26 June was globally 'a bleak day', to use a phrase from an English broadcast. A Kuwaiti mosque was blown up. Tourists were gunned down at a Tunisian resort. A gas plant was put in danger near Lyon, France. There was another attack in Somalia.
All of them have been supposedly made by the so-called 'Jihadists'. They have made claims for some of them already. We will, however, not discuss them as such, but look into their possible relation to what is being debated in the Japanese Parliament at this moment.
The current 'War-Bills', presented by the Abe Government, and the passage of which Abe has committed to the US Congress in his knee-bending speech, are intended to make Japan much easier to participate in, even wage, an armed conflict. It would make it possible for her to give logistical supply to the US forces at or near the battleground. It would make her to be a part of the ISAF-type military operations which have been under way in Afghanistan. It would also allow Japan to use the right of collective self-defense for the sake of, presumably, the US military. In all these cases, it would greatly tarnish Japan's image as a peace-loving, no war-going nation, the image long entertained by ourselves and by the peoples abroad.
Coming back to the Jihadist attacks, the 'War-Bills', if enacted, would surely make Japan much more vulnerable to such actions. They should be immediately withdrawn. But I am not saying that they should be withdrawn simply because they would put Japan in danger. They certainly would. But what is more important is that Japan should adhere to her peace-loving position, and try to think out ways and means, together with other peace-loving countries, how to make the on-going or attempted use of force, especially by the big countries, inactivated. The above Bills would place an enormous block on that a road.
All of them have been supposedly made by the so-called 'Jihadists'. They have made claims for some of them already. We will, however, not discuss them as such, but look into their possible relation to what is being debated in the Japanese Parliament at this moment.
The current 'War-Bills', presented by the Abe Government, and the passage of which Abe has committed to the US Congress in his knee-bending speech, are intended to make Japan much easier to participate in, even wage, an armed conflict. It would make it possible for her to give logistical supply to the US forces at or near the battleground. It would make her to be a part of the ISAF-type military operations which have been under way in Afghanistan. It would also allow Japan to use the right of collective self-defense for the sake of, presumably, the US military. In all these cases, it would greatly tarnish Japan's image as a peace-loving, no war-going nation, the image long entertained by ourselves and by the peoples abroad.
Coming back to the Jihadist attacks, the 'War-Bills', if enacted, would surely make Japan much more vulnerable to such actions. They should be immediately withdrawn. But I am not saying that they should be withdrawn simply because they would put Japan in danger. They certainly would. But what is more important is that Japan should adhere to her peace-loving position, and try to think out ways and means, together with other peace-loving countries, how to make the on-going or attempted use of force, especially by the big countries, inactivated. The above Bills would place an enormous block on that a road.
No comments:
Post a Comment