Will two external pressure change the lagging 'post-war Japan'?
NISHIKAWA Megumi / Journalist
February 9, 2023
In the past three years, Japan has been exposed to two severe external pressures. One was the new coronavirus scourge. The other was the war in Ukraine, which broke out a year ago with the invasion of Russian troops. Japan, inept at changing itself, in the past took advantage of external pressures to carry out deregulation and structural reforms, but the latest external pressures have the impact of changing the shape of post-war Japan in a profound way.
What challenges do these two external pressures pose to Japan?
Firstly, the new coronavirus has exposed in broad daylight the delays in the digitalization of Japanese society, including in public administration. Problems surfaced such as the significant delays in the provision of special benefits to support households and other kinds of assistance, the systems and practices requiring seals and written submissions even in an internet environment... The government realized that this was indeed a big trouble and was forced to move ahead with digitalization.
Symbolic of this is the strong promotion led by the government to expand the holders of the so-called My Number Card, which can be used as the Social Security and Tax Number Card. According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, as of 29 January applications had reached approximately 85 million, or 67.7% of the population. This is a rapid increase from 16.0% in April 2020, when the coronavirus disaster became apparent. It is common to see those in charge standing in front of train stations and appealing to passers-by to apply for a My Number Card.
My Number card is important because it is the foundation for increasing convenience for citizens, improving administrative efficiency, and realizing a fair and just society. However, because of its low acquisition rate, Japan's well-developed internet environment ended up being a treasure wasted.
The delay in digitalization was partly due to a lack of effort on the part of the government, but public opinion and the media are also partly to blame. They argued that "discussions were insufficient" and "we should not proceed too hastily", citing privacy and other issues, and the march to digitalization was stalled at the entrance. The US and China, as well as South Korea and Scandinavian countries, took a pragmatic approach, first implementing digital technology in society and then addressing individual issues. This put them far ahead of Japan.
This is not simply pointing to individual services using digital technology. It means that Japan has completely lagged behind in the transformation of the capitalist structure into one supported by digital technology. Japan has been left behind in the so-called "immaterialist turn of capitalism", as Professor Toru Morotomi (finance and environmental economics) at Kyoto University's Graduate School puts it.
Today, the focus of economic value has shifted significantly from goods to 'immaterial things' such as information, services, and comfort, and according to Mr. Morotomi, capitalism is evolving towards 'dematerialization'. This is not limited to the service sector but is also rapidly progressing in manufacturing, agriculture, and other sectors. The reason behind this is that we are saturated with goods, and the more services are developed, the more profitable they become.
For example, the automobile, which represents the manufacturing industry, is beginning to integrate with the service industry. It has already been mentioned that the car will move away from being an object in the form of a car body and become more of a medium for services, such as automatic driving through artificial intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT), as well as the provision of entertainment such as music and video. Their relative weight as material objects will decrease and their value as 'immaterial elements' will increase.
Japan is doing relatively well in the automotive sector, but when we look at the industry as a whole, the belief in manufacturing remains strong. The excessive myth of manufacturing is that if you make good products, they will always sell and that improving manufacturing is the way for Japan to survive. In fact, this myth is hindering digitalization. The dichotomy of either manufacturing or digital is also a habit that has stuck. Whether or not the economic structure can be converted to digitalization in light of the coronavirus disaster depends on how keenly one perceives that the consumer market is shifting from goods-oriented consumption to situation-oriented consumption.
Another external pressure is the war in Ukraine. Post-war Japan has long held an idealistic view of security. The preamble to the Constitution of Japan, which states that "trusting in the justice and faith of peace-loving peoples, we have resolved to preserve our security and existence", is emblematic of this. In recent years, however, the Japanese view of security has been shaken.
The Senkaku Islands, located in the southwest of Japan, are protected as Japanese territory because Japanese patrol vessels prevent the coercive actions of Chinese Maritime Police Bureau vessels by physically blocking them from approaching the island. We know that in the face of North Korea's missile launches and nuclear tests, idealistic views of security do not work. However, in the case of China, the conflict was over small islands on the border, and there was a mood to avoid overreacting, dismissing the North Korean behavior as an exceptional event, being the “action of a peculiar dictatorship".
