世界中で起きている重要な事件、事象についての忌憚なき批判、批評の場とします。


by shin-yamakami16

日本「集団的自衛権」:'Pentagon' 支持で「腕力誇示」–'The Washington Post'

f0166919_22257100.jpg


 「7月1日火曜日首相官邸前:日本首相アベ・シンゾー政権に抗議する反戦デモ」
A policeman, right, observes as anti-war protesters hold placards and shout slogans against the government of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe during a rally in front of Abe’s official residence in Tokyo on Tuesday. The Japanese government will press ahead with divisive plans to loosen restrictions on its military despite widespread public anger. (AFP PHOTO/Yoshikazu TSUNOYOSHIKAZU TSUNO/AFP/Getty Images)

                                  山上 真

 7月1日付『ワシントン・ポスト』紙は、「首相官邸前の数千人の抗議デモや焼身自殺事件にも拘らず、安倍政権が従来の憲法解釈を変更して、『集団的自衛権』という概念の下に、海外派兵に道を開く方向に行こうとしているのは、驚くべきことではなく、これまでに米軍との協力体制を強めて、米国海兵隊同様の部隊を創ろうとしていることから見ても、『尖閣』を巡っての中国との対立などを意識したものだ。米国防相ヘーゲル氏は、広範囲に日米共同作戦を展開することが出来て歓迎すると述べている」と伝えているが、愈々日本は,「ヴェトナム」・「イラク」・「アフガン」など、米国が率いた戦争と同様の「間違った戦争」に参戦する危険性が差し迫ったものになった。例えば、日本の石油確保に関わる今度の「イラク」の場合はどうか?   

'The Washington Post'
Checkpoint
Japan flexes its muscles, shifts its defense policy with Pentagon supportー「日本は米国防省の支持の下に筋力を見せ、その防衛政策を変更した」
Checkpoint

BY DAN LAMOTHE July 1 at 4:48 PM

It has been a long, complicated week in Japan. Thousands of people have taken to the street to protest Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s decision to reinterpret the country’s constitution to allow for the defense of Japanese allies in a concept known as “collective self-defense,” a move away from the internal self-defense model Tokyo has embraced for decades. One man even set himself on fire in protest.

The move by Abe isn’t a surprise, however. The Japanese military has gradually been expanding its capabilities for years, training with U.S.troops in a variety of disciplines. In March, Japanese officials even indicated they wanted to establish a new 3,000-man amphibious force modeled after the U.S. Marine Corps to defend its far-flung islands.

Abe has stressed that the policy change is not designed to draw Japan into unnecessary wars. Rather, he said, it is necessary to protect Japan’s interests.

Japan’s military growth has been fueled by their concerns over the even broader expansion of China’s military. China announced in March that its 2014 military budget would be boosted 12.2 percent to $131.6 billion, stoking fears again about Beijing’s long-term plans.

As noted in this Checkpoint post, China also is locked in a long-time argument with Japan over who owns a string of islands in the East China Sea. In November, China unexpectedly and unilaterally established an air defense identification zone in the region, a show of strength that rattled Japan and other countries in the region. More recently, Japanese and Chinese leaders traded barbs about an incident in which aircraft from the two countries flew uncomfortably close in the ADIZ area.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said in a statement Tuesday that he welcomes Japan’s new defense policy. It will enable their military to engage in a wider range of operations, making the U.S.-Japanese alliance more effective, he said.

“This decision is an important step for Japan as it seeks to make a greater contribution to regional and global peace and security,” he said. “The new policy also complements our ongoing efforts to modernize our alliance through the revision of our bilateral guidelines for defense cooperation.”

Japan’s defense minister, Itsunori Onodera, will be visiting Washington next week, Hagel said. The issue is certain to come up then.


仏 'Le Figaro'

Le Japon n'exclut plus d'utiliser ses forces arméesー「日本はもはや軍隊使用を排除しない」
HOME ACTUALITE INTERNATIONAL
Par Alain Barluet Publié le 02/07/2014 à 19:29

f0166919_753711.jpg


Une « réinterprétation » de la Constitution pacifiste permettra à Tokyo de mener des opérations militaires pour aider un allié.ー「平和憲法の『解釈変更』によって東京は同盟国を助ける為に軍事作戦が可能になる」

La «révolution silencieuse» du Japon se poursuit avec un sérieux infléchissement de sa Constitution pacifiste, adoptée en 1947 pour tirer un trait sur les années de guerre et d'expansionnisme nippon en Asie. Le gouvernement du premier ministre Shinzo Abe a annoncé mardi qu'une nouvelle interprétation de la charte fondamentale permettra au pays d'exercer son droit à l'«autodéfense collective». En clair, les troupes nipponnes pourront venir à la rescousse, si un des ses alliés proches est attaqué. Cela, sous certaines conditions, si «un danger pressant et réel menace la sécurité» de l'Archipel ou la liberté de ses habitants et si aucune solution alternative à la force n'est possible.
L'article 9 de la Constitution par lequel le Japon «renonce à la guerre» et qui proscrit «à jamais le maintien de forces terrestres, navales ou aériennes» n'est pas révisé mais «réinterprété». Un distinguo qui traduit un tournant «à la japonaise», peut-être le plus important depuis la création des «forces d'autodéfense» (FAD), un terme cache-sexe pour désigner une des armées les plus puissantes d'Asie (240.000 hommes, 300 avions de combat, 500 chars) mais cantonnée depuis 60 ans à un rôle purement défensif.
«Un jour de honte»

