After the war&sbquo Japan valued highly its manifest of defense&sbquo because it is meaningful word that symbolizes the renunciation of war. The essence of national determinism and policy is contained in this word&sbquo and it has been a political principle that has caused debate in a most concentrated manner. Defense is the fending off and protection from external aggression&sbquo and in Japan its meaning has been emphasized by such phrases as "non-aggressive defense." It is&sbquo however&sbquo clear that such policy as "non-aggressive defense" is an illusion and has no practical effect or utility. Nevertheless&sbquo it is certain that this principle is the most idealistic national policy in the world. Amendment to Article 9 of the Constitution is being debated vigorously today&sbquo but this shows the lack of a fundamental definition as to what "defense" is. In design&sbquo does the word defense and its specific facts become an object of design? Broadly speaking&sbquo I believe it is necessary to define the concept of defense as a design object from two viewpoints: conceptual awareness as a citizen and as an individual. As an individual&sbquo even if non-aggressive defense is an illusion&sbquo you have to keep holding that ideal or principle. As a citizen&sbquo however&sbquo it is necessary to discuss within design the embodiment of the details of defense. In other words&sbquo it is necessary to discover what defense is as a design object from the standpoint of both your worldview and the national view. At the root is the design of violence and peace. This is the protection of peace and peace by protection. The design expression for this is exclusively consolidated in communication among individuals. For defense and its design&sbquo it is a principle of action that Japan must lead the designer must initiate.