The picture shows the Japanese Self-Defense Force
Japan took a dangerous step and allowed network defense to take a preemptive strike! What's the mystery?
Today we will take a look at Japan's latest "Three Security Documents". On the 16th local time, the Japanese government officially passed the new version of the "National Security Strategy", "National Defense Strategy" and "Defense Force Preparation Plan", which include Japan's top-level strategic documents. The design also clarifies its armament plan for the next five to ten years. It is generally believed that the birth of new content means a major turning point in Japan's security and defense strategy after World War II. At the same time, this has also triggered concerns from all walks of life, believing that Japan will use this to break through the exclusive defense principle, conceal the truth, and take a more dangerous step.
So, what exactly are stipulated in these three documents that will cause such a big response? And what is the Japanese government’s intention?
The picture shows Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida
Let’s talk about the content first. As we all know, after the end of World War II, Japan's defense capabilities were greatly restricted due to the constraints of the "peace constitution", and the regulations clearly stated that Japan was not allowed to develop offensive armed forces. This new security document was the first to break this principle. One of its core contents is to allow Japan to develop so-called "counterattack capabilities." In its "counterattack standards", Japan is even allowed to launch a "counterattack" without being directly attacked. Its essence is no different from an active attack.
At the same time, in order to have corresponding "counterattack capabilities," the new security document also allows Japan to develop medium- and long-range cruise missiles. Its total defense expenditure will also increase to 43 trillion yen, approximately 313.4 billion U.S. dollars, in five years, which is equivalent to doubling the current basis. By then, Japan's military expenditure is likely to reach the third in the world, and may even become the second. Its intention to break through the restrictions of the pacifist constitution and achieve military expansion is obvious.
In addition, Japan also left two "foreshadowings" in the new security document. The first is an explicit requirement that Japan must have "the ability to counterattack enemy bases" within 1,000 kilometers. Who exactly this distance is aimed at, I don't need to say more. After all, in the document, Japan has openly positioned China as "the biggest strategic challenge to date", and also said that China's external posture "poses a threat" to Japan, and even labeled China as "economic coercion". Of course, Russia is also called a "serious security risk."
The picture shows the electronic warfare unit of the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force
The second is to align with and NATO in everything. Not only does military expenditure follow NATO and set a standard of 2%, but also after joining the NATO Cyber Defense Center, Japan has further strengthened its information warfare capabilities. In its new security document, it requires that its own side should have "active network defense," that is, the destructive ability to actively invade the other party's servers. To this end, Japan has reorganized relevant departments and increased staffing in an attempt to "raise this capability to the same level as major European and American countries."
From this point of view, the intention of the Japanese government is quite obvious. It is to exaggerate the peripheral military threats, incite regional tensions, strengthen the US-Japan alliance, and even "pave the way" for joining NATO. The root cause of all this is mainly that Japan currently adheres to the Cold War mentality. , is deeply obsessed with the so-called camp confrontation. The most important thing is that Japan’s goal of strengthening its military and expanding its armed forces has not changed. The current international situation is facing multiple crises, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and the United States’ deployment in the Asia-Pacific. These have provided Japan with an excellent opportunity to seek to “relax”, so the current situation has emerged.
The picture shows the Japanese people's opposition to the new security document
However, the Japanese government's actions have also attracted severe criticism and warnings at home and abroad. Many Japanese scholars have publicly stated that the government's behavior is "very hypocritical" and that its so-called "counterattack capabilities" actually consider how to attack. This means that these politicians have not learned from history. In addition, local time 1 On the 3rd, more than 30 public groups in Nagasaki Prefecture, Japan also issued a statement, accusing the government's new security document of violating the pacifist constitution. In addition, the Japanese Prime Minister did not hesitate to increase taxes to meet military expenditure needs in order to achieve his goals. This has caused popular resentment in Japan. The latest polls show that as of December 18, the support rate for the Fumio Kishida cabinet has been as low as 25%, while the number of opponents has reached 69%, a record high.
Korean media pointed out that Japan has a long history of aggression in the past. If Kishida Fumio insists on going his own way and continues to break the constraints of the pacifist constitution, it will likely be regarded as a kind of "new militarism." The spokesperson of the Chinese Embassy in Japan also responded that Japan's relevant statements in the document seriously deviated from the facts and wantonly incited China to threaten. China has made serious representations to Japan. At the same time, the spokesperson also warned that the current behavior of the Japanese government has to make people suspect that Japan is "deviating from the track of peace."
Of course, the United States has shown great support for the new security document. Senior officials such as U.S. Secretary of State Blinken, U.S. Defense Secretary Austin, and U.S. President’s National Security Advisor Sullivan have successively spoken out, approving Japan’s various “efforts” and expressing support for Japan’s strengthening of deterrence. Canada and the United Kingdom also uphold their approval attitude.
Finally, let’s talk about the impact of Japan’s move.
The picture shows the US-Japan joint military exercise
The first point is that Japan has opened the "Pandora's Box". Next, it is likely to go all the way to the dark side on the road to regaining its "military power". Now it is offensive weapons, will it be nuclear weapons in the future? No one can guarantee this, and once it has sufficient military power, Japan may not be willing to be limited to the islands, which will undoubtedly pose a serious threat to the situation in the Asia-Pacific.
The second point is that Japan’s economy will be more difficult to support, and sooner or later the government will need to divert domestic conflicts. From the current point of view, the Japanese automobile industry has suffered serious setbacks in the changing times. Coupled with its energy shortage, shrinking exports, and the domestic economic situation, it is already in a straight decline. If the Japanese government continues to increase taxes at this moment, it will inevitably cause extreme dissatisfaction among the people. The best way to resolve conflicts is to transfer. In this way, Japan will only repeat the mistakes of 80 years ago.
The third point is that Japan will achieve more "strategic autonomy." Previously, the cornerstone of Japan's defense was the security treaty signed with the United States. However, a conflict between Russia and Ukraine clearly demonstrated the substantive attitude of the United States. Faced with this situation, Japan had to consider whether the US military stationed in Japan could really protect Japan's security if the situation changed. Therefore, it chose this "self-reliance" path. Even if it cannot completely get rid of the influence of the United States at this stage, it will eventually exceed the limit. At that time, it is difficult to say what Japan will do if it loses control.
The picture shows Japan’s unconditional surrender in World War II
As the old saying goes, no one will die if they are willing to fight and fight. The Japanese government should understand as soon as possible that blindly strengthening armaments and developing military strength will neither realize its so-called "dream of a great power" nor achieve its goal. The geostrategic separation between France and the United States is ultimately a "springboard" for the United States to intervene in the Asia-Pacific. Moreover, the current peaceful situation is hard-won. Only by recognizing the trend of the times, learning from historical lessons, and truly achieving win-win cooperation with neighboring countries can we achieve our own development. If we go further and further down the wrong path, we will ultimately only play with fire and burn ourselves.
