欧州の核兵器廃絶に向け連携

（先(2010.02.15)にヨーロッパの数カ国にアメリカから供与された核兵器が配備されているという報告をここに掲載した。その各国のうちの何カ国かがその核兵器を廃絶しようとしているという記事が２月20日付け朝日新聞に出たので、お知らせします。このことは、ヨーロッパの公認核保有国イギリス、フランスの他に核兵器が配備されている国があることを追認することになる。）

ベルギー政府は１９日、同国やドイツなど北大西洋条約機構（ＮＡＴＯ）に加盟する欧州の５カ国が連携し、１１月にまとめる予定のＮＡＴＯの「新戦略概念」の策定作業の中で、核兵器廃絶に向けた動きを主導していく方針を表明した。具体的には、欧州に配備されている米軍の核兵器の撤去を求めていくとみられる。５カ国は近く、自分たちの見解を関係各国に送付するとしている。５カ国はベルギー、ドイツのほか、オランダ、ルクセンブルク、ノルウェー。このうちベルギー、ドイツ、オランダには、それぞれ１０〜２０発の米軍の核兵器が配備されているとされる。
　ベルギーのルテルム首相は１９日に出した声明で、「核なき世界」への支持を表明。具体的な前進には、ＮＡＴＯ加盟国との協議や、国際的な軍縮協議の動きを考慮に入れることも必要だとした上で、「オバマ米大統領が『核なき世界』を呼びかけたこの機会をとらえたい」とした。
　欧州にある米軍の核兵器を巡っては、ドイツが昨年１１月に、自国内にある核の撤去を求めていく方針を表明。ベルギー政府は、ドイツの立場に基本的に賛同を示す一方で、具体的な行動についてはＮＡＴＯ全体の合意が必要だとして、「新戦略概念」の策定に合わせて、他の加盟国に核戦略を再考するよう水面 下で働きかけていた。
　ただ、ＮＡＴＯ加盟国の中で同様に米軍の核兵器が配備されているとされるイタリアやトルコは、今回の呼びかけに名を連ねておらず、撤去の動きがＮＡＴＯの総意となるかどうかは不透明だ。米国を含む他の国々が、ベルギーなど５カ国の動きにどう応じるかが今後の焦点になる。
一方、元首相やＮＡＴＯの元事務総長らベルギーの有力政治家４人が１９日付の地元主要各紙に、欧州に配備されている米軍の核兵器の撤去などを求めた投稿を掲載した。フェルホフスタット氏、デハーネ氏の２人の元首相やＮＡＴＯのクラース元事務総長ら中道の右派・左派、リベラルなど超党派で、「冷戦が終わり、米国の欧州における戦術核は軍事上の意味を完全に失っている」と訴えた。
（落合栄一郎）

共同声明「改憲手続き法の凍結・廃止を要求します～改憲手続き法施行予定の５月18日に際して」

許すな！憲法改悪・市民連絡会から賛同の呼びかけです。

http://www.annie.ne.jp/~kenpou/seimei/seimei131.html

（引用開始）

以下の主旨に賛同する団体・個人の方、連署して下さいますようお願いします。

共同声明「改憲手続き法の凍結・廃止を要求します～改憲手続き法施行予定の５月18日に際して」
改憲手続き法（日本国憲法の改正手続きに関する法律）は安倍晋三内閣の下、2007年５月14日、参議院で強行採決され、成立しました。「美しい国」「戦後レジームの転換」を掲げ、「任期中の改憲」を公言し、それを急いだ安倍内閣と与党の強引な採決でした。まともに審議が尽くされないまま、ひたすら改憲を急ぐために強行された同法は、多くの「附則」や「附帯決議」がつけられた、まったくの欠陥立法というべきものでした。

議論が先送りされ、附帯決議などで与党も不備を認めた同法の主な問題点は以下のようなものです。

1.投票権者をどう規定するか（18歳投票権問題、公職選挙法や民法との整合性の保障）。
2.国民投票の対象はなにか（憲法だけでなく、国政の重要問題についての国民投票の可否）。
3.広報や広告など、メディアの在り方（議席数で広報の量の配分を決めてよいか、有料広告を認めると資金能力で宣伝に差ができる）。
4.国民投票運動の自由に関する問題（公務員や教育関係者の政治活動、地位利用の制限などによって、自由な活動が制限される）。
5.投票成立の要件をどうするか（過半数の分母問題や、成立に必要な最低投票率規程の有無）、などなど。
当時、同法は世論の冷却をねらって「憲法改正の発議」や「国民投票」の部分の施行を
３年間凍結されました。その結果、同法の施行（凍結解除）は2010年５月18日に予定されていますが、以後の国会では、ここにあげたような同法の附則や、附帯決議にもとづく検討や法改正は、まったく行われておりません。

