By Chang Sichun

Since the end of World War II, Japan has never fully eradicated the militarist elements that drove its wartime aggression. Recent developments indicate a resurgence of these forces, fueled by intersecting domestic and international factors.

Domestically, Japanese society has avoided a comprehensive reckoning with the ideological foundations of its imperial expansionism. Descendants and ideological inheritors of pre-war militarist figures have regained influential positions in government and politics, creating structural concerns about the revival of expansionist ideologies.

Over subsequent decades, Japanese authorities have systematically tolerated right-wing efforts to whitewash history education. Since the mid-1950s, state-approved textbook revisions have progressively minimized, distorted, or outright denied Japan’s wartime atrocities. This institutionalized historical revisionism cultivates distorted national narratives among younger generations, creating enabling conditions for a militarist revival.

Yasukuni Shrine, long a spiritual tool and symbol of Japan’s militarist aggression, has increasingly been used by Japanese politicians. By visiting the shrine to cater to right-wing forces and consolidate political support, they turn this symbol of militarism into an instrument for personal political gain.

Since the end of the Cold War, profound changes in the international landscape and Japan’s prolonged economic stagnation—often referred to as its “lost decades”—have driven the country to seek so-called “normal country” status through breakthroughs in the political and security domains.

Historical revisionism has continued to spread within Japan. Some politicians and right-wing forces openly deny atrocities committed by the Japanese military during World War II, including the Nanjing Massacre and the forced recruitment of “comfort women,” while persistently questioning, undermining, or hollowing out the Murayama Statement and the Kono Statement.

Japanese leaders have repeatedly staged so-called “memorial” activities overseas and vigorously promoted a narrative centered on Japan as a “victim of nuclear bombings,” attempting to dilute Japan’s responsibility as a perpetrator of aggression by reshaping its international image as a victim.

Externally, flawed historical perspectives such as “Western centrism” and the notion of Europe as the sole main battlefield of World War II have distorted the global understanding of Japanese militarism. As a matter of fact, the policy of appeasement was one of the key causes of the outbreak of the war.

Following the September 18th Incident, some Western countries adopted policies of indulgence and appeasement toward Japan’s aggression in China. In the post-World War II era, a Cold War mentality led Western academia to largely underestimate the significance of the main Eastern battlefield and seriously overlook China’s major contribution to the Allied victory in the World Anti-Fascist War.

During the Cold War, ideological considerations dominated international relations. In order to safeguard their vested interests in the Far East, certain countries hastily sought to turn Japan into a frontline outpost against communism, thereby prematurely ending the process of reckoning with Japanese militarism.

A number of imprisoned Class-A war criminals received early release, while many militarists were removed from postwar purges and returned to political and business circles, occupying key positions. For example, Class-A war criminals Mamoru Shigemitsu and Okinori Kaya later served as Japan’s deputy prime minister and foreign minister, and justice minister, respectively.

These facts demonstrate that the “poisonous seed” of militarism was not eradicated in postwar Japan; instead, it quietly took root and grew under the protection of right-wing forces that had escaped accountability.

More recently, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has recklessly claimed that a “Taiwan contingency” could constitute a “survival-threatening situation,” justifying Japan’s exercise of the right to collective self-defense and openly challenging the postwar international order.

It is widely recognized that Japanese militarists repeatedly used the so-called “survival-threatening situation” as a pretext to launch wars of aggression in the past. This year marks the 80th anniversary of the victory in the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War, yet the specter of militarism still looms over Japan.

Takaichi’s irresponsible remarks on Taiwan fully exposed the lingering presence of Japanese militarist thinking and its unrepentant coveting of Taiwan. Such actions directly challenge China’s core interests, seriously undermine regional peace and stability, and pose hidden dangers to world peace. The international community must work together to resolutely oppose and contain this trend.

(Chang Sichun is the deputy director of the office of diplomatic studies of the Institute of Japanese Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.)

Source: People’s Daily