national

Japan still divided on revising war-renouncing Constitution: survey

45 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

45 Comments
Login to comment

I don't trust Kyodo to find unbiased respondents. Besides, the government doesn't need majority support of voters to make decisions anyway. If they want to do it, they will...

-6 ( +13 / -19 )

In the survey, 76 percent said that Japan has not waged war since the end of World War II because of Article 9, up 9 percentage points from the poll last year.

Who actually really want war? Is not Japanese people right. Any other element in Japan really want go to war?

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Nobody wants a war. But like any other country Japan must be able to defend itself. Article 9 must be amended in such a way that every action and plan does not require a lengthy constitutomal debate, and can be debated on the merits alone.

7 ( +27 / -20 )

Article 9 of the Constitution renounces war and bans the possession of military forces and other "war potential." 

and

The government has said the article does not prohibit the country from maintaining its ability to defend itself and thus allows Japan to possess defense forces.

so that's a definite maybe is it situation is it? (^_-)

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Although Article 9 is the central focus of amendment debate, there arise several other constitutional issues which I think are also significant yet largely overlooked.

For example, the devolution of power into local administration levels would be necessary in proper responses to locally specific issues, some of which are new and hitherto unanticipated. Unfortunately, the 75-year old Constitution shall keep the current administrative arrangements or deny any form of realignment. Likewise the retirement aged Constitution never expects the same-sex union or other culturally diverse phenomena in Japan.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Second paragraph of Article 9 states that Japan will not maintain a military. Yet the JSDF, which was created at the urging of the U.S when the Korean War broke out in 1950, is considered number 5 in global miitary power ranking. This obvious contradiction can only be removed through an amendment,

https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.php

9 ( +27 / -18 )

OssanAmericaToday  08:07 am JST

Nobody wants a war.

Except Vlad and Western Leftists.

3 ( +21 / -18 )

Besides, the government doesn't need majority support of voters to make decisions anyway. If they want to do it, they will...

A simple majority in the Diet is not enough for amendments. Two-thirds of MPs at both chambers shall support the motion, and then go to the public for a referendum to gain the majority. The entire process is tedious, time-consuming and demanding even for the LDP who has ruled most of the post-war period in Japan.

9 ( +13 / -4 )

There's no need to amend Article 9. Just drop it along with the second paragraph of Article 76 that prohibits court marshal. Then Japan will be able to have a functioning military. Amending the constitution to introduce an emergency clause is a bad idea. It could be abused to curtail people's freedoms. A simple legislation would be better and just as effective.

6 ( +16 / -10 )

Randy JohnsonToday  08:24 am JST

OssanAmericaToday  08:07 am JST

Nobody wants a war.

Except Vlad and Western Leftists.

Which... um, "western leftists," specifically? Got names and quotes?

-3 ( +7 / -10 )

The world doesn’t need a rearmed Japan.

Everytime they did we know what happened.

And especially with this government/sect in charge.

LDP/Nippon Kaigi.

-21 ( +10 / -31 )

But Japan isn't just defending itself .

Japan is involving itself in other countries conflicts.

Japan is involved in waging an economic war against it's neighbors and seeks to be a big brother of Asia.

Shooting down missiles heading towards Japan is yes defensive.

but however seeking strike capabilities of foreign enemy bases and nuclear capabilities isn't pacifist or only defensive.

If Japan is truly a democracy then why is the imperial system still in use ?

Japan is an imperialistic dictatorship masquerading as a democracy.

-27 ( +9 / -36 )

Randy

Japan seeks to change the status -quo and that is precisely whats happening.

The only reason the Japanese people have enjoyed 80 years of peace was because of a war their government started.

I don't support war for any reason.

-28 ( +5 / -33 )

Japan has not been at war since 1945. It is easy to forget the benefits of that after generations lived in people. Japanese did not fight in Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq and Afghanistan or overthrow democratic governments. Like the U.S.

Japan does not have conscription. Serving in the SDF is voluntary.

Citizens of nations that stay out of wars prosper. Warfare states breed misery. Look at the U.S. Look at Russia.