09年６月、安倍晋三の意向を受けついだ麻生内閣により衆議院憲法審査会「規程」が強行採決されましたが、当時の野党が委員の選出にも応じなかったため、衆議院審査会はつくられず、野党多数の参議院では「規程」の議論すら行われませんでした。憲法審査会は改憲手続き法成立後、２年９ヵ月、まったく始動していません。

この間、07年の参院選や、09年の衆院選で与野党議席数が逆転し、明文改憲の動きを推進してきた
自公政権が下野するなど、政治情勢は大きく変わりました。またこの間の世論も改憲を要求していません。新政権は憲法問題ではなく、小泉政権以来の構造改革政策の転換、「生活が第一」を掲げて多数議席を得ました。新政権に有権者が期待しているのは改憲などではなく、「生活」問題の解決です。

強行採決され、改憲国民投票では国民の意思が正当に反映されないという点において多くの問題点を
持っている欠陥立法は、５月18日がきても、ひきつづき凍結されるべきです。中身が伴わないままに「規定された３年が過ぎた」などという理由で、同法を施行するなどは許されないことです。改憲手続き法は凍結し、いったん廃止にして出直すべきです。

以下、３２団体の連名で賛同を呼びかけます。
アジア連帯講座／アンポをつぶせ！ちょうちんデモの会／うちなんちゅの怒りとともに！三多摩市民の会／おんな9条の会北海道／憲法・教育基本法改悪に反対する市民連絡会おおいた／憲法ひろば・杉並／憲法を生かす会／護憲ネットワーク（札幌）／市民自治を創る会／戦争への道を許さない女たちの会札幌／第九条の会ヒロシマ／東京空襲犠牲者遺族会／東京大空襲訴訟原告団／盗聴法（組織的犯罪対策法）に反対する市民連絡会／とめよう改憲！おおさかネットワーク／長野ピースサイクル実行委員会／日本山妙法寺／日本消費者連盟／日本ＹＷＣＡ／ＶＡＷＷ―ＮＥＴジャパン／バスストップから基地ストップの会／ピースサイクルおおいた／ピースサイクル埼玉ネット／ピースサイクル全国ネットワーク／ピースサイクル新潟／ピースリンク広島・呉・岩国／ふぇみん婦人民主クラブ／プライバシーアクション札幌／平和を実現するキリスト者ネット／平和をつくり出す宗教者ネット／ユーゴネット／許すな！憲法改悪・市民連絡会／（３２団体）
以下、賛同団体・個人連署。

【共同声明の取扱について】

1.この声明の呼びかけは２月１４日の「許すな！憲法改悪・市民運動全国交流集会」で採択され、参加した団体有志で呼びかけ団体を作りました。
2.賛同して下さる方は至急ご連絡下さい（団体、個人、それぞれ可。個人は所属団体名か肩書き、あるいは○○県△△市などと居住地を書いて下さい）。
3.インターネットやウェブサイトでの転送・転載にご協力下さい。
4.賛同一覧は２月28日、３月15日、３月31日、４月15日の各日ごとに集約し、関係国会議員の事務所などに提出し、最終的には４月30日を締め切りと致します。
5.賛同の送り先は、ＦＡＸ０３－３２２１－２５５８、メールはkenpou@annie.ne.jpです。

（引用終了）

Nuclear Weapon States

Apparently there are more states now that have nuclear weapons than officially recognized. The following is a portion of an article by Professor Chossudovsky
(http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17550)


The "Official" Nuclear Weapons States

Five countries, the US, UK, France, China and Russia are considered to be "nuclear weapons states" (NWS), "an internationally recognized status conferred by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)". Three other "Non NPT countries" (i.e. non-signatory states of the NPT) including India, Pakistan and North Korea, have recognized possessing nuclear weapons.

Israel: "Undeclared Nuclear State"

Israel is identified as an "undeclared nuclear state". It produces and deploys nuclear warheads directed against military and civilian targets in the Middle East including Tehran.

Iran

There has been much hype, supported by scanty evidence, that Iran might at some future date become a nuclear weapons state. And, therefore, a pre-emptive defensive nuclear attack on Iran to annihilate its non-existent nuclear weapons program should be seriously contemplated "to make the World a safer place". The mainstream media abounds with makeshift opinion on the Iran nuclear threat.

