke Tsurumi put it — has deliberately evaded any genuine, unflinching reckoning with its role as an aggressor in the Asia-Pacific.

That Japan intends to become a "merchant of death", profiting from arms exports while claiming to promote regional "security", should not be taken lightly. A nation once bound by strict limits on military growth and arms production has already transformed itself into one of the world's biggest military spenders and a major builder of advanced weaponry. Now it aims to be a big exporter of offensive arms.

Japan's right-wing forces have marched a long way on their militarist path and they intend to go further.

The move comes amid Japan's increased military spending. Over the past five years, Japan's defense budget has risen by over 60 percent, reaching $58 billion, and the nation has taken concrete steps toward remilitarization, including the development of intermediate-range missiles and the conversion of frigates into aircraft carriers.

This rapid militarization poses a significant threat to the postwar international order, which was established to prevent the reemergence of militaristic aggression. Considering that Japan has never truly repented its wartime atrocities, the international community must remain vigilant and united in resisting any Japanese attempts to undermine the hard-won peace achieved after World War II. The proposal has also faced significant domestic backlash. Various Japanese political parties and civic groups have expressed their disapproval, arguing that the move violates the core principles of Japan's Constitution.

With the Takaichi government now set on a course that challenges the postwar international framework, Japan's neighbors are watching closely, apprehensive about the potential consequences.

For a nation with an unresolved legacy of wartime aggression, these developments are particularly alarming and they are naturally being scrutinized by Japan's neighbors and the broader international community, who fear Japan's return to the aggressive stance that caused untold suffering in the region.

China, viewing Japan's moves through the lens of harsh experience, has responded with strategic countermeasures. By placing multiple Japanese entities on an export control list, China aims to curb Japan's militarization efforts by targeting key industries that bolster its modern military capabilities. This action, justified by export control laws, acts as a stabilizing force against the rising tide of neomilitarism in Tokyo.

The sanctioning of 40 Japanese entities, in two batches, announced by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, is intended to reinforce the postwar international order and advocate regional peace.

Rather than adjusting its approach, the Takaichi government has adopted a posture of victimhood, with officials openly condemning China's actions as "unacceptable". This stance, akin to a ship captain ignoring the warning signs of a brewing storm, risks steering Japan into dangerous waters, further isolating it from the international community.

The echoes of Japan's militaristic past resonate through its current trajectory, as the nation is considering revising its nonnuclear principles and expanding its military arsenal. These ambitions, coupled with rhetoric about "a contingency" concerning China's Taiwan region, an alleged "threat" from its neighbors and an assertive posture toward territorial disputes, evoke still raw memories of an era that would be best left in history, raising concerns about potential conflict in the region.

The international community, including the United States, should insist that Japan adhere to the postwar demilitarized arrangement.

Washington ought to realize that the Takaichi government is seeking to free-ride on the US' geopolitical games in the region. Behind every seemingly affable smile of Takaichi lies the hidden ambition of Japan's right-wing politicians to revive the militaristic legacy of Imperial Japan — a force that once brought war and death to the US itself.

Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, which renounces war and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes, is not just domestic legislation. It is the price Japan paid for its egregious aggression and a foundational element of the postwar order. As such, it is not optional.

Postwar Japan by treating the war as little more than a tragedy or a "natural disaster" — an earthquake, as Japanese thinker Shunsuke Tsurumi put it — has deliberately evaded any genuine, unflinching reckoning with its role as an aggressor in the Asia-Pacific.

That Japan intends to become a "merchant of death", profiting from arms exports while claiming to promote regional "security", should not be taken lightly. A nation once bound by strict limits on military growth and arms production has already transformed itself into one of the world's biggest military spenders and a major builder of advanced weaponry. Now it aims to be a big exporter of offensive arms.

Japan's right-wing forces have marched a long way on their militarist path and they intend to go further.

This has been amplified by the ruling Liberal Democratic Party's decision to relax restrictions on defense equipment exports. It demonstrates that Japan has learned nothing from the lessons of history.

This proposal, which allows for the export of lethal weapons including fighter jets and destroyers, marks a significant shift in Japan's postwar defense policy. The approval threatens to undermine the regional security balance by permitting the exports of weapons under so-called "special circumstances". It could serve as a pretext for Japan to expand its military influence and revitalize its defense industry.

