On My Mind - Seventy Years Since World War II
HIRAYAMA Kentaro / Journalist
October 6, 2015
Seventy years have passed since Japan surrendered to the Allies, thus ending World War II. And in the space of these seventy years, Japan has not fought a single war. This can be attributed to the good fortune that the "deterrence" – nuclear umbrella – provided by the US under the Japan-US Security Treaty, and Japan's war-renouncing pacifist pledge exemplified by Article 9 of its Constitution, functioned as two sides of the same coin, or through the skillful use of one or the other depending on the circumstances.
However, the past seventy years have been nothing but a peaceful period for the world. The "Cold War" between the US and the Soviet Union, which began almost as soon as the world war had ended, was maintained through a "balance of terror" based on nuclear weapons and never flared up into a "hot war." Instead, there was prolonged warfare in Korea and Vietnam that took on the character of a proxy war between the two superpowers, followed by an unending series of armed conflict in Africa and the Middle East caused by various factors, of which some have continued to this day. Beginning with the Vietnam War, I covered many of those battlefields as a TV correspondent.
In mid-July, only a day after a multilateral accord on restricting Iranian nuclear development was announced, the government of Prime Minister Abe Shinzo forced a vote on the national security bills through parliament, which has become the topic of heated debate. Allow me to make a sudden change of course here, and turn the clock back to 1980, the halfway point in time in the "seventy years after World War II." It was the year in which western nations including Japan boycotted the Moscow Olympics and Saddam Hussein's Iraq launched a surprise attack against Iran in a war that would drag on for the next eight years.
The boycott of the Olympics was explained as a protest against Soviet intervention in the civil war in Afghanistan that began at the end of the previous year. Meanwhile, the main motive behind the Iraqi attack on Iran lay in Saddam's fear that the rise to power of radical Shi'ite political factions under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in Iran could spill over to Iraq and lead to a revolt by its Shia majority. America severed its diplomatic ties with Iran following a hostage crisis in Tehran in which the US embassy was besieged by a group of radical Islamists that held diplomatic staff hostage for 444 days. When seen in this context, we could say that both the Iraqi attack on Iran and Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan were triggered by the Iranian Revolution and the subsequent "power vacuum" created by the downfall of the US-backed Pahlavi dynasty, which once boasted of being the "Guardian of the Persian Gulf."
The Soviet intervention in Afghanistan lasted nine years and became known as the "Soviet Union's Vietnam War," draining its national resources and sapping morale, and ultimately leading to the end of the Cold War and the unraveling of the USSR itself. In the Iran-Iraq War, US and French support for Iraq became conspicuous toward the end, resulting in frequent terrorist incidents in Lebanon such as suicide bombings and kidnappings by Shi'ite groups targeting the military staff and civilians of these two powers. There was a time when Islamist terrorism was almost exclusively associated with Shi'ites. I think we should give greater recognition to the fact that apart from military attacks against Israel by Lebanon's Hezbollah, Shi'ite terrorism of this kind have all but disappeared since the end of the Iran-Iraq War. Keeping within the limits of revenge against violations of their domain is a characteristic of Shi'ite terrorism. On the other hand, "volunteer soldiers" from Sunni nations who took part in anti-Soviet guerrilla warfare in Afghanistan at the time received CIA support, and in the wake of the Gulf War of 1991, some of them have gone on to become core members of Al Qaeda and Islamic State (IS).
While guerrilla warfare and terrorist attacks during the first half of the "seventy years after World War II” were founded on ultra-leftist "ideology" and radical "nationalism," in the latter half, they were inspired by the "Islamic Jihadist movement" that transcends nationality and ethnicity, and have characteristically spread through the use of information technology. Let me offer some words on the course Japan should take and on aspects that require care, specifically with respect to these issues.
On July 14, the five UN Security Council member countries and Germany reached a final agreement with Iran on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action aimed at limiting Iranian nuclear development and lifting economic sanctions. Japan should recognize this achievement and offer its cooperation in attaining its goals. To be sure, there are plenty of outstanding issues by the standards of advanced western countries, such as the enormous authority - including the right to veto - held by supreme religious leader Ali Khamenei, and strict limitations placed on freedom of speech and association. However, Iran's national integrity remains intact, and it shares much with western countries in its stance against the Islamic State (IS). Paying due respect to US President Barack Obama's somewhat apologetic explanation to the effect that the accord was "not built on trust, but on verification," I will be carefully following his negotiations with Congress, which is expected to take a winding path. I would also like to express my understanding and support for Mr. Obama's unspoken hope of seeking Middle East peace and a peaceful resolution to the Syrian situation, and of mitigating the conflict between Sunnis and Shi'ites throughout the Middle East and the Gulf region by improving America's relationship with Iran.
