Debate over Article 9 intensified as Japan sought limited collective self-defense and closer allied cooperation. Abe's 2014-15 interpretation allowed Japan to use force to protect close allies when an attack on them also threatened Japan's survival. With longer-range weapons, waiting for a direct attack could leave Japan responding too late. If an ally had already been defeated, Japan could face the same threat with less support, particularly against a much larger power. This reasoning supported limited collective self-defense while the constitutional text remained unchanged.
Notable Point · 29:45-31:44
Article 9 and collective self-defense
Limited collective self-defense allowed Japan to protect close allies when an attack also threatened its own survival, without a formal constitutional amendment.