It is too easy to forget how good peace is. Until you've lost it.

4 ( +14 / -10 )

But Japan isn't just defending itself .

> Japan is involving itself in other countries conflicts.

> Japan is involved in waging an economic war against it's neighbors and seeks to be a big brother of Asia.

> Shooting down missiles heading towards Japan is yes defensive.

> but however seeking strike capabilities of foreign enemy bases and nuclear capabilities isn't pacifist or only defensive.

> If Japan is truly a democracy then why is the imperial system still in use ?

> Japan is an imperialistic dictatorship masquerading as a democracy.

Really well observed and said.

-17 ( +8 / -25 )

Probably time for Japan to amend its constitution.

However, there is something deeply untrustworthy about the LDP and Nippon Kaigi that really bothers me.

Probably stems from how they whitewash WW2 and make out Japan has the victims.

I just don’t like the idea of nuclear weapons in the hands of Abe et al.

I’m sure the LDP will use the Ukraine crisis to spend yet even more money on its big company benefactors.

-8 ( +5 / -13 )

As we are sadly seeing with the rise and rise of warlike terror-states China and Russia, the democratic, free world needs to stand up more than ever to protect freedom and rule of law.

Japan absolutely should have the same right as every other nation to defend herself - and yes, that sometimes means striking at other nations. If Germany is allowed to normalise her defense forces - rightly so - so should Japan.

Scrap that US written constitution.

15 ( +23 / -8 )

If may be beneficial for Japan to put itself under the protective power of the bigger, nuclear powers of countries like USA and/or China . . . rather than to put itself in a totally independent position which could result in a disastrous situation of smaller nations, now hampered with war destruction . . . .

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

The biggest differences are that Ukraine has a huge amount of natural resources while Japan has zero. In addition Japan has a massive aging population and huge debt……not an attractive proposition for any would be invader.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Fighto

Defense and strikes are two different things.

Look at a truly pacifist neutral nation and how peaceful and healthy and successful that nation is.

Japan isnt like other nations and with its wartime past it can never gain ultimate trust in only 80 years since Japan attacked other nations.

Japan is a himself nation not a herself nation.

As your name represents you are a fighter not a pacifist that seeks only Defense.

Your confused !

Its a passive agressive superiority complex issue .

-20 ( +4 / -24 )

@AgentX

Regards also thanks.

-12 ( +1 / -13 )

The survey was conducted between March 1 and April 11 via mail ahead of Constitution Memorial Day on Tuesday, targeting 3,000 people aged 18 or over, of whom 65.3 percent gave valid answers.

Err, half the respondents of a poll with 65.3 percent of valid answers means: 32.65% said it is necessary to review the constitution. Case closed.

To be frank, over the last 10 years and when looking at other polls listing 10 items the population want the successive J-govs to tackle, the highest constitutional revision has ever ranked was (if memory serves): eight and ex-aequo with the Okinawa base moving. I'm actually pretty sure that if you list 11 items asking for a top 10 the revision would in most cases not even make it into the top ten. So, not much (if any) interest from the public.

Funnily enough, the top items which have been steady for now a decade: (in no particular order) employment, salaries, health, pensions, education, taxes have always remained a wishy-washy item on the J-gov's actual to-do / action list. So, not much (if any) interest from the J-gov.

But anyway, let's look more in details.

Former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said during his tenure that it is vital to clarify the SDF's legal status to put an end to arguments that Japanese forces are "unconstitutional."

At my end, living amongst the Japanese plebs for 18 years in Japan and having worked with them for an additional 11 years in Europe, I have yet to hear any such discussions about the "JSDF being unconstitutional" or any "desire to change the constitution". Except within the LDP and a handful of loudmouths in black vans (whom I am not hanging out with), who exactly are we talking about?

In the survey, 76 percent said that Japan has not waged war since the end of World War II because of Article 9, up 9 percentage points from the poll last year.

So, in the same survey 50 want to tinker with war-renouncing Article 9 while 76 percent (an actual increase) think that same article kept them out of a very troubled world for 67 years. Err, cognitive dissonance or just Kyodo producing a lot of smoke here? I'll go for "smoke".

