中日历史共同研究取得进展 China-Japan Joint History Research Committee Released Research Papers

China-Japan Joint History Research Committee concluded the first phase of the history research project and released research papers. These papers include historical events that have have often been disputed, including the Nanjing Massacre. Some agreements have also been reached between scholars from the two countries, like the understanding that Japan waged a war of aggression against China.

These papers can be downloaded from MOFA website (Japanese and Chinese version):http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/area/china/rekishi_kk.html

Bu Ping, the coordinator of the Chinese side and the director of the Contemporary History Institute of Chinese Social Science Academy, was interviewed by XinHua News of China. Here is the report from Xinhua News (in Chinese)
http://news.xinhuanet.com/society/2010-02/02/content_12921839.htm

and our English translation:

随着“中日共同历史研究”工作取得阶段性进展，中日两国之间的历史问题再一次浮现在人们面前。参与这项研究的中方首席委员、中国社会科学院近代史研究所所长步平说，对于中日战争历史的认知，一直是困扰中日两国关系的问题之一。这项研究主要是希望先从学术上理清历史事实，分析历史认识的差异与问题，增进两国交流，加深两国间和平友好关系。
The history issues catch attention in China and Japan, since the Sino-Japan history research program achieved its partial goals. Bu Ping, Director of the Contemporary History Institutes of the Social Science Academy of China, says that understandings of the Sino-Japan War have long been a problem, deteriorating relations between China and Japan. We expect that this research program can sort out historical facts in academic studies, analyzing the causes of the different historical understanding, facilitating bilateral communication, and building a friendly relationship.

　　共同历史研究 原则问题已达成共识

　　尽管中日战争已经结束60多年，但日本社会部分人士否认侵略战争的态度，让中日两国的友好发展道路始终布满荆棘。
　　2006年10月，中日两国领导人就启动中日学者之间的共同历史研究达成共识。同年11月，中日两国外长在举行会谈之时就中日共同历史研究的实施框架达成协议，确定基于中日联合声明等三个政治文件的原则及正视历史、面向未来的精神，开展中日共同历史研究。
　　在这一共识与实施框架的基础上，中日双方各10名学者组成共同历史研究委员会，分为古代与中世纪史、近现代史两个组，开展了共同研究。
---Consensus has been reached at the basic level by studying history together

The Sino-Japan war was over more than 60 years ago, but some Japanese deny the aggressiveness of the war, and this has been the barrier of the friendship between the two countries. In October 2010, leaders of the two countries agreed to launch a research program of contemporary history together. Each side provided a committee of ten historians, divided into two groups of ancient history and contemporary history studies, and started a study program in November of the same year.


　　中日共同研究的目的在于通过学者间的冷静研究，首先从学术上理清历史事实，缓解围绕历史问题的对立情绪，促进两国友好交流。
　　据介绍，此次共同研究与以往的学术研究最大区别，在于一是有共同确定的研究题目，二是对重要问题都进行充分讨论，在吸收部分对方意见的基础上多次修改，形成各自的论文。概括地说就是“同一题目，交换意见，充分讨论，各自表述”。虽然是“各自表述”，但因为研究题目是共同确定的，两国学者能够在同一题目下围绕关键问题展开研究和讨论，不回避分歧，已经是向前走了一大步。
According to Bu, this program has two unique characters: 1) Studies have been done on the same topics, which are strictly and clearly defined to both sides; 2) Discussions are widely held on important topics. Each article has been revised several times according to the opinions from the opposite sides. This program is conducted under the principle of “Under the same topic, exchanging opinions widely, discussing fully, but expressing separately.” Although the final papers are released separately, it is still a great improvement because scholars from the two countries have been able to directly face the key problems and challenge each other.

　　步平介绍，近代史组的双方学者对中日战争的性质进行了充分讨论，在各自的论文中都明确指出：自1931年开始到1945年的中日间的战争是日本对中国的侵略战争，阐述了侵略战争给中国人民造成的巨大的伤害与损失，表达了谴责侵略战争和维护和平的愿望。中方委员会认为：对侵略战争性质的认定是中日之间大是大非的原则问题，必须首先达成共识，然后才能开始学术研究。
　　同时，日本学者也在相关研究成果中明确承认了日本军国主义对中国的侵略和给中国人民造成的巨大伤害，日军的种种非法行为给大量中国平民带来了深刻的战争伤痕，认为那是新的中日关系的绊脚石。他们的论文还认为：近年关于细菌战、遗弃化学武器、强制征用劳工、对妇女的暴行等问题的诉讼，都是战争带给中国人民深刻伤痕的表现。
According to Bu, the scholars had intensive discussions on the character of the Sino-Japan War. Both publications have clearly indicated: the Sino-Japan war (1931 - 1945) was a war of aggression, which Japan imposed on China; this war of aggression brought significant loss and damage to Chinese people; and wars shall be condemned and peace shall be maintained. Japanese scholars confirmed that Japanese militarism brought significant suffering to Chinese people, and the war-crimes committed by the Japanese Army are still barriers in the China-Japan relations. They also recognized that, in recent years, the law suits that have been filed regarding the biological weapons, abandoned chemical weapons, forced labour, and the sex crimes against women represent the scars of the war that are still bleeding.

