A Defense Ministry panel is set to propose that the government consider raising defense spending beyond the current goal of 2 percent of gross domestic product, sources close to the matter said.
In a draft proposal to be presented to the government soon, the panel, set up in February 2024, also calls for discussions on deploying submarines equipped with long-range missiles, including nuclear-powered ones, to strengthen the country's deterrence capability, the sources said.
It remains unclear how the proposal will be reflected in Japan's defense policy, as questions remain over how to fund a larger budget and whether using nuclear power for defense purposes would conflict with the country's policy of peaceful atomic energy use.
The government "should not hesitate to pursue the further strengthening of defense capabilities after the achievement" of the current target to have defense-related spending account for 2 percent of GDP, the panel says in the draft proposal, according to the sources.
The panel says submarines that enable Japan to strike from beyond an enemy's missile range would significantly enhance the country's deterrence capability.
The government should discuss all possible options for propulsion systems, including nuclear power for the submarines, "without taboos," the panel says.
The panel, chaired by Sadayuki Sakakibara, the former chairman of the Japan Business Federation, was set up to discuss how the country's defense capabilities should be bolstered in line with its current defense buildup plan.
The plan, known as the Defense Buildup Program, allocates 43 trillion yen over five years through March 2028, aiming for defense spending to reach 2 percent of GDP in fiscal 2027.
Japan's annual defense budget had long been capped at around 1 percent of GDP.
The program was adopted in December 2022 as part of three key security documents that marked a major shift in defense policy for a country with a pacifist Constitution, including a plan to acquire strike capabilities that could reach an adversary's territory.
"It is necessary to make efforts to achieve the 2 percent target ahead of schedule and compile the next defense strategy and the buildup plan," the panel says in the draft proposal.
The panel, made up of experts in security, the economy, and science and technology, also calls for the full-fledged introduction of unmanned defense equipment using cutting-edge artificial intelligence technologies, the sources said.
The government should consider using unmanned aircraft for continuous day-and-night aerial monitoring, the panel says, following a May incident in which a Chinese military helicopter entered Japanese airspace near the Japanese-administered Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea, which are claimed by Beijing.
© KYODO
48 Comments
Login to comment
sakurasuki
However those panel never mentioned how Japan supposed get that money? From retiree savings?
Mr Kipling
Panel? It is the US master who wants Japan to increase "defense" spending primarily on US manufactured weapons.
Legrande
The panel, chaired by Sadayuki Sakakibara, the former chairman of the Japan Business Federation
All you need to know that the military industrial complex is thriving in Japan, blissfully unaware it seems about how those trillions of yen put away for defense could be used to improve the lives of citizens
Peter Neil
Spending on what? Just some arbitrary number.
Defending against whom? Papua New Guinea? The Philippines? Greenland? Is North Korea going to attack Japan? Of course not. It just threatens and rattle swords to get attention.
Japan has nothing other countries need. No resources, no oil. China will attack Japan because it wants to rid the world of Hello Kitty?
koiwaicoffee
Exactly,
A 2% of the GDP is ¥12.18 trillion, or about $78.9 billion USD.
In comparison, education budget is about a 3.5%. Way lower than other developed countries, ranking 129 in the world. Behind El Salvador or Iran.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_spending_on_education_as_percentage_of_GDP
They will soon want to spend more in weapons than in education. Why Japanese people is not informed of this, you would ask.
dbsaiya
Why? No food security, no energy security, dwindling population and an aging society with decreasing tax sources and has one of the highest debt to GDP ratios among developed countries. Stop buying war toyz from the charlatan warmonger.
Aly Rustom
Agree with all the above posters.
Time to boot out the LDP and get some real leadership into Kasumigaseki.
garymalmgren
RE: The panel, made up of experts in security, the economy, and science and technology, also calls for the full-fledged introduction of unmanned defense equipment using cutting-edge artificial intelligence technologies, the sources said.
No mention of an expert in demographics.
About 20 years ago the "Foreign Affairs" journal identified the falling number of eligible recruits to be the biggest threat to Japan's future defense.
Because of the technical nature of modern defense/ offense systems these recruits will need to be highly educated and trained.