However, the Russian invasion of Ukraine starkly showed that "authoritarian states do not hesitate to use military force for their own interests", and made Japan realize that it was not simply someone else’s problem when you think about a contingency on Taiwan.
In December last year, the Government approved three security-related documents to strengthen defense capabilities. However, there were no protest demonstrations comparable to those at the time of the enactment of the 2015 national security legislation, indicating that a significant change in the Japanese people's view of security is taking place. In a nutshell, it is a deepening of awareness of the need for a realistic view of security.
There is, of course, opposition to the strengthening of defense capabilities including the ability to counter-attack on enemy territory. Some contend that it will turn Japan into a nation that will fight wars and nullify the purely reactive defense policy (senshu boei) of the past. However, I believe that the psychological deterrent effect against war in Japan should not be taken lightly. The psychological deterrent effect is the deplorable memory of the war that has been passed down from generation to generation.
When I was a young journalist posted to the Foreign News Department of the Mainichi Shimbun, I regularly had study meetings on modern and contemporary European history with a French friend. The material was a book in French by a French historian chosen by my friend. I have forgotten the name of the historian and the title of the book, but the only thing that remains in my memory is the historian's statement: 'I have a hypothesis that in modern history, countries that started wars, were thoroughly destroyed and defeated, and became democratic, never started wars again'.
Naturally, this referred to Germany and Japan, but under the assumption that they are democracies, this historian noted that "the tragic memory of war, passed on from generation to generation at the national level, is a great deterrent to war".
When I refuted his argument at the study meeting by saying "But didn't Germany start two wars, World War I and World War II?", my friend replied, "In World War I, the war did not reach the German interior. The war ended with the frontline stalemated on the Franco-German border". That was indeed the case.
The recent hesitation of German Chancellor Scholz over the provision of Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine, in defiance of strong requests from other European countries, is probably not unrelated to the war experience of the German people. Mr. Scholz is of the post-war generation, but he, like the Japanese, has a sharply etched memory of the tragic war. It must have been a difficult decision whether to support our European friends who were invaded or to live true to Germany’s war experience. The criticism directed at Germany for only thinking about its own country is similar to that directed at Japan, which was criticized during the Gulf War (1991) for trying to "just give money and get on with it".
Japan's holding a realistic view of security is in no way inconsistent with being a peaceful country. I believe that Japan should place importance on two things: maintaining a realistic view of security and passing on the memory of the war.
To add to passing the memory of the war, modern and contemporary Japanese history should be taught properly in school education up to the post-war period. Further, memorial ceremonies should be held at each milestone, such as the anniversary of the end of the war, the anniversary of the atomic bombing, the Battle of Okinawa, and the Tokyo Air Raid. This is because remembrance is not only about looking back, but also about refreshing our memories for the future.
The two external pressures are severely questioning the state of post-war Japan in two areas: the economic and industrial structure and our view on national security.
Megumi Nishikawa is a contributing editor of Mainichi Shimbun. This essay originally appeared on the online site of the Mainichi Newspapers on the 5th. of February 2023.
What challenges do these two external pressures pose to Japan?
Firstly, the new coronavirus has exposed in broad daylight the delays in the digitalization of Japanese society, including in public administration. Problems surfaced such as the significant delays in the provision of special benefits to support households and other kinds of assistance, the systems and practices requiring seals and written submissions even in an internet environment... The government realized that this was indeed a big trouble and was forced to move ahead with digitalization.
Symbolic of this is the strong promotion led by the government to expand the holders of the so-called My Number Card, which can be used as the Social Security and Tax Number Card. According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, as of 29 January applications had reached approximately 85 million, or 67.7% of the population. This is a rapid increase from 16.0% in April 2020, when the coronavirus disaster became apparent. It is common to see those in charge standing in front of train stations and appealing to passers-by to apply for a My Number Card.
My Number card is important because it is the foundation for increasing convenience for citizens, improving administrative efficiency, and realizing a fair and just society. However, because of its low acquisition rate, Japan's well-developed internet environment ended up being a treasure wasted.