Déterminant pour expliquer cette initiative, le contexte de montée des périls, en mer de Chine avec l'affirmation militaire de Pékin, et dans la péninsule coréenne, permet de mieux comprendre les nouvelles marges de manœuvre de l'armée nipponne. «Dans l'hypothèse, certes assez peu probable, où un navire américain, accompagné par un bateau de son allié nippon, est attaqué par la Chine, le Japon n'est théoriquement pas en droit de riposter», explique Valérie Niquet, maître de recherche à la Fondation pour la recherche stratégique (FRS). Jusqu'à présent, Tokyo ne peut utiliser ses défenses antimissiles, dans le cas d'un tir balistique nord-coréen visant les États-Unis. Dorénavant aussi, le Japon devrait être plus facilement en mesure d'intervenir avec des troupes dans le cadre de missions de l'ONU ainsi que dans la «zone grise» des conflits de faible ampleur. L'initiative a été saluée à Washington, soucieux des ambitions de la Chine et désireux de voir ses alliés asiatiques se prendre davantage en main, financièrement et militairement.

« Shinzo Abe a toujours estimé que la Constitution était antijaponaise, parce qu'imposée par les États-Unis »ー「アベ・シンゾーは憲法が米国によって押し付けられたから反日的なものだと常に看做していた」

Robert Dujarric, chercheur à l'université Temple de Tokyo
Le volontarisme de Shinzo Abe a été déterminant dans cet aggiornamento de la défense nipponne. Résolument ancré dans le camp nationaliste, le premier ministre nourrit son projet depuis son premier mandat de chef du gouvernement (2006-2007). Sous sa houlette, Tokyo a levé, fin 2013, des restrictions sur les exportations d'armement. «Shinzo Abe a toujours estimé que la Constitution était antijaponaise, parce qu'imposée par les États-Unis» après la Seconde Guerre mondiale, explique Robert Dujarric, chercheur à l'université Temple de Tokyo. Pour promouvoir sa politique de défense «proactive», il aurait même souhaité aller jusqu'à une révision en bonne et due forme de la Constitution - et ne désespère sans doute pas d'y parvenir un jour. Une telle modification aurait toutefois nécessité le vote d'un amendement difficile à obtenir à la Diète. M. Abe a dû en effet tenir compte d'objections au sein de son propre parti, le Parti libéral démocrate et de ses alliés bouddhistes du Komeito.
Même si les mentalités évoluent, les Japonais demeurent profondément attachés à leur Constitution pacifiste: 50 % se disent hostiles au projet gouvernemental, selon un sondage publié lundi par le quotidien Nikkei. «Un jour de honte», a titré l'Asahi Shimbun, classé «à gauche», tandis que plusieurs milliers de personnes ont manifesté, deux soirs de suite, devant la résidence du premier ministre à Tokyo. Se voulant rassurant, ce dernier a déclaré que le Japon ne serait «jamais plus» un pays belliciste. Les réactions les plus sonores sont venues de Pékin et, dans une moindre mesure, de Séoul.


'The New York Times' 7月2日付『社説』
EDITORIAL

Japan and the Limits of Military Powerー「日本と軍事力の限界」

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDJULY 2, 2014

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has disturbed many in Japan and increased anxiety in Asia by reinterpreting his country’s pacifist postwar Constitution so that the military can play a more assertive role than it has since World War II. While a shift in Japan’s military role was never going to be readily accepted by many, Mr. Abe’s nationalist politics makes this change even harder to swallow in a region that needs to reduce tension.ー「アベ・シンゾー首相は、第二次大戦以来初めて軍隊がより専横的に振舞える様に、日本の戦後平和憲法の解釈変更をすることによって、日本の多くの人々を悩ませ、アジアの人々の懸念を増大させている。日本の軍事的役割の変更は決して直ぐには多くの人々によって受容されていないのであるが、アベ氏の国家主義的政治は、緊張を和らげることが必要な地域に於いて、この変化をなお一層呑込むことが難しくしている」

It is difficult to overstate the significance of what Mr. Abe has done. Since 1947, Japan’s Constitution, written and imposed by the American Army, has permitted the military, known as the Self-Defense Forces, to engage only in self-defense. That meant the large and technologically advanced armed forces was barred from “collective self-defense” — aiding friendly countries under attack — and thus was far more constrained than those of other nations.

