It is useful and perhaps instructive, when considering how the current Japanese constitutions has been and is being twisted by the AbeAso regime, to remember that Japan's German inspired constitution of 1889 was never formally amended, although it was used to as the base document of governments ranging from the Meiji regime, Taisho democracy, and the ultra-nationalist and fascist military dictatorship of the 1930s which led Japan's calamitous war against the Asia-Pacific.  It is unlikely that the 1946 constitution will be amended any time soon, as Aso stated in a meeting with LDP militants about a year ago, essentially because the AbeAso regime does not have the votes in neither the Diet, nor among the electorate to do it.  As a result Aso advised the militants to learn from the Nazis  of how to change a constitution by changing how it is interpreted.  That is precisely what is happening in Japan today. 

Kenneth Courtis

On 30/5/2015 5:35 PM, Knittel, Siegfried wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
Dear Forum Members,

Ellis Krauss is right. The constitution of Japan has to be changed. It would be better to change the paragraph 9 instead to reinterpret it. But I would say there is not only a gap between the  of reinterpretation and the words of the constitution. It is in reality a break of the constitution. It manipulates the public. And then everyone is wondering why only 50% of the voters vote at the General election. They feel helpless against a the government who changes the constitution but calls it only reinterpretation.

Emily Chens article in the National Interests als meets an important point. She asks how to define a ‚clear danger‘. The Abe government wants the Japanese public to trust the government. But after the government tried to manipulate the public with the reinterpretation the paragraph 9 instead to follow the legal way to change the paragraph 9 in the way the constitution says who can trust the words of the  government.

Siegfried Knittel

Von: Roger Brown <[log in to unmask]>
Antworten an: NBR Japan Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Datum: Samstag, 30. Mai 2015 09:52
An: NBR Japan Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Betreff: [NBR's_Japan_Forum] writings on Japanese security policy & Article 9

First, Ellis Krauss wrote a thoughtful op-ed for Japan Times on why he used to oppose amending Article 9 and now favors it:

Also, Emily S. Chen, a graduate student at Stanford and associated with Hoover, has a comprehensive article in The National Interest on the national security bills now being debated noisily in the Diet--she thinks they do represent a substantial change in policy.

Members might have opinions on either or both.

John Campbell 

To unsubscribe from the list, send an email to: [log in to unmask]

To unsubscribe from the list, send an email to: [log in to unmask]

Avast logo

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

To unsubscribe from the list, send an email to: [log in to unmask]