In 1945, the Second World War ended as Japan surrendered to the Allies and accepted the Potsdam Declaration which represented Japan’s demilitarisation and democratisation. Soon after, General Douglas MacArthur of the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers urged the Japanese government to draft a new Constitution . One of the new Constitution’s features is the pacifist clause in Article 9 , which prohibits any use of force beyond use of force for self-defense . Subsequently, Japan’s participation in the United Nations collective security operations has also been prohibited . Thereafter, as Japan’s economical growth strengthened and crystallised their position in the global society, the United States, who initially had drafted the Japanese Constitution, started to change its policy of demilitarising Japan . Through some events, such as the Korean War, the United States asked Japan to share the burden of maintaining its defense capability and developed a different and new interpretation with respect to Article 9. …show more content…
Therefore the Japanese government changed its plan from amending Article 9 to reinterpreting it to legalise Japan’s collective self-defense. Due to the pressure from the United States and the potential danger to Japan’s security, such as terrorism and nuclear attack from North Korea, there has been a shift in the Japanese public towards pro-constitutional revision. The LDP regards this as a good opportunity and is eagerly trying to start revision after the Upper House election which will be held in 2016. However, this movement of reinterpretation does not seem favourable to the neighbouring countries, including Chin and South