politics

Japan's peace constitution under pressure at 70

23 Comments
By Kelly OLSEN

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

© 2017 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.


23 Comments
Login to comment

A severely biased AFP will not bother to let the reader know that a "Nationalist" is not synonymous with "Right Wing" or "Militarist". Imperial Japan's horrific end to WWII was the result of Militarists taking the helm of government and instituting Militarism as a state policy. Nobody in Japan, short of some deranged right winger would want a return to such a past. Just a few years after the U.S. forced Article 9 on Japan, they then forced Japan to create the JSDF, which since inception has never fired a shot in any deployment. Germany on the other hand has fired in combat, as an active member of NATO. Both of these are the creation of U.S. interests facing the Cold War. While that war may be over, the remnants of the adversarial relationships remain, and today's security demands require the participation of our democratic allies.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

I am no expert on the constitution but why do they want to change it? Is it because of "national humiliation"? Or is it because the conservatives want the "obligation" to go to war? And how does the change make this more in line with "family" values? If you ask me Abe and co are dead set on wanting the ability to go on some crusade. I fear the worst for Japan with Abe in charge because he is so confident now that he is likely to get his way and with no strong opposition....well.....

5 ( +5 / -0 )

There are various problems with article 9 that does not match with reality. The biggest being since JSDF is not a military force under law, they are no court martial nor rule of engagement making everything more complicated requiring PM to provide authorization to every move.

JSDF personnel are also under pressure difficult to move out of the organization since there are no honorable discharge making it difficult to obtain a satisfying career afterwards.]

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The US should apologize to Japan for our unwise act of imperialism in imposing this almost unworkable constitution.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

This is too bad. I really like Article 9, as I don't have that in my country. This is something to be celebrated and appreciated not removed for the sake of warmongering PM's

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The constitution has served the nation and its people for 70 years and kept it at peace with all other countries including those it was previously at war with it.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

" warn attempts to revise it risk whitewashing the country's modern history."

dont make me laugh. Any one who has two minutes of experience in Japan and has read two paragraphs of a history book know full well japans modern take on history in Japan is the definition of white washing. The denial of Nanking has been common place for decades. Japan as the victim and USA and the big meany who dropped the bomb and the Chinese who started the war are all common place. That's the tip of ice burg when it comes to common place Japanese history white washing.

that being said, Japan is NOT an occupied country anymore, and for better or worse they should be able to admin or write their own constitution.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

The point would be, could a better one be written?

5 ( +6 / -1 )

@ Nissan America. I beg to differ, in Japan, " Nationalist", "Right wing" and Militarist do tend to interchange , morph or synergize one another. The demarcation like lines are pretty blurred, if at all they exist.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@OssanAmerica not Nissan America sorry for the Google self" correct" app.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The point should be, has Japan evolved enough to trust them with a change to this pacifist constitution? The only real reason they have given for the change is so they can assist allies in conflicts, which is just malarkey! Japan's allies don't need their assistance. Under the current constitution, Japan can assist its allies in a logistical sense, which is all that is needed. Which begs the question, why does Japan need to change the constitution? Is it so they can get a slice of the international arms trade? Or, is it so they can smack any hamster they like without provocation? As far as I am concerned, Japan's imperial rule and attempts at genocide during the first half of last century cannot ever be forgotten or forgiven. Therefore, article 9 should stay exactly as it is. These right-wing imperialistic loons cannot be trusted, ever!

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Cogito Ergo Sum

If you limit to the ones known as "Netuyo" or on-line right wings that maybe true but most real nationalist don't really post on the net which you probably obtain most of your information about them.

The world changed from the start of the last century where now Japan can trade freely with most nations around the world and does not need to worry about blockade of oil directly from the oil producing nations nor other natural resources.

In other words Japan doesn't even need to consider in becoming a militarist because it's cheaper to do trade then to invade another nation.

The present concern is another nation trying to invade and occupy Japan's sovereign territory and or try to block sea lanes essential in transporting natural resources to Japan.

My only concerns are towards to the men and women that serves and may even make the ultimate sacrifice to maintain stability to this nation.

Am I what your regards as a militarist as well?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The point should be, has Japan evolved enough to trust them with a change to this pacifist constitution?

Not your call or damn business, end of story.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

There are various problems with article 9 that does not match with reality.

What some are calling problems are exactly the reasons why that constitution should stay in my opinion, I believe it is the reality which does not match with peace nowadays...all thanks to people like this prime minister and his political tribe.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Its time Japan had one of their own and not a foreign written one anyways.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

any constitution that can stop a warmongering imbecile from taking their country down a road that long ago stopped going down is doing its job. It's the people that need to respect it that need replacing, not the document. Same problem for Trump and Abe and anyone else that finds notions of peace a hassle. They are both hitting the wall of consequences. Breach it and all bets are off

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I would love to see more countries adopt Article 9, including the US (most at war country, regardless if you believed they're justified or not). Truth is Japan will be in,same position South Korea is - near North Korea. South Korea could've had an article 9 (and parliamentary monarchy to protect against the dictatorship that lasted until the late 80s), just like Japan.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I would love to see more countries adopt Article 9, including the US (most at war country,

Exactly!

In fact, Article 9 should be in the constitutions of all countries.

Having said that, I agree that it's time for Japan to write its own constitution.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

So what will a revised constitution actually look like? What are the proposal and articles Abe ruling LDP Government have in mind need revision?

Colin P.A. Jones is a professor at Doshisha Law School in Kyoto....has a few ideas.....If LDP gets its way, a charter full of rights that are barely known would be replaced with one heavier on duties

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2016/05/08/issues/japanese-constitution-mean-anything/

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@itsonlyrocknroll ... Thanks for the link. I've read all the comments here and everyone has some good points. But as Professor Jones said, what is the real point of revising the Constitution? If it is only to allow the SDF to be more combat-ready, then I'm ok with that. But if it is to impose "duty" on the Japanese people, then I am totally against it. Because that is taking us back down the road of total obedience to the State - tens of millions of people died horribly or suffered terribly because of that ideology.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Hi ramenbaka, I honestly don't understand the urgency in revising the constitution. If the population is prosperous, crime is low, the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan is serving a useful purpose. And the Government of Japan, it people are politically/economically adequately contributing to regional security to further a common economic partnership there is little need to expend the resources when there many other issues that need this government attention.

I suspect, at least part of the reason behind this LDP government inability to except that over eighty percent of the population have moved on. is society in general have embrassed human rights, defined on the principle of respect for the individual, without fear of colour, ethnicity, or religion, respectful of human dignity, obligations rather than rights, or the emphasis of family over individually is not a political means to an end.

The scandal over an ultra-nationalist kindergarten provided an insight into just how far the insidious influence of a nationalist right wing group had reaching into every level of government. The opposition parties must prove in the coming weeks and months they can force this   LDP government fixation for ideological post-war imperialist values and focus wholeheartedly on the real issues, depopulation, social mobility, and growing the economy through a comprehensive reform programme.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

itsonlyrocknroll

It's always better to discuss and debate such important thing while in peace then to argue about it during an emergency. 9.11 and the freedom act that was rushed through congress is a good reference.

Like my momma always said finish your homework while you have ample time rather then trying to finish it off at the last minute.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cogito Ergo Sum May. 3 11:17 am JST

@ Nissan America. I beg to differ, in Japan, " Nationalist", "Right wing" and Militarist do tend to interchange , morph or synergize one another. The demarcation like lines are pretty blurred, if at all they exist.

That the demarcation lines are blurred are the result of the media's common practice to deliberately do so.  In the west the media has made "guns", "legal guns" and "illegal guns" all the same. More recently "legal documented immigrants" and "illegal undocumented immigrants" have all been blurred into "immigrants". Likewise in Japan it's media do their utmost to blur the line between "nationalist", "right wing" and "militarists". But anyone with half a brain knows that these terms are not necessarily concordant.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

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