　　不要因历史学术分歧影响两国关系的发展

　　“学术分歧、争议都是学术界进行研究的一个过程，不要因历史学术分歧影响两国关系的发展。”步平认为。
　　“学术研究是允许存在争议的，双方学者由于掌握资料及观察问题的角度有所不同，在细节问题上难免存在分歧。两国学者在历史学术上的分歧不等于就是中日两国关系的鸿沟。从另一个角度讲，也正是因为存在学术分歧所以才要进行共同研究。”步平说。
　　步平表示，目前我们所说的历史问题，其实表现在政治判断、学术研究和民众感情这三个层面，现在这三个层面相互交错，让历史问题变得尤为复杂。我们需要理顺这三个层面的关系。中日共同历史研究项目研究的目的首先是解决学术层面的问题，从而为政治判断和民众感情提供正确的依据。虽然对于战争民众是有着记忆依据的，但毕竟视角有限而且已事隔多年，就需要学者通过研究把历史比较健全和准确地呈现给大众。
　　“学术研究需要时间、过程，不能让这个过程影响到两国关系的发展。”步平说。
---Don’t let disputes in academic studies damage the bilateral relations.

Bu comments: "Academic disputes are common in the process of learning. We shall not let the academic disputes deter our bilateral relations."
“We should allow disputes to exist in the academic world. We have different angles of viewing the question and different ways of accessing information, so it is unavoidable that we have disputes on the details of the issues. These academic disputes shall not be amplified as the gap between the two countries. We need mutual study programs like this.”
“Now when we talk about the disputes on historical issues, problems exist in three aspects: 1) political decision making, 2) academic studies, and 3) the emotion of the general public. Right now, these three aspects entangle each other, making the issue extremely complicated. We should rethink about the relations between the three aspects, and decide which one we should work on first. This study program aims at solving the academic aspect of the history issues first, so we can provide an intellectual base of rational judgement for dealing with the other two aspects of the history issues. Academic history studies are valuable, because we can provide a comprehensive and accurate record of history events to the public.”
“Academic research is always a long process. We need time. But we don’t need to wait till we have the final answer. We shall start building a friendly relationship now.”

　　以大国胸怀面对历史问题

　　步平介绍，中日历史共同研究的前提是，坚持中日邦交正常化以来的几个重要文件精神和原则，就是日本应反省发动侵略战争的责任，以史为鉴，面向未来。因此共同研究也是把日本对中国的战争是侵略战争作为前提确定下来。
　　“现在我们国家的发展日益富强，我们的国民也应该树立大国意识，包括对历史问题，要站在更高的角度观察，如果我们能够同日本的进步力量一起来思考战争历史，与亚洲所有的战争受害者一起来谴责战争，就能够逐渐使历史认识跨越国境，真正实现正视历史，面向未来。这样，日本的右翼与保守势力否认侵略战争责任的言行就不会有任何影响。”步平说。(王茜)
--- Show our tolerance to the historical disputes:

Bu says, “The premise of this research program is that Japan recognizes its war responsibility, and we should learn a lesson from the history, for the sake of a peaceful future. This premise has been well recognized by both sides.”
“Now, China is growing very fast. Our citizens also should have a sense of being a member of a responsible major country. We should be more tolerant and confident. To the history issues, we should view it from a higher place (rather than the lower level nationalistic views). If we can first reach reconciliation with the progressive members of the Japanese society, we can unite all the victims of the war in Asia and condemn the war together. Then we can align ourselves with all the international peace-loving forces, and then we can finally solve disputes on the history issues and create an everlasting peace. In that process, Japanese right-wing conservatives won't be able to deny the war of aggression anymore. ”


For more information, here is a collection of initial reactions from the media, in Japanese, Chinese, and English, compiled by George Washington University's "Memory and Reconciliation in the Asia-Pacific" website.
http://memoryreconciliation.wordpress.com/2010/02/01/china-japan-joint-history-report-released/

Mainichi Newspaper Reports U.S. Censorship of 731-related Mail Before Tokyo War Tribunal 毎日新聞報道：米国、占領下７３１部隊関係者の郵便物検閲指示

Related news in Chinese:
http://news.sohu.com/20100206/n270104313.shtml

A comment from our colleague Arc:
"I think it is an important evidence of how the American occupation forces did not properly conduct the war trial with justice, and this injustice still effects the Asian countries today. "

In English:
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/national/archive/news/2010/02/06/20100206p2a00m0na002000c.html
U.S. forces ordered all mail items sent to ex-Unit 731 members to be censored

• 
  U.S. forces instructed the General Headquarters of the Allied Forces to censor mail items sent to 21 people linked to Japan's notorious Unit 731 that conducted research on germ warfare during World War II, it has emerged.
  
  Taketoshi Yamamoto, professor of media history at Waseda University, has found a relevant document from among U.S. official documents preserved at the National Diet Library.
  
  "The censorship occurred before the Tokyo Tribunal of War Criminals. It may have been necessary for granting Unit 731 members immunity from prosecution," said Yamamoto.
  
  After Japan's defeat in the war, U.S. forces granted Unit 731 members immunity from prosecution as war criminals in return for providing data on the unit's human testing and other experiments. However, it had not been known that U.S. forces were monitoring the moves of former Unit 731 members and others linked to the unit by censoring mail items sent to them.
  
  The document, dated Feb. 15, 1946, was sent from the U.S. Army to the Civil Censorship Department (CCD) of the Allied Forces' General Headquarters. It was treated as a secret document.
  
  It instructed the CCD to censor mail items sent to 12 people including Shiro Ishii, head of Unit 731; Ryoichi Naito, an aide to Ishii and the founder of pharmaceutical firm Green Cross; and Kanji Ishihara, former lieutenant general with the defunct Imperial Japanese Army who played a key role in the Manchurian Incident.
  
  The document states that the CCD should closely examine any reference to Ishii and germ warfare and meetings between those involved.
  
  The document also lists nine other people with a medical background, who had allegedly worked at the unit's research facility. U.S. forces required the CCD to pay close attention to their moves.
  
  The lists of 21 people include figures that have not been known as those linked to Unit 731.
  
  U.S. forces began to question those linked to the unit in September 1945, shortly after they occupied Japan. They attempted to draw detailed information on the unit's activities by hinting at granting them immunity from prosecution as war criminals.
  
