Introducing Rule of Human

Discussion over the Constitution of Japan is now converging on whether Japan is going to exercise the right of collective self-defense. The administration led by Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, made up its mind to limitedly allow the right, while public pros and cons are sharply divided in two. This should be recognized as a matter of rule of law. Against traditional attitude of the government, which restrained political leaders from exercising arbitrary power on use of force, Abe administration contemplates introducing a concept of “rule of human.”

On interpretation of Article IX of the Constitution, the government of Japan has changed its viewpoint several times. In spite of the article renounces war as a sovereign right of the nation and denies maintenance of forces, Japan decided to possess minimum force, based on a notion that the constitution had not declined the right of self-defense. With that interpretation, which should have been the biggest change of interpretation ever, self-defense force was established.

Then, the point was shifted to the definition of self-defense. The government has long been taking a position that it could not exercise collective self-defense right, or right to retaliate to an enemy attacking on closely related country without any direct offense on Japan, even though it is acknowledged by the Charter of the United Nations as sovereign right of a nation. To implement its pacifism, Japan has been denying the right in self-restrictive way.

Feeling potential threat from China, or North Korea, Abe administration realized necessity of political discretion in security policy. There is no doubt on that the alliance between Japan and United States is indispensable. To make the alliance appropriately work, Abe determined to step into more flexible operability of self-defense force.

However, what makes things complicated is Abe’s personal ambition of changing post-war regime. Since the time when his grandfather was the Prime Minister of Japan, Abe family has been negative against restrictive government on security policy. Not limited to reinterpretation, abolishment of the Article IX is the goal he seeks. This political agenda will definitely be on political schedule after the reinterpretation will be achieved.

Here is a key point. Do other nations embrace not only the reinterpretation but also his ambition? No one can deny Japan’s right of collective self-defense, regardless exercising it or not. But for a nation that realizes Japan as a nation renouncing war, Abe’s new security policy may seem to be as something aggressive. Even how Japan asserts no possibility of retuning to imperial warmongering regime, there is no evidence, except verbal promise, of refraining from being that.