TOKYO – The Japanese government has decided to abolish the “five categories” that limited arms exports to noncombat purposes such as “rescue” and “transport,” lifting the ban on exporting lethal weapons and allowing exports even to countries currently in conflict when there are “special security circumstances.”
The government says the move is intended to broaden sales channels to strengthen the defense industrial base, bolster Japan’s ability to sustain operations in an emergency and enhance deterrence in recipient countries.
Japan has traditionally been cautious about arms exports out of concern — consistent with the spirit of Article 9 of the Constitution, which renounces settling international disputes by force — that exporting weapons could fuel international conflicts.
That concern has grown as the world has witnessed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and U.S. strikes on Iran.
These conflicts have taken on the character of prolonged wars of attrition involving missiles and drones, driving strong demand for weapons. In the United States, there have also been reports that missile stockpiles have been depleted following the Iran strikes, potentially delaying delivery to Japan of Tomahawk cruise missiles.
Amid the war in Ukraine, Japan exported Patriot surface-to-air guided missiles to the United States, which has been supplying missiles to Ukraine. While the move was attributed to U.S. stock shortages, some have pointed out that it already amounts to a de facto “detour” export to Ukraine via the United States.
The biggest issue is whether Japan should export weapons to the United States simply because it is an ally now that Washington has become a party to a war through its strikes on Iran. If Japan exports weapons, it is clear the result would be to encourage international conflict.
Beyond the United States, countries with which Japan has concluded “defense equipment” transfer agreements include Middle Eastern states attacked by Iran, as well as the Philippines, which is at odds with China over the South China Sea.
If those countries become parties to conflicts, they would end up fighting with Japanese-made weapons. Supplying weapons to a belligerent is, from the other side’s perspective, a hostile act, raising the risk that Japan could be drawn into war.
Moreover, if Japan supplies weapons to one side, it becomes impossible for Tokyo to act as a fair mediator to bring about an early settlement.
The question of what truly constitutes “special security circumstances” that would still justify supplying weapons demands rigorous scrutiny.
If a contingency involving Japan were to become a war of missile attrition, the ability to keep producing missiles would be crucial. At the same time, as seen in the Iran strikes, there is also the risk that the production base itself becomes a target.
If Japan is to discuss its war-sustaining capability, it should consider not only how to boost defense-industry output but also how to protect that capacity from enemy attack, but such debate is not being heard. Without it, the discussion amounts to industrial policy in peacetime rather than preparation for an emergency.
Lifting the ban on arms exports also has the effect of encouraging self-perpetuating growth in the defense industry by expanding orders for defense equipment beyond the scale of Japan’s own defense needs. That could further increase pressure to export.
If the defense industry is treated as an engine of economic growth, it becomes all too easy to fall into a profit-first mindset. That is precisely why strict safeguards are essential.
At its core, arms exports mean Japan becoming involved, even indirectly, in other countries’ conflicts.
To determine whether that truly contributes to Japan’s security, the government must fulfill its responsibility to explain decisions to the public on a concrete, case-by-case basis rather than in generalities.
Prior notification to the Diet, as sought by opposition parties, should be indispensable as a minimum safeguard.
Kyoji Yanagisawa. (For editorial use only)(Kyodo)
(Kyoji Yanagisawa, born in Tokyo in 1946, was a Defense Ministry bureaucrat who served as assistant chief Cabinet secretary from 2004 to 2009.)