Japan Institute for National Fundamentals

　　　　　Through the July 10 House of Councilors election, the ruling Liberal Democratic Party and Komeito, plus their allies who favor constitutional amendment, won a two-thirds majority required for proposing a national referendum on a constitutional amendment. The result can be viewed as the ruling camp’s major victory.
　　　　　Even so, campaigns for the election were strange. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, known as a staunch constitutional amendment supporter, repeated vigorless remarks that the constitutional amendment is not a campaign issue. In contrast, Democratic Party leader Katsuya Okada in the opposition camp had an angry look in his eyes when he shouted that Japan would plunge into a crisis if voters give a two-thirds majority to those who favor constitutional amendment.
　　　　　A key to explaining the strangeness is populism. There has been a Japanese politician on television criticizing presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump as an “awesome populist.” However, I doubt if there is any politician who is not a populist.

Ruling parties refraining from discussing constitutional amendment
　　　　　Asked about the constitutional amendment amid the news of the ruling camp’s major victory in the election, LDP Secretary General Sadakazu Tanigaki said: “As public opinion should not be divided in a national referendum, we will make arrangements to have full discussions with opposition parties.” Komeito Secretary General Yoshihisa Inoue said: “We will move carefully so that we can add necessary clauses to the current constitution (as Komeito has advocated).”
　　　　　They refrain from discussing the constitutional amendment simply because no one can benefit from advocating the amendment under the present political situation. Meanwhile the opposition camp speaks against constitutional amendment only because they think they can win the game if the amendment is an issue. These politicians cheapen themselves by behaving only within the framework of politics.
　　　　　There were demagogues who branded Japan’s new security law enacted last year as “war law” and warned of a draft system revival only to deceive the public. People who have not read even one page of the Japanese Constitution have still remained deceived. Apparently, Prime Minister Abe refrained from making the constitutional amendment a campaign issue because he knew the deception. Security law discussions have sent Japan back to the 1960 Japan-U.S. security treaty struggle era.

Fast-changing international situation
　　　　　However, the international situation has begun to rapidly change. A big problem for Japan is the fact that Americans have been disenchanted with U.S. military’s involvement in overseas conflicts, whoever the next president is. That is why Trump has loudly urged U.S. allies including Japan and South Korea in Asia and North Atlantic Treaty Organization members in Europe to fairly share the burden with the United States.
　　　　　Neville Chamberlain, who served as British prime minister between 1937 and 1940, made a concession to Adolf Hitler at the 1938 Munich conference and was respected temporarily as a peace-loving politician. However, the outbreak of World War II led him to be branded as appeaser. Winston Churchill, who was disfavored as hawkish then, replaced Chamberlain as prime minister and became the hero of national salvation.
　　　　　In Japan, politicians’ stances on the constitutional amendment will likely to serve as a litmus test to indicate whether they are populists or statesmen.

Tadae Takubo is Vice President, Japan Institute for National Fundamentals.