3
symbolism has been that kimigayo states: “May the reign of the Emperor continue for a
thousand, nay, eight thousand generations and for the eternity that it takes for small
pebbles to grow into a great rock and become covered with moss.” Moreover, for some
Japanese and for most of their Asian neighbors hinomaru today continues to bring to
mind thoughts of Japan’s imperialistic and militaristic past.
4
Although the Japanese
government officially approved kimigayo and hinomaru in August 1999, they are
nonetheless still somewhat controversial in Japan today.
While Article 9 of the postwar constitution technically prohibits Japan from using
military force to resolve international conflicts, Japanese conservatives and some
American statesmen have long felt that changing this war-renouncing clause would be in
the best interest of the country. Since the strength of Japanese industries became
apparent, pressure for constitutional change from the United States, which has mostly
been tacit rather than overt, has rested on some variation of the argument that Japan has
taken a free ride on security for too long, making it necessary to bring the country’s
security policies in line with its economic power. The Japanese argument, on the other
hand, has been based on the fundamental point that for years Japan has had a parochial
interpretation of Article 9, since policy makers have acknowledged the government’s
right to rely on collective defense but have proscribed its use.
5
Since 2000, Japan has been actively engaged in a national debate on constitutional
change, with much attention aimed squarely at Article 9. The national debate to promote
the revision of Article 9 intensified after Junichiro Koizumi became prime minister in late
April 2001, though he and his Liberal Democratic Party have worked to minimize public
backlash as much as possible.
6
Still, early on in his tenure as prime minister, Koizumi
Convention