As expected, Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the US Republican Party, which is opposed to President Obama's policies, have reacted by criticizing the accord as the "worst possible deal." They have taken the stance of vociferously claiming Iran to be a threat, while forcefully expanding the exploitation of land and construction of settlements in Israeli-occupied territory in disregard of international law. Even Jewish voters in the US have grown increasingly critical of this stance. The Japanese government should firmly maintain its position of supporting the self-determination of the Palestinian people and the creation of a self-sustaining Palestinian state. When Prime Minister Abe spoke out on the issue of the Japanese journalist who was kidnapped by the IS and who eventually died a tragic death, he did so during his visit to Israel, appealing to the TV cameras for the need to combat terrorism as he stood beside Prime Minister Netanyahu. Although the timing and location may have been coincidental, I was disturbed by the poor judgment. In the upcoming discussion on defense, I hope he pays closer attention to the context, particularly when making references to the Hormuz Strait.
Kentaro Hirayama is a member of the Editorial Staff of “The Arab” quarterly magazine, and former NHK Executive Commentator.
However, the past seventy years have been nothing but a peaceful period for the world. The "Cold War" between the US and the Soviet Union, which began almost as soon as the world war had ended, was maintained through a "balance of terror" based on nuclear weapons and never flared up into a "hot war." Instead, there was prolonged warfare in Korea and Vietnam that took on the character of a proxy war between the two superpowers, followed by an unending series of armed conflict in Africa and the Middle East caused by various factors, of which some have continued to this day. Beginning with the Vietnam War, I covered many of those battlefields as a TV correspondent.
In mid-July, only a day after a multilateral accord on restricting Iranian nuclear development was announced, the government of Prime Minister Abe Shinzo forced a vote on the national security bills through parliament, which has become the topic of heated debate. Allow me to make a sudden change of course here, and turn the clock back to 1980, the halfway point in time in the "seventy years after World War II." It was the year in which western nations including Japan boycotted the Moscow Olympics and Saddam Hussein's Iraq launched a surprise attack against Iran in a war that would drag on for the next eight years.
The boycott of the Olympics was explained as a protest against Soviet intervention in the civil war in Afghanistan that began at the end of the previous year. Meanwhile, the main motive behind the Iraqi attack on Iran lay in Saddam's fear that the rise to power of radical Shi'ite political factions under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in Iran could spill over to Iraq and lead to a revolt by its Shia majority. America severed its diplomatic ties with Iran following a hostage crisis in Tehran in which the US embassy was besieged by a group of radical Islamists that held diplomatic staff hostage for 444 days. When seen in this context, we could say that both the Iraqi attack on Iran and Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan were triggered by the Iranian Revolution and the subsequent "power vacuum" created by the downfall of the US-backed Pahlavi dynasty, which once boasted of being the "Guardian of the Persian Gulf."
The Soviet intervention in Afghanistan lasted nine years and became known as the "Soviet Union's Vietnam War," draining its national resources and sapping morale, and ultimately leading to the end of the Cold War and the unraveling of the USSR itself. In the Iran-Iraq War, US and French support for Iraq became conspicuous toward the end, resulting in frequent terrorist incidents in Lebanon such as suicide bombings and kidnappings by Shi'ite groups targeting the military staff and civilians of these two powers. There was a time when Islamist terrorism was almost exclusively associated with Shi'ites. I think we should give greater recognition to the fact that apart from military attacks against Israel by Lebanon's Hezbollah, Shi'ite terrorism of this kind have all but disappeared since the end of the Iran-Iraq War. Keeping within the limits of revenge against violations of their domain is a characteristic of Shi'ite terrorism. On the other hand, "volunteer soldiers" from Sunni nations who took part in anti-Soviet guerrilla warfare in Afghanistan at the time received CIA support, and in the wake of the Gulf War of 1991, some of them have gone on to become core members of Al Qaeda and Islamic State (IS).
While guerrilla warfare and terrorist attacks during the first half of the "seventy years after World War II” were founded on ultra-leftist "ideology" and radical "nationalism," in the latter half, they were inspired by the "Islamic Jihadist movement" that transcends nationality and ethnicity, and have characteristically spread through the use of information technology. Let me offer some words on the course Japan should take and on aspects that require care, specifically with respect to these issues.
