Suchergebnisse

Over seventy years ago it would have seemed inconceivable in the aftermath of a calamitous war that a complete reorientation of Japan into a pacifist society, modeled on Western principles of individual rights and democracy, would succeed in upending a deeply entrenched political order with roots dating back centuries. The post-war Japanese constitution lies at the heart of this transformation. Drafted, negotiated and promulgated a mere fourteen months after Japan's formal surrender, it has remained a model of stability amidst transformational changes in the domestic and international political landscape. In the seventy-plus years since its adoption, it has not been amended once.

Japan's constitution has remained unchanged for over 70 years since its adoption. With Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's re-election as the leader of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party of Japan (LDP) in 2018, the issue of constitutional revision has gained renewed attention. On March 13, 2019 the Center for Japanese Legal Studies at Columbia Law School co-hosted, with the Council on Foreign Relations, a full-day conference on "Constitutional Reform in Japan: Prospect, Process, and Implications." Three panels of distinguished experts examined the domestic political landscape in Japan, provided comparative legal perspectives, and considered the political, strategic, and social implications of proposed changes.

During the three years leading up to this year 's 60th anniversary of the signing of the 1960 U.S.-Japan Security Treaty, a series of workshops were held under the joint sponsorship of Columbia Law School's Center for Japanese Legal Studies and the National Defense Academy of Japan's Center for Global Security. Bringing together experts in international law and political science primarily from the United States and Japan, the workshops examined how differing approaches to use of force and understandings of individual and collective self-defense in the two countries might adversely affect their alliance. The workshop participants explored the underlying causes of the gap in understanding between the United States and Japan with respect to these issues, and they considered the alliance in the conte xt of each state's interpretation of international law and policy positions regarding its rights and obligations under such law. In doing so, they also examined how the differing approaches could be applied to possible crisis situations of current concern in East Asia, and what that might mean for alliance relations.