"Hiroshima and Nagasaki" as Diplomatic Assets
NISHIKAWA Megumi / Journalist on International Affairs
September 30, 2010
For the first time on August 6 this year, the Peace Memorial Ceremony in Hiroshima was attended by representatives of the United States, the United Kingdom and France, which had heretofore avoided participation in the ceremony. The presence of all the world's nuclear powers marked a moment of great significance. It gave symbolic meaning to "Hiroshima and Nagasaki" - the historic sites of atomic bombing - as a rallying point for moving international politics in the direction of nuclear disarmament.
For 65 years after World War II, "Hiroshima and Nagasaki" had stood aloof from the tide of international politics. Appealing for a world without nuclear weapons by communicating the experiences of the atomic bombings is an admirable stance, and the motive behind the anti-nuclear movement in Japan has undoubtedly been sincere. Still, they had exerted little influence over the course of international politics.
The reason had partly to do with the excessive sense of ethics and fastidiousness that characterized Japan's anti-nuclear movement over the years. And although "abolition of nuclear weapons" had always been a slogan, the movement lacked any persistent efforts to pursue the process for realizing that goal. Neither was there much interest in how to influence the world of real politics. Such moves were scorned as "catering to politics."
However, things began to change toward the end of the 1990s. Foreign Ministry officials in charge of disarmament were invited to conventions and forums for discussion in an effort to transform the movement from one based on accusations to that of proposals. Change also came to the global environment surrounding the movement. Due to nuclear proliferation, the possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of dictatorships and terrorist organizations became a real threat, which has led to mounting public pressure in the world calling for the abandonment of nuclear weapons. In 1998, India and Pakistan became the first nuclear powers to participate in the Peace Memorial Ceremony in Hiroshima, followed by Russia and China. Last year's ceremony was attended by Israel, which is suspected of possessing nuclear weapons.
And in 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama advocated a "world without nuclear weapons" in a speech he gave in the Czech Republic, and in April this year announced a Nuclear Posture Review that significantly reduced the role of nuclear weapons. Such were the events that preceded the attendance in the Hiroshima ceremony by the United States, the United Kingdom and France this year. And that linked "Hiroshima and Nagasaki" to the overall context of international politics. This meant that "Hiroshima and Nagasaki" were recognized as the symbolic rallying point for issues related to nuclear disarmament, including non-proliferation, non-use, nuclear-free zone concepts and abolition. In other words, they were given the symbolism not only of a place to look back in remembrance of the horrors of atomic bombings, but of a place from which to move international politics towards nuclear disarmament.
In Europe, historic sites of important battles and tragic events are given new meaning within the context of international politics that go beyond their place in history. One example is the Auschwitz Concentration Camp. National leaders congregate for a ceremony held in January to commemorate its day of liberation, where the themes of "ethnic collaboration" and " tolerance toward other faiths" are repeatedly emphasized. The stance is not simply about vindicating the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany, but about contemplating the problems faced by Europe today by reflecting on the past.
This is the same with Normandy, France, where an Allied landing operation took place toward the end of World War II. It is now a diplomatic asset for France. On June 4 in each anniversary year, U.S. and European leaders gather for a ceremony in which they confirm the importance of unity and solidarity between the United States and Europe. They discuss the importance of collaborating on issues such as the conflict in Afghanistan, war on terrorism and aid for Africa by reflecting on the close cooperation that was required for the historic landing operation.
"Hiroshima and Nagasaki" will grow in significance along with the anti-nuclear tide of international politics. They are a diplomatic asset for Japan, and I look forward to a creative diplomatic effort by the government that makes the best use of their symbolism.
The writer is Expert Senior Writer on the Foreign News Desk at the Mainichi Shimbun newspaper.
For 65 years after World War II, "Hiroshima and Nagasaki" had stood aloof from the tide of international politics. Appealing for a world without nuclear weapons by communicating the experiences of the atomic bombings is an admirable stance, and the motive behind the anti-nuclear movement in Japan has undoubtedly been sincere. Still, they had exerted little influence over the course of international politics.
The reason had partly to do with the excessive sense of ethics and fastidiousness that characterized Japan's anti-nuclear movement over the years. And although "abolition of nuclear weapons" had always been a slogan, the movement lacked any persistent efforts to pursue the process for realizing that goal. Neither was there much interest in how to influence the world of real politics. Such moves were scorned as "catering to politics."
