image: Asahi Shinbun
Asahi Poll Shows 63% Oppose Exercising Right to Collective Self-Defense
Considering that major mass media like NHK always provide news coverage as if they curried favor with the Abe administration, I am slightly surprised at decent results of an opinion poll survey. I think this is mainly because something like illusion or ignorant mist covering the earth has been blown away. I suppose that you feel refreshed as if mist were clearing up to some extent. Magnetic control of thoughts by artificial intelligence has actually influenced human consciousness. Since such artificial intelligence has been destroyed, however, people have been liberated from the condition of blind acceptance.
Masatoshi
Takeshita
April
7, 2014
English translation of a Japanese article: TheAsahi Shimbun Degital – April 6, 2014 – (1)
Asahi
Poll Shows 63% Oppose Exercising Right to Collective Self-Defense
Right to Collective Self-Defense
While the Abe administration has sharpened
its stance toward approving the use of the right to collective self-defense, the Asahi Shimbun has conducted a mail-in opinion poll survey across the country to
look into voters’ perception of the Constitution. The survey results show that those who
responded that Japan “should not lift ban on exercising the right to collective
self-defense” account for 63%, which was 56% in the last year survey, while responders who said
“should lift ban” account for 29%. There
is also an increase in those who think Japan “should
not revise the Constitution” and pacifist-oriented attitude has been
seen in every field.
Even more than 50 % of supporters of the Abe
administration or the LDP also said that Japan “should not lift ban.”
Although the Abe administration tries to
move to have Japan allow the exercise of the right by changing constitutional
interpretation, 56% of those allowing the exercise of the right answered that
Japan should revise the Constitution while 40% of them answered that it is
sufficient just to change the interpretation by the government. It turns out that those who agree with the
prime minister account for only 12% of all respondents.
—–
English translation of a Japanese article: TheTokyo Shimbun – April 5, 2014 –
Right
to Collective Self-Defense – Sophistry called “Limited Allowance”
Approval of the exercise
of the right within a limited range of circumstances isn’t sophistry, is it? It is about the “theory of approval
of limited exercise” of the right to collective self-defense. The government’s interpretation
of the Constitution has been made through many years of discussions. The Constitution is not allowed to be revised
in accordance with the intentions of just one cabinet.
The “theory of approval
of limited exercise of the right” means approval
of the limited exercise of the right to collective self-defense for a specific case, for example, “in the case of defense of
U.S. warships under attack in the vicinity of Japan by the Self Defense Forces” This theory was proposed by LDP Vice
President Masahiko Komura.
His proposal is based on a 1959 Supreme
Court “ruling in the Sunagawa case” over the constitutionality of the U.S.
military presence in Japan.
As for Japan’s self-defense right, the
ruling says: “It is indisputable that, as an act of exercising its proper
powers as a nation, Japan is allowed to take self-defense measures that are
necessary for ensuring its existence.”
Referring to this part of the ruling, Mr.
Takamura made the case that “exercising the right to collective self-defense in
some situations falls under the minimum necessary exercise of self-defense
rights and that defense of a U.S. warship is “interpreted as the minimum necessary
measures.”
Some of New Komeito and
LDP lawmakers take a strong cautious stance toward whether to approve the
exercise of the right to collective self-defense, which has been interpreted
unconstitutional by the government, as constitutional. It is likely that the theory of approval of
limited exercise of the right has emerged as a tool for persuading such
members.
However, it is impossible to do so.
It is nothing but a jump in logic to use
the ruling made in the times when the topic of discussion was about the
constitutionality of individual self-defense as a rational for approval of
partially exercising the right to collective self-defense, a New Komeito executive
member says.
In a meeting with Mr. Komura, New Komeito
leader Natsuo Yamaguchi reportedly showed a cautious stance toward the theory
of limited exercise of the right by saying the government should initially examine
the applicability of the right to individual self-defense. It stands to reason.
The true nature of an
argument over collective self-defense right lies in whether it is valid to
resort to force to defend a foreign country even though Japan is not directly
attacked and whether the government’s interpretation of the Constitution that
has gone through long years of discussions is allowed to be changed in
accordance with the intention of just one cabinet.
Even limited exercise is
nothing less than a fundamental change of the government’s constitutional
interpretation.
Once this way is
accepted, the government can do
anything by interpretation favorable to it regardless of articles of the
Constitution or legislative intent. The
Constitution would be a dead law and “constitutionalism” in which power
observes the Constitution would become a mere façade. The possibility of
getting involved in an erroneous war like the Iraqi war would become more
likely.
We should not consider quite good for
approval for limited exercise. Every lawmaker should realize that constitutionalism is on the
verge of a crisis.
Leave a Reply