reinterpretation of japan's constitution

Political scientists, foreign personalities, and analysts provide perspectives on international, cultural, and international issues. However, there have been misunderstandings regarding the constitutional proposal accepted by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, which requires the Japanese military to exercise the right of collective self-defense (CSD). Green and Hornung also debunked several of these theories, which obviously demonstrate a lack of objectivity by opponents of the proposed problems. From the arguments by Green and Hornung 2014, some of the critics have no idea of the contents contained in Japan’s CSD. Collective self-defense is a concept that has been adopted by other nations to protect their internal and external interests.
Demystified concepts
Contrary to the assertions by critics that the role of Japan’s Self-Defense Forces will change, the proposal for the modification of the functions of the SDF depends on the legislations to be introduced in the Diet. The CSD would also be enforced under the conditions that first there is a threat to Japan or threatens the people’s constitutional freedoms and rights, secondly when there is no alternative way to repel attacks on Japan and its citizens, and finally when the use of force is limited to the maximum. Another misleading assertion is that the Japanese military will be involved in a foreign war. The CSD being adopted by Japan doesn’t allow Japan to launch wars against other nations and that it is strictly for defensive purposes. The CSD proposal, therefore, remains constitutional which elected legislators will discuss, the media is given chance to highlight before it is adopted. The CSD proposal also follows international laws including UN charters. Critics also present a misunderstanding of Japan’s legal provisions such as revisions to the constitution which are entirely unrelated to the CSD. However, military cooperation with foreign allies has been considered in the CSD but limited to protection of Japanese interests. The military cooperation with other allies does not threaten regional peace. These concerns have been raised by China and North Korea whose aggression and military practices are of greater concern than Japan’s CSD. Citizens of Japan and Asian countries such as South Korea and Australia have acknowledged the move by Ade. Therefore it is improper for critics to say that Asia and Japanese are opposed to the move by Shinzo Ade (Green and Hornung 2014).
Conclusion
Sovereignty demands that nations practice noninterference in the politics of another country. Therefore, the criticism by China, North Korea and other countries that are meant to misrepresent the constitutional provisions of Japan are infringing on Japan’s sovereignty. It is important that a clear understanding of the concerns embedded in the CSD be understood before the critics publish misleading reports.

Bibliography
Biersteker, Thomas J. 1999. State sovereignty as social construct. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Green, Michael and Jeffrey W. Hornung. 2014. "Ten Myths About Japan’S Collective Self-Defense Change: What The Critics Don’T Understand About Japan’S Constitutional Reinterpretation.". The Diplomat. http://thediplomat.com/2014/07/ten-myths-about-japans-collective-self-defense-change/.