The delay in digitalization was partly due to a lack of effort on the part of the government, but public opinion and the media are also partly to blame. They argued that "discussions were insufficient" and "we should not proceed too hastily", citing privacy and other issues, and the march to digitalization was stalled at the entrance. The US and China, as well as South Korea and Scandinavian countries, took a pragmatic approach, first implementing digital technology in society and then addressing individual issues. This put them far ahead of Japan.
This is not simply pointing to individual services using digital technology. It means that Japan has completely lagged behind in the transformation of the capitalist structure into one supported by digital technology. Japan has been left behind in the so-called "immaterialist turn of capitalism", as Professor Toru Morotomi (finance and environmental economics) at Kyoto University's Graduate School puts it.
Today, the focus of economic value has shifted significantly from goods to 'immaterial things' such as information, services, and comfort, and according to Mr. Morotomi, capitalism is evolving towards 'dematerialization'. This is not limited to the service sector but is also rapidly progressing in manufacturing, agriculture, and other sectors. The reason behind this is that we are saturated with goods, and the more services are developed, the more profitable they become.
For example, the automobile, which represents the manufacturing industry, is beginning to integrate with the service industry. It has already been mentioned that the car will move away from being an object in the form of a car body and become more of a medium for services, such as automatic driving through artificial intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT), as well as the provision of entertainment such as music and video. Their relative weight as material objects will decrease and their value as 'immaterial elements' will increase.
Japan is doing relatively well in the automotive sector, but when we look at the industry as a whole, the belief in manufacturing remains strong. The excessive myth of manufacturing is that if you make good products, they will always sell and that improving manufacturing is the way for Japan to survive. In fact, this myth is hindering digitalization. The dichotomy of either manufacturing or digital is also a habit that has stuck. Whether or not the economic structure can be converted to digitalization in light of the coronavirus disaster depends on how keenly one perceives that the consumer market is shifting from goods-oriented consumption to situation-oriented consumption.
Another external pressure is the war in Ukraine. Post-war Japan has long held an idealistic view of security. The preamble to the Constitution of Japan, which states that "trusting in the justice and faith of peace-loving peoples, we have resolved to preserve our security and existence", is emblematic of this. In recent years, however, the Japanese view of security has been shaken.
The Senkaku Islands, located in the southwest of Japan, are protected as Japanese territory because Japanese patrol vessels prevent the coercive actions of Chinese Maritime Police Bureau vessels by physically blocking them from approaching the island. We know that in the face of North Korea's missile launches and nuclear tests, idealistic views of security do not work. However, in the case of China, the conflict was over small islands on the border, and there was a mood to avoid overreacting, dismissing the North Korean behavior as an exceptional event, being the “action of a peculiar dictatorship".
However, the Russian invasion of Ukraine starkly showed that "authoritarian states do not hesitate to use military force for their own interests", and made Japan realize that it was not simply someone else’s problem when you think about a contingency on Taiwan.
In December last year, the Government approved three security-related documents to strengthen defense capabilities. However, there were no protest demonstrations comparable to those at the time of the enactment of the 2015 national security legislation, indicating that a significant change in the Japanese people's view of security is taking place. In a nutshell, it is a deepening of awareness of the need for a realistic view of security.
There is, of course, opposition to the strengthening of defense capabilities including the ability to counter-attack on enemy territory. Some contend that it will turn Japan into a nation that will fight wars and nullify the purely reactive defense policy (senshu boei) of the past. However, I believe that the psychological deterrent effect against war in Japan should not be taken lightly. The psychological deterrent effect is the deplorable memory of the war that has been passed down from generation to generation.
When I was a young journalist posted to the Foreign News Department of the Mainichi Shimbun, I regularly had study meetings on modern and contemporary European history with a French friend. The material was a book in French by a French historian chosen by my friend. I have forgotten the name of the historian and the title of the book, but the only thing that remains in my memory is the historian's statement: 'I have a hypothesis that in modern history, countries that started wars, were thoroughly destroyed and defeated, and became democratic, never started wars again'.