  In 1947, U.S. forces decided not to prosecute members of Unit 731 in return for providing data on their experiments.

In Japanese:

http://mainichi.jp/select/wadai/news/20100206ddm041040164000c.html
７３１部隊：関係者の郵便物を検閲、１９４６年２月、米軍が指示－－秘密文書発見

• 
  　◇１２人対象、情報収集図る
  　第二次世界大戦後の占領下で、米軍が「細菌戦」などを研究した旧日本軍７３１部隊の関係者１２人の郵便物を検閲するよう指示していたことが分かった。山本武利・早稲田大教授（メディア史）が国立国会図書館の米公文書資料から、検閲指示の秘密文書を発見した。米軍は人体実験などのデータ提供と引き換えに、同部隊員らの戦犯訴追を免除した。その一方で、郵便検閲により関係者の動向を探っていた事実が明らかになったのは初めて。謎の多い部隊をめぐる情報収集に、米側が戦後、硬軟両様の手段を駆使していた事実が浮かび上がった。【大井浩一、栗原俊雄】
  
  　文書は１９４６年２月１５日付で米陸軍参謀第２部（Ｇ２）から、連合国軍総司令部（ＧＨＱ）の民間検閲局（ＣＣＤ）あてに出された１枚。上下に「機密」のスタンプ、右上には「廃棄」を求めた手書きのメモがある。
  
  　内容は２項目で、最初に「下に挙げた人物の郵便物を検閲するように」と指示。７３１部隊長だった石井四郎（１８９２～１９５９年）や、石井の側近で戦後はミドリ十字を創設した内藤良一（１９０６～８２年）ら１２人の氏名をローマ字で、肩書や住所とともに列挙している。満州事変の首謀者、石原莞爾（１８８９～１９４９年）の名前もある。
  
  　検閲のポイントは五つで、石井や細菌戦に関するあらゆる言及など。「会合の手はず」なども挙げ、関係者同士の連絡にも注意して検閲するよう求めている。
  
  　第２の項目は、部隊の研究施設にいた「医学的な背景を持つ」とされる９人のリスト。住所は「不明」だが、これらの人物の動向にも注意するよう求めたとみられる。二つのリストとも、従来７３１部隊の関係者として知られていなかった名前が含まれている。
  
  　米軍は占領開始直後の４５年９月から、同部隊関係者の尋問を始めたが、当初から戦犯免責をちらつかせ、情報を引き出そうとした。４７年には実験データを提供させ、関係者の訴追は見送った。今回の文書は、米軍が尋問により証言を引き出すと同時に、郵便検閲を通し、ひそかに情報を得ようとしたことを示す。
  
  　山本教授は「東京裁判（極東国際軍事裁判）が始まる前の時期で、７３１部隊の免責に必要な作業だったのかもしれない」と話している。
  
  ＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
  
  　■解説
  
  　◇闇の駆け引きを生々しく伝える
  　占領下での米軍による「７３１部隊」郵便検閲の指示文書は、国立国会図書館が所蔵する米公文書のマイクロフィルム資料に含まれていた。「廃棄」と記されながら残り、後に公開された文書だが、見過ごされてきた。
  
  　山本教授によると、郵便検閲の対象となった戦犯容疑者らの「要注意人物リスト」と同じファイルにあった。「７３１部隊関連のファイルではなかったため、研究者も気づかなかったのでは」と話す。
  
  　ＧＨＱによる郵便検閲は、占領開始直後の１９４５年９月に始まり、４９年１０月まで続いた。今回の文書から「米軍にとって有益な情報を持つ人物の所在や行動を明らかにする道具として、郵便検閲が利用されたことが分かる」（山本教授）。
  
  　なぜ米側は、表で戦犯免責の取引を進める一方、裏では検閲により情報を集めたのか。常石教授は「戦争の経験から米側には、この連中（日本人）は何をするかわからないという不安があったのでしょう。『自分たちにも何かを撒（ま）くのではないか』というような」と推測する。
  
  　文書は、戦争犯罪をめぐって占領期の日米間で闇の駆け引きが行われた事実を、６０年以上の時を超え生々しく伝えるものと言える。【大井浩一、栗原俊雄】
  
  ＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
  
  　◇文書のリストに挙げられていた人名
  　（かっこ内は戦時中の肩書）
  
  　▽第１の項目＝１２人
  
  石井四郎（陸軍軍医中将、７３１部隊長）
  
  モリタ・ヒロシ（森田広＝陸軍中将）？
  
  クリツ・ミツイチ（宮本光一＝石井の開発した「石井式濾水（ろすい）機」を製造した会社社長）※
  
  内藤良一（陸軍軍医。後に「ミドリ十字」社長）
  
  北野政次（陸軍軍医中将、７３１部隊長）
  
  神林浩（陸軍軍医中将、陸軍省医務局長）
  
  正路倫之助（京都大教授。後に兵庫県立神戸医科大＝現神戸大医学部＝学長）
  
  吉村寿人（７３１部隊で研究した医師。後に京都府立医科大学長）
  
  緒方規雄（千葉医科大＝現千葉大医学部＝教授）
  
  石原莞爾（陸軍中将。満州事変時の関東軍参謀）
  
  ニシ・カツゾウ？
  
  ミノワダ・マスゾウ？
  
  　▽第２の項目＝９人
  
  ホホ・エンリョウ（北条円了＝軍医）※
  
  ニシムラ・キジ？
  
  サカクラ・ジュン？
  
  オカデラ・ヨシオ？
  
  イシヤマ・キンゾウ？
  
  サクライ・カンイチ？
  
  ヤキザワ・ユキマラ（八木沢行正＝研究者）※
  
  シンボ・シンイチ？
  
  タカハシ・ヨシイチ？
  
  　（カタカナ表記のうち、※はつづりが誤っているとみられる名前。？は７３１部隊の関係者としてはこれまで挙がっていない名前）
  
  毎日新聞　2010年2月6日　東京朝刊
  
  
  

Korean Prime Minister - Emperor Must Repent If Coming to Korea 韓国首相、天皇訪韓なら「明確な反省を」

Kyodo News from February 5.
http://www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/emperor-must-repent-for-wrongdoings-if-he-visits-s-korea

• Emperor must repent for Japan's colonial rule if he visits: S Korea
  Friday 05th February, 03:35 PM JST
  
  SEOUL —
  Emperor Akihito should be willing to repent for his country’s colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula if he is to visit South Korea, South Korean Prime Minister Chung Un Chan said Friday.
  