All industries will need young people with the same attributes .
Young people will have the choice of a reasonably well paid private sector employment or a poorly paid career in the military.
You can have all the fancy equipment in the world (from submarines to fighter planes) but you will still need staff to man and maintain them.
JboneInTheZone
Is it the US that’s causing China to act in such an aggressive way that it’s forcing Japan to reinvest in its military?
Cephus
"Panel to propose Japan raise defense spending above 2% of GDP."
Of course a great Nation like Nippon need to be able to defend it's people effectively.
Alongfortheride
Japan will spend this money on unnecessary military toys rather then support its own elderly who are constantly in the media for murdering one another because of "I was getting tired to take care of He/Him"
Pathetic waste of tax payer money.
Aoi Azuuri
Greedy Japanese warmongers such as corporations group and domestic arms industries who try to extort or swindle more immense taxes from general people facing unprecedented poverty or inequality, with even victimizing social vulnerable.
virusrex
Not at the expense of much more necessary things that are being abandoned to waste money on military expenses. Money that would have a huge effect on things like food self-sufficiency or improving the living conditions so people feel confident enough to raise more children are being wasted on things that realistically make no difference.
Wasabi
Ok if they take this extra cost from the money we sent to the USA for "protection".
Also, do not buy any weapon from this country.
HopeSpringsEternal
2% the new bare minimum, but in Japan's case not nearly enough, given historical under investment in Defense, post WWII and the rise of China next door.
Garlic eater
This proposal to increase Japan's defense spending needs to be interpreted in context: As the 80th anniversary of WWII approaches, NHK's broadcasts will be full of interviews lamenting the horrors of war and calling for peace. Meanwhile, as described in this article, the reality is that Japan wants to boost its defense budget, and politicians still visit Yasukuni Shrine—a site that glorifies the very war they claim to regret. Right next to Yasukuni is a museum that whitewashes history by portraying Japan as Asia’s liberator, not an aggressor. This isn’t about peacekeeping. It’s historical revisionism in uniform.
nozaki
They are same to bloodsucker.
virusrex
There is no under investment when there are no negative consequences. And if the threat to opopose is China then 2%, 20% or 200% more would be still completely irrelevant.
BertieWooster
Why, when so many people are obviously against it, does Japan insist on frittering away huge money? No one is attacking or likely to. All China wants is to trade. They are no threat at least not in a military way. If we were a bit more clever about it, we would pour our resources into making more and better products than China. Rather than surrounding China with US bases, maybe they should surround China with Costco's!
cv
This lot intend to exploit huge money from public by continue to threat public.
Ishikawa
a kind of blackmail anymore.
isabelle
Ah, the "blame the US" card. The traditional, tired tactic of the pro-PRC/Russia crowd in their pathetic attempts at deflection.
Some of the money will go on US weapons, but much of it won't. For anyone interested in the truth -- rather than anti-US propaganda -- Japan has considerable indigenous capabilities, and runs a variety of programs that don't involve the US, such as the Global Combat Air Programme, and its railgun program.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Combat_Air_Programme
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2025/04/japan-releases-image-of-railgun-installed-on-naval-vessel/
All the threats are detailed in the Defense of Japan whitepaper. Anyone who wants to understand Japan's threat environment should read it.
https://www.mod.go.jp/en/publ/w_paper/index.html
And if they do read it, and still claim that Japan faces no threats, then I would question their reading comprehension skills. Or their motives.
isabelle
Because that isn't its job.
Only if you ignore the fact that Japan lives right next door to the aggressive, revisionist China, North Korea, and Russia. Any government that doesn't spend tax payer money on countering such threats would be guilty of dereliction of duty.
The threats are well-known, and well-documented, with China being right at the top of the list. Per the whitepaper:
...
