2006年9月アーカイブ

September 3, 2006 Daily Yomiuri
Hisahiko Okazaki

One of the myriad political science theories and expressions is the term "pseudo event." A clear historical example of this is the Ako Incident of 1703, also known as the Forty-seven Ronin (masterless samurai) Incident, where a group of samurai from the Ako feudal region avenged their lord's death by assassinating their enemy during a raid on his home.

From a popular perspective the incident was certainly the most significant event in the period from the 1615 fall of Osaka Castle to the 1853 visit to Japan by Commodore Matthew Perry's fleet, which fell during the 2-1/2 centuries of the Tokugawa shogunate. The Forty-seven Ronin Incident certainly electrified the country.

While the fall of Osaka Castle and the visit of Perry's Black Ships were certainly of significance in changing the course of the nation's history, the Forty-seven Ronin Incident did not actually have long-term consequences for the country's political, economic or social structures, and thus cannot be considered epochal.

The Ako Incident, therefore, can be described as a pseudo event in contrast to ones that made real changes to the course of history.

Artificially brewed pseudo event

Turning to present-day Japan, the issue of Yasukuni Shrine will not bring about any lasting change to Japan's politics and society, having nothing to do with the security and prosperity of the people.

Once this issue passes into oblivion, it will not leave a trace in history. What we currently see is the issue being discussed boisterously day after day and China's top leaders refusing to meet Japan's over the issue, with South Korea echoing the Chinese stance.

How did this pseudo issue come about?

Tracing the origins of the dispute, one can see that it was created artificially, and that it did not arise naturally from historical or political imperatives.

To put it briefly the issue arose out of the actions of leftist, antiestablishment movements in this country, as well as a diplomatic faux pas on the part of China. The problem is the fact that leftist forces in Japan have successfully thwarted one attempt after another on the part of China to rectify the faux pas and have effectively kept the issue burning.

It is inevitable that people's memories of war fade in a single generation, with the issues stemming from those wars left for historians to mull over thereafter.

In the age of reactionaryism following the 1815 Battle of Waterloo, for example, former French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte was considered by many to be evil incarnate--indeed Victor Hugo called Napoleon an errand from hell in 1822. Yet it was only five years later, in 1827, that Hugo lauded the glories of Napoleon.

The imperialist wars waged by Napoleon as well as the atrocities he committed in Spain were no longer discussed after the 1848 European Revolutions. For that matter, no Americans in Boston now seem to harbor a grudge against Britain nor demand an apology for the British government's past tyranny.

In East Asia, too, as of 1980, one generation after the war's end, the war had already ceased to be a political problem, having been turned over to the historians.

Fiction forged in 1980s

That Japan after the war had persistently been negligent in addressing wartime problems, and therefore was left isolated internationally, was a fiction forged in the 1980s.

In 1980, a generation after the end of the war, there was no evidence at all that war-related problems remained an issue either in Japan, China, South Korea or the United States--not in any commentary nor any remarks made by any politicians.

In Europe, the legacy of the Holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis is lingering even today. But the Holocaust, as with the Inquisition in the 16th century, is an exceptional event in history and will be remembered for a long time in the future.

Japan's wartime problems, however, had vanished from people's memories after a generation, just like memories of a large number of imperialistic wars in the past.

The processes by which these problems were rekindled have already been proved in detail by a number of experts, so here I will simply repeat their conclusion that they were reignited, without exception, by the artificial and intentional maneuvers of Japanese leftists.

Behind such plots were, of course, the international communist forces who, during the Cold War, had a vital interest in keeping the antimilitaristic, pacifist atmosphere in Japan intact, thereby leaving Japan's defense capabilities emasculated. Leftist forces in Japan were serving as communist pawns, either intentionally or inadvertently.

Real existence of real issues

Since a pseudo issue, by nature, is spawned in the absence of logic, there can be no way of resolving the problem logically, but two kinds of solution may be possible. First, its significance certainly vanishes when confronted by real issues.

Had the forty-seven Ronin Incident taken place before the fall of Osaka Castle or after the arrival of Perry's fleet, a majority of people would likely have frowned upon the incident, arguing that no such action should have been taken at a time of national crisis.

Our nation is currently confronted with real issues, although their existence has yet to be generally accepted.

They are changes in the balance of power in the East Asian region because of the rapid increase in China's military might. In particular, the shift in the balance of power in the East China Sea will most likely rise to the surface as an acute, real issue over the next several years, thus burying Yasukuni as a minor emotional issue.

Another solution is the passage of time.

The emotional conflict between Japan and South Korea in the first half of the 1990s was far more intense than it is today. Compared with those days, bilateral relations today can be said to be in a friendly phase.

The tone of anti-Japanese arguments in South Korea was so intense in the first half of the 1990s that pro-South Korean groups in Japan, who had endeavored to support South Korea against the leftist, pro-North Korean forces in the Cold War, practically vanished.

