LDP pushes for revising Constitution to include mention of SDF

For people that cannot defend themselves,they be wise to try too live with their insecurities,than constantly promoting to their adversaries, nobody fears the SDF

Setting the stage to engage in armed conflict, but only in situations of 'self-defense.'

Real,how can you defend yourself now,China , Russia,,NK can strike in 5 minutes the city of Tokyo

Japan sets a high hurdle for any constitutional revision. Any amendment proposal needs to be approved by a two-thirds majority in both houses of parliament before it can be put to a national referendum.

Good! No country should make it easy to change their constitution. The LDP, if memory serves me right, once brought up the idea of it making it a simple majority in the Diet, but fortunately that idea got shot down.

Let the people choose!

My personal read on this is that they fear an attack on Taiwan from China and are revising this make it easier to enter into armed conflict in the region without being actually attacked.

I could be wrong, but that's my reading of it.

How about cleaning out the rot in the LDP before trying to change the constitution? They keep talking about regaining the trust of the people, but I've yet to see anything moving in that direction.

How about cleaning out the rot in the LDP before trying to change the constitution? They keep talking about regaining the trust of the people, but I've yet to see anything moving in that direction.

Brother, you can't clean the rot out of the LDP. The LDP is the rot. They just have to get rid of the LDP and all their cronies. But I'm not holding my breath

It's interesting just as a thought study to remember that a group of USA lawyers wrote the Japanese constitution back in the 1940s, including the difficult procedures necessary to amend the constitution.

One would think a more self-confident and independent country would have molded the constitution by now to better reflect national characteristics.

I see they’re still using the MILES-like laser tag gear.

It was a bit bulky, but functioned better than what we had.

deanzaZZRToday 08:16 am JST

It's interesting just as a thought study to remember that a group of USA lawyers wrote the Japanese constitution back in the 1940s, including the difficult procedures necessary to amend the constitution.

But not article 9, which is what you were hoping to have some drama about.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_9_of_the_Japanese_Constitution#Historical_background

Love seeing the Osprey in the background too! Subliminal message!

Who ever is beating the drums of war should teak a PEAK at what is happening in Ukraine and Palestine first.

I pray that I will never live to see a war in the Indo Pacific or Japan.

I pray that I will never live to see a war in the Indo Pacific or Japan.

Why don’t you send signed pleas to China. It won’t do much, but praying won’t do anything.

To tackle the divisive issue of amending the supreme law for the first time and end the debate over the constitutionality of the SDF,

Debate? Doesn't everyone know it's unconstitutional?

Under Article 9, Japan forever renounces war, declaring that "land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained." The SDF is treated in Japan as an "armed organization" for the defense of the country.

These War Mongers and so called law makers will be the first to flee the nation to the Caribbean with their families when a war is imminent .

Aly RustomToday  07:44 am JST

My personal read on this is that they fear an attack on Taiwan from China and are revising this make it easier to enter into armed conflict in the region without being actually attacked.

I could be wrong, but that's my reading of it.

You are completely wrong. There is nothing in Artcle 9 that addresses what you describe. That is already covered outside the constitution by the right of Collective Defense.

The only change being suggested is to amend or eliminate the second paragraph of Article 9 which states that no milirary will be maintained, an obvious contradiction with reality since Japan has had a military since 1950,

By keeping the first part of Artcile 9, Japan would still have a "peace constitition" that does not permit it to start any wars.

Given how some other countries worship their armies, I don't see any problem with Japan finally breaking its shell and defending itself. That is what I was going to say. But we all know this is sadly the outcome of western warmongering.

Tokugawa Iemitsu must be turning in his grave. He was smart enough to prevent western powers having a foothold in Japan and preventing it to be another Philippines. I wonder what they teach in Japanese schools recently that we get these contemporary weak Japanese politicians.

I still would like to think that East Asians are smart enough not to kill each other just to serve western powers.

we have US army here.

question.

do we need JSDF?

if yes-why both?

if Japan wants real army-send US boys,ladies and others back home,Mom and Pop are waiting for them...

EastmannToday 09:32 am JST

we have US army here.

question.

do we need JSDF?

if yes-why both?

if Japan wants real army-send US boys,ladies and others back home,Mom and Pop are waiting for them...

Common sense would say you need as many soldiers and equipment as you can get against a 1.4 billion pound gorilla. Toothless Russia not so much.

GDBDToday 09:31 am JST

Tokugawa Iemitsu must be turning in his grave. He was smart enough to prevent western powers having a foothold in Japan and preventing it to be another Philippines.

And left it powerless to prevent the US from opening it up later on. Tokugawa Iemitsu should be thankful the US was only interested in trade and not having its sailors executed.

You are completely wrong. There is nothing in Artcle 9 that addresses what you describe. That is already covered outside the constitution by the right of Collective Defense.

If that's true then there is no need to change anything

The only change being suggested is to amend or eliminate the second paragraph of Article 9 which states that no milirary will be maintained, an obvious contradiction with reality since Japan has had a military since 1950,

So what? They've had it like you've said since 1950 with no issues, so why change it now unless its to respond to a percieved threat.

