What Is It Good For? Absolutely Nothing.

It is disturbing to read that Japan’s long-held policy of pacificism, stated explicitly in its constitution since 1946, is being “reinterepreted.  One statement from the document states “The Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.”  Yet Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe seems to think it’s time to relax that troubling restriction, allowing Japan to defend its allies, as well as itself.

While that may sound reasonable, on the surface, I see it as the first step on the march toward a policy that permits countries (like the United States) to invade other countries that they perceive as a threat to themselves or their allies.  Countries that know others “have their backs” are prone to be more belligerent.  And “threats” can take the form of potential military attack or “attacks” on the economic well-being, or political supremacy, of a country.

The world would be a better, safer, less violent place if every nation had in its constitution a statement saying its “people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.”  Of course, that would require nations to refrain from “reinterpreting” those words.

I suppose the nature of humanity would have to change to make the world a safer place, too.  If we continue to allow nations to go to war, eventually humanity will change.  And then the creatures that are left will have what’s left of the earth to themselves.

About John Swinburn

"Love not what you are but what you may become."― Miguel de Cervantes
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

Please, comment on this post. Your response? First, you remain silent and then you abandon me.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.