Yet time settled the issue. During a visit in autumn of 1998 to Japan, then South Korean President Kim Dae Jung declared an end to the anti-Japanese posture, and all through 1999, the South Korean side, in any summit or ministerial meetings, made no reference at all to Japan's wartime past. China, for its part, also largely refrained from referring to war-related issues.

The tranquillity, however, turned out to be short-lived and was shattered again in 2000.

Leftist forces in Japan obtained copies of confidential drafts of school textbooks prior to their government authorization, when they were in the screening process to have incorrect or questionable passages removed. They had the sensitive parts of the drafts run in newspapers and aggressively invited criticism from authorities and the media in China and South Korea.

As the dispute flared up with Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visits to Yasukuni Shrine, China then committed the unprecedented diplomatic faux pas of linking the prime minister's visit to the shrine to whether to hold a summit meeting between the two countries. Consequently, China has found itself unable even today to make up for this mistake.

In fact, the mass media in Japan hampered Chinese moves to ease tensions over the issue.

At the time of Koizumi's visit to the shrine in autumn last year, a news report in China about the matter comprised only a few lines. The Japanese media, by contrast, made a point of highlighting the prime minister's shrine visit day and night, pestering Chinese officials for comments. This forced the Chinese into a position where they could not back down over the issue.

Perfect, but impossible, solution

I often have pointed out that there is a perfect solution to the Yasukuni problem, the enforcement of which, though, is an impossibility.

The problem would be solved completely if Japan's media stopped reporting on the problem. This would annihilate China's strategic option to split Japanese public opinion over the Yasukuni issue.

While China is capable of silencing the media, Japan can never do so.

It is noteworthy that since the day before Koizumi's visit to the shrine this year, access to anti-Japanese Web sites in China has been barred, obviously on the instructions of the Chinese government.

On Aug. 15, the Xinhua News Agency's Web site described a protest filed by the Chinese Foreign Ministry with the Japanese government immediately after Koizumi's latest visit to Yasukuni as a "vehement protest," but changed the wording eight minutes later to a "strong" protest.

It seems that China intends to put a lid on the Yasukuni controversy.

I would therefore like to make a proposal.

Even if government control over mass media is not possible in Japan as a free, democratic country, its politicians should still put some restraints on their own actions.

Essentially, the Yasukuni problem should be dealt with as a suprapartisan issue, as a matter of how to cope with a foreign country's interference in domestic religious affairs.

The reality, however, is that Ichiro Ozawa, president of the major opposition Democratic Party of Japan, who earlier backed the idea of the prime minister paying homage to the shrine, has now opposed the idea--clearly motivated by partisan considerations.

In addition, New Komeito, the Liberal Democratic Party's ruling coalition partner, has persistently been opposed to the prime minister's visit to the shrine for religious reasons, as is its parent body, Soka Gakkai, a lay Buddhist organization.

The upcoming LDP presidential election, however, is an internal contest of the party.

Only if the candidates for the top party post in the LDP election are at one with each other in not making an issue of the prime minister's visit to Yasukuni, will the heat be taken out of the problem.

The candidates in the party election should therefore all act in a statesmanlike way to ensure this can finally happen. Okazaki served as Japanese ambassador to Saudi Arabia and Thailand. He is currently a guest research fellow at the Yomiuri Research Institute.

［地球を読む］政争の具にするな　自民総裁選と靖国問題　岡崎久彦（寄稿）
2006年9月3日 読売新聞掲載
岡崎久彦

　　政治学では「スード・イベント」（偽の事件）という言葉があるそうである。　わかりやすい例として、徳川時代２５０年、大坂城落城からペリーの来訪までの間の日本における最大のイベントはなんであったかというと、それは赤穂浪士の討ち入りだった。討ち入りは天下の耳目を聳動（しょうどう）させた。しかし大坂城落城とペリーの来訪はたしかに日本の歴史を変えたが、討ち入りは日本の政治、経済、社会の構造になんら影響を及ぼすものでもなく、歴史の流れを変えたものでもなかった。したがって、それをリアル・イベント（本当の問題）にたいするスード・イベントと呼ぶのである。

　ひるがえって、靖国問題とは何だろう、と考えると、日本の政治、社会に変化をもたらすような問題ではないし、まして国民の安全と繁栄にも影響はない。そしてこの問題が忘れ去られたあとは、歴史に爪痕（つめあと）も残さないであろう。

　現在あるのは、朝から晩まで喧（さわが）しく論じられているという現実と、中国の首脳が日本の首脳との会談を拒否し、韓国がこれに同調しているという事実だけである。

　どうして、こんなスード・イッシューが生まれてきたのか。その経緯を辿（たど）って見ると、その原因は政治的歴史的に必然性のない、人為的なものであることがわかる。

　一言で言えば、すべては日本国内の左翼反体制運動から端を発し、これに中国側の「フォー・パ」（外交上の誤った一歩、失策）があり、中国側がこれを修正しようとする努力を、日本国内の左翼勢力が事毎（ことごと）に妨害し問題の拡大に成功してきたということである。