  ‘‘If the Japanese emperor is to visit our country, he must be firmly determined to repent for Japan’s past wrongdoings and establish a new Korea-Japan relationship,’’ Chung said during a parliamentary interpellation, according to Yonhap News Agency.
  
  ‘‘Though the government has taken a moderate and practical stance in the field of international diplomacy, principles must be kept’’ regarding past issues, Chun was quoted by Yonhap as saying.
  
  President Lee Myung Bak said in an interview with Kyodo News last year he hopes Emperor Akihito will visit South Korea this year to ‘‘put an end to the sense of distance’’ between the two countries as 2010 marks a century since Japan’s annexation of the Korean Peninsula.

Jiji report in Japanese.

• 天皇訪韓なら「明確な反省を」＝韓国首相
  http://www.jiji.com/jc/c?g=pol_30&k=2010020500880
  　【ソウル時事】韓国の鄭雲燦首相は５日の国会答弁で、天皇陛下の訪韓問題について「（天皇が）わが国を訪問するなら、過去を明確に反省し、新しい韓日関係を定めるという意志が確かでないといけない」と語った。聯合ニュースが伝えた。
  　一方、年内開催の観測が出ている南北首脳会談について、鄭首相は北朝鮮の核問題解決や、朝鮮戦争で捕虜となった韓国軍兵士の帰還実現を目指す考えを強調。これらの問題で進展の準備が整うなら、「場所を選ばずいつでも用意がある」と述べた。　（2010/02/05-19:15）

It would be inconceivable for the Emperor not to express repentance over the past wrongdoing of Japan to Korea and its people. I hope he and the Empress will visit and express sincere remorse and apology.

Peace Philosophy Centre and several other organizations issued an Open Letter to the Emperor and Empress when they visited Canada in July, 2009. For more information, follow this link.
http://peacephilosophy.blogspot.com/2009/07/open-letter-to-emperor-and-empress-and.html

January 30 Tokyo Rally for Okinawa Attended by 6,000 People 日比谷で６千人規模の集会―普天間閉鎖と辺野古中止を求めて

Here is a YouTube video of the 6,000-people rally at Hibiya Park, Tokyo, on January 30 (Sat.) to call for smooth closure of Futenma Air Station and cancellation of construction of a new base in Henoko.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=517lqBIWFjY&feature=player_embedded#



Slogans in this video are:

"We don't need Futenma Base!"
"We won't allow construction of a new base!"
"We don't need a base in Henoko!"
"U.S. bases, leave Okinawa!"
"We will take back the peaceful island!"

Other YouTube links (Japanese Language) from the rally:

Speech of Head of SDP Mizuho Fukushima:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4Lf9nOpFUM&feature=related
Speech of Iwakuni Mayor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVsgeh3QPok&NR=1
Demonstration march http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiIi-Nzoe-s&feature=related

Here is the Kyodo Report.

TOKYO —
Some 6,000 people gathered Saturday in Tokyo to rally against relocating the U.S. Marine Corps’ Futenma Air Station within Okinawa, as debate on the issue intensifies following the local election victory of a relocation opponent. Consumer affairs minister Mizuho Fukushima, who took part in the rally, reiterated her resolve to see the base moved out of Okinawa or Japan altogether. Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has said all options remain open, including the current plan to relocate it within Okinawa, until a final decision is taken in May.

‘‘I hope to win the struggle in terms of having the land for the Futenma base returned and seeing that no more burdens are placed on Okinawa,’’ Fukushima said in an address to the gathering, which was organized by civic groups such as Peace Forum and included more than 100 participants from Okinawa.

‘‘We have several months to go before reaching a conclusion at the end of May, and we will definitely win with all our might,’’ said the head of the small ruling coalition partner Social Democratic Party.

Highlights from Ryukyu Shimpo's summary of the Resolution:

• An agreement was reached in 1996 between US and Japan so Futenma would be returned. In 2004, a U.S. helicopter crashed into Okinawa International University. The dangerous Futenma Air Station should be returned as soon as possible with no conditions.
• The reason why the reversion of Futenma has not happened is that the US demanded and Japanese Government tolerated the construction of a new base in Henoko. The interests of construction businesses appeartto be at work behind the 1 trillion yen (over 10 billion US dollars) project.
• The new base will NOT bring wealth to Okinawa, but will destroy the life of people and the environment of the ocean in which endangered dugongs reside.
• Residents of Nago, where Henoko is, made their opposition against the new base clear in the last mayoral election.
• 50 years after the revision of ANPO, or Japan-US Security Treaty, and 20 years after the Cold War, we need to reexamine the framework of "deterrence" based on military and nulcear powers.
• We need to fundamentally review SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement), and the Host Nation Support.
• We need to encourage policies based on Hatoyama Administration's idea for peace and co-existence of East Asia, rather than relying upon the Japan-US relationship that's heavily focused on military alliance.
• We call for return of Futenma, express our opposition against the construction of a base in Henoko, and ultimately aim to reorganize then eliminate all the US bases in Japan.
  

