In my essay from the February 2018 issue of Apple Town, I wrote as follows about the overseas autumn study tour for the Shoheijuku, APA Corporate Club, franchises, partner hotels, and employees that took place last December, in which we visited old battle sites in Hawaii:

　On January 2, Akiba contacted me to say these objections were fruitful and the panels would be corrected by the end of March.
　Also, on February 3, I received an e-mail from Yoshiro Kishida, who has made a lecture at Shohehijuku in the past,that read as follows:

　I was astonished by this, and I immediately called Kishida on the telephone to confirm. He said there was a similar exhibition to the one at the Pacific Aviation Museum in Hawaii that claimed the Japanese Army did horrible things to the people who gave refuge to the Doolittle pilots or helped them flee. I contacted Akiba once again to give him this information, and he told me that Member of the House of Councillors Shigeharu Aoyama had discovered this exhibition at the National Museum of the Pacific War in Fredericksburg, Texas last April. He sent a request to the MOFA to have this information corrected or removed. Thanks to Aoyama’s efforts, the phrase “from China” was removed in September of that year. Museum exhibitions like this should be amended to contain correct information, and going forward it will be important to keep monitoring in this way, both inside and outside Japan.

　Kishida is helping ensure that correct information is displayed at the National Museum of the Pacific War in Fredericksburg, Texas. In his speech at the 53rd Monthly Meeting of the Shoheijuku in October 2015, he described facts regarding how China uses financial and other types of pressure to make museums reflect its intentions in their exhibitions. China started devoting time and money to this “history warfare” after the Tiananmen Square protests. Takushoku University Guest Professor Nobukatsu Fujioka, vice-chairman of the Japan Society for History Textbook Reform, gave details about this in his speech on November 11, 2017 entitled, “Structure of History Warfare and Points at Issue.” Why did Jiang Zemin implement “patriotic education?” Fujioka explained:

　The background to his decision likely included the issue of Jiang’s legitimacy. Jiang seized power in 1992, but he had no military record, nor was he a revolutionary hero. He gained this position merely because he was selected by Deng Xiaoping. Mao Zedong personally led a revolution and built the People’s Republic of China. Deng lost his position and then regained it multiple times, including the Cultural Revolution, and he achieved economic development with reformation and liberalization policies. Compared to them, Jiang had accomplished nothing. That is why he turned his eyes to history warfare and adopted an anti-Japanese stance to overcome these handicaps and maintain his authority.
　Fujioka also pointed out that the “united, common front against Japan,” as advocated by current President Xi Jinping in 2012, was the origin of this history warfare:

　Xi did not name a successor at last year’s National Congress of the CPC, although the general custom has been for presidents to do so after five years. I wonder if Xi is using the tactic of linking these territorial and historical issues to establish a long-term government, which should be called the “Empire of Xi Jinping.”

　　One year has passed since the inauguration of American President Donald J. Trump. On February 2, the Trump administration released its Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) that is a complete about-face from the Barack Obama government. It clearly indicates that nuclear disarmament will be implemented, while also including the possibility of possessing a varied nuclear force and nuclear counteroffensives against non-nuclear attacks. The background to this includes the modernization of Chinese and Russian nuclear weapons and North Korea’s nuclear program. In addition to nuclear weapons, the China policy is also undergoing transformation. In January, a friend of mine who lives in China recommended an online article to me. Entitled, “Randy Named an Official for Asian Affairs in the Trump Administration: Changing China Policy,” it was published on Yahoo! News on January 25. It was written by Homare Endo, director of the Center of International Relations at the Tokyo University of Social Welfare, who is well versed in the underside of China. It read:

　Since the Trump campaign, Henry Kissinger fulfilled a role rather like a diplomatic policy advisor in the Trump government. Kissinger was secretary of state during the Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford administrations. He visited China and met with Premier Zhou Enlai in 1971. He is also known for hating Japan, and has even said the traditional Sino-American relationship (like that before World War II) would likely come into play in the event of excess rearmament by Japan. According to some news reports, he gave advice to Trump while receiving an advisory fee from China. However, Schriver’s appointment means Kissinger’s influence is removed, and that the U.S. is switching to a strong stance against China. Trump does not actually recognize the North Korea crisis as a significant threat to Japan or the U.S.; he believes the China crisis is actually the vital issue. China is reclaiming coral reefs in the South China Sea and building military bases, and is engaging in continual provocation to snatch the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea. It even aspires to divide the Pacific Ocean with the U.S., with Hawaii serving as the boundary line in the middle. The cause of these circumstances is the weak-kneed diplomacy against China by Obama, who declared that the U.S. would no longer be the world’s policeman.

