FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Abe and the Re-Militarization of Japan

by

Most politicians picking a date to announce a major policy shift, overturning a fifty-year ban on the exports of military hardware, would not chose April 1. But the polished corridors of power in Tokyo are not renowned for their sense of humor. 

The past is another country, one which Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe  consistently harks back to. Abe has even mentioned a timeframe for his goal to be achieved, what he claims is 2020 vision or in this case revision: the lighting of the Olympic flame in Tokyo in six years.

Abe has vowed to push for a wholesale revision of the Japanese constitution to be enacted  before the Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympics. “By 2020, I think Japan will have completely restored its status and been making great contributions to peace and stability in the region and the world,” he said.

Overturning the export ban inevitably means that the focus will turn to Article 9 of the constitution. This states that Japan pledges  never to wage war, or even maintain land , sea or armed forces capable of waging war.  But the article that is key to Abe’s ambitions is 96.

This article sets out the procedures required to change the constitution, one that has never been altered; revised, re-interpreted but never actually altered since its enactment in 1947.

It states that any amendment must be backed by two-thirds of both houses of the Japanese parliament and a referendum. Abe wants just a simple majority in both houses, which he has, to allow him to change the constitution.

Reinterpreting has been successful at least in terms of defense.  Japanese military spending will hit  $232 billion over the next five years as it purchases anti-missile destroyers, submarines, 52 amphibious vehicles, surveillance drones, US fighter planes and 17 Boeing Osprey aircraft, capable of vertical take-off. Not bad under a constitution that forbids a standing army.

But if Abe can change 96, then the LDP, who have been in power for all but a handful of the last 60 years, will be able to drive through wholesale changes to the constitution which has been reinterpreted on three key occasions that were at odds with the article’s original intention.

In 1965 the US was allowed fly B-52s out of Japan’s Kadena Air Base to bomb North Vietnam.

In 1991 Japan provided $13 billion in financial support to help remove the Iraqi army from Kuwait but no troops. Conservatives in Japan felt that this anomaly, in their opinion, was a golden opportunity to press for major constitutional change.

In 1999  Tokyo said it could provide logistic support to the US in emergencies in “areas surrounding Japan,” which was understood to include the Korean Peninsula.

Tokyo also passed a law in 2001 allowing it to refuel US vessels in the Indian Ocean in support of Operation Enduring Freedom — the war in Afghanistan.

But Abe’s plans to further fiddle with the constitution are meeting opposition from within his own ranks. Retired lawmaker and former LDP secretary-general Makoto Koga said at a public lecture recently: “Changing a constitutional interpretation through a cabinet decision is a patchwork measure… One mistake and we could be involved in a war.”

Emperor Akihito and Crown Prince Naruhito have indicated that they were against changing the constitution.

The Japan Times stated in an editorial last year that : It cannot be emphasized too much that the LDP is trying to impose a constitution that runs counter to the principle of modern constitutional politics as well as postwar Japan’s no-war principle. 

In September 2007, Abe wrote in a magazine article that “From now on, I want to sacrifice myself as one lawmaker to make true conservatism take root in Japan.”

Abe, from a wealthy political family, was exposed early to the ultra-conservative viewpoint at the knees of his grandfather,  Nobusuke Kishi, a former prime minister. 

Kishi was imprisoned for his wartime role, including atrocities committed in China, but never tried as a war criminal after World War II. He was premier from 1957 to 1960, but, in an ironic twist had to resign without achieving his goal of revising the constitution. You could say it runs in the family.

Abe has also pushed through a draconian “secrets law”that allows the government to decide what can be classified as secret. Critics say it is a charter against uncovering abuse of power and will strengthen government influence over the media

Sirens of alarm are ringing. How they are heeded will determine whether the 2020 Olympics will see Japan delving into the past or embracing the future.

 

Tom Clifford is a freelance journalist and can be reached at: cliffordtomsan@hotmail.com.

More articles by:
Weekend Edition
June 24, 2016
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
A Blow for Peace and Democracy: Why the British Said No to Europe
Pepe Escobar
Goodbye to All That: Why the UK Left the EU
Michael Hudson
Revolts of the Debtors: From Socrates to Ibn Khaldun
Andrew Levine
Summer Spectaculars: Prelude to a Tea Party?
Kshama Sawant
Beyond Bernie: Still Not With Her
Mike Whitney
¡Basta Ya, Brussels! British Voters Reject EU Corporate Slavestate
Tariq Ali
Panic in the House: Brexit as Revolt Against the Political Establishment
Paul Street
Miranda, Obama, and Hamilton: an Orwellian Ménage à Trois for the Neoliberal Age
Ellen Brown
The War on Weed is Winding Down, But Will Monsanto Emerge the Winner?
Gary Leupp
Why God Created the Two-Party System
Conn Hallinan
Brexit Vote: a Very British Affair (But Spain May Rock the Continent)
Ruth Fowler
England, My England
Jeffrey St. Clair
Lines Written on the Occasion of Bernie Sanders’ Announcement of His Intention to Vote for Hillary Clinton
Norman Pollack
Fissures in World Capitalism: the British Vote
Paul Bentley
Mercenary Logic: 12 Dead in Kabul
Binoy Kampmark
Parting Is Such Sweet Joy: Brexit Prevails!
Elliot Sperber
Show Me Your Papers: Supreme Court Legalizes Arbitrary Searches
Jan Oberg
The Brexit Shock: Now It’s All Up in the Air
Nauman Sadiq
Brexit: a Victory for Britain’s Working Class
Brian Cloughley
Murder by Drone: Killing Taxi Drivers in the Name of Freedom
Ramzy Baroud
How Israel Uses Water as a Weapon of War
Brad Evans – Henry Giroux
The Violence of Forgetting
Ben Debney
Homophobia and the Conservative Victim Complex
Margaret Kimberley
The Orlando Massacre and US Foreign Policy
David Rosen
Americans Work Too Long for Too Little
Murray Dobbin
Do We Really Want a War With Russia?
Kathy Kelly
What’s at Stake
Louis Yako
I Have Nothing “Newsworthy” to Report this Week
Pete Dolack
Killing Ourselves With Technology
David Krieger
The 10 Worst Acts of the Nuclear Age
Lamont Lilly
Movement for Black Lives Yields New Targets of the State
Martha Rosenberg
A Hated Industry Fights Back
Robert Fantina
Hillary, Gloria and Jill: a Brief Look at Alternatives
Chris Doyle
No Fireworks: Bicentennial Summer and the Decline of American Ideals
Michael Doliner
Beyond Dangerous: the Politics of Climate
Colin Todhunter
Modi, Monsanto, Bayer and Cargill: Doing Business or Corporate Imperialism?
Steve Church
Brexit: a Rush for the Exits!
Matthew Koehler
Mega Corporation Gobbles Up Slightly Less-Mega Corporation; Chops Jobs to Increase Profits; Blames Enviros. Film at 11.
David Green
Rape Culture, The Hunting Ground, and Amy Goodman: a Critical Perspective
Ed Kemmick
Truckin’: Pro Driver Dispenses Wisdom, Rules of the Road
Alessandro Bianchi
“China Will React if Provoked Again: You Risk the War”: Interview with Andre Vltchek
Christy Rodgers
Biophilia as Extreme Sport
Missy Comley Beattie
At Liberty
Ron Jacobs
Is Everything Permitted?
Cesar Chelala
The Sad Truth About Messi
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail