Japan’s national space agency – the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) – was established in 2003, but the history of Japan’s space programs dates all the way back to early developments in rocketry in the 1920s. As Japan transitioned through alternating phases of war and peace, it evolved economically, politically and socially; so too did Japan’s space ambitions. Although rocketry’s history is invariably intertwined with conflict, in Japan as elsewhere, in the post-World War II period peaceful endeavors such as commercialization and scientific inquiry took the lead in narratives about space exploration amid the country’s technological boom.
In “The Islands and the Starts: A History of Japan’s Space Programs,” Subodhana Wijeyeratne, an assistant professor of history at Purdue University, charts Tokyo’s course through three three distinct eras leading to the Japanese space program as we know it today. In the following interview, Wijeyeratne discusses the critical role of narratives, the key figures, and the unique forces that shaped Japan’s space programs.
How have Japan’s narratives surrounding rocketry and space exploration shifted over the decades? What roles have geopolitical and generational change played?
Japan’s narratives around rocketry have shifted repeatedly over its history. In the early 20th century, rockets were understood as emblems of national genius and imperial modernity. Critically, they were inseparable from military ambition. Wartime rocketry was, in fact, understood as proof of Japanese technical sophistication. Defeat in 1945 rendered this framing untenable.
In the immediate postwar period, rockets became symbolically dangerous objects, too closely associated with militarism to be openly celebrated. Thus, from the 1950s onward, engineers and advocates deliberately recast rocketry as peaceful, scientific, and aspirational. Space exploration was framed as evidence that Japanese technology could serve humanity, rather than empire. This narrative aligned with Japan’s broader postwar pacifism and allowed rocketry to re-enter public life as a legitimate pursuit.
Then, as economic growth accelerated in the 1960s and 1970s, narratives shifted again, emphasizing national prestige and practical benefits. Space exploration was presented as a sign that Japan had “returned” to the world stage as a modern, advanced nation. By the 1980s, spacefaring successes, and the confidence these entailed enabled more ambitious ambitions: spaceplanes, a permanent orbital presence, and leadership in commercial launch services.
Yet by the late 1990s, yet again, this optimism had collapsed amidst economic stagnation and high-profile failures. For many, rockets came to symbolize bureaucratic excess more than anything else, and it was partly as a result of this that we see the creation of JAXA in 2003.
Why do narratives matter in rocketry and space exploration?
Narratives matter in rocketry because for most of history, space programs have been uniquely dependent on long-term public, political, and financial commitments. Unlike many technologies, rockets are expensive, risky, and often opaque in their benefits. They cannot be sustained without stories that explain why they’re worth building, who they serve, and what they represent.
In Japan’s case, narratives were integral to making space exploration socially and politically possible. After 1945, rocketry required narrative rehabilitation. By framing space exploration as focused on peaceful science for the purposes of national renewal, space administrators secured funding, institutional support, and public tolerance. Later, nationalist narratives helped reconcile competing stakeholder interests: corporations emphasized commercial utility; politicians highlighted prestige; engineers foregrounded scientific autonomy; and local communities negotiated compensation and recognition.
Such narratives, and the interest they provoked, also shape how success and failure are interpreted by different stakeholders. Technical failure can be narrated as incompetence, bad luck, or examples of fortitude, and accordingly have different political consequences.
The heroic presentation of projects such as Hayabusa, for example, demonstrates how frame stories of endurance and ingenuity can convert a near-disaster into a source of national pride. Conversely, when narratives collapse – as they did in the 1990s – failures become understood as systemic dysfunction, rather than temporary setbacks.
Lastly, and important to commentators and analysts, is the fact that narratives determine the inclusion and exclusion of participants in the space program. By foregrounding engineers, institutions, or astronauts, histories can obscure the experiences of local residents, fishermen, and taxpayers whose lives were materially affected by space infrastructure.
In short, narratives are the medium through which power, legitimacy, and meaning circulate in space exploration. They govern not only how rockets fly, but whether why they fly in the first place.
Who is Hideo Itokawa, and how did he become so central to the development of Japan’s space programs?
Hideo Itokawa, known as “Dr. Rocket” in Japan, was the founder of Japan’s first space project. He has since come to be regarded as the “father” of the enterprise. Trained as an aeronautical engineer in the 1930s, and active during the wartime period, Hideo Itokawa possessed rare continuity across Japan’s imperial, defeated, and postwar phases. This allowed him to translate prewar and wartime engineering knowledge into postwar civilian projects – specifically, a rocketry project.
As a result, he not only had a powerful influence on the establishment of Japan’s first space agency, ISAS, but he also trained a great deal of the senior figures who would go on to run nearly all of Japan’s space programs. His central institutional contribution was the formation of the Avionics and Supersonic Aerodynamics (AVSA) group at the University of Tokyo in 1953. AVSA became the seedbed of Japan’s postwar rocketry effort, providing technical training, research culture, and a coherent vision at a moment when no centralized space agency existed. It was AVSA that provided the core of ISAS.
