IN THE light of his ill-judged visits to a shrine commemorating, among others, Japanese war criminals, it is not surprising that Japan’s neighbours view Shinzo Abe’s plans to tinker at the edges of Japan’s long-standing pacifism with deep suspicion. Yet the proposals the Japanese prime minister unveiled this week, allowing Japan to come to the defence of its allies for the first time, move the country in the right direction. So long as they are accompanied by energetic diplomacy, they should make the region more, not less, secure.

The times they are a-changin’

Since defeat in 1945 Japan has been a model global citizen, contributing to peace and prosperity in East Asia. The pacifist post-war constitution, written by Japan’s American occupiers, must take some credit. At its heart, in Article Nine, Japan forever renounces the use of war to settle international disputes. This pledge helped reassure neighbours that Japanese militarism would never stalk Asia again, and it allowed the United States to lay down the law in the Western Pacific. That security guarantee, in turn, let the Japanese race down the path to prosperity, having thrown off the army uniform in favour of the salaryman’s suit. For many Japanese, the constitution is not just a source of pride. It is a national treasure.

Yet dangers are growing, and Japan’s arrangements are looking out of date. Threats come from North Korea, whose engineers have developed nuclear bombs and are now working on the missile technology to carry them. And China is nourishing grievances, building its military power and challenging Japan’s control of long-held islands out in the East China Sea.

At home, doubts niggle over the surety of the security guarantee of an American superpower that is distracted and keen to avoid conflict with China. The doubts are mutual: some American strategists are fed up with Japan free-riding on American security. Under today’s interpretation of the constitution, Japan may not shoot down a North Korean missile flying over its islands on the way to California. If war struck the Korean peninsula, Japan could not even refuel an American plane heading for the fight. American strategists want Japan to play a bigger part in the security of the alliance.

More than any recent Japanese leader, Mr Abe understands all this. To bolster his country’s security, he has already taken what by Japan’s cautious standards are notable steps, including appointing the country’s first national security adviser and devising a national security strategy. The latest proposals are a push not to change the constitution but to reinterpret what it may allow, in particular, the principle of collective self-defence—coming to the aid of allies.

China cries foul, accusing Japan of militarism—though its own airwaves are full of marching troops and screaming jets. Its misunderstanding seems almost wilful. Outside peacekeeping, there is no question of Japan’s deploying troops beyond home waters. The difficulty Mr Abe is having in persuading his countrymen to accept even these relatively small changes (see article) shows Japan has no yearning for belligerence. The main effect of the new approach will be to help Japan work more closely with American forces in logistics, intelligence and the like.

Anywhere else, Mr Abe’s proposals would be unexceptional. But given the havoc that a wartime Japan wrought and its currently rocky relations with neighbours, the reforms need to go hand-in-hand with vigorous diplomacy. If they are to enhance rather than undermine security, Mr Abe must reassure the region that Japan’s intentions are limited and well-meaning, not the first step in a militarist revival.