However, things began to change toward the end of the 1990s. Foreign Ministry officials in charge of disarmament were invited to conventions and forums for discussion in an effort to transform the movement from one based on accusations to that of proposals. Change also came to the global environment surrounding the movement. Due to nuclear proliferation, the possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of dictatorships and terrorist organizations became a real threat, which has led to mounting public pressure in the world calling for the abandonment of nuclear weapons. In 1998, India and Pakistan became the first nuclear powers to participate in the Peace Memorial Ceremony in Hiroshima, followed by Russia and China. Last year's ceremony was attended by Israel, which is suspected of possessing nuclear weapons.
And in 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama advocated a "world without nuclear weapons" in a speech he gave in the Czech Republic, and in April this year announced a Nuclear Posture Review that significantly reduced the role of nuclear weapons. Such were the events that preceded the attendance in the Hiroshima ceremony by the United States, the United Kingdom and France this year. And that linked "Hiroshima and Nagasaki" to the overall context of international politics. This meant that "Hiroshima and Nagasaki" were recognized as the symbolic rallying point for issues related to nuclear disarmament, including non-proliferation, non-use, nuclear-free zone concepts and abolition. In other words, they were given the symbolism not only of a place to look back in remembrance of the horrors of atomic bombings, but of a place from which to move international politics towards nuclear disarmament.
In Europe, historic sites of important battles and tragic events are given new meaning within the context of international politics that go beyond their place in history. One example is the Auschwitz Concentration Camp. National leaders congregate for a ceremony held in January to commemorate its day of liberation, where the themes of "ethnic collaboration" and " tolerance toward other faiths" are repeatedly emphasized. The stance is not simply about vindicating the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany, but about contemplating the problems faced by Europe today by reflecting on the past.
This is the same with Normandy, France, where an Allied landing operation took place toward the end of World War II. It is now a diplomatic asset for France. On June 4 in each anniversary year, U.S. and European leaders gather for a ceremony in which they confirm the importance of unity and solidarity between the United States and Europe. They discuss the importance of collaborating on issues such as the conflict in Afghanistan, war on terrorism and aid for Africa by reflecting on the close cooperation that was required for the historic landing operation.
