论文部分内容阅读
A nation’s constitution represents its highest ideals and laws， and any attempt to change such a crucial foundation must be approached with utmost respect and foresight. However， Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe recently reaffirmed his pledge to revise his country’s supreme law in such a brash manner that it drew fierce criticism from neighboring countries as well as media worldwide.
Seen from the context of the current Japanese pacifist Constitution’s origins and the attitude of the Japanese Government toward that period of history， critics say that outsiders may easily understand why Abe’s vows have provoked such a strong backlash.
Abe’s pursuit of constitutional revision aims to erase Japan’s aggressive history during World War II. Critics say， however， that to close that dark chapter of its history， the Japanese Government should face up to it through honest introspection rather than whitewash its past deeds.
Great-power dream
Abe， like other ambitious state leaders， has a dream of great power for Japan—especially at a time when the economic power’s global status is continually declining. During his Washington trip in February， Abe claimed that “Japan is not， and will never be， a tier-two country” in a speech titled Japan Is Back.
Since returning to power last December， Abe has taken bold steps toward economic reform， including deregulation and joining TransPacific Partnership free-trade negotiations. The so-called “Abenomics” plan has gained the prime minster high popularity in Japan. A Kyodo poll at the beginning of May showed Abe’s approval rating is 71.1 percent， which Geng Xin， Deputy Director of the JCC New Japan Research Institute， said is mostly owing to Abe’s economic policies.
His high domestic popularity， however， has been accompanied by strong criticism by overseas media and howls of protest from neighboring countries.
The Abe administration has taken the opportunity to undergo the beginning of a rightward shift， beautifying past Japanese war crimes and raising once again the issue of rewriting its pacifist Constitution.
Asked in parliament about his government’s position on an official apology made by former Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama for Japan’s colonial rule and aggression in Asia during World War II， Abe replied， “The definition of what constitutes aggression has yet to be established in academia or in the international community. Things that happened between nations will look differently depending on which side you view them from.” Abe’s move has enraged not only China and South Korea， two of the biggest victims of Japan’s war crimes， but also some major Western media outlets.
An editorial in The Washington Post reads，“Yes， history is always being reinterpreted. But there are such things as facts. Japan occupied Korea. It occupied Manchuria and then the rest of China. It invaded Malaya. It committed aggression. Why， decades after Germany solidified its place in Europe by facing history honestly， are facts so difficult for some in Japan to acknowledge？”
Meanwhile， a comment of The Wall Street Journal said that Abe’s “foray into historical relativism will come as news to survivors of Pearl Harbor， the Bataan Death March or the Rape of Nanjing.” “Much of the world long ago forgave Japan its wartime atrocities. But it hasn’t forgotten them.”
On April 28， the first “Restoration of Sovereignty Day” advocated by the Abe administration in commemoration of the day in 1952 when the San Francisco Peace Treaty took effect and formally ended the U.S. occupation of Japan， Abe called for a renewal of a sense of hope and determination， “to make Japan a strong and resolute country，” a clear sign of Abe’s intention to revise the Japanese Constitution.
When meeting with reporters on May 1 during his overseas trip， Abe vowed to win two thirds of the seats in the upper house required for constitutional revision in the July election.
The revision， which would once again give the nation the right to self-defense， is seen by many experts as a pretext for strengthening the Japanese military.
“Japan is an economic power， but Japanese politicians have always pursued a military-political power status， expanding its political sway through the normalization of its military power， which calls for breaking the tether of the current pacifist Constitution，” said Shi Yongming， an associate research fellow with the China Institute of International Studies.
The Japanese pacifist Constitution， which has served as a solid foundation for the rapid development of Japan in the postwar era， is denounced by Japan’s right wing as a national shame because it was drafted by the “occupying forces.”
Wu Huaizhong， a researcher with the Institute of Japanese Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences， said that although revising a Constitution and possessing an army are normal for a sovereign country， the prospect of military normalization and constitutional revision under the guidance of right-leaning thought would certainly arouse concern. However， Abe appears to have ignored the concern of neighboring countries. He said to reporters on May 1 that there is no need for Japan to explain its decision to revise its Constitution to its neighbors.
Abe isn’t alone in his appeal to revisionism. On April 23， 168 Japanese lawmakers paid tribute to the controversial Yasukuni Shrine， which still houses the memorial tablets of major war criminals of World War II—the largest collective visit made by Japanese politicians in years. Days before， three members of the Abe cabinet visited the shrine respectively while Abe sent a ritual offering. In China and South Korea， visits to the Tokyo shrine are seen as symbolic of Japan’s refusal to atone for its crimes against its neighbors.
Uncertain consequences
Abe’s right-leaning tendency on the one hand is intended to satisfy domestic political needs， and on the other hand concerns the acquiescence and even encouragement of Washington.
“Tokyo is taking advantage of Washington’s‘pivot to Asia’ strategy，” Shi said to Beijing Review. In this context， the United States is inclined to rearm Japan to balance the rise of China， Shi added.
