News Analysis: Abe's monocratic stewarding of national ship towards conflict stirring vociferous public opposition

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is forging ahead with his plans to pass contentious security legislation through parliament albeit at a delayed date and in spite of the fact that the vast majority of the public oppose the implications the new bills will have on the nation's future security and the fact the bills themselves have been deemed unconstitutional by a plethora of legal experts on constitutional matters.

Abe's administration has been seeking passage of the bills through parliament in the current Diet session but due to the public's staunch opposition to the bills that would, by-in-large, allow Japan's forces to conduct borderless military operations beyond geographical restrictions if it was deemed that Japan's interests, security, freedom or the safety of one of its allies was under threat.

And contrary to previous promises made by Abe vowing that Japanese troops'lives would not be put in mortal danger under the new reforms, the U.S. saying that it expected Japan to put"boots on the ground"in conflict zones along side its ally in the Middle East, the Korean Peninsular -- should needs arise -- and in other regions where tensions are rising, including in East Asia if needs dictate, discredited such a notion. "Abe was forced to backtrack on this one too. The prime minister, as ever, is racing ahead to fulfill what he believes is some kind of divine destiny to remilitarize Japan and restore a bygone era of Imperialism here, but is doing so regardless of public or political opinion at home and abroad,"pacific affairs research and defense analyst, Laurent Sinclair, told Xinhua. "What Abe then tends to do is try and backtrack, by making ambiguous statements about the'security environment'in the region, in order to generate fear among the public so they don't question his antics. Simultaneously he retroactively, and, as has been the case recently, unconstitutionally, tries to force legislation through parliament knowing his party has the majority vote in both chambers,"Sinclair explained, adding that such tactics, however, were starting to"backfire horrendously."

Sinclair pointed to a recent poll taken by the popular Yomiuri newspaper this month which showed almost 60 percent of Japanese citizens"firmly oppose" the passage of the latest package of security bills, rising 11 percent from the same survey conducted a month earlier.

Further proving the Japanese public's growing disdain for the prime minister's autocratic and truculent moves to boost the legal scope of Japan's forces at home and abroad, was a recent survey by Kyodo News, which showed that over 80 percent of Japanese people feel that the government's explanations about the security bills are "not sufficient," compared to just 14.2 percent who feel they are.

Meanwhile, 68 percent of those surveyed said the security legislation would increase the risk of Japan's forces getting dragged into war, causing the approval rating for the Cabinet of Abe to fall 2.8 percentage points from April to below the key 50 percent threshold to 49.9 percent. The disapproval rating rose 3.1 percentage points to 38 percent, the survey also showed. "The figures speak for themselves,"said Sinclair."And the likelihood is that Abe's support rate and the disapproval of the security bills has increased since the prime minister has been forced to delay the passing of the bills due to the public outrage that has been seen in high-profile demonstrations around the country, most notably at the Diet building where opposition party members joined regular civilians to call for the bills to be quashed." "The unconstitutionality of the bills has also upset the public, as the latest gaffe from the prime minister's administration over the issue, in assuming the public is as docile as it is pliable when it comes to accepting any old legislation lawful or otherwise Abe decides to dragoon through parliament, has seen a recent backlash, which proves, of late, malleable and docile the public are not,"said Sinclair.

Sinclair was referring to a commission session on June 4, at which all three constitutional law scholars invited to give testimony on the new security bills that would, if enacted, mark the nation's biggest post-war defense reform, concurred that the fact that the legislative package would"widen the range of activities by the Self-Defense Forces to allow for the exercise of the right to collective self-defense"made it unconstitutional.

Yasuo Hasebe, a professor of constitutional law at Waseda University, who himself was recommended by Abe's ruling Liberal Democratic Party said"It is improper to allow for the exercise of the right to collective self-defense based on the logic of the Constitution's Article 9, which only permits the right to individual self-defense."

Similarly, Setsu Kobayashi, a professor emeritus of constitutional law at Keio University, who is widely known to be a supporter of revising Japan's decades-old pacific Constitution, agreed that"the security legislation allowing the exercise of the right to collective self-defense is unconstitutional,"adding that Paragraph 2 of Article 9 does"not grant any legal standing for military activities abroad." Kobayashi reiterated that going to war abroad to help a friendly nation is"a violation of Article 9."

Furthermore, Eiji Sasada, a constitutional law professor at Waseda University, highlighted the fact that the accepted interpretation, rather than the Cabinet's recent reinterpretation of the Constitution, as followed by past governments, although being on very"delicate footing,"was still"within the limits of what was acceptable,"and hence,"the security legislation is unconstitutional because it clearly exceeds that past interpretation." "Along with more than 200 constitution experts in Japan who have joined a statement also calling the legislation unconstitutional and insisting that the bills be scrapped by Abe, and Japan's Bar Association demanding a similar verdict, even the prime minister's own party members don't want to be tied to the party line on this, and have called for non-partisan votes on the bills, so they can vote freely," Dr. David McLellan, a professor emeritus of postgraduate Asian Studies in Tokyo, told Xinhua.

To this end, Seiichiro Murakami, a former Minister of State for Regulatory Reform, who also holds a degree in law from Tokyo University, remarked earlier this week that lawmakers should not be"bound by compulsory adherence to the party's decision when voting on the bills." "What we're starting to see is growing fractures in the armor of Abe's ruling party, caused by Abe himself being overly zealous about forcing more security changes on a pacifist public that does not want to risk any chances of Japan being involved in any form of conflict here or abroad,"said McLellan. "And there's discord growing now within the party, from those who believe Abe has gone too far this time in his unconstitutional dealings, having previously reinterpreted the Constitution by way of Cabinet decision rather than public or parliamentary mandate as stipulated by the Supreme Law." "And the public unrest is growing and is set to grow further, as long as the government continues to act of its own accord on issues of security that could very well threaten the lives of normal civilians,"McLellan said, adding that Okinawa's anti-base and antiwar sentiments were also beginning to resonate on the mainland.

He pointed to a poll jointly conducted by the Ryukyu Shimpo newspaper and the Okinawa Television Broadcasting (OTV) at the end of last month, which showed that more than 80 percent of Okinawans are against Abe and the central government's plans to relocate the controversial U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Futenma within Japan's southernmost prefecture.

The number of people opposing the relocation plan is the second- highest on record and the highest since Abe took office in 2012 and the survey showed that more than 30 percent of Okinawans want the base relocated outside Japan, while around 30 percent said the base should be closed and removed unconditionally. More than 20 percent said the base should be moved to another prefecture in Japan. "At first I think the public were enamored with Abe and his strong economic policies, but it would seem that they are finally coming around to understand that their leader's priority was never the economy, it was the military, and taking it from a glorified police force of sorts, and reintroducing it alongside new weapons and tie-ups with other countries as a global fighting force, committed to following the United States into battle,"said McLellan. "Okinawans perhaps have felt firsthand the brutality of Japan' s past militarism and hence their anti-base and antiwar calls have been ringing out for decades, but it appears that the public on the mainland is finally understanding that their leader is autocratically and rapidly steering the nation towards potential conflict and as the statistics and demonstrations show, opposition to his war moves are growing here," McLellan concluded. Endi