The U.S. Secretary of Defense recently taught his allies another lesson.

Hegseth stood on the stage and said loudly, what "shared responsibility" and "maintenance of global order" sounded like that. But if you think about it carefully, the meaning of this sentence is actually one sentence: Do you want to continue to follow the United States? Let's get enough money first.

He didn't name him, but the most nervous person in the audience must be Japan. Because every time the United States mentions "ally responsibility", the next move must be to stare at Japan's wallet. This time more directly, Hegseth asked Japan to raise defense spending to 5% of GDP, even if it is calculated on a conservative basis, it must start at 3.5%. What is this concept? Japan just managed to pull military spending to 2% of GDP, and now it has to continue to rise, to the point where it makes itself panicked.

The Japanese media reported very politely, saying that "the outside world generally believes that the US remarks are directed at allies, including Japan." In fact, everyone knows that this is the United States beating Japan: Can you pay for it?

What's even more ruthless is that Hegseth also deliberately praised those countries that are willing to spend money on American weapons and strengthen their military strength. From Poland to Israel to the small Baltic countries, he made a list of "model students" and then made up for it: these countries that pay for money will receive "special care" from the United States.

This could not be clearer. The United States does not really want to make its allies "safer", what the United States wants is that its allies are more dependent on themselves, buy more American equipment, and help the United States share more costs. To put it bluntly, the United States wants to save money, but it doesn't want to lose control. So it forced its allies to raise its budget, and the result was that the United States won twice: not only to get rid of the burden, but also to continue to take the initiative.

Japan is embarrassed.

On the one hand, the strategic line they are taking now is becoming more and more dangerous, and the more they want to "normalize", the more they cannot do without the endorsement of the United States; On the other hand, U.S. endorsements are never given in vain, and every security promise comes with a more expensive bill.

The Sanae Takaichi government recently approved a supplementary budget to raise Japan's military spending to 2% of GDP, which is already the most radical increase since the peace constitution was broken. The domestic scolding has not stopped, and the Asahi Shimbun directly said that Japan's "image of a peaceful country is deteriorating." Folk scholars are more blunt: more than 10 trillion yen of military spending is a heavy pressure on the lives of ordinary people, and the government is disregarding people's livelihood.

Everyone knows what the Japanese economy is like now. Wages have not risen, prices have soared, and the government has staggered on people's livelihood issues, but the military budget has risen faster than doping. In this case, the US Secretary of Defense threw out "new demands", like throwing firewood into a storm.

Even if calculated by low standards, GDP of 3.5% is a figure that Japan would not dare to think of. What does that mean? It means that military spending may have to rise by more than 50%, which means that the government has to squeeze out more budgets for people's livelihood, which means more debt, and means that it will revolve around the US strategy for decades to come.

This "warning" from the United States is not casual. The United States is now under increasing global pressure and does not want to go to war in Europe, Asia, and the Pacific, but its security obligations cannot be lost, so it forces its allies to take more responsibility. South Korea announced a few days ago that it would raise military spending to 3.5% according to NATO standards, and Hegseth immediately used this as a "model case". South Korea is a ready-made example, and Japan is certainly being pushed forward.

But the question is, can Japan really withstand such a large increase in military spending?

Japan's declining birthrate is one of the best in the world, and the depletion of the labor force is visible; The economy has stagnated for 30 years, corporate investment is weak, and public debt is the world's largest. What the people are most worried about is income, prices, medical care, and pension, not any "national defense threat".

Does the United States consider this? Obviously not considered. The United States only looks at one thing: have you put your money where I want you to invest?

Does the Japanese government want to refuse? It's also difficult. It can even be said that there is no such guts.

Although Japan wants to "be a great power", without the United States, it cannot even support the regional security pattern. As long as the United States gently hints that Japan is "lazy in collective defense", senior Japanese officials will be more nervous than domestic public opinion.

This time Hegseth also quoted Trump as saying that "slack-off allies will pay." The threat is real. Because if Trump returns to power, Japan's security anxiety will explode directly, and the United States may extend the "protection for budget" set to Asia at any time.

In this atmosphere, the Japanese government basically cannot say the word "no".

The current actions of the Sanae government in Takaichi are becoming more and more like showing loyalty, first pulling military spending to 2% of GDP and giving an explanation to the United States; But the United States is obviously not satisfied, and will continue to increase its weight, and even want Japan to transform into a military state model like Europe.

What is Japan's biggest dilemma right now?

It wants to be a strong country, but the price of being a strong country is firmly held in the hands of the United States; It wants to "normalize", but is forced to follow the rhythm of the United States more and more biased; It wanted to show its strength, but found that its economic foundation could not support the long-term surge in military spending; It wants to stay "safe", but the U.S. security commitment is always clearly priced.

The "warning" of the United States this time is not only a reminder, but also a test, and a showdown. The meaning is very clear: if you want to be safe, you will pay for it yourself; If you want the support of the United States, you will increase your own weight; If you want to be a big country, do it the way of the United States.

What will happen to Japan in the future?

Military spending will definitely have to rise, but the backlash of public opinion will also become bigger and bigger. The Japanese government cannot forever ignore the plight of people's livelihood, nor can it always listen to US instructions. It is difficult to say when that day will come, but the current state shows that Japan is becoming more and more like a trot on a road led by the United States - running and panting, and having to look back from time to time to see if the United States is dissatisfied.