However, the survey found that only 29 percent feel that momentum toward revising the article is increasing or somewhat increasing, while 70 percent do not.

This, pretty much in-line with the 76 percent who think that Article 9 is a "protection" than anything else, no?

Some 76 percent support the amendment of the Constitution to introduce an emergency clause to better respond to the coronavirus pandemic and other disasters while 23 percent oppose such a revision.

The Corona-virus is a national health issue, so nothing to do with war-renouncing Article 9, me thinks. (Again) choking on smoke here.

Long story short, sounds like one of these vested interest polls asking:

Want an apple?

No. I want an orange!

Want a fruit?

Yes.

Want some fruit juice?

Err...yes?

Want a fruit with seeds in it?

Err...dunno...?

Do you like the color green?

.....???

I would really really REALLY love to have a foreign specialist in polls and their design / methodology to have a look and give me an unbiased opinion about the organization, the content, the design and the stats of polls as organized in Japan.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Japan still divided on revising war-renouncing Constitution - survey:

~50% Japanese want to retain Article 9's status quo.

Yet, 76% said the nation has not waged war since end of WWII because of it. Does that insinuate, deep in their mind, they are actually craving for war..?

No, no, better not..

-10 ( +3 / -13 )

Japan is able to defend itself. Joe Biden said an offhand remark over a decade ago that if Japan wanted nukes they could do it in a day.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Yawn. This is as old as the end of WW2 itself. One side worships a guy who won the inheritance olympics and is emperor of a nonexisting empire. The other side are a bunch of academics who want to sell their nation off to China because academic reasons of theory.

Hate to tell both side, not gonna happen or it would have under Abe.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Wouldn’t say divided that suggests a 50-50 split, when it’s a 95-5 split. So not so divided. I’m embarrassed have to put my IJA uniform back into the cupboard.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

What's the point of being president if you can't make necessary changes to protect your country?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

It's corruption hiding in plain sight !

-15 ( +3 / -18 )

Keep it the way it is!!!!

0 ( +4 / -4 )

To judge from the polling and the comments here, I would say that the times have clearly changed. China is on a determined move; Joe Biden is wandering about in a daze. Japan must be able to defend itself. Si vis pacem para bellum.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Nobody wants a war. But like any other country Japan must be able to defend itself.

Defense against nukes?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

This is basically just another announcement to inform us that the war renouncing constitution its changing or has changed whether we like it or not.

Japan has contested territory issues with China , South Korea and Russia.

Then there's North Korea also.

If there's no peace agreement then technically they ARE at war.

Then we have the economic war with Russia also.

This all adds up to not a good scenario for Japan.

Japan's a bit slow and lagging to even review the strike capabilities until the end of the year might be too late anyway.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

ChibakunToday  03:33 pm JST

Nobody wants a war. But like any other country Japan must be able to defend itself.

Defense against nukes?

Not all invasions and conflicts invcolve nuclear weapons. In fact none have for the past 77 years despite countless conflicts and wars all over the world. There is no defense against Nukes, other than to have, or to have access to the threat of Reciprocal Nuclear Reprisal. Japan already is protected by the U.S. Nuclear Umbrella.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Japan must stay peaceful.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

If they want to see more body bags, then go ahead. Just don't come crying when USA forces you into participating in yet another of their pointless wars.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

The government never adheres to the constitution anyway so why bother to change it?

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Funny to read that some say that the JSDF is an "army" currently in legal limbo (not untrue actually), which albeit being the 9th biggest budget by country and having its personal perfectly trained would be unable to defend the territory (which they actually already do) without tweaking some wording in a document.

Defense is defense, which is what we are talking about and which is already insured by both JSDF and US agreement and agreed by the status quo loving population. Striking or attacking is not, which is not what we are talking about here and which is an off-topic to all, JSDF, US and the population.

As usual the mad-as-a-hatter right-wing of the LDP trying to stir up much ado about nothing in their echo-chamber with Kyodo (and other "friendly" media) acting as their usual mouthpiece.