Belgium, Germany, The Netherlands, Italy and Turkey: "Undeclared Nuclear Weapons States"

While Iran's nuclear weapons capabilities are unconfirmed, the nuclear weapons capabilities of these five countries including delivery procedures are formally acknowledged.
The US has supplied some 480 B61 thermonuclear bombs to five so-called "non-nuclear states", including Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey. Casually disregarded by the Vienna based UN Nuclear Watchdog (IAEA), the US has actively contributed to the proliferation of nuclear weapons in Western Europe.
As part of this European stockpiling, Turkey, which is a partner of the US-led coalition against Iran along with Israel, possesses some 90 thermonuclear B61 bunker buster bombs at the Incirlik nuclear air base. (National Resources Defense Council, Nuclear Weapons in Europe , February 2005)
By the recognised definition, these five countries are "undeclared nuclear weapons states". The stockpiling and deployment of tactical B61 in these five "non-nuclear states" are intended for targets in the Middle East. Moreover, in accordance with "NATO strike plans", these thermonuclear B61 bunker buster bombs (stockpiled by the "non-nuclear States") could be launched "against targets in Russia or countries in the Middle East such as Syria and Iran" ( quoted in National Resources Defense Council, Nuclear Weapons in Europe , February 2005)
Does this mean that Iran or Russia, which are potential targets of a nuclear attack originating from one or other of these five so-called non-nuclear states should contemplate defensive preemptive nuclear attacks against Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Turkey? The answer is no, by any stretch of the imagination.
While these "undeclared nuclear states" casually accuse Tehran of developing nuclear weapons, without documentary evidence, they themselves have capabilities of delivering nuclear warheads, which are targeted at Iran. To say that this is a clear case of "double standards" by the IAEA and the "international community" is a understatement.

Submitted by Eiichiro Ochiai

アメリカの軍事基地

　現在、沖縄の普天間基地の移設が議論されているが、これはアメリカの世界規模の軍事ネットワークの一つである。そこで、現在のアメリカの軍事基地の大要を、TomDispatchの記事（http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175204/tomgram%3A_nick_turse%2C_america%27s_shadowy_base_world/#more）から報告する。
　現在、アメリカの国防総省による正式な軍事基地数は、世界中で716だそうである。しかし、これには、イラク、アフガニスタンにある基地は含まれないし、カタール近辺にあるアル・ウデイド空軍基地も含まれない。この基地の規模は大きく、例の無人爆撃機ドローンを操作している。
　イラクのアメリカとその連合国の基地は、2009年8月時点で300、アメリカは2010年までに撤退するはずであるが。アフガニスタンでは、現時点でアメリカと連合国軍の基地数は約400であり、アメリカが後押しするアフガン軍や警察機構の施設が300、全部でアフガニスタンだけに700の基地（とそれに準ずる施設）があることになる。アフガニスタンでは、オバマ政権が決定した３万の増派を受け入れる為に、さらに基地新設や基地の拡充を行っている。これで、2011年には撤退するのであろうか。これらを総計するとアメリカの軍事基地は優に1000を超す。
　戦後、東西冷戦時に日本、韓国、ドイツなどに儲けられた多くの基地は、冷戦終了後もそのまま留まっている例が多く、イラク、アフガニスタンの基地も今後永続的に使用される可能性が高い。アメリカの世界制覇の為の軍事基地群である。何とかアメリカとアメリカ国民にそのおぞましさを知ってもらう方はないものであろうか。

Tatsuo Kage's Talk at the World Peace Forum Teach-In, November 8, 2009

The Rise of Fascism in Japan in the 1930’s

WPF Teach-In, November 8, 2009

By Tatsuo Kage, VSA9

Thank you for inviting us to this year’s Teach-In of the WPF.

1. Was the Japanese Regime in the 1930’s and 40’s Fascist?　

Since Japan was one of the axis powers during World War II, it meant that Japan as a nation in Asia joined the fascist powers and fought the allies of democracy in WWII. Still, some of you may hesitate to call Japan a fascist regime at that time.

There were differences between Japan and Germany or Italy: Japan did not have a fascist party similar to the Nazis in Germany, or to the one in Italy based on a mass movement which took power and established a dictatorship. Another difference was that Japan lacked a dictator like Hitler or Mussolini. Tojo Hideki is sometimes called a dictator because at one time he held the positions of prime minister, minister of army and the chief of Army Staff simultaneously. He was an elite military officer who climbed the ladder of the military bureaucracy but lacked the “charismatic character’ of European dictators who could generate mass support. Once he lost support from political leaders and court advisers, he had to resign, as happened in July 1944.　.

