26 June : A Bleak Day

     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  They should be immediately withdrawn.  But I am not saying that they should be withdrawn simply because they would put Japan in danger.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.       

Korean War Anniversary

     Three days ago, it was 22 June.  This was a day when many historic events took place.  Napoleon crossed the border to invade Russia in 1812.  Hitler also attacked the Soviet Union in 1941.  More recently and nearer our home, the Foreign Minister of South Korea came to Tokyo on this day in 1965, and gave his signature to the Treaty normalizing the relations between the two countries.  The media in Japan, and in South Korea also, widely covered the fiftieth anniversary of this Treaty.

     But the media, at least in Japan, has scarcely covered the 65th anniversary of the beginning of the Korean War, which falls on this day, 25 June 1950, no less important than the signing of the above Treaty, to the peace and prosperity of the Far East.  The War ended in 1953, but only by an Armistice, and not by a Peace Treaty.  The Armistice was signed by North Korea, China which fought side by side with North Korea, and the US which fought on the South Korean side, but not by South Korea.  In that sense, we have been living in a war situation ever since.

     We will not go into the controversy here of which started the War, as both sides were trigger-happy at the time.  Instead, we would like to propose that each should immediately set up an official Mission in the other's capital, with a seasoned Ambassador-class diplomat as its head, on the understanding that it will be elevated to the Embassy status in two years.  Both the nations will be pressed to make a real endeavour to solve the standing issues between them in these two years, like the nuclear weapons and missiles, economic cooperation, railways connectivity, meeting of the dispersed relatives, and so on.  They should make it sure to send a united team to the Tokyo Olympics to be held in 2020.

     Japan, in the meantime, cannot afford to be idle.  She is responsible for the division of Korea into two, initially by the 38ｔｈ Parallel, by delaying in accepting the Potsdam Declaration.  It is true that the US and the Soviets both brought in their own puppets and gave them wide powers in their respective zones, but that was possible as there was the line drawn already.  Above all Japan should try to set up diplomatic relations with the North. by putting into practice more or less the same measures as mentioned above. 　　         

Myth and Reality on the Droppings of the Bombs

     In the seventieth year of the droppings of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Peter Kuznick, historian from the American University, spoke to the Asahi, a Japanese daily. Here are some excerpts from the original(ajw.asahi.com).

     '...many Americans would have been killed(without the bombs).  That's what they were told at the time.  The American people believed it at the time.  Still, a lot of people believe it, especially the elder generation.  And so, they still believe that Harry Truman(the President who ordered the bombings) was a hero, and that he saved their lives.'

     'I think Truman was hoping that it would speed up the Japanese surrender.  He wanted to get the war over with, if he could, before the Russians got in and got what the U.S. promised them at Yalta, the concessions.'

     '...the Soviet leaders understood the situation better than anybody...they knew that the atomic bombings were not necessary to end the war.  So the reaction among the Soviet leaders, when the U.S. bombed Hiroshima, was that the real target was the Soviet Union.  It wasn't Japan.'

     'He(Truman) said he was going to Potsdam(in July 1945) for one reason:to make sure that Russia was coming into the war...He said that the Japanese would be finished when the Soviets entered the war.'

     This writer is also of the opinion that the Soviet participation was crucial in bringing the war to the end, and not the bombs.  If so, however, why was Truman so keen in bringing in the Russian troops into the war, which would and did enormously strengthen their position in the East?  As to the American casualties he could have delayed the planned landings in the main Japanese islands and prevented bloodshed of his forces.  That way he could also have taken the pride in the role of the atomic bombs in ending the war.      

New Defense Cooperation Guidelines

     One month back, on 27 April, the so-called two and two, namely the Foreign and Defense Ministers, of Japan and the US agreed on the New Defense Cooperation Guidelines.  In many ways the new Guidelines make us wonder if they are putting us in greater danger.

     They say, and repeat over and over again, more than a dozen times, that the alliance between the two will be such that it will be seamless, meaning that it will cover all sorts of situation from the normal times to the emergency.

     Then they say that the US will continue to provide deterrence to Japan through all her capability including nuclear fighting power.  What is surprising is that this is not a unilateral US policy but what Japan has accepted.  It shows Japan believes in the nuclear deterrence.  This is only weeks before the NPT Conference at the UN has ended in failure betraying the hopes of billions.

     They stressed that the alliance must be made global in nature.  It is said that the Japanese SDF could be mobilized to defend Japan against ballistic missiles, and may try to retake Japan's own islands when necessary.  One can easily see that this is basically a military document.

     Furthermore, they say that the SDF will come to the aid of those countries which are in close relations with Japan, when they are attacked in such a way as to endanger the existence of Japan.  It is presumed that the US and Australia are meant by these lines.  This is what is known as the issue of collective self-defense.  The present Abe's Government decided on 1 July 2014 that Japan is able to exercise her 'inherent right of collective self-defense' as is mentioned in Article 51 of the UN Charter.
   
     A collection of Bills, collectively called the War Bills by critics, embodying the above and more, has been presented to the Parliament, and has been discussed from 27 of May.  On the same day Mr. Onaga, Governor of Okinawa Prefecture, left for the US to appeal to the public opinion against the US plan to build a new, huge and permanent air base in his Prefecture.  He is overwhelmingly backed by the public opinion there.   

Abe's Congressional Speech

     Japan's Prime Minister Abe made a 45-minute speech before the joint session of the US Congress at the end of April, 2015.  His defense talks with Obama will be discussed later.  Here we will look into the speech to see how statesman-like it was.

     He duly expressed his 'eternal condolences' to the Americans who lost their lives in the War.  He concluded his speech saying that the two countries will work 'to make the world a better, a much better, place to live', which was good by itself.  On the Asians, however, what he said was too short, and it was not easy to comprehend what he meant by it.  All that he said was 'Our actions brought suffering to the peoples in Asian countries.  We must not avert our eyes from that.  I will uphold the views expressed by the previous prime ministers in this regard'.  He could have talked here why Japan fought one war after another in the half century from 1894 to 1945. He could even said his opinion on the still widely held view that the atomic bombs were necessary to end the War, if at all he had to touch upon the War.

     Apparently he likes to compare himself to his grandfather.  Perhaps that would explain the motives for some of his actions.  He did so twice on this occasion. We are rather surprised to hear, in effect, that Kishi was a believer in democratic ideals.

     He repeatedly talked of peace and prosperity, but not in concrete terms.  We are not told of the details of the ongoing TPP negotiations.  When he says that 'the goal is near', we get very apprehensive.  It is as if he is making use of it to introduce reforms in our economy.  Agriculture is one such sector.  But why is it that agriculture does not pay nowadays?  Why is it that, as Abe says, the agricultural population is aging?  And why there is 'depopulation'?  He may plan the economy in such a way that the birth rate will recover to maintain the labour force, not only in quantitative terms, but a better educated, healthier and more contented labour force.

     Abe devotes roughly a quarter of his speech to strengthening the Japan-US military alliance.  He wants to make it 'seemless'.  He calls it 'credible deterrence for the peace in the region'.  But why stick to these Cold-War concepts?  Deterrence against whom?  Does the speech talk of any political initiative to take on the threat, if there is any?  None.  So the alliance is purely a military doctrine.  From the fact that he does not mention China at all in the speech, it is clear, is it not, that in his mind the alliance is against China.  It is another matter if the US would agree.  The US may not.  That means there will be the second edition of the Nixon shock of 1971.  Peace should be fought for, not by military means, not by the amount of money and the number of soldiers, but by peaceful means.  It is doubtful if Abe sees things that way, and here he is following his grandfather.