◆琉球新報より引用―普天間全国集会決議（要旨）
　１９９６年日米両政府は普天間基地の全面返還で合意した。５年前には隣接する沖縄国際大学に米軍ヘリが墜落した。現在も米軍ヘリが頻繁に飛び交う普天間基地は一刻も早く無条件に返還されるべきだ。
　しかし１３年たった今も返還は実現していない。理由は、返還の見返りに米国は辺野古新基地建設を要求し、日本政府もそれを容認してきたからにほかならない。背景には新基地建設に絡み１兆円ともいわれる建設事業の利権が見え隠れする。
　新基地建設で沖縄は豊かになるどころか、危険と生活破壊を増幅し、ジュゴンが生息するたぐいまれなる自然環境を失うことになる。
　辺野古がある名護市民は市長選挙で新基地建設に反対の立場を明確にした。全国の市民、労働者はこの民意を守るために闘わなければならない。
　日米安保５０年、冷戦終結２０年を迎える今日、米軍再編が進む中、旧来の核・軍事力を背景とした抑止力に頼る安全保障のあり方が根本的に問われている。日米地位協定や思いやり予算の根本的な見直し、米軍被害の徹底検証も取り組まなければならない。安全保障に特化した日米関係を見直し、鳩山連立政権の東アジアの平和と共生に向けた基本政策を強めるべきだ。
　普天間返還、辺野古・新基地建設反対、沖縄をはじめとする全国の米軍基地の整理・撤去に向けより大きな闘いを目指そう。右決議する。

Washington Shifting from Hard-Sell to Soft-Sell 米国は姿勢を和らげ「説得」に取り掛かっているが・・・

Here are some of the English-language media reports of the February 1 Tokyo speech by Wallace Gregson, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asia and the Pacific. I have not been able to find the full text of his speech at JIIA, the Japan Institute of International Affairs, but found some reports on it. Much of the Japanese media, as always, have been emphasizing how the US leaders think the current plan (2006 Roadmap) is the best, but ther overall tone is definitely changing. グレグソン国防次官補が東京の日本国際問題研究所主催で行ったスピーチについて、日本語の報道はあいかわらず「現行案が最善」ばかり繰り返している。元のの原稿は手に入っていないが、英語による報道はこうである。

Futenma can wait till May: U.S. defense envoy （「普天間解決は５月まで待つ」国防省）
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20100202b1.html

US softens stance on Japan base （米国は日本の基地問題で態度を和らげる）
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=117584§ionid=351020406

Official: U.S. willing to compromise on Futenma （米国は普天間について妥協する用意がある）
http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=67711

Quoting from this Stars and Stripes article,
この記事に引用されている言葉は、
“If we have to go back to negotiating, we will go back to negotiating,”
（「再交渉しなければいけないのならするまでの話だ。」）

“The solution is not an American-imposed one,” he said. “It’s a cooperative U.S. and Japanese solution.” （「解決策はアメリカが押しつけたものではない。アメリカと日本が協同で出すもの。」）

Gregson also stressed he believes the current plan is “the most balanced plan which satisfies the needs of both governments.” （現行案は「双方の政府のニーズを満たすもの」と強調もした。）

Shortly after the election, U.S. officials decried the need for a review of existing agreements. More recently, U.S. leaders have struck a more conciliatory tone in public, saying they need to do a better job explaining the Marines’ role on Okinawa and the reasons they need an air base on Okinawa. （昨年の総選挙後、米政府高官たちは現行案見直しを非難したが、最近になって米国の指導者たちはより和解的な口調を公の場で取るようになった。沖縄での海兵隊の役割や沖縄に飛行場がなぜ必要かということをよりよく説明する必要性を感じるようになった。）

Yoshida Kensei, whose new book on the U.S. plan to move the Marines out of Okinawa will be published through Kobunken soon, says, "We need to re-examine what kind of U.S. and Japanese administrations were they when the current agreement was reached." Obama Administration, which made the word "change" an international buzz word, has been clinging to the status quo - the 2006 Roadmap Agreement. Only recently they have started to realize that the Japanese administration actually changed last summer, after the election that clearly reflected the "people's will" of opposition against the new Henoko base plan. 間もなく高文研から『米軍のグアム統合計画　沖縄の海兵隊はグアムへ行く』という本を出版する吉田健正さんは、「そもそもあの合意を結んだ日米の政権がどういう政権だったのか、検証する必要が
あると思います。」と言っている。「チェンジ」を世界的流行語とした米国オバマ政権が、この件に限っては前政権が作った合意にしがみついてきたのが、ここにきてやっと日本の政権が交代し、名護市長選どころか総選挙で沖縄の基地反対派候補を含む民主党が圧勝したことで民意は示されたことに気づきはじめた。

This "softening" trend of Washington was seen in the speech by US Ambassador Roos at Waseda University, the Defense Department briefing on January 27, and the statement by Kurt Campbell, Assistant Secretary of State who arrived in Narita on January 31. この交渉姿勢が柔和になった傾向は先日のルース大使の早稲田大学での講演にも見られたし、先日紹介した２７日の国防総省のモレル報道官の発言にも見られたし、今回来日しているカート・キャンベル国務省次官補（東アジア・太平洋担当）の発言にも見られた。

They also started to give a series of unconvincing explanations of why we need Marines in Okinawa. Why unconvincing? Because there is really no reason why we need Marines in Okinawa, or nowhere in the Asia-Pacific. There are notable arguments on this issue by experts, like Sato Manabu of Okinawa International University, Gabe Masaaki of Ryukyu University, and the Asahi article by former Defense official Yanagisawa Kyoji. Sorry these materials are mostly in Japanese. In English, Mark Selden of Japan Focus recently brought attention to Peter Ennis's article which will soon appear in Weekly Toyo Keizai. と同時に、沖縄に海兵隊がなぜ必要かという苦し紛れな説明をたくさんするようになった。なぜ苦し紛れな説明しかできないのか。それは沖縄に海兵隊が必要な理由はないからである。これについては沖縄国際大学の佐藤学さんのこの講演記録に丁寧に記されているし、先日紹介した元防衛幹部の柳沢協二さんの小論も読んでほしい。また琉球大学の我部政明さんのテレビ出演の記録も紹介した。日米の政府やメディアや官僚が決して教えてくれないことを私たち市民はこういった人たちから学ぶべきである。これらを日英語でまとめたいが時間がないのでなるべく少しずつやっていくようにする。

US for Okinawa Peace Action Network Fact Sheet

"US for Okinawa," who initiated a major rally held on Sunday January 31st at Yoyogi Park, put together an excellent fact sheet about the base issues of Okinawa.

