Constitution

Since May 3rd, 1947, Japan has had the current constitution, which might change to activate the Japan Army under the present Prime Minister regime. Recently, there has been talk about whether it should be revised. Most crucial in the talk seems to be the ninth article: Japan does not have any force effective to handle international conflicts.

The problem is on how to intepret the international conflicts, or, more directly, if the purpose of self-defense will be categorized into international conflict. This is a gray zone susceptible to some interpretations. This room was the cause of our WWII, concluded by some of us. The room gives persons in power the choice to interpret and lets them run.

It is nonsense to try to choose one of the two views: the first that war or violence cannot work as a way to solve conflicts among nations but to conclude and the second we need to have the capacity to protect our country and the world peace from countries that will try to handle matters with power. Because both of them are right. History tells us wars have killed guilty and innocent persons indiscriminately and good and righteous persons are not always superior to evil persons in power.

The two views can remain intact in the current ninth article; therefore, I conclude we should not change the constitution. The problem is not the constitution but how we can use it, so we must be deliberate when electing the representatives among whom the prime minister will be selected. More important, any person, however diligent and deliberate they are, can make mistakes in many cases, so you have to realize each of you should be responsible for the decision our leader you have elected has made.