Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution is a paragraph in the current Japanese constitution prohibits from 1946, the military activities and the maintenance of armed forces.

text

Text in Japanese:

第九条 日本 国民 は 、 正義 と 秩序 を 基調 と す る 国際 平和 を 誠 実 に 希求 し 、 国 権 の の 発 動 た る 戦 争 と 、 武力 に よ る 威嚇 又 は は し の 行使 る 永久 手段 と す を を る 、 手段 と す を を を 、 手段 と 紛争 を をを 放棄 す る。
二 前 項 の 目的 を 達 す る た め 、 陸海空 軍 そ の 他 の 戦 力 は 、 こ れ を を 保持 し な い。。 国 の 交 戦 権 は 、 こ れ を 認 め な い。

Translation in German:

Art. 9 1 In a sincere pursuit of an international peace based on justice and order, the people of Japan renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes for all time.
2 In order to achieve the objective of the preceding paragraph, no land, sea or air forces or other means of war are maintained. A right of the state to wage war is not recognized.

debate

The interpretation of the article in relation to the Japanese Self-Defense Forces is controversial. The political right has called for its abolition or modification. Against the background of the People's Republic of China's growing military power , the right-wing conservative government under Prime Minister Shinzō Abe decided in July 2014 to reinterpret the constitution and thus introduce a new military doctrine. After a successful parliamentary vote in September 2015, Japan can now use the right to “collective self-defense” and fight alongside allies in conflicts, even if it is not attacked directly.

history

During the occupation , both the later hoshu honryū ("conservative mainstream") around Prime Minister Yoshida Shigeru as well as the political left interpreted the article as a strict restriction of military capacities and in some cases as a prohibition of any armed forces, while the later hoshu bōryū ("conservative tributary" / anti- mainstream ) of liberals and conservatives around Hatoyama Ichirō , Ashida Hitoshi and Shigemitsu Mamoru called for rearmament and (partial) emancipation from the United States. At the same time, even before the first security treaty of 1952, the USA began to demand that Japan contribute to its own defense.

When the revisionists took over the political leadership with Hatoyama's "tributary" in 1954, the interpretation of Article 9 changed to the effect that it represented a prohibition of military capacities only beyond the minimum necessary for a defense against direct attacks. This covered the creation of the self-defense forces. With the founding of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) in 1955, both conservative currents came to an agreement on this basic consensus under pressure from the Socialist Party of Japan , which, particularly in its left wing, pursued a strictly pacifist interpretation of Article 9. However, the Hatoyama supporters, who led the government until 1960, further expanded the potential scope of this interpretation: Kishi Nobusuke ( Kishi faction , hoshu bōryū ) declared in 1957 that it would not be unconstitutional for Japan to arm itself with nuclear weapons, too if it doesn't currently intend to.

In the sometimes violent protests of the political left against the Security Treaty (and its new edition from 1960) in the 1950s and 1960s, Article 9 developed into a central argument in the political dispute with the political right over foreign and security policy. The government, which after Kishi was again under the control of the Yoshida supporters of the "mainstream" until the 1970s, remained in its position, but restricted the growth in military spending (1955: 1.78 percent of gross domestic product, 1967 <1% ). In 1976 defense spending was capped at 1% of GDP by a cabinet decision.

When Koizumi Jun'ichirō ( Mori faction , hoshu bōryū ) extended the interpretation of Article 9 to a form of collective defense with the Japanese participation in the Iraq operation after 2001 , the debate about Article 9 heated up again. The political left viewed Koizumi's anti-terrorism law and foreign deployment as unconstitutional. The Cabinet's Legislative Office also saw collective defense as not being covered by the constitution, but revised its view under pressure from the government, namely Cabinet Secretary Fukuda and his deputy Abe : Since Japanese soldiers in Iraq are primarily involved in a humanitarian reconstruction mission, it is not a case of collective defense. At the same time, a public debate about a formal change to Article 9 has been developing since around 2000, as the Japanese public is increasingly interested in foreign assignments, e.g. B. the UN missions in Cambodia and Mozambique, is more open-minded. In 2005, around half of the population voted in favor of an amendment to Article 9, as proposed by parts of both the LDP and the Democratic Party .

swell

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Turning away from pacifism? Japan is allowed to send soldiers abroad from faz.net, September 19, 2015 (accessed September 20, 2015).
  2. ^ Richard J. Samuels: Securing Japan. Tokyo's grand strategy and the future of East Asia. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 2008, ISBN 978-0-8014-7490-3 , in particular chap. 2, pp. 38-59: Baking the Pacifist Loaf.
  3. ↑ Samuels, pp. 94-99: De facto collective self-defense
  4. ↑ Samuels, p. 81 f.