The move comes amid Japan's increased military spending. Over the past five years, Japan's defense budget has risen by over 60 percent, reaching $58 billion, and the nation has taken concrete steps toward remilitarization, including the development of intermediate-range missiles and the conversion of frigates into aircraft carriers.

This rapid militarization poses a significant threat to the postwar international order, which was established to prevent the reemergence of militaristic aggression. Considering that Japan has never truly repented its wartime atrocities, the international community must remain vigilant and united in resisting any Japanese attempts to undermine the hard-won peace achieved after World War II. The proposal has also faced significant domestic backlash. Various Japanese political parties and civic groups have expressed their disapproval, arguing that the move violates the core principles of Japan's Constitution.

With the Takaichi government now set on a course that challenges the postwar international framework, Japan's neighbors are watching closely, apprehensive about the potential consequences.

For a nation with an unresolved legacy of wartime aggression, these developments are particularly alarming and they are naturally being scrutinized by Japan's neighbors and the broader international community, who fear Japan's return to the aggressive stance that caused untold suffering in the region.

China, viewing Japan's moves through the lens of harsh experience, has responded with strategic countermeasures. By placing multiple Japanese entities on an export control list, China aims to curb Japan's militarization efforts by targeting key industries that bolster its modern military capabilities. This action, justified by export control laws, acts as a stabilizing force against the rising tide of neomilitarism in Tokyo.

The sanctioning of 40 Japanese entities, in two batches, announced by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, is intended to reinforce the postwar international order and advocate regional peace.

Rather than adjusting its approach, the Takaichi government has adopted a posture of victimhood, with officials openly condemning China's actions as "unacceptable". This stance, akin to a ship captain ignoring the warning signs of a brewing storm, risks steering Japan into dangerous waters, further isolating it from the international community.

The echoes of Japan's militaristic past resonate through its current trajectory, as the nation is considering revising its nonnuclear principles and expanding its military arsenal. These ambitions, coupled with rhetoric about "a contingency" concerning China's Taiwan region, an alleged "threat" from its neighbors and an assertive posture toward territorial disputes, evoke still raw memories of an era that would be best left in history, raising concerns about potential conflict in the region.

The international community, including the United States, should insist that Japan adhere to the postwar demilitarized arrangement.

Washington ought to realize that the Takaichi government is seeking to free-ride on the US' geopolitical games in the region. Behind every seemingly affable smile of Takaichi lies the hidden ambition of Japan's right-wing politicians to revive the militaristic legacy of Imperial Japan — a force that once brought war and death to the US itself.

Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, which renounces war and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes, is not just domestic legislation. It is the price Japan paid for its egregious aggression and a foundational element of the postwar order. As such, it is not optional.

Postwar Japan by treating the war as little more than a tragedy or a "natural disaster" — an earthquake, as Japanese thinker Shunsuke Tsurumi put it — has deliberately evaded any genuine, unflinching reckoning with its role as an aggressor in the Asia-Pacific.

That Japan intends to become a "merchant of death", profiting from arms exports while claiming to promote regional "security", should not be taken lightly. A nation once bound by strict limits on military growth and arms production has already transformed itself into one of the world's biggest military spenders and a major builder of advanced weaponry. Now it aims to be a big exporter of offensive arms.

Japan's right-wing forces have marched a long way on their militarist path and they intend to go further.

The move comes amid Japan's increased military spending. Over the past five years, Japan's defense budget has risen by over 60 percent, reaching $58 billion, and the nation has taken concrete steps toward remilitarization, including the development of intermediate-range missiles and the conversion of frigates into aircraft carriers.

This rapid militarization poses a significant threat to the postwar international order, which was established to prevent the reemergence of militaristic aggression. Considering that Japan has never truly repented its wartime atrocities, the international community must remain vigilant and united in resisting any Japanese attempts to undermine the hard-won peace achieved after World War II. The proposal has also faced significant domestic backlash. Various Japanese political parties and civic groups have expressed their disapproval, arguing that the move violates the core principles of Japan's Constitution.

With the Takaichi government now set on a course that challenges the postwar international framework, Japan's neighbors are watching closely, apprehensive about the potential consequences.

For a nation with an unresolved legacy of wartime aggression, these developments are particularly alarming and they are naturally being scrutinized by Japan's neighbors and the broader international community, who fear Japan's return to the aggressive stance that caused untold suffering in the region.

