As the world commemorates the 79th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan contemplates pivotal shift in its defence policy

As the world commemorates the 79th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a profound moment of reflection intersects with a pivotal shift in Japan's defence policy.

On August 6 and 9, 1945, the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan were devastated by atomic bombs dropped by the United States, marking a pivotal moment in World War II and the history of warfare. The bombings resulted in the immediate deaths of tens of thousands of people, with the total number of casualties, including those from radiation sickness and injuries, rising to over 200,000. Hiroshima, targeted first, saw the "Little Boy" bomb obliterate much of the city, while Nagasaki was struck by the "Fat Man" bomb three days later.

The immense destruction and loss of life precipitated Japan's surrender on August 15, 1945, effectively ending World War II. These events also ushered in the nuclear age, highlighting the devastating power of atomic weapons and sparking global debates on nuclear ethics, warfare, and disarmament. The bombings remain a somber reminder of the catastrophic consequences of nuclear conflict and the importance of striving for peace and international cooperation.

The devastation, which claimed the lives of  civilians, imprinted an indelible mark on the nation's collective consciousness and laid the foundation for its pacifist constitution. In the aftermath of these horrific events, Japan adopted a policy of defensive neutrality, enshrined in Article 9 of its constitution, renouncing war and prohibiting the maintenance of armed forces for combat.

This commitment to pacifism became a cornerstone of Japan's identity, earning it a place of respect in the global community and even frequent nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize. However, as the world grapples with evolving geopolitical threats, Japan has announced a significant shift in its defence policy.

The government has decided to allocate 2% of its GDP to defence spending, marking a departure from its longstanding pacifist stance. This decision, driven by perceived threats from North Korea and China, positions Japan as the second-largest arms importer globally, following Saudi Arabia.

Japan's new national security strategy is a response to the growing tensions in the region. North Korea has already conducted missile tests capable of reaching Japanese territory, while China's increasing assertiveness in the South China Sea and its broader regional ambitions have raised alarms in Tokyo.

These developments have prompted Japan to reconsider its post-World War II defence posture. Former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, a staunch advocate for revising Japan's pacifist constitution, argued that the nation must strengthen its military capabilities to counter regional threats. Although Abe's tenure saw some legislative changes allowing for a modest self-defence force, widespread public opposition prevented a complete overhaul of Article 9. Nonetheless, Abe's vision of a robust Japanese military continues to influence current policies.

Current Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, with the backing of both the House of Councillors and the House of Representatives, has pressed forward with this new defence agenda. However, public sentiment remains largely against these changes. According to a Kyodo News Agency survey, 80% of the population opposes the government's constitutional amendment efforts, reflecting a deep-rooted commitment to pacifism among the Japanese people.

The decision to shift defence policies on the anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is particularly poignant. The memories of the atomic bombings serve as a stark reminder of the horrors of war and the importance of peace. The destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not just a military strategy but also an unprecedented human tragedy. The bombings, justified by the U.S. as necessary to end the war, were, in reality, cruel scientific experiments that unleashed untold suffering and long-term consequences.

The atomic bombings forced Japan to adopt a peace-oriented constitution, promoting disarmament and dialogue over conflict. Article 9 has been a symbol of hope and a testament to Japan's commitment to ensuring that such devastation never occurs again.

The policy shift, therefore, raises important questions about the future of pacifism in Japan and its role in international peace and security. As Japan increases its defence budget and modernizes its military capabilities, it steps into a complex and competitive arms race.

The nation that once stood as a beacon of pacifism now finds itself at a crossroads, balancing its historical commitment to peace with the pressing need to address contemporary security challenges. The legacy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki endures, reminding the world of the catastrophic consequences of war and the enduring value of peace.

As Japan navigates this new defence trajectory, it must reconcile its past with its present, ensuring that the principles of peace and humanity remain at the forefront of its national identity.

In the shadow of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan's defence policy evolution marks a significant chapter in its history. The world watches closely as Japan seeks to uphold its commitment to peace while safeguarding its future in an increasingly uncertain global landscape.

The devastating bombings marked a turning point in World War II,  leading to Japan's surrender and the end of the conflict. These tragic events imprinted a commitment to pacifism in Japan's national consciousness, enshrined in its post-war constitution.

However, with rising geopolitical threats from North Korea's missile tests and China's regional ambitions, Japan has no choice but to reconsider its pacifist stance and increase its defence spending, sparking a national debate on the future of its long-held commitment to peace.

(The writer is an asssociate professor Centre For South Asian Studies, School of International Studies & Social Sciences Pondicherry Central University; views are personal)