In Trailblazing Tokyo Governor, Japan Meets Its Great Disrupter
By MOTOKO RICHOCT. 8, 2017
Koike is not particularly proposing to revise the the article 9 ; She is asking if the applicants support the revision of the Constitution and promote the discussions of the revision.
The claim should be understood against the background of the history that in Japan any revision has been opposed no matter what .
Koike says the article 9 is important to discuss but specifically she wants to advance decentralization by the revision of the Constitution.
It is misleading to say Japan is considering participating in overseas combat missions led by allies.
Japan is only saying we use the force to the minimum extent necessary when
It seems Non-Japanese have hard time understanding what Japanese diet members are discussing.
Japan communist Party claim JSDF are unconstitutional because they embody forces that the articles 9 has banned.
Japanese government had claimed that as defined by UN Charter every country had the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence.
But since Japanese Constitution bans a war of aggression, Japan is only allowed to hold minimum forces just strong enough to exercise the right to individual self-defense. Offensive Military Capacity is prohibited. That's what Japanese government had been saying. JSDF are not offensive forces that are banned by the Constitution. They are defensive forces that are barely strong enough for individual self-defense.
But if so, strictly speaking Japan is not allowed to support US weaponry divisions even when U.S. is fighting against North Korean military because it can be interpreted as the exercise of collective self-defense.*
Abe proposed the revision.
Note Abe says
Opposition parties are opposed to the new security bill saying it is against Japanese Constitution and what Japanese government had been saying.
They want to abolish it.
Koike does not want to abolish it. She wants to keep some of it and revise other part of it.
False.
更新
やっぱり、新聞は読んでないみたいだね。
*
ほとんどの憲法学者や２０１４年以前の政府解釈が集団的自衛権を違憲としていたのは、９条２項がある以上、仮に自衛隊が合憲だとしても、自衛のための必要最小限度の実力行使しかできないはずで、自国が攻撃されていないのに武力行使をする集団的自衛権は、その限界を超えると考えられていたからです。
By MOTOKO RICHOCT. 8, 2017
she would admit only those who supported several principles, including a revision of the pacifist Constitution,
Koike is not particularly proposing to revise the the article 9 ; She is asking if the applicants support the revision of the Constitution and promote the discussions of the revision.
The claim should be understood against the background of the history that in Japan any revision has been opposed no matter what .
Koike says the article 9 is important to discuss but specifically she wants to advance decentralization by the revision of the Constitution.
she would admit only those who supported several principles, including ・・・ Japan’s right to participate in overseas combat missions led by allies
It is misleading to say Japan is considering participating in overseas combat missions led by allies.
Japan is only saying we use the force to the minimum extent necessary when
an armed attack against Japan occurs and when an armed attack against a foreign country that is in a close relationship with Japan occurs and as a result threatens Japan’s survival and poses a clear danger to fundamentally overturn people’s right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, and when there is no other appropriate means available to repel the attack and ensure Japan’s survival and protect its people, ”
It seems Non-Japanese have hard time understanding what Japanese diet members are discussing.
Article 9. Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.
In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.
Japan communist Party claim JSDF are unconstitutional because they embody forces that the articles 9 has banned.
Japanese government had claimed that as defined by UN Charter every country had the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence.
But since Japanese Constitution bans a war of aggression, Japan is only allowed to hold minimum forces just strong enough to exercise the right to individual self-defense. Offensive Military Capacity is prohibited. That's what Japanese government had been saying. JSDF are not offensive forces that are banned by the Constitution. They are defensive forces that are barely strong enough for individual self-defense.
But if so, strictly speaking Japan is not allowed to support US weaponry divisions even when U.S. is fighting against North Korean military because it can be interpreted as the exercise of collective self-defense.*
Abe proposed the revision.
The Main Points of Revision
In a situation where a close ally of Japan comes under attack from a foreign country, Japan reserves the right under the Constitution to use a minimum required level of force to protect Japanese citizens from clear threats to life, freedom, and the right to pursue happiness.
There are cases under international law that justify the use of collective self-defense.
When the US military is engaged in efforts to defend Japan, the Self-Defense Forces will be allowed to provide a greater level of support, such as supporting US weaponry divisions.
The Self-Defense Forces will be allowed in certain situations to provide logistical support to foreign militaries in noncombat zones.
Note Abe says
Let me assure you, there is no possibility that our country will be dragged into a war on foreign soil.”
Opposition parties are opposed to the new security bill saying it is against Japanese Constitution and what Japanese government had been saying.
They want to abolish it.
Koike does not want to abolish it. She wants to keep some of it and revise other part of it.
she would admit only those who supported several principles, including ... discouraging local governments from allowing permanent residents of foreign descent to vote in local elections.
False.
更新
やっぱり、新聞は読んでないみたいだね。
*
ほとんどの憲法学者や２０１４年以前の政府解釈が集団的自衛権を違憲としていたのは、９条２項がある以上、仮に自衛隊が合憲だとしても、自衛のための必要最小限度の実力行使しかできないはずで、自国が攻撃されていないのに武力行使をする集団的自衛権は、その限界を超えると考えられていたからです。