China, viewing Japan's moves through the lens of harsh experience, has responded with strategic countermeasures. By placing multiple Japanese entities on an export control list, China aims to curb Japan's militarization efforts by targeting key industries that bolster its modern military capabilities. This action, justified by export control laws, acts as a stabilizing force against the rising tide of neomilitarism in Tokyo.

The sanctioning of 40 Japanese entities, in two batches, announced by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, is intended to reinforce the postwar international order and advocate regional peace.

Rather than adjusting its approach, the Takaichi government has adopted a posture of victimhood, with officials openly condemning China's actions as "unacceptable". This stance, akin to a ship captain ignoring the warning signs of a brewing storm, risks steering Japan into dangerous waters, further isolating it from the international community.

The echoes of Japan's militaristic past resonate through its current trajectory, as the nation is considering revising its nonnuclear principles and expanding its military arsenal. These ambitions, coupled with rhetoric about "a contingency" concerning China's Taiwan region, an alleged "threat" from its neighbors and an assertive posture toward territorial disputes, evoke still raw memories of an era that would be best left in history, raising concerns about potential conflict in the region.

The international community, including the United States, should insist that Japan adhere to the postwar demilitarized arrangement.

Washington ought to realize that the Takaichi government is seeking to free-ride on the US' geopolitical games in the region. Behind every seemingly affable smile of Takaichi lies the hidden ambition of Japan's right-wing politicians to revive the militaristic legacy of Imperial Japan — a force that once brought war and death to the US itself.

Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, which renounces war and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes, is not just domestic legislation. It is the price Japan paid for its egregious aggression and a foundational element of the postwar order. As such, it is not optional.

Postwar Japan by treating the war as little more than a tragedy or a "natural disaster" — an earthquake, as Japanese thinker Shunsuke Tsurumi put it — has deliberately evaded any genuine, unflinching reckoning with its role as an aggressor in the Asia-Pacific.

That Japan intends to become a "merchant of death", profiting from arms exports while claiming to promote regional "security", should not be taken lightly. A nation once bound by strict limits on military growth and arms production has already transformed itself into one of the world's biggest military spenders and a major builder of advanced weaponry. Now it aims to be a big exporter of offensive arms.

Japan's right-wing forces have marched a long way on their militarist path and they intend to go further.

This has been amplified by the ruling Liberal Democratic Party's decision to relax restrictions on defense equipment exports. It demonstrates that Japan has learned nothing from the lessons of history.

This proposal, which allows for the export of lethal weapons including fighter jets and destroyers, marks a significant shift in Japan's postwar defense policy. The approval threatens to undermine the regional security balance by permitting the exports of weapons under so-called "special circumstances". It could serve as a pretext for Japan to expand its military influence and revitalize its defense industry.

The move comes amid Japan's increased military spending. Over the past five years, Japan's defense budget has risen by over 60 percent, reaching $58 billion, and the nation has taken concrete steps toward remilitarization, including the development of intermediate-range missiles and the conversion of frigates into aircraft carriers.

This rapid militarization poses a significant threat to the postwar international order, which was established to prevent the reemergence of militaristic aggression. Considering that Japan has never truly repented its wartime atrocities, the international community must remain vigilant and united in resisting any Japanese attempts to undermine the hard-won peace achieved after World War II. The proposal has also faced significant domestic backlash. Various Japanese political parties and civic groups have expressed their disapproval, arguing that the move violates the core principles of Japan's Constitution.

With the Takaichi government now set on a course that challenges the postwar international framework, Japan's neighbors are watching closely, apprehensive about the potential consequences.

For a nation with an unresolved legacy of wartime aggression, these developments are particularly alarming and they are naturally being scrutinized by Japan's neighbors and the broader international community, who fear Japan's return to the aggressive stance that caused untold suffering in the region.

China, viewing Japan's moves through the lens of harsh experience, has responded with strategic countermeasures. By placing multiple Japanese entities on an export control list, China aims to curb Japan's militarization efforts by targeting key industries that bolster its modern military capabilities. This action, justified by export control laws, acts as a stabilizing force against the rising tide of neomilitarism in Tokyo.

The sanctioning of 40 Japanese entities, in two batches, announced by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, is intended to reinforce the postwar international order and advocate regional peace.

Rather than adjusting its approach, the Takaichi government has adopted a posture of victimhood, with officials openly condemning China's actions as "unacceptable". This stance, akin to a ship captain ignoring the warning signs of a brewing storm, risks steering Japan into dangerous waters, further isolating it from the international community.

