Recently, a unit of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces posted an article on its official X account, introducing the unit's participation in the memorial ceremony for the war dead on Iwo Jima between the United States and Japan, and expressing respect for the war dead on both the United States and Japan.
However, in the article, the unit's post referred to Iwo Jima as "the largest area of intense fighting in the Greater East Asia War," a designation that immediately sparked heated discussions on the Internet.
The "Greater East Asia War" undoubtedly reminds people of the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" plan of the Japanese militarist government during World War II, and in fact, this is exactly what the Japanese government called the "Pacific War" at that time.
With the defeat of Japan and the stationing of American troops in Japan, the term was also banned, and until this time, Japan had never used the expression "Greater East Asia War" at the official level.
Now that this expression has reappeared, people can't help but worry about whether Japanese militarism is "revival", and many Japanese netizens have also criticized it, saying that it is a retrogression for the Japanese government and the Self-Defense Forces.
During World War II, Hitler of Germany, Mussolini of Italy, and Emperor Hirohito of Japan were the main culprits in the tragedy of World War II.
After the defeat of the Axis powers, Hitler committed suicide by drinking bullets, and Mussolini was also shot.
However, Emperor Hirohito was spared approval by Tokyo because of the need for the American occupation of Japan, and the Yasukuni Shrine, the symbol of Japanese militarism, was preserved.
Originally, the U.S. occupation policy toward Japan was to completely destroy militarism, but later, in order to contain the Soviet Union, its attitude toward Japan also changed from punishment and reform to support.
With the help of the United States, Japan's economy recovered, but in the military aspect, the United States put an iron chain on Japan, and the signing of the Japan-US Security Treaty in 1951 put Japan's military firmly under the control of the United States.
Originally, the Japan-US Security Treaty was an unequal treaty with no bilateral character to speak of, and Japan sacrificed its sovereignty to allow the United States to station troops, and the US military stationed in Japan also had the privilege to suppress the civil unrest in Japan.
However, as the US military needs in the Asia-Pacific region continue to increase, it can be seen that the United States is gradually loosening its grip on Japan.
In fact, the U.S.-Japan security system has been upgraded several times.
In 1960, the United States and Japan signed a new Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, which replaced the previous one, which was more egalitarian than the old one, strengthened Japan's autonomy, and strengthened the U.S.-Japan military alliance.
In 1978, the United States and Japan formulated the "U.S.-Japan Defense Cooperation Guidelines," which stipulated that if the United States went to war in the Far East, Japan must provide the United States with logistics and military bases.
In 2015, Japan's Self-Defense Forces were allowed to provide support to the U.S. military around the world.
It can be seen from this that the logistical support capability of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces is gradually improving, but this is far from satisfying Japan's appetite, and the ultimate goal is to achieve military independence.
After China's rise, the United States has promoted a series of "small multilateral" layouts to contain China in response to China's threat, and Japan has played an important role in it.
Taking advantage of the opportunity of the great power game, Japan fished in troubled waters and "used the issue to play" under the instructions of the United States, and even some issues of containing China were pushed by Japan to the United States.
With regard to Japan's "outstanding" performance, the United States is also willing to give Japan greater military autonomy.
Over the past few years, Japan's military spending has been on the rise, it has continuously relaxed restrictions on arms exports, revised its three major security documents, and actively promoted cooperation with NATO.
Even things such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which are not directly related to Japan's national security, have become excuses for the Japanese government to promote the strengthening of the military and the expansion of its armed forces.
It can be seen that Japan is constantly expanding the scope of its military activities, and of course this is also being carried out with the tacit consent of the United States.
On April 10 this year, Fumio Kishida visited the United States, and the United States and Japan once again pointed the finger at China, hyping up the so-called "China threat", and at the same time, the "U.S.-Japan Security Treaty" will be upgraded on a large scale.
What merits even more vigilance is that this escalation was actively promoted by Japan, which shows Japan's ambition to seek a political and military power.
In addition, the "Aukus" alliance established by the United States, Britain, and Australia also intends to include Japan.
With the support of the United States, Japan's military development is no longer concealed, and Japan's military capability, especially offensive military capability, is constantly improving, and the US-Japan alliance seems to have changed from a defensive alliance to an alliance with both offensive and defensive capabilities.
At first, the U.S. military stationed in Japan was supposed to exist after the victory in World War II to prevent the restoration of Japanese militarism, but now it has become a booster for the development of Japan's military strength, seriously impacting the peace of the surrounding regions and bringing confrontation risks to the Asia-Pacific region and the world.
The gradual escalation of the security system of the United States and Japan is a mistake to open a Pandora's box.