The peace movements in Japan should have been pursuing, or having relations to some extent to, the principles of peace, which are contained in the Constitution of Japan. But, in most cases these movements have not been so keenly trying to achieve in their actual moves what the peace principles should demand. In many of them there has been observed a sort of dilemma between their achievements or even objectives and what they should be expected from the peace principles. One perhaps very serious reason for above situation may be the fact that to most of the leaders engaging in the peace movements in Japan the profound significances of the peace principles have not been clear enough to become the core of their consciousness. Although most of the Japanese scholars of constitutional law have been maintaining that the peace principles should request the government of Japan to observe the fundamental policy or position of 'no war, no armaments and neutrality', there has remained room for different interpretations of the related provisions of the Constitution of Japan. Therefore, the author first tries to make the concepts and meanings of the peace principles clear. Analysing the sentences of Preamble and the provisions of Article 9, the author reaches the conclusion that these norms or principles will constitute 'the Peace Principle' as a complex or system of norms. In the light of the above-mentioned findings, or under 'the Peace Principle', the peace movements in Japan and some other movements 'towards peace' are examined. After this the author proposes that the said principle could be taken up anew as an alternative or the basic norm for an alternative security for Japan, by the peace movements. The author then states that a dilemma can become a challenge, if those engaging in the peace movements should try to face it in the most square manner, and the author places a hope upon some of the movements 'towards peace' in their roles in transforming the world into one that the Peace Principle should be realized.