Naturally, this referred to Germany and Japan, but under the assumption that they are democracies, this historian noted that "the tragic memory of war, passed on from generation to generation at the national level, is a great deterrent to war".
When I refuted his argument at the study meeting by saying "But didn't Germany start two wars, World War I and World War II?", my friend replied, "In World War I, the war did not reach the German interior. The war ended with the frontline stalemated on the Franco-German border". That was indeed the case.
The recent hesitation of German Chancellor Scholz over the provision of Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine, in defiance of strong requests from other European countries, is probably not unrelated to the war experience of the German people. Mr. Scholz is of the post-war generation, but he, like the Japanese, has a sharply etched memory of the tragic war. It must have been a difficult decision whether to support our European friends who were invaded or to live true to Germany’s war experience. The criticism directed at Germany for only thinking about its own country is similar to that directed at Japan, which was criticized during the Gulf War (1991) for trying to "just give money and get on with it".
Japan's holding a realistic view of security is in no way inconsistent with being a peaceful country. I believe that Japan should place importance on two things: maintaining a realistic view of security and passing on the memory of the war.
To add to passing the memory of the war, modern and contemporary Japanese history should be taught properly in school education up to the post-war period. Further, memorial ceremonies should be held at each milestone, such as the anniversary of the end of the war, the anniversary of the atomic bombing, the Battle of Okinawa, and the Tokyo Air Raid. This is because remembrance is not only about looking back, but also about refreshing our memories for the future.
