Japan Could Begin Real Constitutional Change after July

Fundamental change to Japan’s “Peace Constitution”—written by a cabal of Americans working under General Douglas MacArthur during the U.S. occupation in 1946—has been a goal cherished by three generations of Japanese nationalists and many more simple patriots who cringe when recalling the origin of the nation’s basic law.  Suddenly pulses are beating faster as the goal seems to be coming within reach.

For the record, I support changing the constitution.  Indeed, I would—like former Tokyo mayor Ishihara Shintaro, and, I suspect, Prime Minister Abe Shinzo—support scrapping the current document and adopting a new constitution written by the Japanese themselves.  Such an action would be both a means and an end in the process of making Japan, as PM Abe says, a “normal country.”

This week, at the urging of PM Abe—under whose imprimatur the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) produced in April 2012 a constitutional revision proposal (about which more below)—Dietmen representing different political parties have begun forming coalitions in support of amending Article 96 of the current constitution.  Article 96 reads in English (the original language of composition) as follows:

Article 96.  Amendments to this Constitution shall be initiated by the Diet, through a concurring vote of two-thirds or more of all members of each House and shall thereupon be submitted to the people for ratification, which shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of all votes cast thereon, at a special referendum or at such election as the Diet shall specify.  Amendments when so ratified shall immediately be promulgated by the Emperor in the name off the people, as an integral part of this Constitution.

The objective of the revisionists—most importantly Abe’s LDP and allies in the Japan Restoration Party and Your Party—is to change the two-thirds of both Diet houses requirement to one-half.  Lowering the Diet vote bar would open wide the door to future revisions. Indeed, it would allow—possibly ensure—eventual scrapping of the foreign-imposed constitution and its replacement by something indigenous and truly reflecting the will of the Japanese people.

Are we talking about radical change?  More to the point and probable concerns of Japan’s Asian neighbors, are we talking about a possible return to emperor worship and militarism?  Here there should be no doubt.  Absolutely not.  Japan today is a wholly different polity and changed society from that which prevailed in the 1930s.  Japan, more than many countries, has learned from its history.  It has embraced pacifism as national policy.

But it is fair to expect, in not to hope for, some near term changes that address the ways U.S. authorities used constitutional constraints to disarm Japan and to ensure that it would remain permanently dependent for its defense on the United States.

The draft constitution produced by the LDP last year (http://www.jimin.jp/english/news/117099.html) and included in the LDP election campaign platform (“manifesto”) last fall provides a hint of what immediate changes might be.  The key revisions are:

1. The Emperor is designated at the “head of the State,” as well as—in the current document--the symbol of the State, and as a unifying entity for the people.
2. Stipulation of the Rising Sun (hinomaru) flag as the national flag and the Kimigayo as the national anthem.
3. Chapter Two, containing only Article Nine (“the peace provision”) and entitled “Renunciation of War” in the current constitution is re-titled “National Security.” The stipulations that Japan “renounces war as an instrument of national policy” and abjures the threat or use of military force to resolve international disputes remain.
4. Article Nine is expanded, however, with subparagraphs stipulating the establishment of “National Defense Forces” under the Cabinet, with the Prime Minister as Commander in Chief, in order to “secure the peace, independence, and security of the country and the people.”
5. In Chapter Three, “Rights and Duties of the People,” it newly prescribes that a family shall be respected as the basic unit of society.  It obligates the State to protect the environment and to aid Japanese citizens in emergencies abroad and when victims of crimes.
6. Chapter Nine is new.  It stipulates how the National Defense Forces would be commanded and deployed in national security emergencies.
7. Chapter Ten is the revision to Chapter Nine on “Amendments,” specifically Article 96, making it a “one-half of both houses of the Diet” requirement in lieu of the previous two-thirds.

This LDP revision proposal is serious and fervently desired by Abe and his supporters, including members of the Osaka mayor Hashimoto’s Japan Restoration Party.  Tactically, however, the only really essential revision needed in the first instance is to Article 96.

The Abe/Aso/Ishiba leadership of the LDP/New Komeito has so far proven itself highly effective in getting what it wants from the Diet—including in the Upper House, where the opposition still holds a majority of seats.  The leadership began this week organizing people and resources needed to win in the July Upper House election enough seats (two thirds of the 242 seats would be 162) to ensure amendment of Article 96.  A victory in July would be a truly epochal event, opening the door through which Japan can step, as a “normal country” into the future.