The Japanese defence minister’s recent denial of militarism, delivered alongside a pointed critique of China’s ‘huge arsenal’, is a fascinating piece of geopolitical theatre. It is, of course, a necessary statement for Tokyo to make, given its constitutional constraints and the spectre of its imperial past. But let us not be naïve.
Japan has been quietly expanding its military capabilities for years, from its helicopter carriers to its nascent space force. The irony is thick enough to cut with a katana. To accuse China of militarism while Japan itself modernises its forces is like Nero decrying arson.
Yet, the minister’s remarks are not without merit. China’s arsenal has grown with alarming speed, and its territorial ambitions in the East China Sea are as blatant as the Kremlin’s in Ukraine. The difference, however, lies in historical precedent.
Japan’s militarism led to a brutal campaign of conquest that ended in atomic fire. China’s militarism, for now, is a tool of intimidation and resource extraction. One is a ghost of the past; the other is a present threat dressed in the garb of a peaceful rise.
The British Asia briefing, where these remarks were made, is a reminder that the old imperial powers still have a role to play, however diminished. Perhaps we are witnessing a new cycle of history, where post-war Japan seeks to shed its pacifist skin while China adopts the assertive postures of earlier empires. But let us not forget the lessons of the last century: arms races and shrill condemnations rarely end well.
The question is not whether Japan is militaristic or China is menacing, but whether the global order can contain these ambitions before they ignite a conflict that no one can win.
