Recently, Prime Minister of Japan Shinzo Abe, also the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party, stated changes in the constitution as the ultimate goal of its party. This statement could imply Japanese remilitarization and greater involvement in the field of humanitarian intervention that is not so relevant to the interests of Japan. But after all, this issue comes to the bottom line that the security of Japana would not be granted with its long-term dependency on the US military.
The dynamics of the world security have been dramatically changing day-to-day. Not only North Korea poses constant threats on East Asia but also Chinese greater sphere of influence over Pacific and South China Sea concerns its neighbouring nations. Given this change in balance of power in East Asia, our constitution that persists to the extreme pacifism after the WWII does not keep up with its current world order. Our legal framework needs to adapt to the constantly changing balance of power. Last year, President Obama stated that the US would no longer act as "world`s police" and acknowledged the limited influence of the United States. This meant to emphasize that Japan as an independent state needs to protect its national security on its own.
You may argue that changes in the constitution will increase Japan`s susceptibility to both regional and international conflicts. But we also have to admit that our current constitution has not secured our territories in the past decades, given the conflicting sovereignty issues over Takeshima, Senkaku and Karafuto islands with its neighbouring states. I would further argue that changes in the constitution will rather apply the idea of deterrence, which will not erupt an unnecessary conflict with its neighbouring states.
No comments:
Post a Comment