US for OKINAWA
peace action network

us.for.okinawa@gmail.com

http://www.us-for-okinawa.blogspot.com/

(I heard the event was a great succcess! Here is a Japanese-language report on Ryukyu Shimpo, one of the two major Okinawan newspapers.)

Foreign Military Bases in Okinawa Information Sheet

U.S. Military Bases in Okinawa

• Although Okinawa makes up only 0.6% of Japan, it “hosts” 75% of all U.S. military bases in Japan under agreements that were made between government administrations in Tokyo and Washington DC, without consultation with the Okinawan people.

• Once an independent kingdom and prosperous trading nation, Japan annexed Okinawa in the 1800s, setting the precedent for it to be used for the convenience of the rest of mainland Japan.

• U.S. military bases occupy approximately 20% of Okinawa Island.

• During the Battle of Okinawa in 1945 (which killed 120,000 innocent Okinawan civilians), the U.S. built many bases for the planned invasion of mainland Japan. After the war, US military forces appropriated Okinawan land using bayonets and bulldozers. The U.S. government ruled Okinawa until 1972, then reverted administration back to the Japanese government. The bases, however, remained.

• The U.S. has used bases in Okinawa to launch attacks during the Vietnam War, and more recently Iraq and Afghanistan Wars.

Futenma Air Base

• 11 kilometers in circumference and significantly larger than Central Park in New York, this base occupies a vast swath of the center of Ginowan City. Its fleet of military helicopters have long been a vexing source of noise pollution to the people of Ginowan, whose homes, schools, libraries and hospitals have been forced to squeeze around the base. (Similar problems exist with the Kadena Air Force Base in Okinawa). Military aircraft accidents have also endangered the lives of the people of Ginowan.

• Massive, sustained protests in Okinawa to the Futenma Air Base led to the U.S. and Japanese governments agreeing that the burden of this base on local residents should be relieved. The U.S. says it will accomplish by relocating some of the functions of the base elsewhere and sending 8,000 Marines to Guam—nearly one third of which is already occupied by U.S. military facilities. (This is not a satisfactory solution to Okinawans who don't want another island in the world to face yet more military occupation...)

• The U.S. and Japanese governments have made new military construction in Henoko, a district in the northeastern part of Okinawa Island, a pre-condition for returning Futenma to the city of Ginowan. Special interest groups (such as contractors and construction companies) in Japan have been implicated in the decision to build in Henoko...



Henoko

• Since the 1990s, the Japanese and U.S. governments have planned to start construction in Henoko by inundating Oura, a bay rich in biodiversity located in the Henoko District, with concrete in order to build a helicopter pad and aircraft runways. Local residents—many of them elderly citizens who value the role the sea has played in sustaining them and their ancestors--have thus far successfully fought this construction from commencing, and have recently marked more than 2,000 consecutive days of sit-ins to protest the plan (likely setting a world record in the process).

• Oura Bay is home to the rare dugong (cousin of the Florida manatee) as well as a fragile marine ecosystem. Construction in Oura would likely spell the extinction of the dugong from Japan and the destruction of the Oura Bay ecosystem.

• Although Futenma is primarily used as a training ground for Marines, the new construction in Henoko would serve as a forward base that the U.S. can use to attack other countries.

• Since 1956, the U.S. military has already appropriated 90% of Henoko Village for Camp Schwab. More military construction would further deny local residents access to their traditional lands and waters.



Money, Military Bases and the Economy in Okinawa

• Okinawa is the poorest prefecture in Japan.

• Every year, the Japanese government pays the U.S. government approximately 2 billion US dollars as a “sympathy budget” for “hosting” the bases. Taxpayers in Japan pay 75% of the expenses of the US military bases in Japan, making Japan by far the biggest contributor of all the US “host nations” in the world.

• In 2004, the total base-related income was 5.3% of the total GDP of Okinawa. However, 70% of that income is actually paid by the Japanese government's “sympathy budget”, which lowers the actual GDP value to less than 2%.

• The high density of military bases on the island hampers the expansion of transportation networks, the systematic development of cities, and the acquisition of lands for industrial use. In addition to the land the U.S. military occupies in Okinawa, it also controls 29 sea zones and 15 areas of airspace around Okinawa, thereby preventing the use of this land, air and water for civilian commercial purposes.

• How much income could be generated if this land, air and water were available for use and development by the local government and civilians is not clear, but in cases where bases have reverted back to Okinawa prefecture for civilian use (like the areas now known as “the American Village” in Chatan and “Shin-toshin” in Naha), the post-base development rendered much more income than when the land was being used as a base. (This also happened when the Subic Naval Base in the Philippines reverted back to civilian use).

• Red sweet potato production and traditional weaving in Okinawa's Yomitan village stand out as a successful case of sustainable, community-based economic development, and serve as a positive model for other communities in creating local alternatives to a military-dependent economy.

