1. Japan in PKO, PKF, and Article 9 Marie SAKAI Clara GILLISPIE YONEMOCHI Emiko YAMAGUCHI Megumi TORAIWA Saki

2. Text of Article 9 1) 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. 2) 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.

3. What are the questions being asked? Should Article 9 be changed? How do Japanese citizens feel about Article 9? How does the international community feel about changing it? What is the impact of changing Article 9? How strictly is Article 9 Enforced? Are PKO operations in violation of Article 9? What can we expect to see in the short term? In the long term?

4. History of Article 9 Demilitarization means : Japan’s militaristic leaders must be removed from power Its ability to make war is dismantled Its military must be disarmed all military industry must be prohibited The Article 9 has been drafted and revised, but all versions contain 2 paragraphs: Renouncing the right to war Armed forces would not be maintained

5. The Final Draft 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.

6. Problems With Interpretation 1 st paragraph- denied the aggressive acts of the war, but it did not deny acts of war in self-defense. At the same time, the 2 nd Paragraph, by effectively prohibiting Japan from armed forces and the right of belligerency, ultimately would make it impossible to carry out a war of self-defense.

7. Origins and History of the SDF "National Police Reserve’s purpose is solely on peace keeping" "It’s about how to maintain peace in Japan therefore it is not an army" - Prime Minister Yoshida Shigeru in 1950, on the National Police Reserve, a forerunner to the Japanese Self-Defense Force

8. History of SDF 1950 - Korean War Instructions from MacArthur, to augment 8,000 personnel in Japan Coast Guard and to establish National Police Reserve National Police Reserve ( 警察予 備隊 ) established one month after MacArthur's instructions 1954 - Self Defense Force ( 自衛 隊 ) established by The Self- Defense Forces Law

9. Self-Defense Force Justified as a defensive means that it permissable under certain interpretations of the Constitution Deliberate use of non-military terms All personnel are technically civilians BUT One of the top five largest military budgets in the world Highly sophisticated navy

10. Changes in SDF - Gulf War 1990 - Gulf War Iraq invades Kuwait President Bush Sr. asks for Japan's full cooperations debate over whether to send SDF abroad unable to reach consensus, bill to dispatch SDF overseas discarded

11. Changes in SDF - PKOs 1992 - Law Concerning Cooperation for United Nations Peacekeeping Operations (Peace Keeping Operations Law) approved Permitted SDF to take part in United Nations PKO and PKF Participated in at least 8 peacekeeping operations

12. Changes in SDF - War on Terror 2001, 9/11 - United States attacked by a terrorist group 10/29- Anti-Terrorism Special Measures Law Can overseas actions be in self-defense? What is the line between defensive and offensive?

13. Pro-Revision of Article 9 Different groups with different views of the world xenophobic --> internationalist Vary on whether to revise or remove Article 9 Identifying characteristics: neo-nationalist internationalists collective-securitists fear/mistrust of Asian neighbors Key groups: LDP, DPJ, Komeito

14. Pro Arguments - The Constitution Should Be Revised... So that Japan can become a 'full state' / recognize the SDF as the official military ( Nationalists ) So that Japan can fully participate in humanitarian/peacekeeping/anti-terrorism efforts ( Internationalists/Collective Securitists ) So that Japan can strengthen its request for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council ( Nationalists/Internationalists )

15. Pro Arguments - The Constitution Should Be Revised... Because Japan is in 'a rough neighborhood' ( almost all ) Because Japan cannot always depend on the United States/others for its support ( Nationalists ) Because it is no longer relevant ( Nationalists )

17. Anti-Revision of Article 9 Tend to have an outlook on the world that is more homogenous than the Pro- Revision camp Against revising Article 9 and may feel that Article 9 is already being diluted Identifying characteristics: pacifists traditionalists idealists some internationalists Key groups: Social Democratic Party, Japan Communist Party

18. Con Arguments - Article 9 should be preserved... So that current conditions can be maintained ( traditionalists ) Because violence is not the answer ( pacifists ) Because it plays an important role in encouraging world peace ( idealists )