The two external pressures are severely questioning the state of post-war Japan in two areas: the economic and industrial structure and our view on national security.
Megumi Nishikawa is a contributing editor of Mainichi Shimbun. This essay originally appeared on the online site of the Mainichi Newspapers on the 5th. of February 2023.
The English-Speaking Union of Japan
遅れた「戦後日本」は変わるか 二つの外圧
西川 恵 / ジャーナリスト
2023年 2月 9日
この３年間、日本は二つの厳しい外圧に晒されてきた。一つは新型コロナウイルス禍。もう一つは１年前に勃発した、ロシア軍の侵攻によるウクライナ戦争。自ら変化するのが苦手な日本は、過去には外圧を利用して規制緩和や構造改革などを行ってきたが、今度の外圧は戦後日本の形を深いところで変えるインパクトをはらんでいる。
この二つの外圧は、日本に何を突きつけているのか。
まず新型コロナは、行政をはじめとする日本社会のデジタル化の遅れを白日の下に晒した。特別定額給付金などの支給の大幅な遅れ、インターネット環境にあっても押印や書面提出を求める制度や慣行…。さすがにこれはまずいと気づいた政府は、デジタル化を一気に進めざるを得なくなった。
その象徴がマイナンバーカード取得への号令だ。総務省によると１月22日時点で申請状況は約8400万人と、人口の67.3％に達した。コロナ禍が顕在化した2020年4月の交付率が16.0％だったから急速な伸びだ。駅前でマイナンバーカードの申請を呼びかける関係者の姿もよく目にする。
なぜマイナンバー制度が重要かというと、国民の利便性を高め、行政を効率化し、公平・公正な社会を実現するための基盤だからだ。しかしマイナンバーカードの取得率が低かったため、日本の充実したインターネット環境も宝の持ち腐れだった。
デジタル化への遅れは政府の努力不足もあったが、世論やメディア側にも責任の一端はある。プライバシー問題などを理由に「議論が不十分」「拙速に進めるべきでない」と主張し、デジタル化は入り口で足ぶみしていた。米国や中国、さらには韓国や北欧諸国などは、まずデジタル技術を社会に実装し、その上で個々の問題に対処するプラグマティックなアプローチを取った。このため遥かに日本の先を行ってしまった。
これは単にデジタル技術を使った個々のサービスを指摘しているのではない。デジタル技術が支える資本主義構造の変容に日本は完全に出遅れてしまったということだ。京都大学大学院教授（財政・環境経済）の諸富徹氏の表現を借りれば、「資本主義の非物質主義的転回」に日本は取り残された。
今日、経済の価値の中心はモノから情報・サービス・快適さなどの「非物質的なもの」へ大きくシフトし、諸富氏によると資本主義は「非物質化」へと進化している。これはサービス産業にとどまらず、製造業、農業などでも急速に進んでいる。背景にはモノが飽和状態にあることや、サービス化を進める方が収益性が高まるためである。
例えば製造業を代表する自動車でも、サービス業との融合が動き始めている。車体というモノから、今後は人工知能（AI）や「モノのインターネット（IoT）」によって自動運転、さらには音楽・映像などエンターテイメントの提供といった、サービスのための媒体としての性格を強めていくことがすでに語られている。モノとしての比重は相対的に下がり、「非物質的要素」としての価値が高まる。
日本は自動車では頑張っている方だが、産業全体を見るとモノづくり信仰が依然として根強い。「良い製品を作れば必ず売れる」「モノづくりを磨くことが日本の生き残る道」といった過度な“モノづくり神話”が、デジタル化を妨げている。モノづくりか、デジタルか、といった二項対立で見るクセも抜けない。コロナ禍を踏まえ、デジタル化を取り入れた構造に転換できるかどうかは、モノ消費からコト消費に移行している消費市場を見抜けるかどうかと深く相関している。
もう一つの外圧のウクライナ戦争。戦後の日本は理想主義的な安全保障観を長らく保持してきた。日本国憲法前文の「平和を愛する諸国民の公正と信義に信頼して、われらの安全と生存を保持しようと決意した」という一節はその象徴だ。しかし近年、日本人の安全保障観は揺さぶられてきた。
尖閣諸島が日本の領土として守られているのは、中国の威圧的行動に対し、日本の巡視船が体を張って防いでいるからだ。北朝鮮のミサイル発射や核実験の前には、理想主義的な安全保障観も通じないことを我々は知っている。ただ中国の場合は国境の小さな島を巡る対立で、北朝鮮も「特異な独裁国家の行動」と、過剰反応せずに例外的な事象と見ようとする空気もあった。
