Japan Elections: Why The New Landscape Offers the Prospect of Radical Reform
Asia expert John Nilsson-Wright explains why the so-called ‘peace clause’ in the Japanese constitution could be targeted by newly-emboldened Japanese conservatives.
Japan’s governing Liberal Democratic Party’s (LDP), led by Prime Minster Shinzo Abe, secured a decisive victory in elections to the country’s influential Upper House, the House of Councillors, on July 10.
Together with its core coalition partner, Komeito, the LDP has a combined total of 146 out of the 242 seats in the chamber.
With additional support from independents and minor conservative parties, the government now enjoys a critical two-thirds majority of 165, alongside a similar two-thirds majority in the lower house of parliament, the House of Representatives.
For the first time in Japan’s post-war history, this gives the government the legislative authority to initiate and approve amendments to the country’s 1947 constitution, offering the prospect of radical reform of the country’s politics.
Constitutional revision has long been a polarizing and divisive theme in Japan.
To many on the Japanese right, the 1947 constitution has been seen as foreign and of questionable political legitimacy given the key post-war role played by the US in its drafting.
To the political left, the post-war constitution was seen as a key bulwark against the revival of the military authoritarianism of the 1930s and an emblem of the country’s post-war democratic transformation.
Fiercely contested debates over the constitution dominated Japanese politics during the 1950s. But it was only in the aftermath of the ending of the Cold War in the mid to late 1990s that the issue of constitutional legitimacy and political identity resurfaced.
For Prime Minister Abe, constitutional revision is an intensely personal issue. His grandfather, Nobusuke Kishi, who served as prime minister from 1957–1960 was a strong advocate of revision.
Abe has made no secret of his desire to honour his grandfather’s legacy, by succeeding where many past conservative LDP leaders have failed.
He has even suggested that if he fails to secure changes before his term as prime minister is over in September 2018, he would seek re-election.
Revision, however, is anything but straightforward. Any reform proposal must, in addition to securing two thirds support in both houses of the Japanese parliament, be approved by the majority of the Japanese electorate voting in a national referendum.
Public opinion however is ambivalent on the question of revision, with roughly equal numbers for or against any change.
Much also depends on what changes are suggested. Some have speculated that Abe’s primary goal is revision of article 9 of the constitution, the so-called ‘peace clause’ which limits Japan’s armed forces to a purely defensive role.
A revision of the clause would open the door, in theory, to a more normalized role, but one which might embroil the military in regional and global conflicts that could escalate unpredictably.
For a generally risk-averse Japanese public, such an outcome is anathema and according to a March 2016 poll, some 61% are opposed to any change to article 9.
In the face of this resistance, the government is likely to focus on less controversial issues.
This might include revising the terms determining the government’s authority in a state-of-emergency, or addressing constitutional issues relating to less contentious social and welfare rights.
Progressive critics of Abe worry that focusing on these themes is merely a political tactic intended to persuade the public to accept the general principle of revision and ultimately to make it more willing to embrace more radical change.
Abe and his cabinet colleagues avoided discussing this issue during the election campaign.
But the prime minister had made it clear since his victory that he expects parliamentary committees in both houses to explore the substantive options for revision before putting any future reforms to a public referendum.
The prime minister would be wise to move cautiously. Not only to avoid antagonizing a skeptical public, but also to prevent relationships with China and the two Koreas deteriorating.
These countries’ publics and governments tend to see the administration as pursuing a historically revisionist and illegitimate reform agenda.
In the immediate short-term it is unlikely that constitutional revision will be the prime minister’s policy priority.
The election was primarily a contest over economic competency.
Abe’s efforts for now are likely to be concentrated on securing passage of a second fiscal 2016 supplementary budget of $98 billion (ten trillion yen), to help jump start the anemic economy, while also pushing a package of labour reforms intended to boost employment and domestic demand.
For now, the elections confirm the dominant position of the LDP and its conservative allies, and provide further proof of the prime minister’s tactical success and remarkable political longevity.