On July 14, the five UN Security Council member countries and Germany reached a final agreement with Iran on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action aimed at limiting Iranian nuclear development and lifting economic sanctions. Japan should recognize this achievement and offer its cooperation in attaining its goals. To be sure, there are plenty of outstanding issues by the standards of advanced western countries, such as the enormous authority - including the right to veto - held by supreme religious leader Ali Khamenei, and strict limitations placed on freedom of speech and association. However, Iran's national integrity remains intact, and it shares much with western countries in its stance against the Islamic State (IS). Paying due respect to US President Barack Obama's somewhat apologetic explanation to the effect that the accord was "not built on trust, but on verification," I will be carefully following his negotiations with Congress, which is expected to take a winding path. I would also like to express my understanding and support for Mr. Obama's unspoken hope of seeking Middle East peace and a peaceful resolution to the Syrian situation, and of mitigating the conflict between Sunnis and Shi'ites throughout the Middle East and the Gulf region by improving America's relationship with Iran.
As expected, Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the US Republican Party, which is opposed to President Obama's policies, have reacted by criticizing the accord as the "worst possible deal." They have taken the stance of vociferously claiming Iran to be a threat, while forcefully expanding the exploitation of land and construction of settlements in Israeli-occupied territory in disregard of international law. Even Jewish voters in the US have grown increasingly critical of this stance. The Japanese government should firmly maintain its position of supporting the self-determination of the Palestinian people and the creation of a self-sustaining Palestinian state. When Prime Minister Abe spoke out on the issue of the Japanese journalist who was kidnapped by the IS and who eventually died a tragic death, he did so during his visit to Israel, appealing to the TV cameras for the need to combat terrorism as he stood beside Prime Minister Netanyahu. Although the timing and location may have been coincidental, I was disturbed by the poor judgment. In the upcoming discussion on defense, I hope he pays closer attention to the context, particularly when making references to the Hormuz Strait.