Ultimately, what do some people expect should the Constitution be amended: armed retaliation in case of perceived aggression, counter-aggression, first strike or some other account settling by military force? Dream on guys, the LDP oyajis (right-wing nutters included) while having some over-bloated egos and a pathological infatuation with the past, are ultimately far too interested in keeping their cushy (and rewarding) seats to do anything so dramatic.

They will just pat themselves on the shoulder for "a good job done", send an offering to Yasukuni Jinja and go back to milk this country for what it's worth by continuing to sit in parliament with nothing changing except a ridiculous increase in military spending that the country couldn't afford (and actually already can't afford).

I would also expect the J(SD)F (with SD now optional) taking part in whatever Mexican army of a coalition is needed somewhere to defend non-Japan related interests. When the first bodybags will come home will the plebs (and possibly even the right-wingers) understand how much they have been had and how much the country has been sold out. That's really all you'll get for having chickensh.t hawks posturing...

The simple fact that they have been very loud when tip-toeing around the issue for nearly a decade but ultimately doing nothing shows how much they are afraid of losing their perks over anything else and especially over "ideology" or "love" or "protection" for their country and other such lipstick on a pig.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Yow, super blooper! The following should've read: " It is easy to forget the benefits of that after generations lived in peace. "

The moment you stop being a peace state and become a warfare state you lose, some, a lot of, most, or all of your freedoms and stability. Russia at the moment serves as a horrid and extreme example. But the American warfare state is also a horror. Think of the thousands of homeless disabled vets, or the rotten social services of the United States. The U.S. is a country that feeds the military and starves millions of people. Kill Article 9 and the horrors of living with a warfare state could be yours.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Blue

If you call allowing armed foreign nations breaching your territory boundaries and sending missiles into your ocean or over your country DEFENSE then your Sadly mistaken.

Its pathetically feeble defense or realistically non existing.

Do you even realize that the Senkaku are within Ishigaki city limits ?

Or that Japan indeed seeks strikes capabilities for foreign enemy bases and wants nuclear weapons at its disposal whilst preaching to the world about how we should all be free of nuclear weapons?

These details have everything to do with the article above that we are discussing about revisions to Japans war renouncing constitution.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Blue

The USA defense agreement with Japan is only if Japan is attacked ,and at that point it's too late !

Its the JSDF and coastguard duty to protect Japan's territorial borders and airspace of which they have done an awefuly feeble and pathetic job of .

Sorry to be so blunt !

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

@Kyo wa heiwa dayo ne

DO you really think Japan is sleeping? Think again!

This is basically just another announcement to inform us that the war renouncing constitution its changing or has changed whether we like it or not.

Japan has contested territory issues with China , South Korea and Russia.

Then there's North Korea also.

If there's no peace agreement then technically they ARE at war.

Then we have the economic war with Russia also.

This all adds up to not a good scenario for Japan.

Japan's a bit slow and lagging to even review the strike capabilities until the end of the year might be too late anyway.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

*Article 9 of the Constitution renounces war and* bans the possession of military forces and other "war potential."

If you abolish a Constitution that 'renounces war' then you are saying, in effect' you welcome war. There is nothing presently in Japan's constitution that prohibits it from defending itself. The debate is alarmist fantasizing.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

I do not think that Japan should ever have a strike first capability. If there is one thing Japan never seems to understand, is that for every action there is a reaction. Playing the victim bares witness to that.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

If Japan repeals Article 9, then what Japan gets is National Military(国防軍), not SDF.

Think about it.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

The Russian invasion of Ukraine, China's assertiveness and North Korea's repeated missile launchings -- all these are godsends for conservative Japanese lawmakers to propose that the war-renouncing constitution must be revised.

Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution goes like this:

"Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.

In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized."

Article 9 was an expression of remorse by post-war Japan over the invasion and devastation by Imperial Japan of its neighboring countries, and also a firm promise that Japan would never do it again. It was in this vein and spirit that the inscription on an epitaph in Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park says to atomic bomb victims, "Rest in peace. We will never repeat the mistake."

So, what does it mean if the Constitution was revised and Article 9 recanted?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites