When the decade-old- serving Prime Minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe, is experiencing high tensions with an extremely hostile neighbour, North Korea, you remake the constitution.
Ever since it’s defeat in WWII, Japan’s constitution has largely been pacifist and completely against the idea of having a large military.
Recently, over 80% of the lower house voted to revise Japan’s old, post-war Constitution but needs to know what the public think before any action can take place.
The Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan, abbreviated CDPJ, is now the smallest opposition group. The anti-war liberals won 55 seats but this is tiny compared to the now-ruling- party that won 313 seats. That’s two-thirds of the house and, as far as I know, in just about all constitutions, a two-thirds victory is a majority.
The Party of Hope, Japan’s conservative bloc and the party that won the majority, said that they weren’t interested in changing everything in the Constitution.
Article 9 states that Japan cannot go to war or makes war illegal. It also states that an armed force cannot be maintained. This Article, as viewed by Democrats, is the foundation of a new democracy after the war. However, conservatives see this as humiliation and degradation of Japan’s right to fight back.
Overall, Japan’s victory could mean bringing back of traditional values and loosening the grip on restraining the military. This is something that should have been done before the turn of the century in 2000.
Article 9 severely limits Japan’s military power for fear of Japan growing strong and becoming hostile itself. It’s a shame that Japan has quite a few strong weapons that can’t be used unless aggressively attacked by an outside power.
Yes, they have fancy tanks and AEGIS Cruisers and Destroyers but it’s pointless if they don’t have ammunition or missiles onboard.
Reference: Japan’s Abe to push pacifist constitution reform after strong election win