しかしロシア軍のウクライナ侵攻は「権威主義的国家は自国の利益のためなら軍事力の行使も厭わない」ことを容赦なく見せつけ、台湾有事を考えた時、日本にとっても決して他人事ではないことを知らしめた。
政府は昨年12月、防衛力強化を図る安保関連３文書を閣議決定した。しかし2015年の安保法制の時のようなデモは起こらず、日本人の安全保障観に大きな変化が生まれていることを示した。ひとことで言うと現実的な安全保障観への認識の深まりだ。
反撃能力を含む防衛力強化に「日本を戦争する国にするものだ」「専守防衛をなし崩しにする」との反対は、もちろんある。しかし私は日本の戦争に対する心理的抑止効果は軽く見るべきでないと思っている。心理的抑止効果とは何かというと、受け継がれてきた悲惨な戦争の記憶だ。
毎日新聞社で外信部に配属になった若き日、友人のフランス人と欧州の近現代史の勉強会を定期的にもった。教材は友人が選んだフランス人歴史家の原書。歴史家の名前も、原書名も忘れたが、唯一記憶に残っているのが、歴史家の「現代史において戦争を始めた国で、国土を徹底的に破壊されて敗れ、民主主義になった国は、二度と戦争を起こさないとの仮説を私は持っている」との言葉だ。
当然ながらこれはドイツと日本を指しているが、民主主義国という前提の下で、「世代を超えて国民レベルで受け継がれた戦争の悲惨な記憶は、戦争の大きな抑止になる」とこの歴史家は指摘した。
勉強会で「しかしドイツは第一次大戦、第二次大戦と２回戦争を起こしたではないか」と反論すると、友人は「第一次大戦では戦火はドイツ国内に及んでない。戦線は仏独国境で膠着したまま終戦になった」と言った。確かにそうだった。
最近、ドイツのショルツ首相がレオパルト２戦車のウクライナへの供与を巡り、他の欧州諸国からの強い要請に抗って逡巡したのも、ドイツ国民の戦争体験と無縁ではないだろう。ショルツ氏は戦後世代だが、受け継がれてきた悲惨な戦争の記憶は日本人と同様、厳然としてある。侵略された欧州の友邦を支援するのか、戦争体験を大事にすべきか、難しい判断だっただろう。ドイツに向けられた「自国のことしか考えていない」との批判は、湾岸戦争（1991年）で「おカネだけ出してすまそうとする」と批判された日本に通じる。
日本が現実的な安全保障観を持つことは、平和国家でいることと何ら矛盾しない。現実的な安全保障観を保持しつつ、戦争の記憶を継承していくことの二つを日本は大事にしていくべきと私は考えている。
記憶の継承で付け加えるなら、学校教育で日本の近現代史を戦後まできちんと教えることと、終戦記念日、原爆忌、沖縄戦、東京大空襲など、節目ごとに追悼式をもつことである。追悼とは振り返るだけでなく、未来に向けて記憶を新たにすることでもあるからだ。
二つの外圧は、経済産業構造と安全保障観の二分野で、戦後日本のありようを厳しく問いかけている。
本稿は2023年２月５日の毎日新聞オンラインサイト「政治プレミアム」に掲載された
この二つの外圧は、日本に何を突きつけているのか。
まず新型コロナは、行政をはじめとする日本社会のデジタル化の遅れを白日の下に晒した。特別定額給付金などの支給の大幅な遅れ、インターネット環境にあっても押印や書面提出を求める制度や慣行…。さすがにこれはまずいと気づいた政府は、デジタル化を一気に進めざるを得なくなった。
その象徴がマイナンバーカード取得への号令だ。総務省によると１月22日時点で申請状況は約8400万人と、人口の67.3％に達した。コロナ禍が顕在化した2020年4月の交付率が16.0％だったから急速な伸びだ。駅前でマイナンバーカードの申請を呼びかける関係者の姿もよく目にする。
なぜマイナンバー制度が重要かというと、国民の利便性を高め、行政を効率化し、公平・公正な社会を実現するための基盤だからだ。しかしマイナンバーカードの取得率が低かったため、日本の充実したインターネット環境も宝の持ち腐れだった。
デジタル化への遅れは政府の努力不足もあったが、世論やメディア側にも責任の一端はある。プライバシー問題などを理由に「議論が不十分」「拙速に進めるべきでない」と主張し、デジタル化は入り口で足ぶみしていた。米国や中国、さらには韓国や北欧諸国などは、まずデジタル技術を社会に実装し、その上で個々の問題に対処するプラグマティックなアプローチを取った。このため遥かに日本の先を行ってしまった。
これは単にデジタル技術を使った個々のサービスを指摘しているのではない。デジタル技術が支える資本主義構造の変容に日本は完全に出遅れてしまったということだ。京都大学大学院教授（財政・環境経済）の諸富徹氏の表現を借りれば、「資本主義の非物質主義的転回」に日本は取り残された。