19. Con Arguments - Article 9 should be preserved... Because it allows Japan the right to self-defense without permitting the offensive use of force ( traditionalists ) Because Article 9 already allows SDF to engage in peacekeeping operations ( internationalists )

20. Japanese Public Opinion "If you ask Japanese people today if they support 'remilitarization,' most would say no. But if you ask the question if they support a broader role of Japanese self-defense forces in the global community, then I believe a higher number would react positively." - Yuki Nakano, Center for Strategic & International Studies

21. Statistics & Graphs Do you think it is necessary to revise the Constitution? Yes, I think so42% No, I don ’ t think so19% Neither32% No reply7% Do you think it is necessary to revise Article 9? Yes, I think so24% No, I don’t think so39% Neither28% No reply9%

22. Opinion poll conducted by Asahi Shinbun three months after the outbreak of the Korean War in June, 1950: 54% endorsed the creation of an army 28% opposed the creation of an army = result related to shock from the Korean War? Still, far removed from principles of Article 9.

23. Asahi Shinbun opinion poll conducted immediately following the conclusion of the San Francisco Peace Treaty (Sept, 1951): 71% favored the formation of an army = At this time, the view that "when Japan becomes independent, it will only be proper for it to possess an army“ was circulating

24. Hatoyama Ichiro cabinet was formed in 1955, which set forth its platform for "constitutional revision" and "independent constitution-making." BUT: 42% opposed revision of Article 9 37% in favor of revision

25. Under Sato Eisaku cabinet in Autumn, 1968: 64%opposed to constitutional revision to permit an army 19%favored of constitutional revision to permit an army Under Ikeda Hayato cabinet in Aug, 1962: 61%opposed to constitutional revision to permit an army 26%favor of constitutional revision to permit an army

26. At the same time... Under Sato Eisaku cabinet, Autumn 1968: 64%"military force in necessary" 19%"SDF should be strengthened" 55%"present force level is acceptable" 74%"support SDF" 40%"SDF is not unconstitutional" 17%"SDF is unconstitutional"

27. International Reactions Asia (led by North Korea, South Korea, and China) Against Revision Bitter history Fear a resurgence of a militaristic Japan Poor timing, when you factor in other recent events in Japan textbook controversy Yasukuni visits by Koizumi

28. International Reactions United States Supports Revision Article 9 is a hindrance to the US-Japanese alliance Japan should assume more heavy lifting in its own/international defense Feels Japan needs a military, if it is to sit on the Security Council

29. US Perspectives "It is quite true that (the security agreement) was fashioned in the last century and we're living in a new security environment." - Donald Rumsfeld, US Secretary of Defense

30. Current Situation Changing perceptions/nationalism among youth Greater threat perceptions North Korean missile launched over Japanese mainland Worries over the rise of China What future support will the US supply? Increase in protests Military exchanges and new programs

31. Current Situation - PKOs and PKFs Peacekeeping a way to help countries torn by conflict create conditions for sustainable peace Forms confidence-building measures power-sharing arrangements electoral support strengthening the rule of law economic and social development.

32. Current Situation - PKOs and PKFs Peacekeeping a way to help countries torn by conflict create conditions for sustainable peace Forms confidence-building measures power-sharing arrangements electoral support strengthening the rule of law economic and social development. UN peacekeepers: soldiers, military officers, police officers and civilian personnel from many countries

33. Scenarios for the Future Unlikely that no change will occur Government pushing for change Lots of groups feel the need to address the ambiguity of Article 9 Change 9 to give greater legitimacy to PKOs/SDF/similar things but keep a defensive- only spirit Removal of Article 9 completely in one step Extremely likely to upset China, NK, SK, others Probably will lead to incident BUT one of the biggest movements within the pro- change camp

34. Scenarios for the Future Removal of Article 9 in stages No actual change to the article but further erosion of its meaning example: offensive/defensive weapons SDF involved in more operations, changes in the meaning of defense/self-defense example: nuclear weapon program w/ US