By keeping the first part of Artcile 9, Japan would still have a "peace constitition" that does not permit it to start any wars.

which it already has, so no. I completely disagree with your assessment. this is all about China.

hese War Mongers and so called law makers will be the first to flee the nation to the Caribbean with their families when a war is imminent .

absolutely

Real,how can you defend yourself now,China , Russia,,NK can strike in 5 minutes the city of Tokyo

If pushed, Japan can have a nuclear detergent very quickly. It's in everyone's interests to maintain the status quo.

Aly...

My personal read on this is that they fear an attack on Taiwan from China and are revising this make it easier to enter into armed conflict in the region without being actually attacked.

I could be wrong, but that's my reading of it.

You are close. The US wants to make it easier for Japan to enter into armed conflict in the region without being actually attacked.

If pushed, Japan can have a nuclear detergent very quickly. 

I’m looking forward to this “nuclear detergent” to finally get rid of those persistent spaghetti and engine oil stains.

You are close. The US wants to make it easier for Japan to enter into armed conflict in the region without being actually attacked.

That makes a lot more sense than what the previous poster said.

My personal read on this is that they fear an attack on Taiwan from China and are revising this make it easier to enter into armed conflict in the region without being actually attacked.

I could be wrong, but that's my reading of it.

Confirmed. Dead accurate. You interpreted it right. Japan recognizes that they need more wiggle room on the ability to defend itself and her allies. Not to make war. But to coordinate and lend a hand strategically.

do we need JSDF?

Because it means more money for somebody.

You have the elites place their people in the Diet. Same in the US and the UK.

Japan, its people must be able to defend itself, deter the government of china, contrived/continued belligerent intent to undermine Japan economy, to harass bully, encroach on its borders, threaten it trading sea routes.

It is with a heavy heart that Japan freedom loving, the only constitution devoted to peaceful coexistence respect for one neighbours, renouncing war has failed to promote maintain regional harmony.

The Japan Self-Defense Forces role must be reformed reviewed restructured enhanced in law, so to, if deemed necessary, with the J people periodical democratic consent, strike first, deter enemies with an tactical strategic onshore/offshore nuclear short long range missile deterrent.

I admit, I have yet to find a single J family member, or any J friends, colleagues acquaintances that doesn't recoil in horror at the merest suggestion.

The despot dictatorship government of china has brought Japan government/people to this crucial point.

Why not go all the way and just include the word military?

SDF is an armed police, thus all its members are civilian volunteers who can quit at will and all its members must volunteer, which leads to a perpetual recruitment shortage in the age of falling birth rates.

The only way to fix this issue once and for all is to add military and conscription to constitution, so that young men of Japan can be dragged into newly restored Japanese National Army, Navy, and Airforce that replaces SDF.

Japan needs 500K troops minimum to counter China and Korea that seeks vengeance, and the only way to reach this number is via conscription.

Love the Osprey in the background

The despot dictatorship government of china has brought Japan government/people to this crucial point.

We have the CPC to thank for giving Japan an opportunity to strengthen its own army.

Why contain Japan? Change your own country’s Constitution to renounce war. I bet it won’t happen.

It is with a heavy saddened heart as I write to see how the UK continues to avoid renouncing war.

Samit Basu,

I suspect you are fully conversant to the answer to your question.

J peace-loving people won't countenance any suggestion of a possible future return to milltary imperialism.

So OssanAmerica article 9 amendment to the second paragraph is the only present achievable option.

I suggest a referendum would be firmly rejected, even the younger members of my J family reject any change to article 9.

@itsonlyrocknroll

J peace-loving people won't countenance any suggestion of a possible future return to milltary imperialism.

Adding SDF to constitution doesn't solve SDF's recruitment problem, because SDF is an armed police with all civilian members who can quit at will if ordered into fire just like regular police officer can.

Only a formal military can order its troops into fire(quitting is a desertion) and build troop strength via conscription of all able bodied young men.

A police officer, armed or not, can resign at will. A conscripted soldier cannot.

quercetum

UK is ill equipped to defend itself, I have read recently, training exercises/military infantry manoeuvres, include the use of carboard assault rifles and soldiers required to give give a healthy load bark of bang bang you are dead......Ho hum.

At least the photo above depicts a force that appears fully supported for combat.

The UK Biggles RAF will soon be jumping up and down arms flapping reminiscing that wonderful childhood spitfire squadron

Confirmed. Dead accurate. You interpreted it right. Japan recognizes that they need more wiggle room on the ability to defend itself and her allies. Not to make war. But to coordinate and lend a hand strategically.

Thank you Christopher

Japan need an army and they should say bye bye to daddy US "protection". Japan can use the money they give the USA to build their own defence.

U.S. Forces Japan primary role is a forward base, to prevent a sustained attack on US mainland.

https://www.usfj.mil/About-USFJ/#:~:text=On%20mainland%20Japan%2C%20there%20are,approximately%2020%20miles%20from%20Yokota.

A Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan is what is commonly referred to as the protective umbrella

The question still remains would present/future US government honour or more importantly be politically open to view interpret this pact arbitrarily?

https://www.mofa.go.jp/region/n-america/us/q&a/ref/1.html

The Japanese constitution is a precious gem that can be a World Cultural Heritage. So, why try to revise or abandon it? Rather, people should endeavor to export the spirit struck home in it.to other countries. Have LDP members ever tried that?

Not likely that the US will leave, in which case taxes will have to be raised even higher for a build-up of the SDF.

The Japanese constitution is a precious gem that can be a World Cultural Heritage

What does that no sense means?

Not likely that the US will leave, in which case taxes will have to be raised even higher for a build-up of the SDF.

If Japan stop payment them and ban them from their territory they better leave presto!

There has never been a single amendment to the constitution.

WasabiToday 11:50 am JST

Japan need an army and they should say bye bye to daddy US "protection". Japan can use the money they give the USA to build their own defence.

You wouldn't get very much for such a pittance.

You wouldn't get very much for such a pittance.

Pittance? 1.2 trillion yen is not and it is coming from our taxes.

WasabiToday 03:04 pm JST

You wouldn't get very much for such a pittance.

Pittance? 1.2 trillion yen is not and it is coming from our taxes.

That's over five years. Japan's defense expenditure is 25x that. Going from 25-26 is not getting you very much.

LDP regime abandon many difficulties people facing such as rice shortage, poverty, repeating Covid19 spreading or frequently natural disaster, and prioritize destroying-constitution that people don't hope it but far-right cult groups cling to it.

Start learning chinese now, save yourself some time in the long run, you’re going to need it, sooner or later

"When the Constitution is revised, the LDP also wants to state that the government can get greater authority and issue emergency orders without parliamentary approval to respond to natural disasters and other crises."

The revision of the Constitution which mentions the SDF doesn't scare me, but the above does. Giving the LDP oligarchy the power to issue "emergency orders" without approval by the Diet is one big step in the direction of the LDP's decades-old goal: getting rid of Japan's democracy and rule of law.

This could be similar to the passing of the Peace Preservation Law of 1925, which assisted the Japanese military cliques in their imposition of wartime totalitarianism.

"Those who don't learn from history are forced to relive it." - George Santayana

Shameless LDP tries to distract public eyes from slush fundraising.

Complacent PM desperates making his "legacy" immediate before the end of his term, not working for citizen.

Disgusting politics.

My personal read on this is that they fear an attack on Taiwan from China and are revising this make it easier to enter into armed conflict in the region without being actually attacked.

I could be wrong, but that's my reading of it.

Confirmed. Dead accurate. You interpreted it right. Japan recognizes that they need more wiggle room on the ability to defend itself and her allies. Not to make war. But to coordinate and lend a hand strategically.

Completely wrong. That has been taken care by Abe's re-interpretation of article 9 in 2014 or 15 or whenever it was.

This here is nothing but lip-service. To keep all the right-wingers in the LDP. To get donations. That's all. The constant call for the revision of the constitution has been here for decades. New plans every few years too. Now the newest plan. But it's only to give the impression that they are doing something. The LDP knows it has no chance in hell to touch article 9. And little chances to change anything else in the constitution, that was the plan a few years ago, change something else as a test run, to see if they manage to get the needed 50%+ in the referendum for something uncontroversial. But they never even tried that, suspecting that people would know it's a test run for the big article 9 attack, and vote against it anyway.

Same this time, just for show. If they were serious they could have tried this under Kishida. But they are afraid of the big defeat in a referendum, so they just keep it alive as a talking point, without any serious intention of actually trying. If and when they feel the need for some actual changes they just do it through legistlation, re-interprete the meaning of article 9. As was done under Abe.

Instead of addressing the actual concerns of the population.

ChristopherToday  10:59 am JST

My personal read on this is that they fear an attack on Taiwan from China and are revising this make it easier to enter into armed conflict in the region without being actually attacked.

I could be wrong, but that's my reading of it.

Confirmed. Dead accurate. You interpreted it right. Japan recognizes that they need more wiggle room on the ability to defend itself and her allies. Not to make war. But to coordinate and lend a hand strategically.

Japan already has agreements with other nations with whom they conduct joint exercises. Japan can already defend itself, and it's allies through Collective Defense without touching Article 9 of the constitution.

The removal or amendment of the second paragraph will simply align Article 9 with reality since the JSDF obviouosly exists and eliminates the needless debates over constitutionality which have hampered JSDF actions. Talk of amending Article 9 in Japan goes back decades, well before the current various alliances.

@Yubaru, the Japanese constitution is not one of the most difficult to change. I would say more, most constitutions in the world are even harder to change.

The main problem here is simply political. The Democratic (Socialist) Party has always refused to support the LDP proposal. In fact, the sum of the LDP and CDPJ is sufficient to successfully pass a modification amendment.

The opposition has never allowed a consultative referendum to be held for the entire country. In order to know the opinion of the Japanese public on this issue.

Such behaviours of LDP are already violating article 99 of Japanese constitution clearly.

But, Japan has no constitutional court, Japanese major media don't even mention about constitutional violation of ruling party and PM.