Former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and former Assistant Secretary of Defense Joseph Nye， Jr.， in a report last August sponsored by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington D.C.， sought tier-one status for Japan. They argued that Japan and the United States should face the rise of China together while advocating a larger role for Japan’s SelfDefense Forces.
Wu Zurong， a research fellow with the China Foundation for International Studies， a think tank based in Beijing， noted that Japan is often used to serve Washington’s dual tactics toward China， with the aim of simultaneously cooperating with and containing the latter.
He added that rearming Japan conforms to the U.S. global military strategy as the United States is mired in a severe budget deficit and shortage of military expenditure.
From the long-term view， however， the rearming of Japan is probably not in line with the interests of the United States in view of Japan’s false reading of history， Shi said.
“It is ill-advised for the U.S. Government to regard China as a strategic opponent at a time when more and more Americans are seeking to develop partnerships with China，” Shi said.
Observers worry the direction Japan is taking could possibly bring instability to the region and sow discord for mutual political trust. Shi told Beijing Review that the shock of Tokyo’s push to regional stability is self-evident.“To attain its goal of military normalization， it is not unthinkable that the Abe administration could stir up trouble in the East China Sea and South China Sea maritime disputes or the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue to attack opposition voices，” said Shi.
East Asian economies are increasingly interdependent. The impact of Tokyo’s move on mutual trust would negatively affect regional economic cooperation.
The economic integration of East Asia is an inevitable trend， but the irresponsible attitude taken by Abe toward Japan’s past as well as his attempt to rewrite the Japanese Constitution would undermine the basis for integration and postpone the process， eventually damaging the national interests of East Asian countries including Japan， said Huo Jiangang， an expert on Japanese studies with the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.
Many Japanese citizens are not willing to give up their pacifist Constitution. On May 3， a group of about 3，500 Japanese people gathered in Hibiya Park in downtown Tokyo and took to the streets to demonstrate their opposition to the government’s attempt to amend the warrenouncing Article 9 of Japan’s Constitution.
Asahi Shimbun， a leading newspaper in Japan， also warned the Abe administration in its editorial that Japan’s isolation from China and South Korea may affect its own interests amid the unpredictable Korean Peninsula situation.
However， observers are not optimistic that Abe will abandon rewriting the Constitution. “If the right wing wins the upcoming upper house election， Abe’s next move is imperative，” Shi said.
China and South Korea are firmly voicing their concern about the issue. Reports said that South Korea’s parliament set up a special committee in May to respond to Japan’s moves. At a recent press conference， a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson advised Japan to take a prudent attitude， deeply repent for its history and take concrete actions to win the trust of its Asian neighbors and the international community.
Huo said the Japanese right wing’s push for the so-called “normal statehood” could have an abnormal effect on the country in light of its wrong view of history.
Seen from the context of the current Japanese pacifist Constitution’s origins and the attitude of the Japanese Government toward that period of history， critics say that outsiders may easily understand why Abe’s vows have provoked such a strong backlash.
Abe’s pursuit of constitutional revision aims to erase Japan’s aggressive history during World War II. Critics say， however， that to close that dark chapter of its history， the Japanese Government should face up to it through honest introspection rather than whitewash its past deeds.
Great-power dream
Abe， like other ambitious state leaders， has a dream of great power for Japan—especially at a time when the economic power’s global status is continually declining. During his Washington trip in February， Abe claimed that “Japan is not， and will never be， a tier-two country” in a speech titled Japan Is Back.
Since returning to power last December， Abe has taken bold steps toward economic reform， including deregulation and joining TransPacific Partnership free-trade negotiations. The so-called “Abenomics” plan has gained the prime minster high popularity in Japan. A Kyodo poll at the beginning of May showed Abe’s approval rating is 71.1 percent， which Geng Xin， Deputy Director of the JCC New Japan Research Institute， said is mostly owing to Abe’s economic policies.
His high domestic popularity， however， has been accompanied by strong criticism by overseas media and howls of protest from neighboring countries.
The Abe administration has taken the opportunity to undergo the beginning of a rightward shift， beautifying past Japanese war crimes and raising once again the issue of rewriting its pacifist Constitution.
Asked in parliament about his government’s position on an official apology made by former Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama for Japan’s colonial rule and aggression in Asia during World War II， Abe replied， “The definition of what constitutes aggression has yet to be established in academia or in the international community. Things that happened between nations will look differently depending on which side you view them from.” Abe’s move has enraged not only China and South Korea， two of the biggest victims of Japan’s war crimes， but also some major Western media outlets.
An editorial in The Washington Post reads，“Yes， history is always being reinterpreted. But there are such things as facts. Japan occupied Korea. It occupied Manchuria and then the rest of China. It invaded Malaya. It committed aggression. Why， decades after Germany solidified its place in Europe by facing history honestly， are facts so difficult for some in Japan to acknowledge？”
Meanwhile， a comment of The Wall Street Journal said that Abe’s “foray into historical relativism will come as news to survivors of Pearl Harbor， the Bataan Death March or the Rape of Nanjing.” “Much of the world long ago forgave Japan its wartime atrocities. But it hasn’t forgotten them.”