China’s current external stance, military activities, and other activities have become a matter of serious concern for Japan and the international community, and present an unprecedented and the greatest strategic challenge in ensuring the peace and security of Japan and the peace and stability of the international community, as well as in strengthening the international order based on the rule of law, to which Japan should respond with its comprehensive national power including its defense capabilities and in cooperation and collaboration with its ally, like-minded countries, and others.
okinawarides
Why not, the average Taro can survive on instant ramen and water, as long as LDP spends more on weapons.
virusrex
If China is the enemy, that still means the spending is for all practical meanings worthless, Japan would have to spend at least 400% of what is currently using just to stop lagging more and more behind China, so an increase of a tiny fraction do not change absolutely nothing.
quercetum
Still collecting war reparations from Japan, are we? Come on, WWII packed up nearly 80 years ago! At this rate, we'll be invoicing the Romans next—‘Dear Caesar, about that little scuffle in Britannia...'
Have you no shame Defense Panel—or did you trade it in for a shiny new missile system and a pat on the back from Uncle Sam?
4123
Take more money from current ordinary people who lack even food or medical care ?
isabelle
What a truly ludicrous argument. An aggressive neighbor has a bigger military budget, so you just stop trying?
I guess you don't work in national security.
Yet again, blaming the US in a pathetic attempt to deflect from PRC aggression.
It won't work.
Mr Kipling
No but it is the US pushing the myth that China is a threat to Japan. It is not. China is only interested in asserting its rights as a nation and standing up to US aggression.
Just google US bases in the far east for a picture of who is threatening who.
Garlic eater
Oh, really? Did you know that Mr. Xi is president for life, that he doesn't tolerate protesters or those who insult him publicly, and that he is a nationalist, and he challenges the territorial claims of other countries? That doesn't sound very threatening, does it?
virusrex
The argument is that if that is the goal for the spending then reducing it or increasing it a 50% makes no real difference Japan would still remain hopelessly behind. So there is absolutely no point in a 2% increase that would actually make a difference in much more urgent priorities for the country.
Why? is it necessary for people that do to stop being logical and act purely on invalid appeals?
isabelle
And how do you explain away all the information on the Chinese threat in the Defense of Japan whitepaper, and other literature?
How exactly are you countering these fact-based assessments?
Are you saying they're all false? Perhaps made up by the US?
My, my - we're really flying with CCP Bingo today. All the classic lines being rolled out.
For the thousandth -- though, no doubt, not the last -- time...
US bases: All there legally, by agreement with the host nations.
China's SCS bases: 100% illegal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_China_Sea_Arbitration#Award
isabelle
How do you know it would make "no real difference," and there would be "absolutely no point?"
Ukraine has a much smaller military budget than Russia, but it has inflicted around a million casualties (or use your preferred estimate), and Russia's actions have been catastrophic for its economy, and international relations.
The argument for increased spending is that it raises the cost of aggression, thus hopefully deterring the aggressor. Xi is unlikely to attack Japan (or Taiwan, or anywhere else with a smaller budget) if he knows he may end up like Russia.
Nothing in my post is an "invalid appeal."
There is a well-documented threat from China. The fact that China has a bigger budget does not mean that Japan should stop trying to improve its capabilities.
Abe234
As I have said previously, tax will go up to pay for defence spending, and more pensioners and higher health care as a result of that.
virusrex
Because 2% compared with a 400% difference is close to nothing. Would it let Japan defend itself? no. Would it let it resist more time? no. The defense of the country depends much more on other factors (like diplomacy and the US) than the small amount (in comparison) that it spends on the military.
And Ukraine has not done that because of its military spending, it is not like it does not have a lot of support from other countries, this would work much more against your position than for it.
How much deterrence are you imagining a difference of increasing from a 25% to a 25.5%? because that is what the increment would represent.
Of course it is, pretending that a tiny microscopic difference (compared with what China spends) would let Japan defend itself in a military conflict is a terribly illogical appeal to emotion.
A threat against which the current Japanese military represents no realistic defense, so pretending that focusing on spending more would change this is completely illogical. Unless you are trying to argue that Japan should quadruplicate (or more) its spending.
Meanwhile actual problems that are developing into crisis would be a much more rational and effective use of that money.
deanzaZZR
So predictably agitated, so long winded. haha
North Korea is a bit crazy and Russia isn't the nicest neighbor to have. Still, it's much cheaper and mutually beneficial to talk and trade with both of them.
