Sordid military tendency of Japan draws the attention of the international community.
Late in June, the Japanese government announced that it would officially cancel the shipment of "Aegis Ashore" for which it has made great efforts for years.
Japan suddenly cancelled the shipment for such reasons as its cost and technical problems though it had already paid a stupendous amount of fund even before a decision was made on the place of its deployment, defying internal and external rejection while asserting that "Aegis Ashore is indispensable for defending the security and life of people".
What matters is that the issue of possessing an "ability to attack enemy base" is being raised again in the Japanese political circle, timed to coincide with this.
In a press conference on June 18, Prime Minister Abe expressed the stand to bring the problem about the possession of the "ability to attack enemy base" up for the governmental discussion, calling for re-examining the mode of existence of a deterrent commensurate with the step taken to cancel the deployment of the said weapons system.
In this regard, the debate is heated up even within the ruling Liberal Democratic Party on Japan's possibility for preemptive attack and all the proposals containing opinions of party members are scheduled to be submitted to the government within this month.
Japan withdrew the deployment of missile defence system on one hand but asserts the possession of the "ability to attack enemy base" on the other hand. This reminds one of a frog withdrawing into itself for further jump.
After its defeat in the war, Japan has sought for the possession of attack ability in its persistent bid for turning the country into a military power, but it has never pursued so openly with an obvious orientation and realistic nature as today.
Under an absurd interpretation of law that the possession of "ability to attack enemy base" belongs to the range of self-defence under a certain condition from the mid-1950s, it has built up corresponding public opinion and steadily granted legitimacy to it under the pretext of "threats from neighbouring countries".
Despite international and legal restrictions, it has massively developed and introduced military hardware with double purposes of attack and defence and waged military drills with various codenames, thus turning the "Self-defence Forces" into an attack-type combat group and preemptive attack forces.
Under the Abe regime, in particular, it randomly introduced such attack weapons as up-to-date stealth fighters, long-range cruise missiles and carriers and now stretches its tentacles to outer space and cyberspace after discarding the veil of "exclusive defence". Such reality clearly shows the true nature of the war-like country which seeks not just "at the minimum level" but "beyond necessity".
In fact, Japan's possession of the ability for preemptive attack has already been rounded off long time ago, and what lacks now is only a legitimate "status".
Through the institution of various kinds of war laws and rules, it implicitly secured the right to belligerency and the right to take part in the war, which it was divested of after its defeat in the war. It has now possessed even combat power for fighting a war. The legitimization of its possession of the ability for preemptive attack precisely means the final completion of its preparedness for reinvasion.
Japan, which has not yet shaken off its ill fame as an enemy state, is running headlong along the road of reinvasion, losing its discretion. Its dangerous acts arouse apprehension and denunciation of the world people.
Japan should not act indiscreetly, fully aware of the fact that its reckless moves for militarization is a foolish suicidal act of adding fuel to fire.