Japan's Constitutional Reform Debate and the Potential for Collective Self-Defense

Japan currently bans collective self-defense with the United States due to the interpretation of Article 9 of their Constitution, which prohibits war as the right of a sovereign state. This restriction hinders future growth of the U.S. - Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security and interoperability between the countries military forces. Because of political difficulties with passing constitutional amendments, the DPJs focus on domestic issues, and weak public support, the Japanese are unlikely to amend their constitution to allow collective self-defense CSD with the United States in the near future. Constitutional change requires a two-thirds majority vote in both Diet houses and a majority of voter support through a national referendum. To date, this has never been attempted since ratification of the constitution in 1951. The ruling DPJ is not focused on constitutional reform and CSD, alternately working on domestic and quality of life issues. This is despite calls from some bureaucrats and an executive national security panel to move forward with CSD. Recently public support for constitutional reform and CSD has waned reducing chances of adopting constitutional change. Although an easier route, reinterpretation of Article 9 by the ruling government is another road to CSD, but one which is publicly and politically unpopular. With the rising military power of China and the unpredictability of North Korea, CSD approval should be a priority of the Japanese government. As an economical and timely improvement in security, CSD offers Japan a quick solution to pressing defense problems. Through an agreement with defined limitations, Japan could draft a treaty which allows the benefits of CSD while preserving their peace constitution.