With the reinterpretation, Japan’s military would still face restrictions on what it could do, but it would be allowed for the first time, for example, to help defend an American ship under attack, destroy a North Korean missile heading toward the United States or play a larger role in United Nations peacekeeping operations.

Mr. Abe has long argued for changing the Constitution on the grounds that Japan should assert itself as a “normal” country, freed of postwar constraints imposed as a consequence of its wartime atrocities and defeat. He now has another argument for expanding the military’s role: Japan, the world’s third-largest economy after the United States and China, needs to be a fuller partner with the United States in countering China as it increasingly challenges the conflicting claims of Japan and other countries in the South China and East Asia Seas. Washington has long urged Tokyo to assume more of the regional security burden.

What stood in Mr. Abe’s way was Article 9 of the Constitution. It says the Japanese people “forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.” Any change should have required a constitutional revision, which would mean winning two-thirds approval in both houses of Parliament, followed by a referendum. Instead, Mr. Abe circumvented that process by having his government reinterpret the Constitution.

This is not the first time Japanese leaders have gone this route. Past governments have reinterpreted the Constitution to allow the existence of a standing military and permit noncombat missions abroad. But this step goes further.

The prospect of altering Japan’s military’s role is controversial as well as consequential, with many Japanese citizens voicing fears about being dragged into foreign entanglements. Several polls showed that 50 percent of all respondents opposed the reinterpretation; in recent days, thousands of people have protested in front of the prime minister’s residence.

Although some countries, like the Philippines, endorsed Japan’s move, China and South Korea, which suffered greatly from Japan’s aggression, are wary about how Japan might exercise this new authority. While they share blame for the current tensions with Japan, Mr. Abe is fueling their fear and mistrust with his appeal to right-wing nationalists and their abhorrent historical revisionism. For instance, he unnecessarily reopened the politically charged issue of the Japanese military’s use of Korean women as sex slaves during World War II, though his government’s recent report acknowledged the abuses. Still, the South Koreans have reacted with outrage.

The Japanese Parliament must still clear legal barriers to the constitutional reinterpretation by revising more than a dozen laws, which could take months. Mr. Abe’s governing coalition has a comfortable majority in both houses, and the revisions are expected to pass. Even so, there is time for citizens to be heard through their elected representatives. It is fair for them to ask Mr. Abe to prove that the shift “is not going to change Japan into a country that wages wars.”


                                 (2014.07.02)

                      <追記>
1. 7月3日付『東京新聞』より
松阪市長「集団的自衛権は違憲」 確認求め提訴へ
2014年7月3日 12時11分
 三重県松阪市の山中光茂市長(38)は3日、集団的自衛権行使を容認する1日の閣議決定は、国民の平和的生存権を保障する憲法に反するとして、違憲確認を求めて提訴する方針を明らかにした。
 山中市長は共同通信の取材に「違憲状態を確認し、ただすための活動を考えている」と話した。
 山中市長は衆議院議員秘書、三重県議などを経て、2009年1月に当時全国最年少で松阪市長に初当選。13年に再選され、現在は2期目。

 7月3日付『朝日新聞』より
解釈改憲、違憲訴訟視野に団体結成へ 三重・松阪市長
2014年7月3日13時38分
 三重県松阪市の山中光茂市長が3日、記者会見し、集団的自衛権行使を認める閣議決定について、違憲確認訴訟を視野に入れた市民団体結成を目指すことを明らかにした。団体名は「ピースウイング」(仮称)とし、1カ月以内に同市で発起集会を開きたいという。

 山中市長は会見で「憲法の原点は武力による紛争抑止ではなく、徹底した平和主義。愚かな為政者による解釈変更は許されない」としたうえで、「全国から広く賛同者を募り、シンポジウムなどを通じ閣議決定の違憲性を訴えていきたい」と述べた。親交のある首長らにも協力を呼びかけているという。

 また、「憲法の平和的生存権への侵害を根拠に、違憲確認や国家賠償請求の集団訴訟も視野に入れたい」と話した。


<写真> The Washington Post, Le Figaro
Commented by Michaeldax at 2015-11-03 13:08 x
Life is short. Of course, this is a well known fact, but do we always remember about it? How can we discover the significance of life staying at the same place? They say if you don't like the place where you are - move, you're not a tree after all. By the same tenet, I want to say that traveling - is an important component of vivid life. Let's not waste life for nothing but explore this wonderful planet! It remains to take a step, just click <a href=http://feel-planet.com>world’s places of interest</a> and you will see all the riches of our world which are near to us. Very often various natural anomalies are just round the corner, but we can't find time for knowing the world. begin reading not fashion books but brochures with natural landmarks. A well known poem says "What is this life if, full of care, we have no time to stand and stare..." Let's change our life!
by shin-yamakami16 | 2014-07-02 23:19 | Comments(1)