Though Article 9 has not been revised since it was implemented in 1947, the past two decades have seen an increase in Japanese military capability due to the government’s loose interpretation of Article 9 and its limitations to allow for Japanese involvement in collective security operations internationally. As a result, a number of Japanese political scholars and newspapers have projected the possibility of not only Japanese constitutional revision but also the re-militarization of Japan as well. Interested in finding out whether or not this projection has any likelihood of success in the future, I have posed the following question: Why has the constitution and the pacifism that it enshrines been so resistant to change despite a changing political context, and does the increase of Japanese public support for constitutional revision necessarily mean re-militarization for Japan? Taking a constructivist approach, I will argue that although pro-constitutional revision forces in Japan have tried to use fear politics and the revival of a Japanese “national spirit” to promote constitutional revision and ultimately re-militarization, the Japanese public has been relatively unreceptive to their ploy due to the integration of pacifism into the Japanese collective identity.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CLAREMONT/oai:scholarship.claremont.edu:scripps_theses-1991 |
| Date | 01 January 2017 |
| Creators | Coram, Shanisha |
| Publisher | Scholarship @ Claremont |
| Source Sets | Claremont Colleges |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | Scripps Senior Theses |
| Rights | © 2016 Shanisha S. A. Coram, default |
Page generated in 0.0122 seconds