Kentaro Hirayama is a member of the Editorial Staff of “The Arab” quarterly magazine, and former NHK Executive Commentator.
The English-Speaking Union of Japan
戦後70年―わたしはこう考える
平山 健太郎 / ジャーナリスト
2015年 10月 6日
連合国への日本の降伏で第二次大戦が終わって７０年。この７０年間、日本は一度も戦争をしていない。日米安保条約による「抑止力」（米国の核の傘）と、憲法９条に代表される日本の不戦・平和主義の看板、の両者が、「表裏一体」（？）、あるいは巧みな使い分けの中で、機能してきた幸運のたまものであろう。
しかし、この７０年、世界が平和であった時期とは到底言い難い。大戦の終結とほぼ同時に始まった米ソの「冷戦」は、核兵器による「恐怖の均衡」の結果、両者の「熱戦」に至ることはなかったが、両超大国の代理戦争の色彩を帯びた朝鮮やベトナムでの長期にわたる戦争に続き、アフリカや中東でも、様々な要因から武力による紛争が絶えなかったし、その一部は今も続いている。私も、ベトナム戦争以降テレビの特派員として、それらの戦場の多くを現場で取材してきた。
この７月中旬、イランの核開発抑制をめぐる多国間の合意が発表されたすぐ翌日、安倍内閣が、安全保障についての関連法案を国会で強行採決。激しい論議の的になっている。
我田引水で唐突な話になるが、この「戦後７０年」の時間的な中間点である１９８０年に、ここで記憶をひきもどしてみたい。日本を含む西側先進諸国が、モスクワ五輪をボイコットし、またイラク（サダム・フセイン）が奇襲攻撃で、８年間にわたるイランとの戦争を始めた年である。
五輪ボイコットは、前年暮の、ソ連軍のアフガニスタン内戦への介入への抗議と説明されていた。イラクのイランへの攻撃は、前年のイラン革命でホメイニ師らシーア派の政治勢力が政権を掌握した事態が、イラク人口の過半数を越える同じシーア派の反乱を招くのではとのサダムの懸念が主な動機だった。イランの急進的なイスラム分子がテヘランの米大使館を４４４日の長期にわたって乗っ取り、外交官らを人質にした事件の結果、アメリカは、イランとの国交を断絶している。イラクによるイランへの攻撃も、ソ連軍のアフガニスタン介入も、こう見てくると、イラン革命の結果、米国の支援を受け「ペルシャ湾の憲兵」を気取ったイランのパーレビ王制が消えた「力の空白」が、誘発したとも言える。
９年間続いたソ連のアフガニスタン介入は、「ソ連のベトナム戦争」とも言われる国力の疲弊と士気の退廃をもたらし、冷戦の終息、ソ連自体の解体につながった。イラン・イラク戦争では、終盤で米仏両国によるイラクへの支援が目立ち、レバノンを舞台にこれら大国の軍隊や市民に対するシーア派の自爆攻撃や誘拐などのテロが頻発。イスラム・テロと言えばすぐシーア派が連想される時期もあった。イラン・イラク戦争が終わった後。この種のシーア派テロが、イスラエルに対するレバノン(ヒズボッラー)の軍事行動を除いて、ほとんど消滅している事実は、重視してもよいのではなかろうか？自分たちの領域を犯すものへの報復という範囲を越えないのが、シーア派テロの特徴の一つなのだ。一方この時期、スンニ派諸国からアフガニスタンでの反ソ・ゲリラ活動に参加した「義勇兵」たちは、米ＣＩＡの支援を受け、湾岸戦争（９１年）以後その一部はアルカーイダや「イスラム国」（ＩＳ）の主力に変貌している。
「戦後７０年」前半のゲリラやテロが極左の「イデオロギー」や急進的な「民族主義」をよりどころにしていたのに対し、後半のそれが、国あるいは民族の枠組みを越えた「イスラム聖戦主義」などに触発され、ＩＴ技術を駆使して広がっている点も特徴だが、これらの問題に限って、日本の採るべき道、あるいは注意しておくべき点について、二、三列記しておきたい。
７月１４日、国連安保理常任理事国５か国とドイツ(計六か国)が、イランの核開発を制限し、経済制裁を解除する「包括的共同計画」で、イラン側と最終合意した事実を評価し、狙いの実現に協力すべきだろう。宗教上の「最高指導者」（ハメネイ師）が持つ拒否権を含む強大な権限や、言論、結社などの自由に対する厳しい制約など欧米先進国の基準に照らせば問題が山積しているとは言え、イランは国として融解していないし、「イスラム国」（ＩＳ）に抵抗する立場も、欧米諸国と共有している部分が多い。「丸呑みの信頼ではなく検証付き」という趣旨のオバマ米大統領の、やや弁解じみた説明にも敬意を払い、今後の曲折が予想されるその対議会折衝を見守りたい。中東和平やシリア問題の平和的な解決、中東、湾岸全域でのスンニ、シーア両宗派の抗争の緩和など、イランとの関係改善にかけるオバマ氏の言外の期待にも、理解と声援を送りたい。
