Japan’s constitutional revision: militarisation under U.S. pressure amid regional tensions and domestic power consolidation

The Ainu people of Hokkaido, Japan’s indigenous group, have faced centuries of assimilation policies and land dispossession, with militarisation further threatening their cultural sovereignty. Indigenous perspectives on peace and security often prioritise community-based conflict resolution over state-led militarisation, yet these voices are entirely absent from mainstream narratives. Japan’s constitutional revision risks deepening the erasure of Ainu self-determination, aligning with historical patterns of state-imposed homogeneity.

Japan’s pacifist constitution (Article 9, 1947) was imposed by the U.S. after WWII to prevent remilitarisation, but its reinterpretation began in the 1950s under U.S. pressure to rearm Japan during the Cold War. The 1960 U.S.-Japan Security Treaty solidified Japan’s role as a U.S. military proxy, setting a precedent for today’s constitutional revision. Historical parallels include Japan’s 1930s militarisation, which led to WWII in Asia, a trauma still vivid in China and Korea’s collective memory.

In China, Japan’s constitutional revision is framed as a revival of imperial ambitions, echoing historical grievances from the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937–1945). Southeast Asian nations like Vietnam and Indonesia, which suffered under Japanese occupation, may view this shift as a destabilising factor in regional security. Meanwhile, in Europe, where pacifism is often tied to post-WWII reconciliation, Japan’s move is seen as a departure from its post-war identity, raising questions about the universality of 'peace constitutions.'

Political science research shows that constitutional revisions in democracies often correlate with shifts in security alliances, particularly under U.S. influence (e.g., South Korea’s 1972 Yusin Constitution). Studies on militarisation highlight how domestic political consolidation (e.g., LDP’s supermajority) enables structural changes that bypass public debate. Quantitative analyses of military spending in Japan reveal a 12% increase since 2020, aligning with U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy goals.

Japanese artists like Issey Miyake and Tadanori Yokoo have long critiqued militarisation through fashion and graphic design, using symbolism to challenge state narratives. In Okinawa, spiritual leaders of the Ryukyu Kingdom (pre-1879) are invoked in protests against U.S. military bases, framing resistance as a spiritual duty to protect ancestral lands. Buddhist and Shinto traditions in Japan often emphasise pacifism (e.g., 'peaceful coexistence'), but these values are sidelined in mainstream discourse.

Scenario modelling suggests that Japan’s constitutional revision could trigger a regional arms race, with South Korea and Taiwan potentially revising their own security postures. If China perceives Japan as a direct military threat, it may accelerate its nuclear modernisation, destabilising the nuclear non-proliferation regime. Long-term, this could lead to a bipolar security architecture in East Asia, reminiscent of the Cold War, with Japan as a U.S. proxy state.

Okinawans, who host 70% of U.S. military bases in Japan, have long protested against militarisation, but their voices are excluded from national debates. Japanese pacifist groups, such as the Japan Congress Against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs (Gensuikyo), warn that constitutional revision undermines Article 9’s protections, yet they are marginalised as 'unrealistic.' Survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, who embody Japan’s pacifist identity, are rarely consulted in policy discussions.