　歴史の必然性から言えば戦争の記憶は戦後一世代で消え、後は歴史家の手に移る。１８１５年のワーテルロー後のレアクシオン（反動）の時代ではナポレオンは悪の権化であった。ヴィクトル・ユーゴーは２２年にはナポレオンを地獄からの使者と呼んだが、２７年にはもうナポレオンの栄光を讃（たた）えている。ナポレオンの帝国主義戦争もスペインでの残虐も４８年の革命以降は誰も口にするものは居なくなった。今ボストンで英国のかつての圧制を怨（うら）み謝罪を要求している米国人は誰もいない。

　実は東アジアでも、戦後一世代を経た１９８０年という年を取ってみればこの問題は、政治問題ではなくなり、全く歴史家の手に移っていた。日本が戦後ずっとこの問題の処理を怠り、常に孤立していたと言うのは８０年代に創（つく）られたフィクションであり、戦後一世代後の８０年という年には、日本、中国、韓国、米国のいかなる評論にも政治家の言動の中にも、この問題がまだ生きていた証拠は存在しない。

　 ◆中国側にも抑制の動き
　　ヨーロッパではナチスのホロコーストの問題は今でも残っているが、これは１６世紀の宗教裁判と同じように特殊な問題であり、今後も歴史に残るであろうが、日本の場合は過去の幾多の帝国主義的戦争の記憶と同じように一世代で消えていた。

　このいったん消えた問題が再燃する経緯はすでに詳しく立証されているのでここでは繰り返さないが、発端は例外なくすべて日本の国内の左翼の策動である。もちろんその背後には、冷戦の中で、日本国内の反軍平和主義を温存して、日本の防衛力を弱体化させて置くという、共産主義の戦略があり、日本の左翼は意識的無意識的にその戦略のお先棒をかついでいた。

　スード・イッシューは、そもそもが論理的必然性のないところに生じたものであるので、論理的な解決方法はない。ただ、それはリアル・イッシューの前には消える。赤穂義士の討ち入りなどは、大坂落城の前、あるいはペリー来航の後に起こっていたならば、「この大変な時に、何をやってるんだ」ということになるような事件である。

　まだ一般の認識とはなっていないが、私は、リアル・イッシューはすでに存在すると思っている。それは中国の急速な軍備拡張による東アジアのバランス・オブ・パワー（勢力均衡）の変化であり、特に東シナ海における軍事バランスの変化は数年のうちに実感をもって浮上してくると思う。

　もう一つの解決方法は時間である。実は９０年代前半の日韓の感情的対立は今どころではなかった。当時に比べれば今の日韓関係は良好と言って良いくらいである。当時はあまりの反日言動のために、冷戦時代親北朝鮮の左翼に対抗して韓国を庇（かば）って来た日本の中の親韓派は壊滅してしまったほどであった。

　しかし日本非難を言い尽くした後で、金大中大統領の訪日後の１９９９年の一年間は、韓国側が歴史問題に言及した例は皆無、中国も形勢を察して、ほんの一言以外は言及をやめた時期があった。

　しかし、この短い平和は、２０００年になって、再び破られる。左翼は、検定前で問題個所が削除される前の教科書原案を不法に持ち出して新聞に掲げ、中国韓国の当局者、メディアの批判を求めた。その騒ぎが続いている中での、小泉総理の靖国訪問に際して、今度は中国が、それを首脳会談に結びつけるという外交的に前例のないフォー・パを犯し、その収拾にいまだ成功していないのが現状である。ただ収拾を妨害しているのは日本のメディアである。昨年の秋の総理の靖国参拝の時中国の報道は数行であったのに、日本のメディアは日夜大々的に報道し、中国の要人に会えば執拗（しつよう）にコメントを求め、中国側を引っ込みが付かないように追い詰めている。

　私は従来、靖国問題については、「その実施は不可能であるが、完全な解決方法を知っている」と言って来た。それは日本のメディアが一切報道しなければ解決するのである。日本の国内世論を分裂させるという見通しが皆無ならば中国がこれを取り上げる戦略的意味もまた皆無となるからである。

　独裁国家中国ならそれは出来るが日本はそれは出来ない。実は、今回の小泉総理の靖国参拝の前の日から、中国における反日のサイトは接触不能になっている。政府の指示であろう。参拝直後の新華社のサイトは外交部の抗議を、「激烈な抗議」と報じたが、８分後には「強烈な抗議」に改めた。中国がこの問題を抑えようとする意図があることは明らかである。

　私は一つの提案がある。自由な国日本でマスコミの統制は不可能でも政治家は自粛できる。本来は、本件は内政干渉に対抗する問題として超党派であるべきである。しかし現実は、かつて靖国参拝を支持した民主党の小沢代表は党派的理由で今や反対である。与党のなかでも公明党は従来とも宗教的理由で一貫して参拝反対である。

　しかし、今回の総裁選は自民党の中だけの選挙である。ここで各候補者が、靖国参拝問題を政争の具としない、という態度をとるだけでこの問題は随分沈静化すると思う。各候補者にそれだけのステートマンシップを期待したい。