JJapan

Japan needs to possess nuclear weapons, prime minister’s office source says

  • December 18, 2025

Japan needs to possess nuclear weapons, prime minister’s office source says

by maruhoi

40 comments

  2. South Korea has now entered the chat. I’m sure this will do wonders for regional stability.

  7. Considering what happened when Ukraine gave theirs up, this really isn’t even up for debate. Unfortunately, as long as a single country has them, everyone else can reasonably be expected to also want them to defend themselves. It’s a very sad statement on humanity, but here we are.

  9. America has withdrawn from international politics. America wants to abandon its relationships with its allies so it can dominate and control its backyard, and allow Russia and China to dominate their own backyards in the same way. no one can blame Japan for wanting and needing nuclear weapons in this new political vacuum.

  12. Even tho I completely disagree with her politics she’s correct about this.

    Japan needs to expel the US military bases before this ever happens though.

  14. I’m all for this. As an American we have clearly abandoned our allies. The Pax Americana is ending and the empire is collapsing in on itself. Our inability to provide security in exchange for economic subservience from our allies is only going to get worse.

    Do not trust us. Japan is alone. Rearm. 

  18. Nuclear proliferations back, the non-proliferation treaty be damned.

    This comes on the back of South Korea looking to build nuclear submarines.

    This is what happens when the so called superpower decides to renege on its security agreements and call it quits.

    Who will get to having enough fissile material to build their own warhead(s) for testing first – Japan or South Korea…

  19. nukes aren’t useful at this point unless if it is to deter North Korea. China wouldn’t use nukes first since they have conventional weapon options. No need to nuke Tokyo when they can send a few thousand missiles instead. And if Japan goes nuclear first, the Chinese have way more nukes to respond with.

  21. They already have nuclear weapons. Have had for decades. They just want to be able to tout it publicly.

  22. Nukes serve the purpose of a deterrent, no sane leader would actually use one today unless they want to be isolated like NK and neutralized. The ambiguity of having one without actually having one, is just as powerful.

  23. Personally, I believe that every man, woman, and child on the planet should have a nuke. It’s the only way to ensure no one uses a nuke.

  24. basically all the countries will want one. 
    this is like christmas. one for south korea, one for japan, one for philippine, one for Vietnam, heck, i think my next door neighbour just had a baby this year, he’d love to have one too. just for good luck 

  28. Good luck getting the public to stomach it. Especially people in Nagasaki. NGOs for peace, and the like. That’s why the office says, because if she said it, there would be a firestorm of public outcry.

  29. Ah yes, I get to sit back and read the level headed responses of the local Reddit warriors. Let me get my ocha.

  31. Japan doesnt need them, Takaichi does to satisfy her ego.

    WTAF. What a stupid fucking thing to be claiming.

    On a brighter note, Kyoto hotel prices are affordable again!

  32. She’s right.

    The ideal situation would be no one have nuclear weapons, but if that’s impossible and one side has them, the other must also have them.

  34. I’m not surprised. The Ukraine situation and the uncertainty with US upholding its commitments make nukes the only option. In this new world you have to protect yourself.

  36. As a student of ancient history and thought, I’m reminded of a line attributed to Homer’s *Odyssey*: **“The blade itself incites to deeds of violence.”** Whether rendered exactly or through later translation, the insight is old and sharp—tools of violence are never neutral. They shape the mind long before they are used. That line frames the problem of Japan going nuclear quite succinctly.

    Nuclear weapons are not inert insurance policies sitting quietly on a shelf; they impose their own logic. Once the blade exists, every hand that holds it must think in terms of preemption, escalation, and acceptable annihilation. Strategy bends around the weapon, not the other way around.

    Japan, uniquely, has lived inside the consequences of that logic. To say “we should possess nuclear weapons” is to argue that Hiroshima and Nagasaki taught the wrong lesson—that the error was being unarmed rather than the existence of the blade itself. That’s a grim misreading of history.

    Japan’s postwar restraint hasn’t been naïveté; it’s been a refusal to let the worst invention in human history define what security means. You don’t stabilize the world by adding more blades to the circle. You stabilize it by remembering, painfully and clearly, that some tools corrupt every purpose they claim to serve.

  37. From protests when US nuclear armed submarines entered Japanese waters and shutting down every reactor in the country after the Fukushima disaster to now, this is wild. While Abe was alive, he was really hoping to push Japan this direction, but with how utterly unreliable the US is to maintain any of the current security agreements now, this has only accelerated it.

  38. If you are a country(good or bad) that wants sovereignty (from western influence or otherwise) yes you need nukes. Its not exatctly news and probably not a good lesson for the world to have to learn but the more america devolves the more poignant it gets.

Comments are closed.