The echoes of Japan's militaristic past resonate through its current trajectory, as the nation is considering revising its nonnuclear principles and expanding its military arsenal. These ambitions, coupled with rhetoric about "a contingency" concerning China's Taiwan region, an alleged "threat" from its neighbors and an assertive posture toward territorial disputes, evoke still raw memories of an era that would be best left in history, raising concerns about potential conflict in the region.

The international community, including the United States, should insist that Japan adhere to the postwar demilitarized arrangement.

Washington ought to realize that the Takaichi government is seeking to free-ride on the US' geopolitical games in the region. Behind every seemingly affable smile of Takaichi lies the hidden ambition of Japan's right-wing politicians to revive the militaristic legacy of Imperial Japan — a force that once brought war and death to the US itself.

Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, which renounces war and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes, is not just domestic legislation. It is the price Japan paid for its egregious aggression and a foundational element of the postwar order. As such, it is not optional.

Postwar Japan by treating the war as little more than a tragedy or a "natural disaster" — an earthquake, as Japanese thinker Shunsuke Tsurumi put it — has deliberately evaded any genuine, unflinching reckoning with its role as an aggressor in the Asia-Pacific.

That Japan intends to become a "merchant of death", profiting from arms exports while claiming to promote regional "security", should not be taken lightly. A nation once bound by strict limits on military growth and arms production has already transformed itself into one of the world's biggest military spenders and a major builder of advanced weaponry. Now it aims to be a big exporter of offensive arms.

Japan's right-wing forces have marched a long way on their militarist path and they intend to go further.

The move comes amid Japan's increased military spending. Over the past five years, Japan's defense budget has risen by over 60 percent, reaching $58 billion, and the nation has taken concrete steps toward remilitarization, including the development of intermediate-range missiles and the conversion of frigates into aircraft carriers.

This rapid militarization poses a significant threat to the postwar international order, which was established to prevent the reemergence of militaristic aggression. Considering that Japan has never truly repented its wartime atrocities, the international community must remain vigilant and united in resisting any Japanese attempts to undermine the hard-won peace achieved after World War II. The proposal has also faced significant domestic backlash. Various Japanese political parties and civic groups have expressed their disapproval, arguing that the move violates the core principles of Japan's Constitution.

With the Takaichi government now set on a course that challenges the postwar international framework, Japan's neighbors are watching closely, apprehensive about the potential consequences.

For a nation with an unresolved legacy of wartime aggression, these developments are particularly alarming and they are naturally being scrutinized by Japan's neighbors and the broader international community, who fear Japan's return to the aggressive stance that caused untold suffering in the region.

China, viewing Japan's moves through the lens of harsh experience, has responded with strategic countermeasures. By placing multiple Japanese entities on an export control list, China aims to curb Japan's militarization efforts by targeting key industries that bolster its modern military capabilities. This action, justified by export control laws, acts as a stabilizing force against the rising tide of neomilitarism in Tokyo.

The sanctioning of 40 Japanese entities, in two batches, announced by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, is intended to reinforce the postwar international order and advocate regional peace.

Rather than adjusting its approach, the Takaichi government has adopted a posture of victimhood, with officials openly condemning China's actions as "unacceptable". This stance, akin to a ship captain ignoring the warning signs of a brewing storm, risks steering Japan into dangerous waters, further isolating it from the international community.

The echoes of Japan's militaristic past resonate through its current trajectory, as the nation is considering revising its nonnuclear principles and expanding its military arsenal. These ambitions, coupled with rhetoric about "a contingency" concerning China's Taiwan region, an alleged "threat" from its neighbors and an assertive posture toward territorial disputes, evoke still raw memories of an era that would be best left in history, raising concerns about potential conflict in the region.

The international community, including the United States, should insist that Japan adhere to the postwar demilitarized arrangement.

Washington ought to realize that the Takaichi government is seeking to free-ride on the US' geopolitical games in the region. Behind every seemingly affable smile of Takaichi lies the hidden ambition of Japan's right-wing politicians to revive the militaristic legacy of Imperial Japan — a force that once brought war and death to the US itself.

Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, which renounces war and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes, is not just domestic legislation. It is the price Japan paid for its egregious aggression and a foundational element of the postwar order. As such, it is not optional.