"Hiroshima and Nagasaki" will grow in significance along with the anti-nuclear tide of international politics. They are a diplomatic asset for Japan, and I look forward to a creative diplomatic effort by the government that makes the best use of their symbolism.
The writer is Expert Senior Writer on the Foreign News Desk at the Mainichi Shimbun newspaper.
The English-Speaking Union of Japan
外交資産としての「広島・長崎」
西川 恵 / ジャーナリスト
2010年 9月 30日
今年８月６日、広島の平和記念式典にこれまで出席を避けてきた米英仏３カ国の代表が初めて出席した。これによって全核保有国の式典への出席が実現したが、これが意味するところは大きい。被爆地「広島・長崎」が、核軍縮で国際政治を動かす象徴的な拠点としての意味合いをもつことになったからだ。
戦後65年、「広島・長崎」は国際政治の潮流からはずれたところにあった。被爆体験の発信を通して核廃絶の思いを世界にアピールするという姿勢は間違ってはいないし、反核運動の真摯さに疑いはない。ただ国際政治に対する影響力はほとんどなかった。
なぜか。それは日本の反核運動が過度の倫理性と潔癖性に彩られてきたこと。また「核廃絶」のスローガンはあれど、それを実現していくためのプロセスへの粘り強い取り組みや、現実の政治をどう動かしていくかについて関心は薄かった。またそうした動きを「政治にすり寄るもの」と敵視してきた。
変りはじめたのは90年代末ごろからだ。集会や議論の場に外務省の軍縮担当者を招き、告発型から提言型の運動への脱皮が図られるようになった。環境も変った。核拡散によって独裁国家やテロ組織が核を手にすることの危険性が現実的なものとなり、世界の世論は核放棄へ圧力を強めてきた。広島の平和記念式典に核保有国が参加したのは98年のインド、パキスタンが最初で、続いてロシア、中国、そして昨年は核保有が疑われているイスラエルが出席した。
そして09年、オバマ大統領はチェコで「核なき世界」を打ち上げ、今年４月には核の役割りを大幅に縮小した核戦略見直し（ＮＰＲ）を決めた。この延長に米英仏３カ国の式典出席はある。これによって「広島・長崎」は国際政治の脈絡とドッキングした。つまり核不拡散、核不使用、非核地帯構想、核廃絶など、核軍縮全般にかかわる象徴的な拠点として「広島・長崎」は認知された。別の言い方をするなら、単に被爆の惨禍を振り返り、追憶する場所としてでなく、核軍縮で国際政治を動かしていく場としての象徴性が与えられた。
欧州では大戦の激戦地や惨事の史跡が、単に過去を振り返る場所としてでなく、国際政治の脈絡の中で新しい意味合いを与えられている。例えばポーランドのアウシュビッツ強制収容所。解放された１月の記念日には、毎年のように各国代表が参集して式典が開かれるが、ここで繰り返し強調されのは「民族融和」「異教徒への寛容」だ。単にナチス・ドイツの暴虐を告発するのでなく、今日の欧州の問題を過去の歴史と照らし合わせて考えようという姿勢だ。
大戦末期、上陸作戦が行われたフランスのノルマンディーもしかり。これは今やフランスの外交資産だ。節目の年ごとに、記念日の６月４日に米欧首脳が集まって式典が開かれ、ここで強調されるのは米欧結束、米欧連帯の重要性である。上陸作戦での連合国の緊密な協力に照らし合わせ、アフガニスタン紛争、テロとの戦い、アフリカ支援などでの連携の重要性が語られる。
反核という国際政治潮流の中で「広島・長崎」の意味合いもますます大きくなる。日本の外交資産であり、その象徴性を最大限に生かす外交上の工夫に期待したい。
（筆者は毎日新聞 専門編集委員）
戦後65年、「広島・長崎」は国際政治の潮流からはずれたところにあった。被爆体験の発信を通して核廃絶の思いを世界にアピールするという姿勢は間違ってはいないし、反核運動の真摯さに疑いはない。ただ国際政治に対する影響力はほとんどなかった。
なぜか。それは日本の反核運動が過度の倫理性と潔癖性に彩られてきたこと。また「核廃絶」のスローガンはあれど、それを実現していくためのプロセスへの粘り強い取り組みや、現実の政治をどう動かしていくかについて関心は薄かった。またそうした動きを「政治にすり寄るもの」と敵視してきた。
変りはじめたのは90年代末ごろからだ。集会や議論の場に外務省の軍縮担当者を招き、告発型から提言型の運動への脱皮が図られるようになった。環境も変った。核拡散によって独裁国家やテロ組織が核を手にすることの危険性が現実的なものとなり、世界の世論は核放棄へ圧力を強めてきた。広島の平和記念式典に核保有国が参加したのは98年のインド、パキスタンが最初で、続いてロシア、中国、そして昨年は核保有が疑われているイスラエルが出席した。
そして09年、オバマ大統領はチェコで「核なき世界」を打ち上げ、今年４月には核の役割りを大幅に縮小した核戦略見直し（ＮＰＲ）を決めた。この延長に米英仏３カ国の式典出席はある。これによって「広島・長崎」は国際政治の脈絡とドッキングした。つまり核不拡散、核不使用、非核地帯構想、核廃絶など、核軍縮全般にかかわる象徴的な拠点として「広島・長崎」は認知された。別の言い方をするなら、単に被爆の惨禍を振り返り、追憶する場所としてでなく、核軍縮で国際政治を動かしていく場としての象徴性が与えられた。
欧州では大戦の激戦地や惨事の史跡が、単に過去を振り返る場所としてでなく、国際政治の脈絡の中で新しい意味合いを与えられている。例えばポーランドのアウシュビッツ強制収容所。解放された１月の記念日には、毎年のように各国代表が参集して式典が開かれるが、ここで繰り返し強調されのは「民族融和」「異教徒への寛容」だ。単にナチス・ドイツの暴虐を告発するのでなく、今日の欧州の問題を過去の歴史と照らし合わせて考えようという姿勢だ。
大戦末期、上陸作戦が行われたフランスのノルマンディーもしかり。これは今やフランスの外交資産だ。節目の年ごとに、記念日の６月４日に米欧首脳が集まって式典が開かれ、ここで強調されるのは米欧結束、米欧連帯の重要性である。上陸作戦での連合国の緊密な協力に照らし合わせ、アフガニスタン紛争、テロとの戦い、アフリカ支援などでの連携の重要性が語られる。
反核という国際政治潮流の中で「広島・長崎」の意味合いもますます大きくなる。日本の外交資産であり、その象徴性を最大限に生かす外交上の工夫に期待したい。
（筆者は毎日新聞 専門編集委員）
一般社団法人 日本英語交流連盟