• The Japanese government is expected to pay for the relocation facility in Henoko (6 billion dollars) and more than 50% of the 11 billion dollars the U.S. will use to transfer Marines and their family members from Okinawa to Guam.

Foreign Military Bases Around the World

Islands around the world have historically been abused by foreign military powers, which see them as globally strategic points on which to base military operations. Thus, big military powers have turned small villages, beaches, farmland, and sacred sites on islands around the world into shooting ranges, housing for military personnel, nuclear dumps, military aircraft runways, entertainment facilities for soldiers, etc. Doing so has typically destroyed economies self-sustained by farming, fishing and manufacturing into economies dependent on service industries, base-related rent, aid and compensations payments.

Island militarization figures include:
• 24% of Oahu is owned by the U.S. military.

• 30% of Guam is in U.S. military hands (this will jump to 40% when Marines are relocated from Okinawa to Guam)

• All of the 2,000 inhabitants of the peaceful, tropical island Diego Garcia were secretly, illegally and forcibly removed from the island in the 1960s so that it could be turned into one of the largest U.S. military bases in the world. These inhabitants were afterward condemned to lives of poverty, depression, alcoholism, prostitution, illness, and premature deaths.

• Of the 9,000 residents of the island of Vieques in Puerto Rico, approximately one third are suffering from cancer and other serious illnesses after their island was long used by the U.S. military to test bombs and missiles.

• For approximately 30 years, the French military used Tahiti as a base from which to conduct 45 atmospheric and 134 underground nuclear tests in the Pacific.

• The US has the largest collection of bases in world history—approximately 1,000 (which does not even include the bases it maintains within the 50 states!). This number jumps increases significantly if “Foreign Operating Locations” and “Cooperative Security Locations” are included. FOLs and CSLs basically translate as national military facilities that some countries lease to the U.S. for use.

• Despite great opposition from villagers, the South Korean government is CURRENTLY preparing to pour concrete over the coral reefs of Jeju Island, South Korea in order to construct a new naval base that can accommodate missile-equipped South Korean and U.S. Aegis destroyers. The United Nations has stated that the coral reefs of Jeju are key environmental treasures that should be saved, but this has not stopped construction plans from proceeding.

Why do foreign military bases WEAKEN
rather than STRENGTHEN Global Security?

• Bases abroad often engender grievances, and create antagonistic rather than cooperative relationships between countries. In Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iraq and Afghanistan for example, grievances caused by U.S. military bases have helped create breeding grounds for radicalism, anti-Americanism, and attacks on the U.S., thereby reducing rather than improving its national security.

• Countries such as North Korea, which feel surrounded by military bases from which sudden attacks can be launched against them, may resort to trying to obtain nuclear weapons to counteract this threat. Such action generates alarm and compels escalating tension and arms buildup in regions.

• Threats to global security are not limited to extremist leaders or groups brandishing missiles. Threats to global security also include climate change and its myriad of after-effects earthquakes, tsunamis, typhoons, droughts, etc. By channeling three trillion dollars every year into military budgets, the global community risks not having adequate funding or preparation for these other threats to security. Poor handling of Hurricane Katrina stands as a good example.

• Bases are being used to launch pre-emptive attacks on countries that have not declared war on others, thereby undermining international law and setting ill-advised precedent for other countries to do the same.



What can provide better security?

• Peace Constitutions. After abolishing its army, adopting a peace constitution in 1949, and channeling former military budgets into health and education, Costa Rica became one of the most stable countries in Latin America with one of the highest standards of living in the region. It also helped negotiate ends to conflicts between neighboring countries.

• Peace Constitutions. Article 9 of the Japan’s peace constitution, which renounces war as a means of settling disputes as well as the maintenance of armed forces and other war potential, has ensured that for the past 64 years, no Japanese citizen has died in battle, nor has Japan killed citizens from any other nation. Contrast this to the pre-Article 9 period, when Japan aggression in Asia and the Pacific during WWII inflicted injury or death on millions of people, and Japan itself lost hundreds of thousands of innocent lives during the Tokyo Air Raids and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The presence of military bases in Japan, however, limits Article’s 9 use as an effective mechanism for maintaining and expanding peace in Asia and elsewhere in the world.

• Peace Constitutions. After leasing its domestic military base in the city of Manta to the U.S. for use, Ecuador found itself saddled with problems of local fishermen being denied access to their traditional port waters, increases in prostitution, and failure to realize economic growth that had been promised. In 2008, the country adopted a new constitution that declares Ecuador to be a territory of peace, promotes the peaceful resolution of conflicts, advocates for universal disarmament, and prohibits foreign military bases from occupying its territory.

• Peace Constitutions. The UN Charter is essentially a peace constitution for the planet, and actually implementing the Articles it contains would do much to achieve global security. Article 26 of the Charter, for example, promotes the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security with the least diversion for armaments of the world's human and economic resources, and makes the Security Council responsible for formulating plans that can be submitted to the members of the UN for the establishment of a system for the regulation of armaments. Currently, however, the Security Council does not formulate and submit such plans.

• Countries forming alliances and communities. By forming communities, agreeing to end old hostilities, and committing to not behaving aggressively toward one another, countries can stabilize their regions (as has been demonstrated in Europe). The new prime minister of Japan, Yukio Hatoyama, is aiming to do this by working with China and South Korea to form an East-Asia Community.

• Creating Nuclear Weapon Free Zones. After Antarctica, Latin America and the Caribbean helped lead the world in this field by agreeing in 1967 to make the region free of nuclear weapons.

