With a view to the political stability of Afghanistan and Iraq, Japan's stance on its international contribution is being widely debated. The Japanese government wants to ensure that the Maritime Self-Defense Force is able to continue supplying fuel and water to U.S. and British naval vessels in the Indian Ocean, but the nation's opposition parties insist that only activities that come under a UN mandate are permissible if members of the Self-Defense Forces are to be sent abroad, arguing that their recent mission has been unconstitutional.

What forms the basis of their opposition is a difference in interpretation of Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, which begins: "Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes."

Through the constraints imposed by the wording of this article, Japan has never been involved in a war in the six decades since World War II, has never sent her troops abroad as fighting forces, and has maintained a continuing state of peace.

In 2001, however, the Japanese government submitted the Anti-Terrorism Special Measures Bill to the National Diet, and after it was passed, under the terms of the new law, Japan began supplying fuel and water to war vessels of the United States, Britain, and other countries that had been dispatched to find and destroy enclaves of Al-Qaeda and other international terrorist groups. The subject of the current debate is whether sending Self-Defense members abroad to continue the refueling mission falls within the purview of the Constitution as a legitimate type of international contribution, or whether it goes counter to Article 9.

For this reason, within the government and the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, a movement to ease the making of military contributions by revising Article 9 has gained strength during the past few years. The National Referendum Law, which is a procedural law necessary for revising the Constitution, was enacted by the Diet in May 2007.

When we observe the brutality of the random acts of terrorist violence as well as the political turbulence not only in Afghanistan and Iraq, but also in neighboring countries, surely there is no one who does not wish for peace to come as swiftly as possible. In that regard, it is only natural for the international community to expect a meaningful contribution from Japan commensurate with its position as one of the world's leading economic powers.

But is it only through military force, one needs to ask, that peace can be brought about? In a world undergoing ever increasing globalization and the deepening of relationships of interdependence, the idea that peace can only be achieved through military means may be a concept left over from an earlier time.

What is needed today is for us all to turn our eyes to such problems as the poverty, discrimination, and oppression that often become the causes of war, and to seek to ensure peace by maintaining a comprehensive viewpoint that encompasses such basic issues as economic and energy requirements, and protection of human rights and the environment.

Here, I am reminded of the preamble to the Japanese Constitution:

"We, the Japanese people, desire peace for all time and are deeply conscious of the high ideals controlling human relationship, and we have determined to preserve our security and existence, trusting in the justice and faith of the peace-loving peoples of the world. We desire to occupy an honored place in an international society striving for the preservation of peace, and the banishment of tyranny and slavery, oppression and intolerance for all time from the earth. We recognize that all peoples of the world have the right to live in peace, free from fear and want."

What this means is that there is a strong national determination to attain world harmony and to maintain peace without reliance on military means. If we can put into practice the spirit of the preamble, perhaps we could say that the actions currently being undertaken by the government are too heavily weighted toward military force. Rather than impetuously rushing to revise the Constitution, is it not the mission and duty of Japan, which established a Peace Constitution after World War II, to use its power to help rebuild the infrastructure and restore the people's livelihood in places such as Afghanistan and Iraq?

Speaking as a Buddhist, I believe that the greatest contribution that Japan could make to the world today is to widely spread the spirit of Article 9 around the globe.