Essay On Prime Minister Abe
At Essay Write we offer research paper writing help services to students at an affordable student friendly prices. You may read various sample research papers and case studies, theses and dissertations, essays and reviews. However, if you like a particular research paper or essay and would like to order a similar one on your custom specific topic – do not hesitate to ask us so that we can help write your essay online. Its as simple as, "placing an order on our website". We will have your paper completed from scratch by our professional PhD and Master's degree holding writers. Switch over to the Essay Write homepage to get started.
Advantages of working with Essay-write
Prime Minister Abe
In the assessment of the question of Japan repealing the section of the constitution that renounces war, it is important for the country to consider some aspects of the nation that have been in play. Historical perspective into the motivation for the international bizarre approach to war is also important. The renouncement also has to consider the economic performance of the country that has been affected by the recession.
Understanding of the above aspects will lead to the creation of the right approach to the nation. It will also look at the exposure of the nation to the external threats and the options that it has had about the war. The constitution provision could be a deterrent to the nation’s economic performance. On the other hand, it could also be the sources of success to the nation given the current political tensions. The paper will devalue the merits of the move by Abe and the repercussions of the decision on the entire nation. It will also revisit the historical events that led to the drawing of the constitution.
The island so japan joined the Second World War against the allied forces. They joined up with the Germans and Italians in the creation of the war that would later lead to the destruction of the Pearl Harbor. The decision to fight was by large detrimental to the relationships that the country enjoyed with the United States. The country had been a growing trade partner to the United States since the United States was among the first countries that the islands of japan opened on their borders to.
Owing to the trust that the two countries had gained, the island were key allies with the United States. The United States had even built harbor for the navy in the Pacific Ocean to protect the interests of both countries. However, the war came in between the two countries leading to the constrained relationship between the nations and the development of the more stable future for the two nations. The promise that the relationships between the nations offered was lost.
The selection of the side of the war to support can be seen as one of the major faults of the ruling leaders of the time. They opted to support the nations that were in Europe instead of United States. Opting for the axis side of the war meant that the country was in close conflict with the American neighbors. It also meant that in the event that there was a need to weaken the axis side, the islands would be the first ones to be attacked due to the reduced logistical complexities of launching attacks against them. It also meant that the foundation of the previous business relationships between the nations was bound to be grossly affected due to the wrong alliance between the nations.
The ruling class made another poor operational and strategic decisions by bombing the Pearl Harbor. Under the misguided illusion that the axis were bound to win in the war, the Japanese sought to weaken the American army by bombing the pearl harbor since this was the operational base for the excursions in the Asian territory (Choong, 173-192).
This move was operationally wrong since the nation was now exposed to attacks from the air force. It could also not match the naval power of the American forces. The strategic nature of the decision was also ill informed since the Japanese were reacting to the mistaken perception that the axis forces were winning the battle in the European front (Curtis, 19-22). Since the country was far away, the information could have been manipulated to compel them to join the fight and keep fighting.
The reaction of the American forces as to drop the atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Singh, 49-64). The destruction that arose from the bombing indicated the gravity of the situation of the country. It also led to the sharp consideration of the premises of the decision to join the war.
Deeper consideration revealed that the country was misinformed for joining the war. As part of the new leadership focus, the drafting of the constitution was called for which included the nonpartisan nature of the country in terms of the relationships with the rest of the countries in the world. The country decided to avoid war in a bid to repel any instance whereby the strategic decisions of the leadership would lead to the destruction of the community and loss of lives. The decision was called for as a means of ensuring that the nation will never undergo through the same ordeal that it faced in the Nagasaki and Hiroshima ordeals (Choong, 173-192).
Adoption of renouncement of the war was called for at the time since there were uncertainties over the deal that the nation had made with the seemingly stronger neighbors. It was also imperative that the entire involvement in the war was not beneficial to the country since the people that were leading the war were based in distant lands whereby there was no strategic benefits of joining arms with tem to fight another war.
The country also adopted the draft constitution as a way of ensuring that the focus of the country’s resources and efforts will be placed solely on reconstruction of the economy and creation of the business ideal that meets the goal do advancement (Choong, 173-192). Reconstruction of the economy called for the adoption of a nonpartisan approach to the global politics. It also called for the development of the amiable relationships with the rest of the countries (Takeuchi, 1). Joining any war would be contradictory to the goal of continued economic development of the country.
At the present day, the country is facing continued economic growth albeit the recession that it faces in the current times. The country is also a major force to contend with in the global economic frontier (Takeuchi, 1). The issues that informed the decision of the nonpartisan approach and the renunciation of the war are no longer as pertinent since there is no war being fought.
The current political climate has also led to the need of the reevaluation of the decision to renounce the war or involvement in any international conflict (Singh, 49-64). The neighboring countries are increasingly collecting arms and increasing their power of attack.
Countries such as North Korea are testing missiles that can traverse the oceans and bomb countries such as the United States. The neighbor such as china have also increased their hostility towards japan. With the increased risk of being attacked by the neighbors, there is need for the country to focus on the creation of powerful position that would also make the rest of the neighboring countries respect the territorial integrity of the country. It is also imperative that the issue of the economic progress cannot be maintained with the country being at constant risk of attack from the openly hostile neighbors that it borders (Curtis, 19-22).
The Chinese conflict with the country is one of the most compelling reasons for the renunciation of the noninvolvement in the global politics and the war (Choong, 173-192). The country’s focus on the economic progress is now under threat from the aggressive neighbors that have made blatant overtures towards the country most of which are threats to the development of the country.
The economic outlook of the country is also under sharp underperformance (Singh, 49-64). This issue has led to the increment of the daring nature of the threats that the neighboring countries have adopted (Takeuchi, 1). The countries may seek to exploit the reduced economic power of the country and take it down. Therefore, the decision by the prime minister to change the constitution could not have come in better time (Curtis, 19-22). The decision is strategic in that the country has to increase its defenses. The decision is also indicative of the need to safeguard the economic orientation of the national plan.
Increased hostility towards the nation is an undesirable outcome. The entire business model on which the country run is focused on the improvement of the economic power of the nation. The looming wars with the nation has led to the sharp questioning of the sustainability of the country’s plan (Curtis, 19-22). Therefore, if the country is to progress, there is need for the amendment of the constitution to repeal the section that renounces the commitment of the nation to war.
The move will come with consequences to the nation and its people. On one hand, the neighboring countries will see the repeal of the clause as an indication of the nation’s readiness to engage in an armed conflict with them (Curtis, 19-22). Since the nations are ready to go to war with any nations that dares, the move may lead to the occurrence of the war at an early stage. In the event that tensions keep mounting (Choong, 173-192). The economic recovery of the nation could be greatly undermined.
Choong, William. "Defence and Japan's Constitutional Debate." Survival 57.2 (2015): 173-192.
Singh, Bhubhindar. "The Development of Japanese Security Policy: A Long-Term Defensive Strategy." asia policy 19.1 (2015): 49-64.
Curtis, Gerald L. "Japan: Stepping Forward but Not Stepping Out." American Foreign Policy Interests 37.1 (2015): 19-22.
Takeuchi, Hiroki. "The New Trend in Japanese Domestic Politics and Its Implications." (2015).