この合意を「史上最悪の合意」と非難しているのは、予想通り、イスラエルのネタニヤフ首相とオバマ路線に敵対する米国共和党だ。占領地での国際法を無視した土地の収奪や入植地の拡大を推し進めながら、イランの脅威を声高に呼号するその立場には、米国内のユダヤ系有権者からの批判の声も高まっている。パレスチナ人の自決権や自立可能なパレスチナ国家の創設を支持してきたこれまでの日本の立場を、政府は堅持すべきだ。「イスラム国」に拉致され、結局非業の最期を遂げた日本人ジャーナリストの問題について、安倍総理が、日程上の偶然ではあったとしても、旅先のイスラエルでネタニヤフ首相と肩を並べた席上、テロとの戦いの必要性をテレビカメラに訴えていたのも、気配りの拙劣さが気になった。今後の防衛論議の中でもとりわけ「ホルムズ海峡」への言及は文脈をよく考えてもらいたいところだ。
（筆者は季刊アラブ編集委員・元ＮＨＫ解説主幹）
しかし、この７０年、世界が平和であった時期とは到底言い難い。大戦の終結とほぼ同時に始まった米ソの「冷戦」は、核兵器による「恐怖の均衡」の結果、両者の「熱戦」に至ることはなかったが、両超大国の代理戦争の色彩を帯びた朝鮮やベトナムでの長期にわたる戦争に続き、アフリカや中東でも、様々な要因から武力による紛争が絶えなかったし、その一部は今も続いている。私も、ベトナム戦争以降テレビの特派員として、それらの戦場の多くを現場で取材してきた。
この７月中旬、イランの核開発抑制をめぐる多国間の合意が発表されたすぐ翌日、安倍内閣が、安全保障についての関連法案を国会で強行採決。激しい論議の的になっている。
我田引水で唐突な話になるが、この「戦後７０年」の時間的な中間点である１９８０年に、ここで記憶をひきもどしてみたい。日本を含む西側先進諸国が、モスクワ五輪をボイコットし、またイラク（サダム・フセイン）が奇襲攻撃で、８年間にわたるイランとの戦争を始めた年である。
五輪ボイコットは、前年暮の、ソ連軍のアフガニスタン内戦への介入への抗議と説明されていた。イラクのイランへの攻撃は、前年のイラン革命でホメイニ師らシーア派の政治勢力が政権を掌握した事態が、イラク人口の過半数を越える同じシーア派の反乱を招くのではとのサダムの懸念が主な動機だった。イランの急進的なイスラム分子がテヘランの米大使館を４４４日の長期にわたって乗っ取り、外交官らを人質にした事件の結果、アメリカは、イランとの国交を断絶している。イラクによるイランへの攻撃も、ソ連軍のアフガニスタン介入も、こう見てくると、イラン革命の結果、米国の支援を受け「ペルシャ湾の憲兵」を気取ったイランのパーレビ王制が消えた「力の空白」が、誘発したとも言える。
９年間続いたソ連のアフガニスタン介入は、「ソ連のベトナム戦争」とも言われる国力の疲弊と士気の退廃をもたらし、冷戦の終息、ソ連自体の解体につながった。イラン・イラク戦争では、終盤で米仏両国によるイラクへの支援が目立ち、レバノンを舞台にこれら大国の軍隊や市民に対するシーア派の自爆攻撃や誘拐などのテロが頻発。イスラム・テロと言えばすぐシーア派が連想される時期もあった。イラン・イラク戦争が終わった後。この種のシーア派テロが、イスラエルに対するレバノン(ヒズボッラー)の軍事行動を除いて、ほとんど消滅している事実は、重視してもよいのではなかろうか？自分たちの領域を犯すものへの報復という範囲を越えないのが、シーア派テロの特徴の一つなのだ。一方この時期、スンニ派諸国からアフガニスタンでの反ソ・ゲリラ活動に参加した「義勇兵」たちは、米ＣＩＡの支援を受け、湾岸戦争（９１年）以後その一部はアルカーイダや「イスラム国」（ＩＳ）の主力に変貌している。
「戦後７０年」前半のゲリラやテロが極左の「イデオロギー」や急進的な「民族主義」をよりどころにしていたのに対し、後半のそれが、国あるいは民族の枠組みを越えた「イスラム聖戦主義」などに触発され、ＩＴ技術を駆使して広がっている点も特徴だが、これらの問題に限って、日本の採るべき道、あるいは注意しておくべき点について、二、三列記しておきたい。
７月１４日、国連安保理常任理事国５か国とドイツ(計六か国)が、イランの核開発を制限し、経済制裁を解除する「包括的共同計画」で、イラン側と最終合意した事実を評価し、狙いの実現に協力すべきだろう。宗教上の「最高指導者」（ハメネイ師）が持つ拒否権を含む強大な権限や、言論、結社などの自由に対する厳しい制約など欧米先進国の基準に照らせば問題が山積しているとは言え、イランは国として融解していないし、「イスラム国」（ＩＳ）に抵抗する立場も、欧米諸国と共有している部分が多い。「丸呑みの信頼ではなく検証付き」という趣旨のオバマ米大統領の、やや弁解じみた説明にも敬意を払い、今後の曲折が予想されるその対議会折衝を見守りたい。中東和平やシリア問題の平和的な解決、中東、湾岸全域でのスンニ、シーア両宗派の抗争の緩和など、イランとの関係改善にかけるオバマ氏の言外の期待にも、理解と声援を送りたい。
この合意を「史上最悪の合意」と非難しているのは、予想通り、イスラエルのネタニヤフ首相とオバマ路線に敵対する米国共和党だ。占領地での国際法を無視した土地の収奪や入植地の拡大を推し進めながら、イランの脅威を声高に呼号するその立場には、米国内のユダヤ系有権者からの批判の声も高まっている。パレスチナ人の自決権や自立可能なパレスチナ国家の創設を支持してきたこれまでの日本の立場を、政府は堅持すべきだ。「イスラム国」に拉致され、結局非業の最期を遂げた日本人ジャーナリストの問題について、安倍総理が、日程上の偶然ではあったとしても、旅先のイスラエルでネタニヤフ首相と肩を並べた席上、テロとの戦いの必要性をテレビカメラに訴えていたのも、気配りの拙劣さが気になった。今後の防衛論議の中でもとりわけ「ホルムズ海峡」への言及は文脈をよく考えてもらいたいところだ。
（筆者は季刊アラブ編集委員・元ＮＨＫ解説主幹）
一般社団法人 日本英語交流連盟