On September 19, 2015 (August 7, 2015 in the lunar calendar), the Japanese Senate passed the security law to lift the ban on the right to collective self-defense. The crowd held various signs and shouted slogans, demanding that the Diet not pass the security bill. In the early morning of September 19, 2015 local time, the Japanese Senate plenary voted to pass a series of security bills with the lifting of the ban on the right to collective self-defense as the core content. As a result, with the ruling party's seat advantage in the Diet, the Abe regime's forceful lifting of the ban on the right to collective self-defense passed the final hurdle and went from conspiracy to reality. The five opposition parties, including the largest opposition party, the Democratic Party, were finally "out of ammunition" after facing the "urgent march" of the Abe camp for days and resorting to various means of resistance, including submitting a no-confidence motion to the cabinet. Its overnight struggle in the Diet ended helplessly. The angry protests of countless Japanese people around the Diet day and day failed to stop the people in power from going their own way. But while the Abe regime is eager to reap this long-planned "victory", it must also face the costs it has caused, including future shocks to its regime caused by the strong backlash of public opinion, and judicial proceedings brought by various parties that it violates the constitution. Public opinion here generally believes that the finality of the new security bill means a major change in Japan's postwar security policy. Some mainstream media are concerned that the passage of the new security bill will completely shake Japan's postwar peace and statehood posture. As a result, even if Japan is not attacked, the Self-Defense Forces may participate in the use of force based on the "comprehensive judgment" of only a small number of rulers. What's more, the new security law also removes strict geographical restrictions on the activities of the Self-Defense Forces. The new security law forcibly established includes the "Peace and Security Legal Law Improvement Act", which is a combination of 10 amendments including the Law on Armed Attacks and the Law on Peripheral Situations, as well as the new law "International Peace Support Act", which allows the troops of other countries to provide rear support to deal with international disputes at any time. A spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry pointed out on the 18th that due to historical reasons, Japan's policy trends in the field of military security have always been highly concerned by its Asian neighbors and the international community. It is hoped that the Japanese government will listen carefully to the calls for justice from the domestic and international community, earnestly learn the lessons of history, adhere to the path of peaceful development, act prudently in the field of military security, and do more to help promote peace and stability in the region. Former Japanese Supreme Court judges, former Cabinet Legal Affairs Bureau chief, president of the Japan Bar Association, and constitutional scholars held a press conference on August 26 in Kasumigaseki, Tokyo, calling the security bill "unconstitutional" to prevent its passage. On August 30, 2015, local time, in Tokyo, Japan, Japanese people hold signs to demonstrate outside the Parliament Building to protest Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's security bill. On August 30, demonstrations took place in more than 300 locations across Japan. It is estimated that the number of demonstrators exceeded 1 million. Tens of thousands of demonstrators surrounded the Diet in Tokyo, demanding the repeal of the security law and Abe's resignation. About 120,000 Japanese people rallied outside the Diet Building in Tokyo on August 30. On August 3, the Federation of Trade Unions marched to the Japanese Consulate in Hong Kong yesterday to protest against Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's imposition of the security law. On September 17, many Japanese people continued to gather around the Diet in heavy rain for anti-security protests. Late at night, autumn rain, and police failed to stop the Japanese people from protesting against the new security law pushed by the Abe Cabinet. "Forced voting is never allowed!" After 45,000 people surrounded the Japanese Diet on the 15th, at least 40,000 people surrounded the Diet on the 16th, protesting against "the lax handling of a bill that will determine the fate of Japan". Meanwhile, the Japanese Diet is also full of smoke: the government and the opposition factions fought overnight over the new security law. The ruling coalition plans to push the bill to be passed by the special committee on the night of the 16th, but the review meeting has not been postponed until 0:30 Tokyo time on the 17th. People all over Japan acted in unison on the 18th, showing signs "No tolerance for Abe politics". What is the Japanese security bill? Article 9 of the Japanese security bill was abandoned. What is the Japanese security bill? On the surface, the Security Act is actually two bills, namely the International Peace Support Act and the Peace and Security Legal Adjustment Act, but the latter is actually composed of ten small bills. The International Peace Support Act provides the basis for the Japanese Self-Defense Forces to support multinational armies, while the Peace and Security Legal Adjustment Act stipulates the conditions for the Self-Defense Forces to exercise the right of collective self-defense and launch armed attacks. The essence of the Security Act is to allow the exercise of collective self-defense rights, with the aim of expanding the military activities of the Self-Defense Forces at home and abroad. When Japan or a country with close ties to Japan is attacked by force, Japan's survival is threatened, and there is a danger of complete deprivation of its citizens' rights; when it is impossible to find other enforceable means to resist the attack, ensure Japan's survival is not threatened, and protect its own people; when the use of military force can be minimized, Japan is allowed to use force