TOKYO, Feb. 13 (Xinhua) -- Following the recent election, Japanese Prime Minister and Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) President Sanae Takaichi swiftly signaled her intention to accelerate constitutional revision, stating that she would "create an environment in which a national referendum on revising the constitution can be held as soon as possible."
Analysts warn that with the LDP winning more than a two-thirds majority in Sunday's House of Representatives election, meeting the requirement to propose an amendment to the constitution at least there, the Takaichi administration may attempt to fast-track changes to Japan's pacifist constitution. However, substantial institutional and political constraints remain before any revision can be realized.
In recent years, right-wing forces in Japan have steadily sought to hollow out the pacifist principles of the postwar constitution, aiming to gradually remove legal constraints on military expansion. Such moves pose significant risks to Japan itself and to regional stability, seriously challenge the existing international order, and warrant high vigilance from the international community.
INTENT TO ACCELERATE REVISION
At a press conference on Monday, Takaichi said that as prime minister, she expected political parties and the public to deepen discussions on constitutional revision, and that as LDP president, she would vigorously advance campaign pledges, including amendment of the constitution.
During the election campaign, Takaichi advocated explicitly stipulating the existence of the Self-Defense Forces (SDF) in the constitution. The LDP's coalition partner, the Japan Innovation Party (JIP), echoed the call, with its leader Hirofumi Yoshimura saying on Tuesday that debate should be accelerated and that the legal status of the SDF under Article 9 should be squarely addressed.
Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution renounces war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes, and stipulates that Japan will not maintain land, sea, or air forces or other war potential, and the right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized. This article forms the core of Japan's so-called Peace Constitution.
For decades, right-wing forces have sought to revise Article 9. In the LDP's 2012 draft constitutional revision proposal, the conservative party not only clearly stipulated the existence of the SDF but also called for the recognition of a national defense force under the direct command of the prime minister.
Experts believe that Takaichi and other right-wing politicians are determined to amend Article 9 in order to fundamentally weaken the pacifist foundation of the constitution and remove legal barriers to Japan's remilitarization.
CONSTRAINTS REMAIN
Despite favorable conditions created by the election outcome, significant hurdles remain.
Institutionally, any amendment to the constitution requires a two-thirds majority in both houses of the parliament and then a majority approval in a national referendum. Although the LDP has met the two-thirds threshold in the lower house, the ruling coalition of the LDP and the JIP does not command a majority in the House of Councillors.
According to Nikkei, even if opposition parties that are relatively supportive of constitutional revision are counted, the ruling bloc still falls short of the numbers required in the upper house, making the path to amendment "a high hurdle."
Even if the parliament were to initiate a revision proposal, passage in a national referendum is far from guaranteed. Japanese media noted that if a Takaichi-backed amendment were rejected by voters, it would deal a heavy blow to both the prime minister and the LDP, and make it difficult to revisit the issue in the future. Public opinion remains divided, and the specific amendments could significantly sway voter attitudes.
Some media outlets have cautioned against rushing the process. An Asahi Shimbun editorial stressed that constitutional revision, as a matter concerning the nation's fundamental law, must be based on broad consensus and cannot be forced through on the strength of a lower house majority. Mainichi Shimbun argued that there is no pressing necessity for revision and that discussions should not proceed on the assumption of a predetermined outcome.
CAUSE FOR VIGILANCE
Experts noted that to lower the threshold for constitutional revision, Japanese right-wing forces have amplified perceptions of external threats and promoted the narrative that amendment is necessary, while advancing "de facto constitutional revision."
During the administration of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, the government reinterpreted the constitution to lift the ban on exercising the right of collective self-defense and pushed through new security legislation in the parliament. Under former Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, the cabinet approved three new national security documents that endorsed the possession of so-called "counterstrike capability," previously referred to as "enemy base strike capabilities" -- a move that seriously deviated from Japan's exclusively defense-oriented policy.
Since taking office last October, Takaichi has advanced policies including increased defense spending, revisions to security documents and eased restrictions on arms exports. Analysts view these steps as both further loosening military constraints and laying the groundwork for constitutional revision.
Such developments have aroused deep concern at home and abroad. A commentary on the website of Spanish newspaper El Espanol suggested that the Takaichi administration may adopt gradual measures to revise the constitution and reshape the postwar order, including sustained increases in defense spending and expanded regional activities by the SDF. South Korean media have warned that Japan appears to be taking substantive steps toward becoming a country capable of waging war, prompting heightened vigilance in South Korean society.
The Japan Federation of Bar Associations has stated bluntly that recent government policies clearly deviate from the fundamental principles established in Article 9 and significantly increase the risk of Japan being drawn into war.
Scholars including Miho Aoi, professor of law at Gakushuin University in Japan, argued that Japan's constitution was founded on the painful lessons of WWII and enshrines the principle that disputes should not be settled through the use of force, and warned that Japan now faces the risk of veering away from that postwar path.
In their view, the justifications offered by Takaichi and the LDP for constitutional revision and military expansion lack solid grounding. Inflating external threats to justify military buildup could steer Japan toward dangerous waters. What Japan truly needs is a peace-oriented policy grounded in constitutional principles rather than a departure from them, they noted. ■
