June 1, 2012
Japanese Communist Party member of the House of Representatives Kasai Akira on May 31 stated that in the context of the Japanese Constitution, Japan should cut its military ties with the United States.
Kasai demanded that the lower chamber’s Commission on the Constitution examine conflicting points between war-renouncing Clause 2 of Article 9 of the Constitution and such actual states as the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, the U.S. military presence in Japan, and Japan’s defense buildup.
Pointing out that Clause 2 of Article 9 renounces not only war but also possession of war potential and the right to belligerency, the JCP representative stated, “Along with the Preamble, Article 9 makes up the very essence of the Constitution.”
Ishiba Shigeru of the Liberal Democratic Party in the discussion said, “It is Japan’s obligation to host U.S. forces, which Japan cannot refuse.” In response, Kasai said to the LDP man who had once served as Defense Minister, “That is because the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty still exists. Don’t change the Constitution to fit the security treaty but abolish the security treaty to fit the Constitution. That’s the way we should proceed.”
The JCP lawmaker stated that a Japan free from the military alliance “could become ‘a launching pad for peace’ based on Article 9 of the Constitution from its current position as ‘a staging platform for U.S. wars’.”
Touching on the use of space for military purposes and the easing of the ban on arms exports, the JCP legislator said, “Regarding these unconstitutional moves, we must strictly enforce compliance with the Constitution.”
Agreeing with Kasai, a Social Democratic Party parliamentarian said, “It is the mission of the Dietmembers to rectify the actual situation if contradicts Article 9 of the Constitution.” Some Democratic Party legislators said, “We should evaluate the legitimacy of the Iraq War and the reality of maintaining U.S. bases on Okinawa.”
Kasai demanded that the lower chamber’s Commission on the Constitution examine conflicting points between war-renouncing Clause 2 of Article 9 of the Constitution and such actual states as the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, the U.S. military presence in Japan, and Japan’s defense buildup.
Pointing out that Clause 2 of Article 9 renounces not only war but also possession of war potential and the right to belligerency, the JCP representative stated, “Along with the Preamble, Article 9 makes up the very essence of the Constitution.”
Ishiba Shigeru of the Liberal Democratic Party in the discussion said, “It is Japan’s obligation to host U.S. forces, which Japan cannot refuse.” In response, Kasai said to the LDP man who had once served as Defense Minister, “That is because the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty still exists. Don’t change the Constitution to fit the security treaty but abolish the security treaty to fit the Constitution. That’s the way we should proceed.”
The JCP lawmaker stated that a Japan free from the military alliance “could become ‘a launching pad for peace’ based on Article 9 of the Constitution from its current position as ‘a staging platform for U.S. wars’.”
Touching on the use of space for military purposes and the easing of the ban on arms exports, the JCP legislator said, “Regarding these unconstitutional moves, we must strictly enforce compliance with the Constitution.”
Agreeing with Kasai, a Social Democratic Party parliamentarian said, “It is the mission of the Dietmembers to rectify the actual situation if contradicts Article 9 of the Constitution.” Some Democratic Party legislators said, “We should evaluate the legitimacy of the Iraq War and the reality of maintaining U.S. bases on Okinawa.”