against other countries. That is to say, even if Japan is not directly attacked, it is only "threatened", it can use force against other countries; the Japanese government can send self-defense forces overseas at any time to support foreign troops with the approval of the Diet. Some analysts point out that fundamentally, the new security law is to strengthen the US-Japan alliance and better cooperate with the US to meet its strategic needs of "Asia-Pacific rebalancing". Article 9 of Japan's security bill abandoned: The new security bill violates the preamble and Article 9 of Japan's peace constitution on "pacifism and non-use of force", and the peace constitution will exist in name only. The security bill will truly change the direction of Japan's future. The dangerous nature of Japan's security bill is increasingly exposed. In response to the series of security bills being considered by the Japanese Diet, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said in the House of Representatives' Special Committee on Peace and Security Law on June 1 that the "important impact situation" of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces providing rear support to the US military and other forces may occur in the Middle East and the Indian Ocean. During this time, many Japanese media and scholars have worried that once the security bill is passed, the scope of activities of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces will be expanded indefinitely. It is understood that this is the first time that Abe has cited an example outside Japan's periphery on the removal of the current legal geographical restrictions, and the speech confirmed the previous concerns of the media and scholars. There are widespread concerns in Japan that the lifting of the ban on collective self-defense will fundamentally change the "exclusive defense" policy that Japan has adhered to after the war. However, the Japanese government has been quibbling that "the idea of exclusive defense has not changed in the slightest". Abe said on the 1st that in the case of an attack on the United States and other countries, even if it is impossible to determine whether the other party intends to attack Japan, the possibility of exercising the right of collective self-defense cannot be ruled out. Defense Minister Nakatani said that the concept of "exclusive defense" has changed. Analysis believes that with the continuous attacks of opposition parties, the dangerous nature of the Abe government's series of security bills has become increasingly exposed. The series of security bills submitted by the Japanese government to the Diet for consideration consists of the "Peace and Security Legal Maintenance Act" and the "International Peace Support Act". Although the Japanese government has always emphasized that this is to protect the peace and security of Japanese citizens, all walks of life in Japan believe that its essence is a "war bill". Even Kobayashi, a well-known conservative constitutional scholar in Japan who has been leading the constitutional amendment discussion within the Liberal Democratic Party, publicly stated before the festival that the series of security bills submitted by the Japanese government to the Diet for consideration are "too outrageous". Although the name of the bill has the word "peace", it is ultimately a "war bill" to expand the right to use force. Not only that, the Japanese government has also listed a lot of obscure words to confuse the people. In fact, the core content can be summed up in only two points - "it is possible to exercise the right of collective self-defense" and "expand the scope of overseas activities of the Self-Defense Forces." When the Japanese government submitted the series of security bills to the Diet last month, the "National Security Legal Conference", a group composed of well-known Japanese constitutional scholars, issued a statement pointing out that the series of security bills aims to implement the cabinet resolution that lifted the ban on the right of collective self-defense last year and the new version of the Japan-US defense cooperation guidelines issued not only at the level of the legal system, which are incompatible with the constitution-based Japanese legal system. Not only will the Self-Defense Forces face greater risk of casualties, but also bring more danger to the Japanese people of being drawn into the war. The Japanese people also expressed their concerns about the security bill in an interview with this In an interview with this reporter, Kitahara, 82, who lives in Tokyo, said that he must oppose the series of security bills that the Japanese government is trying to pass. The reason is very simple - for the people of Japan and the world to live in peace, "I hope Japan will not let the tragedy of the past war repeat itself." Ishikawa, 46, told reporters that the Japanese government's security bill violates Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, and as a young generation, he must participate in various rallies and demonstrations to prevent the bill from passing. On the evening of May 28, more than 1,100 Japanese people gathered near the Diet, chanting slogans such as "no need for laws that can start war" and "absolutely oppose the war bill", expressing a firm attitude. On May 31st, about 10,000 people came to Saitama City, Saitama Prefecture, near Tokyo to hold a rally and march, demanding that the cabinet's decision to lift the ban on collective self-defense rights be revoked. Kyodo News recently conducted a national telephone public opinion survey on how the Japanese people perceive the series of security bills. The results showed that 47.6% of the respondents were opposed to the security bill itself, exceeding 35.4% who voted in favor. 81.4% of the respondents believed that "[the Japanese government] did not fully explain [the bill]". 68% of the respondents believed that after the bill was passed, the risk of the Self-Defense Forces being involved in the war would increase, and only 2.6% believed that the risk would be lower. Picture: Japanese people surrounded the National Assembly on the evening of the 14th Anti-security law - Abe's rise to power is uneasy