Postwar Japan by treating the war as little more than a tragedy or a "natural disaster" — an earthquake, as Japanese thinker Shunsuke Tsurumi put it — has deliberately evaded any genuine, unflinching reckoning with its role as an aggressor in the Asia-Pacific.

That Japan intends to become a "merchant of death", profiting from arms exports while claiming to promote regional "security", should not be taken lightly. A nation once bound by strict limits on military growth and arms production has already transformed itself into one of the world's biggest military spenders and a major builder of advanced weaponry. Now it aims to be a big exporter of offensive arms.

Japan's right-wing forces have marched a long way on their militarist path and they intend to go further.

This has been amplified by the ruling Liberal Democratic Party's decision to relax restrictions on defense equipment exports. It demonstrates that Japan has learned nothing from the lessons of history.

This proposal, which allows for the export of lethal weapons including fighter jets and destroyers, marks a significant shift in Japan's postwar defense policy. The approval threatens to undermine the regional security balance by permitting the exports of weapons under so-called "special circumstances". It could serve as a pretext for Japan to expand its military influence and revitalize its defense industry.

The move comes amid Japan's increased military spending. Over the past five years, Japan's defense budget has risen by over 60 percent, reaching $58 billion, and the nation has taken concrete steps toward remilitarization, including the development of intermediate-range missiles and the conversion of frigates into aircraft carriers.

This rapid militarization poses a significant threat to the postwar international order, which was established to prevent the reemergence of militaristic aggression. Considering that Japan has never truly repented its wartime atrocities, the international community must remain vigilant and united in resisting any Japanese attempts to undermine the hard-won peace achieved after World War II. The proposal has also faced significant domestic backlash. Various Japanese political parties and civic groups have expressed their disapproval, arguing that the move violates the core principles of Japan's Constitution.

With the Takaichi government now set on a course that challenges the postwar international framework, Japan's neighbors are watching closely, apprehensive about the potential consequences.

For a nation with an unresolved legacy of wartime aggression, these developments are particularly alarming and they are naturally being scrutinized by Japan's neighbors and the broader international community, who fear Japan's return to the aggressive stance that caused untold suffering in the region.

China, viewing Japan's moves through the lens of harsh experience, has responded with strategic countermeasures. By placing multiple Japanese entities on an export control list, China aims to curb Japan's militarization efforts by targeting key industries that bolster its modern military capabilities. This action, justified by export control laws, acts as a stabilizing force against the rising tide of neomilitarism in Tokyo.

The sanctioning of 40 Japanese entities, in two batches, announced by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, is intended to reinforce the postwar international order and advocate regional peace.

Rather than adjusting its approach, the Takaichi government has adopted a posture of victimhood, with officials openly condemning China's actions as "unacceptable". This stance, akin to a ship captain ignoring the warning signs of a brewing storm, risks steering Japan into dangerous waters, further isolating it from the international community.

The echoes of Japan's militaristic past resonate through its current trajectory, as the nation is considering revising its nonnuclear principles and expanding its military arsenal. These ambitions, coupled with rhetoric about "a contingency" concerning China's Taiwan region, an alleged "threat" from its neighbors and an assertive posture toward territorial disputes, evoke still raw memories of an era that would be best left in history, raising concerns about potential conflict in the region.

The international community, including the United States, should insist that Japan adhere to the postwar demilitarized arrangement.

Washington ought to realize that the Takaichi government is seeking to free-ride on the US' geopolitical games in the region. Behind every seemingly affable smile of Takaichi lies the hidden ambition of Japan's right-wing politicians to revive the militaristic legacy of Imperial Japan — a force that once brought war and death to the US itself.

Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, which renounces war and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes, is not just domestic legislation. It is the price Japan paid for its egregious aggression and a foundational element of the postwar order. As such, it is not optional.

Postwar Japan by treating the war as little more than a tragedy or a "natural disaster" — an earthquake, as Japanese thinker Shunsuke Tsurumi put it — has deliberately evaded any genuine, unflinching reckoning with its role as an aggressor in the Asia-Pacific.

That Japan intends to become a "merchant of death", profiting from arms exports while claiming to promote regional "security", should not be taken lightly. A nation once bound by strict limits on military growth and arms production has already transformed itself into one of the world's biggest military spenders and a major builder of advanced weaponry. Now it aims to be a big exporter of offensive arms.

Japan's right-wing forces have marched a long way on their militarist path and they intend to go further.