今日、経済の価値の中心はモノから情報・サービス・快適さなどの「非物質的なもの」へ大きくシフトし、諸富氏によると資本主義は「非物質化」へと進化している。これはサービス産業にとどまらず、製造業、農業などでも急速に進んでいる。背景にはモノが飽和状態にあることや、サービス化を進める方が収益性が高まるためである。
例えば製造業を代表する自動車でも、サービス業との融合が動き始めている。車体というモノから、今後は人工知能（AI）や「モノのインターネット（IoT）」によって自動運転、さらには音楽・映像などエンターテイメントの提供といった、サービスのための媒体としての性格を強めていくことがすでに語られている。モノとしての比重は相対的に下がり、「非物質的要素」としての価値が高まる。
日本は自動車では頑張っている方だが、産業全体を見るとモノづくり信仰が依然として根強い。「良い製品を作れば必ず売れる」「モノづくりを磨くことが日本の生き残る道」といった過度な“モノづくり神話”が、デジタル化を妨げている。モノづくりか、デジタルか、といった二項対立で見るクセも抜けない。コロナ禍を踏まえ、デジタル化を取り入れた構造に転換できるかどうかは、モノ消費からコト消費に移行している消費市場を見抜けるかどうかと深く相関している。
もう一つの外圧のウクライナ戦争。戦後の日本は理想主義的な安全保障観を長らく保持してきた。日本国憲法前文の「平和を愛する諸国民の公正と信義に信頼して、われらの安全と生存を保持しようと決意した」という一節はその象徴だ。しかし近年、日本人の安全保障観は揺さぶられてきた。
尖閣諸島が日本の領土として守られているのは、中国の威圧的行動に対し、日本の巡視船が体を張って防いでいるからだ。北朝鮮のミサイル発射や核実験の前には、理想主義的な安全保障観も通じないことを我々は知っている。ただ中国の場合は国境の小さな島を巡る対立で、北朝鮮も「特異な独裁国家の行動」と、過剰反応せずに例外的な事象と見ようとする空気もあった。
しかしロシア軍のウクライナ侵攻は「権威主義的国家は自国の利益のためなら軍事力の行使も厭わない」ことを容赦なく見せつけ、台湾有事を考えた時、日本にとっても決して他人事ではないことを知らしめた。
政府は昨年12月、防衛力強化を図る安保関連３文書を閣議決定した。しかし2015年の安保法制の時のようなデモは起こらず、日本人の安全保障観に大きな変化が生まれていることを示した。ひとことで言うと現実的な安全保障観への認識の深まりだ。
反撃能力を含む防衛力強化に「日本を戦争する国にするものだ」「専守防衛をなし崩しにする」との反対は、もちろんある。しかし私は日本の戦争に対する心理的抑止効果は軽く見るべきでないと思っている。心理的抑止効果とは何かというと、受け継がれてきた悲惨な戦争の記憶だ。
毎日新聞社で外信部に配属になった若き日、友人のフランス人と欧州の近現代史の勉強会を定期的にもった。教材は友人が選んだフランス人歴史家の原書。歴史家の名前も、原書名も忘れたが、唯一記憶に残っているのが、歴史家の「現代史において戦争を始めた国で、国土を徹底的に破壊されて敗れ、民主主義になった国は、二度と戦争を起こさないとの仮説を私は持っている」との言葉だ。
当然ながらこれはドイツと日本を指しているが、民主主義国という前提の下で、「世代を超えて国民レベルで受け継がれた戦争の悲惨な記憶は、戦争の大きな抑止になる」とこの歴史家は指摘した。
勉強会で「しかしドイツは第一次大戦、第二次大戦と２回戦争を起こしたではないか」と反論すると、友人は「第一次大戦では戦火はドイツ国内に及んでない。戦線は仏独国境で膠着したまま終戦になった」と言った。確かにそうだった。
最近、ドイツのショルツ首相がレオパルト２戦車のウクライナへの供与を巡り、他の欧州諸国からの強い要請に抗って逡巡したのも、ドイツ国民の戦争体験と無縁ではないだろう。ショルツ氏は戦後世代だが、受け継がれてきた悲惨な戦争の記憶は日本人と同様、厳然としてある。侵略された欧州の友邦を支援するのか、戦争体験を大事にすべきか、難しい判断だっただろう。ドイツに向けられた「自国のことしか考えていない」との批判は、湾岸戦争（1991年）で「おカネだけ出してすまそうとする」と批判された日本に通じる。
日本が現実的な安全保障観を持つことは、平和国家でいることと何ら矛盾しない。現実的な安全保障観を保持しつつ、戦争の記憶を継承していくことの二つを日本は大事にしていくべきと私は考えている。
記憶の継承で付け加えるなら、学校教育で日本の近現代史を戦後まできちんと教えることと、終戦記念日、原爆忌、沖縄戦、東京大空襲など、節目ごとに追悼式をもつことである。追悼とは振り返るだけでなく、未来に向けて記憶を新たにすることでもあるからだ。
二つの外圧は、経済産業構造と安全保障観の二分野で、戦後日本のありようを厳しく問いかけている。
本稿は2023年２月５日の毎日新聞オンラインサイト「政治プレミアム」に掲載された
一般社団法人 日本英語交流連盟