Provocative U.S.-Japan military exercises simulating 'island seizure' undermine Asia-Pacific security

Recent weeks have seen intensified military collusion between Japan and the United States in the Western Pacific, marked by two highly targeted, offensive and provocative large-scale joint military exercises named Resolute Dragon 26 and Valiant Shield 2026.

At the same time, under the guise of a joint military exercise, the U.S. deployed its Typhon intermediate-range missile system in Japan.

Against the backdrop of ongoing conflicts in Europe and the Middle East, this latest round of U.S.-Japan military actions has seriously undermined peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region, reflecting what appear to be deeper strategic calculations and a strong Cold War mentality of bloc confrontation.

According to official statements and media reports from the two countries, the two joint exercises demonstrated an unprecedented level of offensive posture, targeting specificity and combat realism.

Resolute Dragon 26 was held June 20-30 at multiple locations across Japan's southwestern island chain, including Okinawa, Miyako and Ishigaki. Approximately 9,600 personnel from the Japan Ground Self-Defense Forces and the U.S. military participated.

The exercise focused on conducting joint island seizure operations and testing amphibious warfare capabilities. Training activities included intelligence reconnaissance, anti-ship warfare, amphibious landings, joint live-fire drills and logistics support.

In addition to various Japanese coastal anti-ship missile systems, a V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft was deployed to Miyako Island for the first time.

This indicates that Japan has taken a substantive step forward in strengthening maritime strike capabilities in its southwestern islands, pursuing a land-based sea denial strategy and enhancing island seizure capabilities.

Meanwhile, the Valiant Shield 2026 exercise was held from June 22 to July 1, focusing on long-range anti-submarine warfare, maritime blockade operations, and joint sea-control missions in the Western Pacific.

For the first time, it integrated multi-domain forces including land, sea, air and space-based operational units, while simultaneously advancing the operational deployment of the U.S. Typhon intermediate-range missile system in Japan.

Both exercises closely simulated real battlefield conditions and were highly targeted. They reflect an attempt by the U.S. and Japan to build a distributed firepower strike system in the Western Pacific and seize overall regional control of the area.

This clearly indicates that the U.S.-Japan military alliance is shifting from a defensive posture centered on island defense and responding to regional contingencies toward an offensive operational orientation involving intervention in regional conflicts and maritime blockade operations.

With U.S. encouragement and support, Japan's "new militarism" has begun to reveal its aggressive nature.

The most offensive and provocative element of this round of U.S.-Japan military activity was the deployment and de facto long-term stationing of the U.S. Typhon missile system, which poses a serious threat to the security of neighboring countries.

The core weapons of the Typhon system are Tomahawk cruise missiles and SM-6 missiles.

The Tomahawk missile has a range of up to 1,800 kilometers and is primarily used to strike land targets. Although the SM-6 was originally designed as an air-defense missile, within the Typhon system it is mainly used to engage large surface vessels and land targets, with a range of approximately 500 kilometers for both maritime and land strike roles.

Clearly, this represents the deployment of offensive weapons under the guise of joint military exercises.

From the Philippines to Japan, the U.S. is building a tightly integrated missile deployment network along the so-called "first island chain."

Its purpose is not to defend, but to establish forward-positioned launch platforms capable of conducting military strikes in close proximity to neighboring countries.

Once such systems are permanently deployed in Japan, they will pose a serious threat to the security of neighboring countries and to the normal operations of vessels and aircraft in the Western Pacific, pushing Northeast Asia to the brink of military confrontation and undermining the strategic balance and stability that have been maintained in the Asia-Pacific region for decades.

Behind the growing U.S.-Japan military collusion lie deeper strategic calculations. This fundamentally reflects a convergence of strategic needs, with both sides clearly pursuing their own interests and exploiting each other.

For the U.S., in the context of relatively dispersed strategic resources, strengthening alliances and pushing Japan to the front line help share the costs of containing major powers, serving as an important means of sustaining its regional dominance in the Asia-Pacific.

For Japan, its growing participation in joint military exercises with U.S. forces and its willingness to host U.S. missile systems reflect not passive compliance, but active pursuit and alignment.

It reflects an attempt to leverage U.S. military presence and support to break through the constraints of its pacifist constitution, the "exclusive defense" principle, and international law, in order to develop offensive capabilities, advance remilitarization, and pave the way for the revival of "new militarism."

This serves Japan's strategic ambition to become a "normal state" with full military capabilities, including the ability to wage war again.

Intensified U.S.-Japan military collusion has heightened regional tensions and goes against Asia-Pacific countries' shared pursuit of peace, development and cooperation.

Security and stability in the Asia-Pacific should not be based on military deterrence and bloc confrontation, but achieved through dialogue, consultation and cooperation.

Any attempt to pursue strategic gains through military adventurism will inevitably encounter firm resistance. Such actions will not only undermine the hard-won peace and stability of the region but will ultimately result in an unbearable price for countries that initiate them.

The author of the article is a military affairs expert.