Japan’s new arms export rules risk eroding its pacifist stance

The Japanese government has revised the “Three Principles on Transfer of Defense Equipment and Technology,” which set rules for arms exports, and its operational guidelines. This marks a major shift away from the restrained stance Japan has maintained for many years.

The framework that had heretofore limited exports to five noncombat categories — rescue, transportation, vigilance, surveillance and minesweeping — has been abolished.

Under the new rules, Japan can export weapons with lethal capabilities, such as missiles, to countries with which it has concluded agreements in advance. It will also allow the export of weapons that Japan has jointly developed and produced with other countries to third countries. The stated aim is to strengthen ties with allies and like-minded nations by supplying them with arms and to enhance regional deterrence.

Another objective is to reinforce the foundations of the domestic defense industry by expanding exports and to secure domestic production capability in preparation for potential contingencies. Behind this lies a strong sense of alarm over the wave of corporate withdrawals from the sector, as companies judged that the domestic market alone offered too few business opportunities.

There is no doubt that Japan’s security environment is becoming increasingly severe. However, if excessive exports trigger an arms race, regional situations will become unstable. Combined with the expansion of the defense industry, this could rather heighten tensions with neighboring countries.

The greatest concern is the lack of a mechanism to curb the expansion of exports. In principle, exports to “countries in which it is judged that actual combat is taking place” will not be allowed, but if the government decides that there are “special circumstances in terms of Japan’s security,” it will permit them as an exception.

The National Security Council (NSC) will review whether exports are allowed, and the government says it will check how the recipient country manages the equipment after export as necessary. However, there remains a risk that weapons will be brought from the recipient country into parties in conflict or countries with serious human rights issues. There are concerns that Japan could become involved in conflicts in unintended ways. The risk of technology leaks has also been pointed out.

The Centrist Reform Alliance and two other opposition parties have argued that easing should remain limited. As a counterproposal, they had compiled a plan to add three items to the five categories for the purpose of defending sea lanes: measures to counter drones, joint training, and air defense systems.

Under the new system, the Diet can hardly be expected to function as a brake. After the NSC decides on an export, it will only send written notification afterward to all Diet members. A mechanism for prior review must be established.

In the United States, export deals that exceed a certain amount must be notified to Congress in advance. There is also a prerequisite that no resolution banning the export has been adopted. To prevent Japan from expanding arms exports without restraint, clear rules and effective safeguards are essential.

To begin with, the latest revision was carried out solely by the government and ruling parties on the grounds that it did not require amending laws. It is hard to say that the public has been sufficiently informed and convinced.

Japan, as a pacifist nation, has long imposed restrictions on arms exports. In 1967, when antiwar sentiment was growing over the Vietnam War, then Prime Minister Eisaku Sato announced the “Three Principles on Arms Exports,” under which Japan was not to export weapons to communist bloc countries, countries subject to United Nations arms embargoes, or parties to international conflicts. In 1976, then Prime Minister Takeo Miki went further and effectively adopted a comprehensive ban.

It was the second Shinzo Abe administration that shifted course toward easing arms export restrictions. Amid China’s military buildup and other factors, the government in 2014 replaced the existing rules with the “Three Principles on Transfer of Defense Equipment and Technology,” allowing exports but limiting them to the five categories and other conditions.

Since then, the Japanese government has continued to create “loopholes.” It allowed exports of finished weapons if they were produced under license, as long as they were shipped to the country that had granted that license. The first such case was the export of the Self-Defense Forces’ Patriot surface-to-air missiles to the United