　For Japan, the worst-case scenario would be for North Korea (a nuclear power) to annex South Korea, creating the “Federation of Korea” that would be the Chinese advance guard to threaten Japan. If that happened, Japan might end up capitulating to China and becoming one of its autonomous regions.
　In my essay published in the March issue of this magazine, I wrote: “We must promptly add a third paragraph to Article 9 of the constitution that maintains the land, sea, and air forces (Japan Self-Defense Forces) as national-defense armies with the right of belligerency as ‘war potential’ for self-defense, regardless of the preceding two paragraphs.” Although there are different views about constitutional reform, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) must firm up plans for this by the end of the year. The Emperor will abdicate on April 30, 2019 and Crown Prince Naruhito will become the new emperor on May 1, marking the start of a new Japanese era. A House of Councillors election will take place in June or July. The Tokyo Olympics will be held in July 2020, the year after next. Considering this timeline, before the House of Councillors Election in 2019 (with National Diet members who are in favor of constitutional change occupying more than two thirds of the seats in both houses), a constitutional reform motion should be made with approval from the Diet members (over 100 in the House of Representatives and over 50 in the House of Councillors). Next, after deliberations by the Commission on the Constitution in the Upper and Lower Houses, the bill should be passed with over two thirds of the votes in plenary sessions in both houses. The Diet could then propose constitutional amendment, and a national referendum should be held to pass the constitutional reform bill with a majority of the votes by citizens age 18 or older, from 60 to 180 days after the proposal. If necessary, a House of Councillors election could also be held at the same time as the national referendum.
　To increase knowledge about the current constitution, in the past a national movement took place that included distributing 20 million copies of a booklet entitled A New Constitution, a Bright Future to all households in Japan. Similarly, a large national movement should be implemented by all Diet members and prefectural and municipal assembly members who support constitutional reform. They should work to unite the country and win over not just a majority of the citizens, but 70% or 80% of the population.
　We should use the North Korea crisis as an opportunity to spread awareness that Japan must protect itself (a concept that is only natural), promote the necessity of constitutional change, and achieve reform. Shinzo Abe should serve a third term as LDP president, and the Constitution of Japan must be revised to strengthen Japan’s national-security structure while Trump is president. Japan is surrounded by the nuclear weapons states of Russia, China, and North Korea, and it cannot eternally protect its territory and people just by espousing a defense-only policy and being bound by the constitution.
　An old saying states, “If you want peace, prepare for war.” As this indicates, war can only be prevented by having offensive weapons for deterrence. Japan should change the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty from a unilateral agreement to a bilateral, equal treaty of mutual benefit, and enter into a nuclear sharing arrangement with the U.S. To that end, a new Diet resolution will be needed to abolish the Three Non-Nuclear Principles of not possessing, not producing, and not permitting the introduction of nuclear weapons. These principles are merely a Diet resolution, not a law. As the U.S. is pivoting to an America First policy that prioritizes its domestic affairs, I think the U.S. might conclude a nuclear sharing agreement with Japan – free of the restraints of the constitution – to check China’s expansion policy rather than military spending in East Asia.
　Instead of aiming to kill Kim Jong Un, the U.S. could stop North Korea’s nuclear program and intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) development by implementing a limited air strike with prior warning. Based on the premise that the current government could be maintained as long as North Korea pledges to freeze its nuclear bomb testing and ICBM launches, the U.S. could announce it would attack roughly 100 major ICBM- and nuclear bomb-related facilities. It could order people to flee from these locations, and during that time it could evacuate Americans and other foreign tourists, American residents, and other persons from Seoul. Then, it could use cruise missiles, B-1 bombers, and bunker busters in air strikes to destroy underground facilities. The Kim administration is a disadvantageous one, but North Korea is an important buffer zone in a geopolitical sense. If North Korea came under Chinese control, the U.S. and China would be in direct confrontation at the 38th Parallel (Military Demarcation Line). If it came under Russian control, the same would be true of the U.S. and Russia. Even if South Korea annexed North Korea, the U.S. and China would be in opposition at the China-North Korea border. It is important that North Korea exist, even if it is not an ideal state. It is extremely difficult to make countries abandon their nuclear weapons after they are obtained. Therefore, we must block North Korean nuclear technologies from being transferred to terrorists, and also ensure that it does not develop any further technologies, including completing atmospheric reentry technologies for ballistic missiles and developing miniature nuclear warheads and missiles with multiple warheads. Allowing North Korea to keep its completed nuclear weapons would also be significant as a type of defense to provide deterrence against the expanding China. China and North Korea are not friendly. The same is true of China and Russia. That is one reason why Russia and North Korea are strengthening their ties today. North Korea’s biggest goal is to protect itself and maintain its current structure; it does not intend to invade Japan. However, nuclear weapons are an absolute threat to countries without nuclear arms. If North Korea completed its nuclear weapons, it might demand that Japan pay enormous amounts of pre- and post-war reparations.
　Just like President Vladimir Putin is augmenting Russia’s military force during his long-term administration – turning Russia into the “Empire of Putin” – China may become the Empire of Xi Jinping, step up its hegemonism, and aim to replace the U.S. as the unipolar ruler of the globe. Then, it would engage in fiercer history warfare against Japan focused on the claims that Japan forcibly transported 200,000 comfort women and killed 300,000 people during the Nanjing Massacre. I suspect we will see more mistaken text about atrocities committed by the Japanese Army, like at the Pacific Aviation Museum in Hawaii and the National Museum of the Pacific War in Texas. It looks like we will somehow be able to resolve this issue in Hawaii via objections, but the problem is that the MOFA has done nothing about claims of this sort. The MOFA should take better measures so this fictitious history does not run rampant across the world. If not, these lies will be rapidly spread across the globe as truths, and more things will happen like the Nanjing Massacre being included in the UNESCO Memory of the World Register. This includes history, cyber, and information warfare. In the 21st century, war does not involve exchanging fire – developments in the information field have become the norm. Japan must quickly rid itself of anti-Japanese education through its inaccurate textbooks and incorrect media, and must stand up to fight in the realm of information. North Korea has hijacked discussions of the PyeongChang Olympics held in February in South Korea, so much that it seems like the games are hosted by North Korea. I think South Korean President Moon Jae In has been fully taken in by North Korea’s information strategy, and Japan should learn from these mistakes.

February 13 (Tuesday), 11:00 p.m.