I’m not a big fan of the neocons either. I had hoped the debacle in Iraq would signal the decline of the policy vision, but that seems somewhat unlikely. Ron Paul is one of the few people in politics who raises the points that make people uncomfortable, and I applaud this. He generates the type of knee-jerk, jingoistic reactions that expose the phoniness that his opponents hide behind, instead of employing actual logic or arguments to advance their points of view.

Is a nuclear Iran ok? I say absolutely not, but that’s because I don’t think a nuclear anybody is ok. I’m 100% behind non-proliferation - but I don’t see America as an effective bearer of sticks and carrots in that game. But my personal opinion is hardly realistic. I’m going to very subtly avoid this question and change the topic.

I think you ask an excellent question that few people are asking: Is a remilitarized Japan good for the rest of the world?

Well, that’s part of the going argument, right? A remilitaized Japan would be able to engage in peacekeeping operations. Think about that: We need to build a military to help keep the peace. The contradiction is manifest, and I had hoped that Japan could lead the world in another direction. I had hoped that Japan, as a permanent member of the UNSC (after it begins to abide by the international treaties it has signed but not yet passed domestic laws on), could lead the world as an example of peace and prosperity that did not feel the need to enforce peace through military means. I know, I’m an idiot.

A remilitarized Japan is good for Japan, and could be useful in securing resources. A remilitarized Japan is good for the United States if it is to remain forward deployed in the Pacific Theater and continue to streamline its supply-chain capabilities. I suppose it’s good for Australia if New Zealand’s Navy shows up in Sydney Harbor.

I think I’ve laid out my opinion fairly clearly in the last two blog entries I made at made a Liberal Japan. (For those who wish to read this just click on my name above.)

You talk about what end game people have in mind, Abe’s is a beautiful Japan. He has some kind of vision of what would be good for the 128,000,000 people in Japan and he seeks to lead them to that vision.

However, as far as the Japanese people, most of them strongly dislike America’s involvement in Iraq. The philosophy underpinning this involvement is neoconservatism, and Abe is a neocon.

People need to have a hard look at this. People need to have hard look Abe going to the neocon de facto headquaters in 2004 and delivering a speech where he aligns himself with the neocons and scoffs at the Japanese people for not understanding issues concerning security.

I think the main problem with doing this would be that it might call into question the entire America-Japan security agreement. And perhaps the DPJ don’t have the clout within their own party or the courage or the moral backbone to do that. I think this was the astute part of the TPR analysis.

Maybe the socialists or the communists can do it, but coming from them, I think people have a tendency not to listen or pay attention. They lack real credibility.

As far as scenarios, I don’t really know. I can’t predict the future. As I stated at my blog, Hillary Clinton is a hawk, and she is supposed to be with the antiwar camp. That is a joke. She has publicly stated that America cannot allow Iran to go nuclear and that all means of stopping them need to be put on the table.

What do you think, Ken? Is a nuclear Iran okay? Should it be preempted through military force? Is a remilitarized Japan good for the rest of the world?

Despite having a conservative streak, I hate the neocons. But what if they’re right? They’re trying to scare the hell out of us all. And I admit it works sometimes.

But you know, maybe if America (and Japan in the future), just backed down and let other countries work these problems out for themselves, maybe they could. And even if they can’t, so long as they leave us alone, maybe it’s only hubris to interfere (especially militarily).

I’m finding myself these days very persuaded by what Ron Paul, and by default Chalmers Johnson, has to say on these topics.

Do you spend any time at www.antiwar.com. It’s always worth a quick look, especially Justin Raimondo’s column.

this should be the *worst* possible time to want to reform article 9 of the constitution

Certainly since the ‘conflict’ in Korea. I suppose it depends on what the endgame is. If the goal is to get armed troops on the ground and some proof that Japan has the capabilities to be a permanent member of the UNSC, then it might be a great time. But will it be tolerated by the Japanese public? I hope there will be an open dialogue on what this all means.

The reality is that Japan could find itself with soldiers on the ground in Iran some day.

This is fascinating and I’d like to get more into the various scenarios here. Japan backed out of a large oil deal with Iran (under US pressure), so could this be Plan B?

The second reason why constitutional reform may be an expedient campaign issue for Mr Abe is that talking about it will allow him to force the DPJ into an awkward position … This is a waste of valuable time for the DPJ, who currently has no coherent, unified stance on constitutional reform and would experience much greater benefit from discussing other issues in the campaign period.

This is a very nice piece of analysis.

Nevertheless, as the Japan Observer pointed out in a recent entry on his blog, Ozawa is trying to play up Abe as out of touch with the people and obsessed with an issue that isn’t at all urgent. Abe is obsessed with abstracts but not real issues.

That could be a great way to run.

It may sound far fetched but I think DPJ could make big inroads by linking the change in the constitution with Bush’s war in Iraq. I mean, think about it, this should be the *worst* possible time to want to reform article 9 of the constitution. Do Japanese really want to sea their sons and daughters caught up in some American adventure?

Most people in Japan strongly think Iraq was an American mistake. Make reforming the constitution *now* an American issue, and make Abe look weak by kowtowing to American interests.

Ozawa could say he too wants to reform the constitution, but not in such a rush. Only after other more important domestic issues have been taken care of and people seem more ready. He should say Japan will do it on their timetable, not on America’s.

The reality is that Japan could find itself with soldiers on the ground in Iran some day. The reality is that American neocons are pushing for this harder than anyone else. The whole thing stinks to high heaven and if the DPJ can find a way to communicate this without hurting USA relations, they could easily get a big win.

Sadly, the best argument for reforming article 9 is probably to free Japan from American external pressure. How ironic that it’s the Americans (well, anyway, the neocons) pushing for this. This is why I emphasized blowback recently on my blog.