• Shifting old paradigms, such as nations being in conflict and competition with one another, to nations being in co-existence and cooperation. Shifting from “preparing for peace by preparing for war” to “preparing for peace by preparing for peace,” through adopting mechanisms such as peace constitutions, engaging in dialogue and diplomacy, creating Departments of Peace, and re-channeling the world’s three trillion dollars in annual military spending into structures and initiatives that promote peace and address underlying causes of conflict. Recognizing that possessing war potential does not guarantee security—rather it engenders fear of attack and goads others to try to outdo that potential, thereby creating arms races and arms buildups that escalate tensions and hamper constructive, peaceful relations. Universal disarmament offers a way out out of this madness.


For more information about military bases around the world, look to:

Okinawa
• Japan Focus http://www.japanfocus.org/ (Search by Keyword “Okinawa”)
• Peace Philosophy Centre: http://peacephilosophy.com/
• Ten Thousand Things from Kyoto: http://www.tenthousandthingsfromkyoto.blogspot.com/
• ANPO: http://anpomovie.com/en/
• 2010 Okinawa http://www.youtube.com/2010okinawa

Guam
• http://theinsularempire.blogspot.com/
• To sign the petition people in Guam are circulating, visit:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/call-for-transparency-and-extension-of-deis-commenting-period

Jeju
• http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/

Diego Garcia
• http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/video1027.htm

Hawai'i
• http://www.dmzhawaii.org/

DoD Geoff Morell Press Conference on January 27 １月２７日国防総省 モレル報道官記者会見

１月２７日の国防総省での記者会見のジェフ・モレル報道官の発言内容についてはまたいろいろな報道がされているが、ほとんど報道されていない注目すべき部分に触れておく。

http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4547

以下緑の部分が引用で、赤部分に注目。

Q Geoff, do you have a specific schedule of Assistant Secretary Chip Gregson's coming trip to Tokyo? And what is the goal of this trip? And do you expect any development of Futenma issue?

MR. MORRELL: I understand he's going to Tokyo -- I think today, arriving tomorrow. I think he'll be there until mid next week. I think there's a -- there are two -- there are two things that he's doing. I think at one hand, in Tokyo, I think he's participating in the SSC (sic) -- which is what again? Security --

STAFF: It’s right up above that. Security consultative talks.

MR. MORRELL: Yeah, something. All right. The Security Consultative Committee. So he's going to participate in that. And then he's also going to be in Okinawa to continue discussions with Okinawan officials about realignment, Futenma replacement and so forth.

Q (Off mike.)

MR. MORRELL: So that's the -- that's the agenda for that particular trip.

Yeah.

(Cross talk, laughter.)

Q Thank you. Satoshi Ogawa, Yomiuri Shimbun.

New Nago mayor was elected last Sunday. And he announced that he would reject any new base construction in Nago, including the current FRF (Futenma Replacement Facility) plan.

So does the U.S. government keep its position with the current FRF plan is the best and only operationally capable plan? And Japanese government is looking for a new location for FRF, so I’m wondering if the U.S. government is ready to renegotiate FRF plan?

MR. MORRELL: Yeah, I would just say in a generic sense that we have heard the prime minister and understand his timetable to address this between now and May. We continue to work with the Japanese government in the interim on that issue, as well as a range of others.

And you know, our relationship extends well beyond just Futenma replacement. I mean, it is -- it is of paramount importance to both of us that we continue to have a strong bilateral relationship particularly on the security side.

It is to both our benefit. It's to the region's benefit. And so we deal with each other on a host of other issues beyond Futenma replacement. So any sense that there is some sort of preoccupation with this, and we're paralyzed by it, and the relationship is frozen as a result of it, I think, is just overblown.(普天間問題を超えて日米関係を重要視していくことは）双方の国にとって有益である。(アジア太平洋)地域にとっても有益である。普天間問題をこえてさまざまな問題にお互いに取り組んでいく。だからこの問題にだけにかかりきりになっているとか、我々が麻痺状態にあるとか、日米関係がこれのおかげで凍結状態になっているとかいう認識があるとしたらそれは誇張としか言いようがない。

We're talking. We continue to talk about a number of other things. And we continue to work the Futenma replacement issue. It's an important one. It's a fundamental part of the base realignment that we have both agreed to.

We understand the timetable the prime minister is working under. We respect it. We'll work with it. And, but we still do believe fundamentally that the road map is the best plan for reducing the burden on the island of Okinawa and as it's been constructed.

That said, we continue to work with our friends in Japan.

Okay?

Q Thanks.

全部訳す暇はないが、国防総省グレグソン次官補の来日予定について触れた後で読売の記者の、名護の市長選結果を受けて米国は普天間の移設地の再検討について受け入れる用意があるのかといった趣旨の質問を受けて、鳩山首相の決定までの新スケジュール（５月までという計画）は聞いていて引き続き協議を続けていくと答えている。ロードマップが最善案と言いながらも日本政府と協議を続けていくという点を強調している。メディアは上に赤で強調し訳したようなところはほとんど報道しない。なぜかというとこのモレルの発言は要するに「メディアの報道が行き過ぎている」との警告だからである。

昨日触れた早稲田のルース講演も、私がもし勝手解釈報道をするとしたら「ルース大使、現行案は不完全なものであったと発言！」とデカデカと見出しを出すであろう。そうすれば行きすぎメディアに仲間入りできる。

最後にご愛嬌。

「ゼロベース」と言い続ける鳩山政権であるが、これは「ゼロから検討するということで、あらゆる可能性を含む」という意味である。米国から「現行案が最善」と言われたあとに「ゼロベース」と言えば「辺野古を中止することもありうる」という意味で、たとえば名護市長選で基地反対候補が勝ったあとに「ゼロベース」と発言すれば「まだ辺野古の可能性もあるのだ」という意味である。ようするにこの「ゼロベース」は、状況によって正反対の意味を持ち得る逃げ口上である。

しかしそういうややこしいことは別として私の家族の言ったことを紹介したい。

「ゼロベースって、基地（ベース）はゼロにするという意味なんじゃないの？」

そうです！