The Yomiuri reports this morning that the LDP has decided to go with a more ambitious proposals for changing Article 9. Apparently there have been changes in internal LDP views over the last week. Basic proposal is to add an Article 9, Section 2, with 2 paragraphs (not a para 3)
In this section 2, rather than previously proposed wording of 必要最小限度の実力組織 (organisation with minimum necessary force [for maintaining Japan's independence]) now proposal is to specify SDF as a "force not prevented from taking the necessary measures for self-defense"
In Japanese: 自衛の措置をとるこを妨げず, そのための実力組織. It may not seem like a big difference in English but against the background of the history of debate in the Diet and vis-a-vis CLB interpretations the difference in Japanese wording carries some significance.
The first proposal/wording, now changed, is how the SDF has been described by the Japanese govt up until now in terms of how the SDF remains constitutional. The new wording adds 'jiei no sochi' 自衛の措置 and removes 'minimum necessary'.
This is more significant than it might first seem. Japan would essentially embrace internationally-recognized 'self-defense rights' 自衛権 that are not necessarily restricted to the 'minimum necessary' - a key operating restriction on Japan's ability to exercise the use of force
The direct constitutional implication would be the immediate or more likely eventual expansion (by reinterpretation) of the scope of collective self-defence, given international law recognises both individual and collective variants as inherent self-defence rights
This is bold because the Komeito, and anti-revision parties will not be fooled by this and it will provide the opposition in particular an opportunity to make debate about collective self-defense (again) rather than be seen to be quibbling over a harmless update.
This will be a bigger problem for the Japanese public than 2015 security legislation because 1) it points to potentially enlarged scope to exercise CSD than even 2015; 2) less popular Abe administration; 3) Trump not Obama is in the White House, now along with Bolton and Pompeo
Factor in that the public gets a direct yes/no vote on this one, and current Moritomo events, then I'd be surprised if Komeito goes anywhere near it. But who knows what international events will take place over the next few months that could radically reorient the public debate
Komeito has been waiting for the LDP to come to a conclusion before they start their own debate on constitutional changes. And they're much more sensitive to public opinion than the LDP, not to mention their own supporters.
So what happens in the next few months internationally and domestically will be critical for the chances of a significant Article 9 revision. There's a fair amount of known unknowns to start with
As side note - this shift to a bolder approach wasn't driven by Abe hawkishness but internal LDP unrest. The party wasn't going to embrace Ishiba's considerably more radical proposal but this may have made Abe's job just a little bit harder amongst everything else going on
Further comment given some responses to this thread: I don't think this proposal will come to fruition. In fact I almost think the LDP may have gone with the bolder change because they are not confident they can get anything past the Komeito in this environment anyway...
unless something quite catastrophic happens in regional geopolitics - which I'll admit is more likely in the next few months than any time I can remember. But if such an event takes place, I think we have other problems to worry about than Japan's constitutional eccentricities