Itokawa was, furthermore, not simply a designer; he understood how technology intersected with politics. His resistance to liquid-fuel rocketry, for example, reflected concerns about dependence on the United States and the risk of militarization. These positions shaped institutional boundaries and technological trajectories long after AVSA’s founding. Finally, Itokawa became symbolically central. Later missions, names, and public narratives retroactively cast him as the “father” of Japanese space exploration. This symbolic status mattered: it provided a human anchor for a program otherwise fragmented across agencies and decades.
How has the U.S. relationship influenced Japan’s space programs over time?
During the occupation period (1945-1952), American authority restricted aeronautical development, and cast a long shadow over any technology associated with military power. Even in its aftermath, the U.S. looked askance at Japan’s rocketry effort, worrying about the potential of a former World War II foe having the ability to deliver warheads across the Pacific. As a result, Japan’s early efforts received no support whatsoever from the U.S.
As the alliance matured, however, American thinking evolved from ignoring the space effort to trying to bind it closely to American technology and networks. U.S. technology transfers allowed Japan to accelerate its space development, without bearing the full cost of indigenous innovation. Meanwhile corporations and policymakers sought competitiveness and commercial viability, and were happy to crib these things from the Americans to the extent that they could. Cooperation in launch vehicles, satellites, and international projects provided access to advanced systems for NASDA, Japan’s second space agency, while reinforcing Japan’s self-imposed civilian orientation.
However, at the same time, U.S. concerns had not gone away. Export controls and political sensitivities constrained what Japan could develop independently, such as, for example, by stalling Japanese progress on heavy-lift rockets. This duality produced friction. Japanese engineers worried about dependency and loss of autonomy. These tensions were particularly visible in debates over liquid-fuel rockets and domestic launch capability, with local rocketeers arguing that buying American meant giving up on any hope of truly independent domestic space industry. In the end, the Japanese decided to pursue heavy lift rocketry in the 1990s as a way, partly, of declaring launch independence from the U.S.
Why have Japan’s space programs received less global attention than U.S., Russian, or Chinese programs?
Japan’s space programs have attracted less global attention not because they lack significance, but because they do not conform neatly to dominant narratives of the space age. International attention has historically gravitated toward superpower competition, military spectacle, and human spaceflight. Japan’s program emphasized none of these: it was civilian, commercially oriented, and comparatively restrained in scale, making it less visible within Cold War and post-Cold War frameworks. Japan’s successes often lay in infrastructure rather than drama: telecommunications, Earth observation, navigation, and incremental technological mastery. These are indispensable to modern life, but poor material for heroic mythmaking.
Institutional structure also mattered. Until 2003, Japan lacked a single, easily identifiable space agency equivalent to NASA or Roscosmos. Instead, responsibilities were distributed across multiple agencies, ministries, and corporations. Achievements were real, but ownership could sometimes be unclear; institutional continuity is hard to convey to folks who don’t know and/or don’t care about how bureaucracies function. Language and archival factors reinforced this — much of the relevant documentation existed primarily in Japanese, limiting engagement by non-Japanese scholars. When Western observers did take notice, they often framed Japan’s program as derivative, or economically motivated, overlooking its distinctive political and social dynamics.
How did the diffuse structure of Japan’s space agencies prior to JAXA influence efforts, and what motivated consolidation?
Japan’s decentralized space structure enabled flexibility, stakeholder influence, and specialist autonomy, while also generating coordination problems that became unsustainable over time. Before 2003, multiple agencies and ministries pursued overlapping space-related goals, often staffed by the same engineers, and linked closely to private industry. This structure allowed manager-specialists to carve out protected niches, and pursue long-term technical visions, with limited political interference. Decentralization also gave non-state actors unusual leverage. Corporations influenced priorities through lobbying and procurement relationships. Japan’s powerful trade union federation Keidanren, in particular, has always had tremendous influence in the development of rockets. Meanwhile, local communities – especially fishermen near launch sites – used legal and political pressure to shape launch schedules and compensation. Hence, groups with no formal authority exercised substantial practical influence. This produced a space program that was responsive, negotiated, and socially embedded, but fragmented.
The costs of this system became apparent in the 1990s. As projects grew more complex and expensive, failures had system-wide consequences, but no system-wide accountability. Budget overruns, duplicated infrastructure, and institutional rivalries frustrated political overseers. Public confidence waned as space failures came to symbolize the broader economic and bureaucratic malaise Japan seemed to be experiencing. Policymakers sought unified oversight, cost reduction, and strategic coherence, while industry restructuring aligned with a smaller number of dominant contractors. The end result was the consolidation of Japan’s many space agencies into JAXA, which marked the end of a distinctive postwar experiment in decentralized technopolitics – and the beginning of a more centralized, security-conscious phase in Japan’s space history.
The Diplomat is an affiliate of Bookshop.org and will earn a commission if you purchase a book using the link above.