A nuclear shortcut to greater insecurity

Japan is steadily treading the dangerous path toward nuclear armament. Citing shifts in the global security landscape and adjustments in Europe's nuclear posture, Japanese Defense Minister Shinjiro Koizumi recently argued that Japan should "discuss nuclear-related policies without taboos".

His remarks challenge the country's long-standing "Three Non-Nuclear Principles" and are intended to garner public support and clear the legal hurdles for Japan's nuclear armament.

Koizumi's remarks are neither accidental nor isolated. Rather, they reveal a systemic push by Japan's right-wing forces to accelerate remilitarization and challenge the postwar international order. Shortly after Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi took office, several of her close aides expressed pro-nuclear sentiments.

Calls for nuclear-powered submarines and repeated attempts by the ruling coalition to scrap the "Three Non-Nuclear Principles" during revisions of Japan's security documents reveal that the die-hard nuclear ambitions of right-wing forces are resurfacing.

Japan may frame such moves as a response to its growing "security anxiety", but history and reality show that pursuing nuclear armament is counterproductive.

It would upset the strategic balance in Northeast Asia, intensify regional tensions, drag Japan back to militarism and plunge it deeper into a security dilemma.

After World War II, guided by pacifists' reflection on its history of aggression and constrained by restrictions of the postwar international order, Japan adopted an "exclusively defense-oriented" policy and embraced the "Three Non-Nuclear Principles" — not possessing, producing or introducing nuclear weapons. This commitment to peaceful development laid the foundation for decades of political stability and economic recovery for the country.

However, amid significant shifts in the international landscape, Japan's right-wing factions have increasingly exaggerated "external threats" to justify dismantling the constraints imposed by its pacifist Constitution and the postwar international order. This rise of neo-militarism, exemplified by Koizumi's overt calls for nuclear armament, reflects a dangerous drift away from pacifism.

By equating nuclear deterrence with "absolute security", Koizumi framed nuclear weapons as the ultimate weapon for coping with potential security risks and for elevating Japan's strategic standing. Koizumi's rhetoric is fundamentally flawed because it overlooks geopolitical realities, Japan's historical responsibilities, and the international constraints it should abide by.

The notion that nuclear weapons can ensure a country's security is also not correct. In fact, nuclear weapons will prove counterproductive for Tokyo by triggering a regional arms race.

Instead of bringing "absolute security" to Japan, they will endanger the security of all regional countries.

Northeast Asia is already one of the world's most strategically sensitive regions. Japan's nuclear aspirations will disrupt the strategic equilibrium maintained for decades, and force other countries to upgrade their necessary nuclear deterrence or conventional military capabilities. This would replace the strategic stability in Northeast Asia with escalating confrontation.

Geography also doesn't favor Japan. The country's long, narrow territory, limited strategic depth and densely concentrated population and industrial centers make it more vulnerable than its larger neighbors in a potential nuclear standoff. Instead of ensuring security, nuclear weapons would make Japan a prominent target while eliminating its strategic security buffer.

As a non-nuclear-weapon signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, Japan's pursuit of nuclear arms blatantly violates the international non-proliferation regime and undermines global nuclear governance.

The country's history of aggression and "Peace Constitution" strip Japan of any legitimacy to acquire nuclear weapons. More importantly, Japan has yet to fully reckon with its wartime crimes. Nuclear weapons would only bolster its historical revisionism and military ambitions.

As a defeated aggressor in WWII and the only country in the world to have suffered atomic bombings, Japan knows all too well how devastating nuclear weapons are. That painful history should reinforce, not weaken, its commitment to nuclear restraint.

Koizumi's advocacy of nuclear weapons for "security" is essentially an attempt to break from the postwar order and reestablish Japan as a major military power.

Its nuclear ambitions can trap Japan in a dual "security dilemma". For decades, the country has relied on the United States-Japan alliance and Washington's nuclear umbrella and military presence for its security. Developing its own nuclear capability would run counter to Washington's strategic layout in East Asia and invite US suspicion.

It would gradually erode the security umbrella provided by the US-Japan alliance. On the other hand, intensified tensions with neighboring countries would leave Japan politically isolated and diplomatically disadvantaged.

The warning signs are already visible. Japan's rapid military buildup — including substantial increases in defense spending, development of offensive arms, hyping of nuclear weapons, and interference in regional disputes — has already put its neighbors on high alert.

This might-makes-right security strategy will drag Japan into a vicious cycle of arms and insecurity, potentially reviving the militaristic path it followed during WWII.

Lasting national security does not come from military expansion or nuclear armament but from a stable regional order, mutual trust among neighbors, strategic restraint, and sustainable development.

Koizumi's fallacy that "nuclear brings security", along with the re-militarization and nuclear agenda pushed by Japan's right-wing forces, is a shortsighted gamble that threatens the country's national security, regional peace, and the shared future of humanity.

Tokyo must recognize that peaceful development, security and stability depend on adhering to the "pacifist"Constitution, committing to non-nuclear principles, and integrating into regional cooperation.

Indulging in militarism and pursuing the so-called "absolute security" through nuclear arms would only lead to disaster.

The author is a professor at the National Defense University, the People's Liberation Army.

The views don't necessarily reflect those of China Daily.