Prime Minister Shinzo Abe Photo: AP

Constitution debate in new stage as Abe puts Article 9 on agenda

By Miya Tanaka

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


©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

In all seriousness, article 9 is ridiculous as Constitutional law and is wholly ignored as is. Any pledge by a government to not defend its own people is an invitation to having your nation gobbled up bit by bit. The first half of article 9 reads:

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.

So if invaded they renounce the use of force and the right to self defense? The goes against the most basic function of government.

Acknowledging the stupidity of renouncing the use of force to protect themselves, the Japanese (with the encouragement of past American administrations) have simply ignored the second half of article 9 outright.

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.

So Japan is already completely ignoring the words written in their Constitution anyway. Why bother seeking to change it when it is already just an illusionary law.

-12 ( +2 / -14 )

The LDP now plans to devise its own amendment proposal possibly by the end of the year, considering the time needed for subsequent discussions with other parties and other procedures to have the revision take effect by 2020, a time frame suggested by Abe.

Yet another 2020 deadline...because after 2021 Abe wont be in office, unless he decides to change the rules again!

There is a good point being discussed here, and should be debated, is the place of the SDF which is in limbo in regards to the constitution.

Keeping Article 9 in place, and making an amendment recognizing the legality of the right of self defense, by the SDF, seems reasonable, but not on Abe's agenda either I am sure.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

I believe that If Japan came under any sort of new real threat, it would quickly do away with the old constitution.

Right now it's sort of in a transitional phase, but how can Japan realistically stay under the US written constitution which was written in accordance with the USA promising to protect it?

It is in essence renouncing war and receiving a non negotiable American military presence and thus protection too.

But if the USA tells you to arm up and help protect yourself 70 years later, you can't really stick with the old constitution just because you like the idea of being a pacifist nation.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Let's just hope Renho gains a momentum as she convey her thoughts for future Japan, as a pacifist country! And by all means becoming the country's first female Prime Minister;)

2 ( +6 / -4 )

It is fair to ask at this juncture who is a greater threat to Japan's security, North Korea or Abe and his rightwing cohorts?

North Korea is an isolated, poor and industrially backward nation. It tries to behave otherwise because it is scared. (North Korea was bombed flat in the Korea War and the memory of that persists.) Being so, its options for surviving any war it starts are highly problematic.

There is another military world in Japan. It is one that is politically bipolar. We have Article 9 which has kept Japan from being involved in American wars in Asia and the Middle East. Japan developed a civilian economy while the U.S. was expanding its military-industrial complex. At the same time, we have the Japanese rightwing lost cause syndrome (not unlike the U.S. South). However, democratic and prosperous Japan has become the lost cause--the imperial conquests, the practically all-power military, the regimented civilian populace--sticks in their gullets. The majority of these rightists grew up after the war and can only see only the glory of militarism and and not the gore.

What would the Japanese military be like if Article 9 was scrapped? At best, it would be a sidekick to American interventions. Japan would be a dutiful servant. That is all.

Abe and Kim are far great danger to their own countries than to anyone else.

What worries me most about Abe scrapping Article 9 is that he and his rightwing allies might get it into their head to scrap other provisions in the Constitution that protect Japan's human rights.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Abe should just call a plebiscite and hear the voice of the supreme Japanese people.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Article 9 is the smallest of changes proposed, Japan has a Military of quite a size now. (Defence Force! )

Personal freedom, not in there.

Freedom of speech, not in there.

Women's rights, children's rights, not in there.

Worship of the Emperor, in there

Shinto being the official religion, in there

An ability to draft children into the army, in there.

Its actually very scary as only 20% of registered actually vote.

And a percentage of those are counted as 2 votes.

Im sad

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

@kabuki Japan has been involved in USA wars in the Middle East. In Iraq, when the civilian population and infrastructure was bombed to pieces, guess who provided all the fuel? Then there is the also thorny issue of Japanese planes and helicopters transporting USA soldiers and equipment to the battlefields.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Hence all the fear mongering. Hope it fails. Article 9 is the best thing, we should all have one. Stick to defence

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

A debate in Japanese politics? The verdict is already in and the changes will go through just as the LDP wants. This debate is just a puppet show with a few objective options that will be quashed by the right-wing majority. It's just a formality.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Japan should stand by the idea of non-invasive

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I am curious as to how this will all play out. IMO, it boils down to, do the Japanese trust themselves to renounce and fight off unbridled right-wing nationalism, or do they still consider themselves susceptible to rabid patriotism?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

I congratulate Abe for his right thought , further i congratulate Japanese for they never made any constitutional amendments like indian politicians in india,

Fact is without public support no law maker can venture in constitutional amendments for constitution is a most sacred document.

Apex courts can simply set aside by declaring 'ultra vires' the constitution.

I admire the way Abe does, so he has held the position so long as PM. congrats Mr Abe,

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Abe should just call a plebiscite and hear the voice of the supreme Japanese people.

With 2/3 of the majority, it seems the supreme Japanese people have already decided and sealed their faith, military and fascism expansion VS peace and human rights.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Proclamation by Abe about Constitution is suggestion from executive of extreme-rightist Religious Cult.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

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