By continuing your visit to this site, you accept the use of cookies. These ensure the smooth running of our services. Learn more.

11 November 2005

Controversy over Article 9 amendment

More than half of Japanese citizens disagree with amendment of article 9 of the constitution, which prohibites State's possesion of arms. Even among youngsters who never exprienced or know the stories about the war there exists strong opposition.

Even after 60 years, people's opinion about the Pacifist constitution is not greatly changed. No one wants the war. But some politicians want to change it.

Well, my opinion is since I am realist I agree with constitutional amendment.  But not now, in the future. One of the reason many people oppose the amendment is they fear that if the constitution is amended, our troops would be easily sent to anywhere by stupid politics. Recently Japan sent troops to Iraq to follow the order of Bush. Our country lacks civilian control functions in the politics. That means our country's democracy is not functioning well.

We have yet to review the mistakes we made in the past. Older generations never reflected how they were wrong in the past. We've been suffering the traumas of the past and have yet overcome it. One example is denying of Masscre of Nanking. We always regret the consequences of the war, not the cause of the war we provoked. We rarely talk about Manchuria and Pearl Harbor.

We have to study the cause of the past mistakes.

That is what we have to do to get ready for the amendment.

Some oppose it simply because they are passionate pacifist. They say they want to make their country completely non military state like CostaRica. But that is totally impossible taking current situation Japan is in into account.

We have the troops so called "Self-Defense Force" and foreign mercenaries mainly stationed in Okinawa island already. That means we need military force to protect our national interests. Also it is not good for our country to heavily rely on US military presence. US is our most reliable ally but the foreign troops who always prioritize their own national interest ahead of others after all.   

01:12 Posted in Politics | Permalink | Comments (1) | Tags: Japanese


I agree the topic should be revisted, but disagree about your argument concerning timing. We are in a post-Cold War period, characterized by a rising China and Global War on Islamic Terror.

The old maxim, "Those who fail to plan, plan to fail" would be appropriate for putting off the reforms. WWII is 60 years ago and the Japan of 1945 is not the Japan of 2005. Now is the time for Japan, who wishes to be a full fledged UN Security Council permanent member, to remove the ambiguity and make its constitution relfect the reality of its national security interests.

Kind regards,

Bill Rice

Posted by: Bill Rice | 11 November 2005

The comments are closed.