Japan’s Rearmament Suggests a Missed Opportunity for Middle Powers

Illustration by Jonathan Rockford

LISTEN TO THIS ARTICLE

In December 2025, Japan’s cabinet approved a record defense budget – a 9.4 percent increase over the prior year and the fourth consecutive annual rise under its five-year plan to double defense spending. The plan, worth roughly $320 billion in total, has placed Japan third in the world for defense expenditure. For a country once defined by its pacifist constitution, this marks a dramatic shift in strategic posture. It also signals a missed opportunity – not only for Japan, but for middle powers worldwide.

Multipolarity’s Promise and Japan’s Divergence

The international order is once again shifting into multipolarity, placing middle or regional powers like Japan at a critical juncture. Will they emulate the great powers of the past with strong militaries and a general distrust of their neighbors? Or will they forge a new path that values diplomacy and cooperation over hard power?

Japan’s recent defense policy decisions suggest the former. Its unprecedented defense budgets, reinterpretation of Article 9 of its pacifist constitution, and development of counterstrike capabilities all signal a fundamental transformation in Japan’s strategic posture. 

The stakes of that choice are now being articulated at the highest levels of global governance. In January 2026, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney issued a pointed challenge to middle powers everywhere: Compete with each other for the favor of great powers, or coalesce to create a “third path with impact.” Accommodation of hegemons, Carney warned, is not sovereignty.

Middle powers like Japan have a chance to emerge as leaders in peacebuilding, development, and cooperation. By investing in soft power rather than military buildup, these states could reshape the world order into one that explicitly values human security and global justice over military strength.

The Weight of Hard Power

The late Prime Minister Shinzo Abe laid the groundwork for constitutional reinterpretation that would allow Japan to exercise collective self-defense. Subsequent administrations have deepened this shift, and Japan now has counterstrike capabilities in what it describes as a response to escalating regional threats. These concerns are not unfounded, as North Korea’s provocations and China’s assertiveness in the East and South China Seas present genuine security challenges. 

Compounding this, US trends toward a transactional, isolationist international policy have cast doubt on the reliability of America’s extended deterrence. At the Munich Security Conference in February 2026, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio framed US commitment to its alliances in terms that place the burden squarely on partners. He warned that US allies must be capable of defending themselves so that no adversary will be tempted to test their collective strength. This validates Tokyo’s rearmament, but it reflects an alliance logic that prioritizes US strategic convenience over Japan’s long-term identity and influence.

Militarization also carries weighty historical baggage for Japan that the region has not forgotten. Unlike post-war Germany, Japan has not fully reckoned with the atrocities it committed during its imperial era, including its colonization of neighboring countries and its “comfort women” system, in which the Japanese Imperial Army subjected women to sexual slavery. 

Japan’s refusal to engage in meaningful historical reconciliation continues to fuel mistrust. This matters not just for diplomatic relations but for the state’s global credibility. Japan is using its identity as a “proactive contributor to peace” to justify its militarization. However, a rearmed Japan with unresolved historical tensions appears less like a force for peace and more like a reemerging threat.

Setting the Wrong Precedent

Instead of competing in a new arms race, middle powers could invest resources and global influence in diplomacy, peacebuilding, climate action, and technological innovation. These are not only the tools of a modern power, but are also areas in which Japan has excelled. Its reputation as a development partner, its role in global health, and its cultural diplomacy have earned Japan significant soft power. Militarization threatens to squander what Japan has built for itself.

While some may argue that military preparedness and soft power can coexist, Japan’s unresolved wartime legacy complicates this balance. In the context of Japan’s history and its lack of historical reconciliation, rearmament risks reviving regional distrust rather than bolstering deterrence.

Madalyn Jane Shircliff is a M.A. candidate in International Security from the Josef Korbel School of Global and Public Affairs.

If you enjoyed this work, please consider sharing our content and website or donating to a non-profit organization linked in the Donate tab.

DISCLAIMER

Mooreposts publishes independent analysis, commentary, and research for informational and educational purposes only. Content on Mooreposts—including articles, Mooreposts Bites, strategic intelligence assessments, opinion pieces, interviews, and visual materials—does not constitute legal, financial, medical, or professional advice, nor does it represent any government agency, official position, or classified assessment.

Unless explicitly stated, all analyses and interpretations reflect the views and analytic judgments of the individual author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Mooreposts, its editorial staff, or affiliated contributors. Strategic intelligence and analytical content is based on open-source information and publicly available materials.

Mooreposts strives for accuracy, transparency, and rigorous sourcing; however, information may change as events develop. Readers are encouraged to consult primary sources and exercise independent judgment.