「国防軍」 本質的な憲法論議に踏み込め

The Yomiuri Shimbun (Nov. 29, 2012)
Step up constitutional debate on 'national defense force'
「国防軍」 本質的な憲法論議に踏み込め(11月28日付・読売社説)

The Liberal Democratic Party has pledged in its manifesto for the upcoming House of Representatives election that it will revise the Constitution to enable Japan to possess a national defense military force. This has emerged as a key issue in the coming election campaign.
 自民党が政権公約で、「国防軍」を保持するとした憲法改正を掲げたことが衆院選の争点の一つに浮上してきた。

At this juncture, each political party should wade into more fundamental discussions on revising the Constitution.
 各党は、これを機に、より本質的な憲法改正論議に踏み込むべきである。

Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda was quick to take a swipe at the LDP pledge. "I don't understand the significance of revising the Constitution to position the Self-Defense Forces as a military force, by venturing to change the name to a defense military force," he said. Noda's comments ignited a debate on this issue.
 自民党の公約に対し、野田首相は「あえて国防軍と名前を変え、憲法を改正して位置づける意義が分からない」と発言した。これが論戦に火を付けた。

LDP President Shinzo Abe countered Noda's criticism, saying the problem is that the SDF are regarded as a military force under international law, but they are not a military force according to the government's interpretation of the Constitution. Abe went as far as saying that if the SDF are not a military force, SDF personnel would not be handled as prisoners of war if they are captured.
 自民党の安倍総裁は、自衛隊は国際法上、軍隊と見なされているのに、政府の憲法解釈では軍隊ではないとされていることこそが問題だと反論した。軍隊でなければ、万一の場合、自衛隊員は捕虜として扱われないとも言及した。

We think Abe's point is quite reasonable.
 もっともな見解である。

===

Defining the SDF

The first paragraph of Article 9 of the Constitution stipulates the nation's renunciation of war. The second paragraph says, "In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained." Thus, it spells out that Japan will not possess military forces.
 憲法9条は、第1項で戦争を放棄し、第2項で「陸海空軍その他の戦力は、これを保持しない」と戦力不保持を定めている。

The LDP pledge mirrors a draft for revising the Constitution it announced in April when Sadakazu Tanigaki was the party's president. According to the draft, the first paragraph of Article 9 will be maintained, but the second paragraph will be deleted. The draft then stipulates the nation's maintenance of a "military force for defense," saying the preceding paragraph "does not prevent the country from invoking its right to self-defense."
 自民党の公約は、谷垣総裁当時の4月に発表した憲法改正草案に沿ったものだ。草案は9条1項を継承する一方で、2項は削除した。その上で「自衛権の発動」を妨げるものではない、として「国防軍」の保持を明記している。

It is only natural for the Constitution to clearly define the organization that will defend this country. We think it is time to end the ambiguity over the legal status of the Self-Defense Forces.
 憲法に、自衛のための組織を明確に記すことは当然だ。自衛隊の法的な位置づけを巡る混乱に終止符を打つべきである。

In 2004, The Yomiuri Shimbun proposed several revisions to the Constitution. One change we suggested was the maintenance of a "military force for self-defense."
 読売新聞も2004年の憲法改正試案で、「自衛のための軍隊」保持を盛り込んでいる。

When Noda's Democratic Party of Japan was an opposition party, he himself said in his book that the SDF are "a military force to the eyes of foreign nations," and they "have to be clearly defined [as a combat force] in the Constitution."
 首相自身、野党時代の自著で、自衛隊を「外国から見たら、日本軍だ」とし、「きっちり憲法の中で位置づけなければいけない」と主張しているではないか。

We cannot understand why Noda recently made a statement that flew in the face of his own argument.
 自らの持論を否定するような発言をするのは理解に苦しむ。

===

Noda rejecting own theory

It is also problematic that the prime minister said such things as, "Does this mean Japan should transform the SDF into an organization that launches intercontinental ballistic missiles?" This is nothing but an electioneering tactic to affix a "hawk" label to the LDP under Abe and unnecessarily stir up voters' anxieties.
 首相が自民党の公約について、「自衛隊を大陸間弾道弾を飛ばすような組織にするのか」などと発言しているのも問題である。安倍自民党に「タカ派」のレッテルを貼り、殊更に有権者の不安を煽(あお)ろうとする選挙戦術そのものだ。

On the other hand, the previous DPJ manifesto's reference to planned discussions on revisions to the Constitution has vanished from its policy pledges for the coming election. This gives the strong impression that the party has retreated from its position three years ago, when it called for "free and unrestricted constitutional debate."
 一方、民主党の新たな政権公約(マニフェスト)からは憲法改正に関する記載が姿を消した。「自由闊達(かったつ)な憲法論議を」とした3年前よりも後退した感が強い。

Given that the DPJ initiated the latest debate over the "defense military force," it must present its policy for defining the SDF and the right to self-defense in the Constitution.
 「国防軍」を巡る論戦を仕掛けた以上、民主党は憲法で自衛隊や自衛権をどう位置づけるのか、方針をまとめるべきだ。

We hope the election campaign will feature lively debate on whether the right to collective self-defense can be exercised, and how the SDF should conduct its international activities.
 衆院選では、憲法とも関連する、集団的自衛権行使の是非や、自衛隊の国際活動のあり方についても活発な論戦を期待したい。

(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, Nov. 28, 2012)
(2012年11月28日01時23分 読売新聞)
[PR]

by kiyoshimat | 2012-11-30 06:44 | 英字新聞

<< 日本未来の党 「卒原発」には国... 韓国大統領選 対日・「北」政策... >>