论文部分内容阅读
Editor’s note： Media outlets in China， Japan and other countries have slammed the controversial security bills recently passed in Japan’s lower house. A commentary by Xinhua News Agency is here translated and republished by Beijing Review to help readers better understand the Chinese perspective on the bills：
Regardless of opposition both at home and abroad， Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and his ruling coalition approved security bills in the lower house of parliament on July 16， in what was to be a step to enable Japan to exercise its right to collective self-defense.
Opposition parties in Japan dubbed the security bills “war legislation，” saying the move ignores tragic lessons from history， that it is in flagrant violation of the spirit of the Japanese Constitution and that it will undermine public commitment to pacifism. What’s more， it will al- most certainly bring instability to the Asia-Pacific region.
The security bills include a new bill and 10 amendments. The new bill on “military aid for international peace” permits the Japanese Government to send troops and arms overseas unencumbered by regional restrictions.
The bills will allow Japan to participate in conflicts occurring anywhere and anytime in the world. This indicates that Japan has abandoned its previous exclusively defense-oriented policy to which the country has adhered since the end of World War II （WWII）.
The Constitution of Japan， enacted in 1947， is also known as the Postwar Constitution or the Peace Constitution， as Article 9 of the document stipulates “the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes.”
Since taking office again in December 2012， the Abe administration has pursued the modification of Article 9. But negotiating the purposefully complicated lawmaking procedures involved in revising the country’s constitution in addition to strong public opposition has proved difficult. The Abe administration has hence turned to the shortcut of reinterpreting the constitution—sometimes drastically—at whim through amendments.
Last July， the Japanese cabinet lifted the ban on the right to collective self-defense by the surreptitious means of modifying definitions of terms contained within the Constitution. The administration has by and large shied away from the strict procedural process required to overtly amend the Constitution and Article 9. This time around， prior to the ruling coalition passing the security bills， lawmakers from opposition parties left the chamber in protest before the vote took place. The move reveals that the Abe administration intends to furnish Japan with the capabilities necessary to participate in war. Every country that was invaded and attacked by Imperial Japan during WWII should remain alert as regards the country’s current legislative activity.
The Abe administration has repeatedly denied the aggression and war atrocities perpetrated by WWII-era Japanese forces. The history revisionism that pervades the remarks uttered and actions undertaken by Abe have aroused deep concern among and strong opposition from neighboring countries that have suffered under the yoke of Japanese hegemony. There is no doubt that the approval of the bills in the lower house will further provoke neighboring countries and heighten tensions， thus affecting regional security.
This year marks the 70th anniversary of both the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and WWII. The approval of the security bills is arguably paving the way for the Abe administration to return Japan to its former path of military expansion. The administration has obviously yet to learn from history.
In Japan， the legislation has proved overwhelmingly unpopular among media outlets and the public. The public fears not only will the security bills be impotent in safeguarding Japanese national security， but also may outright endanger it.
A poll released on July 14 by Asahi Shimbun， a major media outlet in Japan， showed that 56 percent of respondents oppose the security bills， while only 26 percent support it. Around 80 percent admitted not fully comprehending the security-related legislation and deemed that there was no need to rashly vote on the bills in the current session of parliament.
Mainstream opinion in Japan holds that national security can be safeguarded only by adhering to an exclusively defense-oriented policy. If the legislation allows Japan to employ military force worldwide， it may lead the country to ill-advisedly indulge in past tendencies.
Since the end of WWII， Japan has been recognized far and wide as a “peaceful country.”The passing of the security bills has the potential to besmirch the country’s pacifist reputation that it has gone to pains to foster and maintain over the last 70 years.
No matter what excuses the Abe administration may use to defend its proposed legislation， Japan is losing the trust of the international community. The administration’s latest move is a dangerous one to say the least， placing national security and the safety of the Japanese people in a precarious position. These so-called security bills will do anything but safeguard Japan’s security. Instead， they have the potential to lead the country once again down the path of war.
Regardless of opposition both at home and abroad， Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and his ruling coalition approved security bills in the lower house of parliament on July 16， in what was to be a step to enable Japan to exercise its right to collective self-defense.
Opposition parties in Japan dubbed the security bills “war legislation，” saying the move ignores tragic lessons from history， that it is in flagrant violation of the spirit of the Japanese Constitution and that it will undermine public commitment to pacifism. What’s more， it will al- most certainly bring instability to the Asia-Pacific region.
The security bills include a new bill and 10 amendments. The new bill on “military aid for international peace” permits the Japanese Government to send troops and arms overseas unencumbered by regional restrictions.
The bills will allow Japan to participate in conflicts occurring anywhere and anytime in the world. This indicates that Japan has abandoned its previous exclusively defense-oriented policy to which the country has adhered since the end of World War II （WWII）.
The Constitution of Japan， enacted in 1947， is also known as the Postwar Constitution or the Peace Constitution， as Article 9 of the document stipulates “the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes.”
Since taking office again in December 2012， the Abe administration has pursued the modification of Article 9. But negotiating the purposefully complicated lawmaking procedures involved in revising the country’s constitution in addition to strong public opposition has proved difficult. The Abe administration has hence turned to the shortcut of reinterpreting the constitution—sometimes drastically—at whim through amendments.
Last July， the Japanese cabinet lifted the ban on the right to collective self-defense by the surreptitious means of modifying definitions of terms contained within the Constitution. The administration has by and large shied away from the strict procedural process required to overtly amend the Constitution and Article 9. This time around， prior to the ruling coalition passing the security bills， lawmakers from opposition parties left the chamber in protest before the vote took place. The move reveals that the Abe administration intends to furnish Japan with the capabilities necessary to participate in war. Every country that was invaded and attacked by Imperial Japan during WWII should remain alert as regards the country’s current legislative activity.
The Abe administration has repeatedly denied the aggression and war atrocities perpetrated by WWII-era Japanese forces. The history revisionism that pervades the remarks uttered and actions undertaken by Abe have aroused deep concern among and strong opposition from neighboring countries that have suffered under the yoke of Japanese hegemony. There is no doubt that the approval of the bills in the lower house will further provoke neighboring countries and heighten tensions， thus affecting regional security.
This year marks the 70th anniversary of both the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and WWII. The approval of the security bills is arguably paving the way for the Abe administration to return Japan to its former path of military expansion. The administration has obviously yet to learn from history.
In Japan， the legislation has proved overwhelmingly unpopular among media outlets and the public. The public fears not only will the security bills be impotent in safeguarding Japanese national security， but also may outright endanger it.
A poll released on July 14 by Asahi Shimbun， a major media outlet in Japan， showed that 56 percent of respondents oppose the security bills， while only 26 percent support it. Around 80 percent admitted not fully comprehending the security-related legislation and deemed that there was no need to rashly vote on the bills in the current session of parliament.
Mainstream opinion in Japan holds that national security can be safeguarded only by adhering to an exclusively defense-oriented policy. If the legislation allows Japan to employ military force worldwide， it may lead the country to ill-advisedly indulge in past tendencies.
Since the end of WWII， Japan has been recognized far and wide as a “peaceful country.”The passing of the security bills has the potential to besmirch the country’s pacifist reputation that it has gone to pains to foster and maintain over the last 70 years.
No matter what excuses the Abe administration may use to defend its proposed legislation， Japan is losing the trust of the international community. The administration’s latest move is a dangerous one to say the least， placing national security and the safety of the Japanese people in a precarious position. These so-called security bills will do anything but safeguard Japan’s security. Instead， they have the potential to lead the country once again down the path of war.