Yes, build a limited ballistic missile defense just in case Kim goes a bit cray cray.
oita
"arms race-first" with making people poverty or death, it's like somewhere dictatorship.
isabelle
You simply cannot know this, so cannot make this argument convincingly.
Ukraine has also increased its own spending, plus vastly increased its indigenous production of things like drones. Both have helped enormously.
(And, if you're including overseas support, be sure to include Russia's support from China/North Korea/Iran etc.)
That depends on how the increase is spent, which isn't covered in the article. The policy hasn't been made yet.
If you've read it like that, you're reading it wrong.
Of course, the PRC would love Japan just to give up like that.
Happily, the Japanese government, just like the Ukrainian government and many others facing threats, doesn't have this defeatist attitude.
virusrex
Saying that Japan could defend itself from China just by its own military is beyond what is believable, there is no source that says this is a realistic possibility, so there is nothing wrong with saying so.
But for your argument to be applicable Ukraine would have to defend itself completely by its own spending without help from anybody else. The example would work much more towards Japan increasing its reliance to alliances than its own spending, specially when trying to justify a very small increment (in comparison with the threat).
Not really not, quantity is a quality of its own, and when the threat is at such bigger scale there is no real argument to say the way of spending would make Japan an opponent to China.
But that is the only appeal you are making, no argument that proves the increase spending could make a difference, no argument that demonstrate Japan could defend itself without completely depending on the US, just that big bad China is coming so Japan should throw more money even if that does not make a difference and much more urgent priorities are already being ignored because of lack of that money.
Who said anything about giving up? it is simply that the increase of spending would make no difference for this purpose, while being extremely detrimental for other purposes. Japan would still exactly as dependent on the US for its defense.
Not defeatist but realist, the increase as proposed would make no difference, and for it to make a difference it would need to be so excessive to be impossible to implement, so Japan would remain as dependent on the US just spending more money (necessary for many urgent things) to change nothing.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Or Japan should have enough missiles to give even China a black eye.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Would be nice if they also could discuss nuclear weapons without taboos.
Mr Kipling
US bases: All there legally, by agreement with the VASSAL nations.
Fixed it for you.
isabelle
Nowhere have I said this.
Straw man.
Even with everything you've typed, you still have not proved this.
And you will never be able to prove it, as the policy hasn't been made yet. You can't dismiss something that doesn't exist.
virusrex
That is what the argument completely depends on, else how would an increase in spending would be justified? if the situation would be a complete dependency on the US no matter if the spending increases or not then the obvious choice is not to increase it at all.
Not a straw man but a logic conclusion of your claims.
That absolutely no expert thinks the increase would change the dependency of Japan?
If nobody thinks this would change anything that is still a much stronger position that just baselessly believing this would represent a change (that you are completely unable to prove).
That is not a rational position to take, If I come and say "you can't prove that Japan would not be better protected by reducing the spending" the same failed argument would be used "you can't dismiss something that doesn't exist".
Sana Hamaya
Those inhuman twisted group victimize the lives of citizen while insisting "for defending the state".
Peter14
Sadly with violence around the globe, conflicts in Africa, the Middle East, Europe and hostile confrontations in Asia and the indo-pacific, most nations are increasing spending on defense, even nations that have traditionally kept spending low by GDP are increasing, doubling or more their spending on defense. Japan is by no means alone in planing to spend more.
The world has been shocked out of apathy with the realities of large scale long term conflicts, high casualty rates with seemingly no end in sight to current wars and the prospect of new conflicts beginning for reasons of empire building.
Japan like other nations, does not feel safe, and concludes that increasing readiness and capabilities is the prudent move. Right now it is the right thing to do. No nation wants to be a victim of another nation expanding their borders through use of force.
HopeSpringsEternal
Japan's real problem regarding increased defense spending, relates to growing cracks in JGBs, meaning the bond markets are demanding higher interest rates.
Thus, only viable solution is for Japanese private sector to aggressively pursue business opportunities in the defense sector, as the Govt. 'credit card' is tapped out
Besides, Govt. can't innovate, as what's really needed for defense thus must be either purchased abroad or bought from the domestic defense industry.
Nana
Poverty class or socially weaks including me will be killed by this Japan version military industrial complex, not the war.