On April 28， the first “Restoration of Sovereignty Day” advocated by the Abe administration in commemoration of the day in 1952 when the San Francisco Peace Treaty took effect and formally ended the U.S. occupation of Japan， Abe called for a renewal of a sense of hope and determination， “to make Japan a strong and resolute country，” a clear sign of Abe’s intention to revise the Japanese Constitution.
When meeting with reporters on May 1 during his overseas trip， Abe vowed to win two thirds of the seats in the upper house required for constitutional revision in the July election.
The revision， which would once again give the nation the right to self-defense， is seen by many experts as a pretext for strengthening the Japanese military.
“Japan is an economic power， but Japanese politicians have always pursued a military-political power status， expanding its political sway through the normalization of its military power， which calls for breaking the tether of the current pacifist Constitution，” said Shi Yongming， an associate research fellow with the China Institute of International Studies.
The Japanese pacifist Constitution， which has served as a solid foundation for the rapid development of Japan in the postwar era， is denounced by Japan’s right wing as a national shame because it was drafted by the “occupying forces.”
Wu Huaizhong， a researcher with the Institute of Japanese Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences， said that although revising a Constitution and possessing an army are normal for a sovereign country， the prospect of military normalization and constitutional revision under the guidance of right-leaning thought would certainly arouse concern. However， Abe appears to have ignored the concern of neighboring countries. He said to reporters on May 1 that there is no need for Japan to explain its decision to revise its Constitution to its neighbors.
Abe isn’t alone in his appeal to revisionism. On April 23， 168 Japanese lawmakers paid tribute to the controversial Yasukuni Shrine， which still houses the memorial tablets of major war criminals of World War II—the largest collective visit made by Japanese politicians in years. Days before， three members of the Abe cabinet visited the shrine respectively while Abe sent a ritual offering. In China and South Korea， visits to the Tokyo shrine are seen as symbolic of Japan’s refusal to atone for its crimes against its neighbors.
Uncertain consequences
Abe’s right-leaning tendency on the one hand is intended to satisfy domestic political needs， and on the other hand concerns the acquiescence and even encouragement of Washington.
“Tokyo is taking advantage of Washington’s‘pivot to Asia’ strategy，” Shi said to Beijing Review. In this context， the United States is inclined to rearm Japan to balance the rise of China， Shi added.
Former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and former Assistant Secretary of Defense Joseph Nye， Jr.， in a report last August sponsored by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington D.C.， sought tier-one status for Japan. They argued that Japan and the United States should face the rise of China together while advocating a larger role for Japan’s SelfDefense Forces.
Wu Zurong， a research fellow with the China Foundation for International Studies， a think tank based in Beijing， noted that Japan is often used to serve Washington’s dual tactics toward China， with the aim of simultaneously cooperating with and containing the latter.
He added that rearming Japan conforms to the U.S. global military strategy as the United States is mired in a severe budget deficit and shortage of military expenditure.
From the long-term view， however， the rearming of Japan is probably not in line with the interests of the United States in view of Japan’s false reading of history， Shi said.
“It is ill-advised for the U.S. Government to regard China as a strategic opponent at a time when more and more Americans are seeking to develop partnerships with China，” Shi said.
Observers worry the direction Japan is taking could possibly bring instability to the region and sow discord for mutual political trust. Shi told Beijing Review that the shock of Tokyo’s push to regional stability is self-evident.“To attain its goal of military normalization， it is not unthinkable that the Abe administration could stir up trouble in the East China Sea and South China Sea maritime disputes or the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue to attack opposition voices，” said Shi.
East Asian economies are increasingly interdependent. The impact of Tokyo’s move on mutual trust would negatively affect regional economic cooperation.
The economic integration of East Asia is an inevitable trend， but the irresponsible attitude taken by Abe toward Japan’s past as well as his attempt to rewrite the Japanese Constitution would undermine the basis for integration and postpone the process， eventually damaging the national interests of East Asian countries including Japan， said Huo Jiangang， an expert on Japanese studies with the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.
Many Japanese citizens are not willing to give up their pacifist Constitution. On May 3， a group of about 3，500 Japanese people gathered in Hibiya Park in downtown Tokyo and took to the streets to demonstrate their opposition to the government’s attempt to amend the warrenouncing Article 9 of Japan’s Constitution.
Asahi Shimbun， a leading newspaper in Japan， also warned the Abe administration in its editorial that Japan’s isolation from China and South Korea may affect its own interests amid the unpredictable Korean Peninsula situation.
However， observers are not optimistic that Abe will abandon rewriting the Constitution. “If the right wing wins the upcoming upper house election， Abe’s next move is imperative，” Shi said.
China and South Korea are firmly voicing their concern about the issue. Reports said that South Korea’s parliament set up a special committee in May to respond to Japan’s moves. At a recent press conference， a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson advised Japan to take a prudent attitude， deeply repent for its history and take concrete actions to win the trust of its Asian neighbors and the international community.
Huo said the Japanese right wing’s push for the so-called “normal statehood” could have an abnormal effect on the country in light of its wrong view of history.