2. Fascism as a Phenomenon of the 20th Century

Dictatorial, reactionary regimes existed widely for many centuries and even under socialism, rule by dictatorship can be seen such as during Stalin’s rule. Fascism, on the other hand, appeared in countries with highly developed monopoly capitalism. Under fascist regimes socialist movements were severely suppressed, while monopoly capitalists prospered as merchants of death in the armament industries. Fascists claimed their regime was state-socialism or “national socialism” but its result was the opposite of socialism.

Fascists served the interests of monopoly capitalism but could be both anti-socialism and anti-capitalism. (For example, the Zaibatsu capitalists were attacked by Japanese fascists.) Although the middle class of small-scale producers declined because of capitalism, they thought socialism would wipe them out totally. Externally they were terrified by international socialism and the rise of nationalist movements in developing countries. Rightly or wrongly, they saw the economic crisis as due to being a ‘have-not nation. They believed their country was unfairly treated by other nations because of a corrupt political system with spineless politicians who tolerated the rise of socialism. Therefore, they argued, the present system has to be destroyed and renewed. It did not matter whether or not this way of thinking was logical because for a fanatic movement, including fascism, irrational thinking may have been necessary.

3. Fascism From Below and Above

In the 1950’s Maruyama Masao, a political science professor, proposed an analytical theme of “fascism from below” and “fascism from above.” Even a half a century later, his theme of analysis is useful when we look at the political scene of the 1930’ and 40’s in Japan.

- “Fascism from below”: Fascism has some aspect of a grass roots movement. If it gathered strength with a party machine, it could seize power through the support of large parts of the population and through parliamentary procedure, i.e., as a major political party it could take power to form a government. They would claim that they could change everything once in power. These movements have sometimes been called “pseudo-revolutionary. ”

- “Fascism from above”: The controlling political and military leaders and high officials in the bureaucracy took measures to dissolve democratic principles by introducing policies such as emergency decrees and the suppression of socialist and communist movements in order to deal with crisis situation. Constitutional principles such as freedom of speech were disregarded or suspended, and dissidents persecuted. In Japan a notorious legislation called the Peace Preservation Law (1925-45) was introduced. Eventually, spontaneous dissolution of political parties took place and with government initiative the Imperial Rule Assistance Association (1940) was founded. It was a kind of one party system. These trends can be characterized as “authoritarian - reactionary”.


4. The Ideological Basis of Fascist Movements in Japan

There were a number of groups of extreme nationalism from around the turn of the century advocating Japan’s expansion into Asia. Why did they want to expand to the continent? Japan was a small country with limited space and resources. To develop into an imperial power, Japan wanted to secure natural resources, markets for its capital investment and industrial products, and land for the settlement of surplus population.

Without exception right wing nationalists supported the Emperor system with its absolute power. Under the Meiji constitution the Emperor was the supreme commander of the army and navy. He also had the power to conclude international treaties and declare war. Nationalists regarded the Emperor system as a uniquely Japanese political institution, based on a paternalistic idea expanded from the level of the family to the nation and the empire.

After WWI extreme nationalists, such as Uchida Ryohei （内田良平）, realized that their expansionist aims could not be achieved without drastic changes in the domestic political system. They promoted a totalitarian position against western style parliamentary democracy and individualism. They were also openly antagonistic toward socialism and communism after the Russian revolution of 1917. The combination of expansionist ideas coupled with an anti-Soviet stance and anti-democratic aims can be regarded as the common characteristics of fascist ideology.

5. What was the Social Basis of Their Movement?
.
Farmers Class: In the early l930’s agriculture was depressed due to a bumper rice crop, causing the price of rice to fall. Soldiers recruited for the military were from families of poor tenant peasants in rural areas. They were happy to have enough to eat and to receive some pay in the army, but were also concerned about their impoverished family members remaining in the countryside. The extreme nationalists, concerned about building military strength, saw the welfare of the peasants and farmers to be the main pillar of the nation’s strength. They had connections with the young and middle rank military officers who came from the landowner class and were familiar with the serious situation in the rural areas. Many supported the ‘nohonshugi’, or ‘agriculture first’ principle, and the component of this principle among Japanese fascists can be understood in this context.

Middle Class: In addition to the rural population, the fascist movement appealed to the traditional middle class, such as smaller business owners and craftsmen.

These entrepreneurs and trade people had strong affinities with the ideas of anti-socialism and anti-capitalism. As capitalism developed, these people felt threatened by poverty and decline. They were anti-capitalist but as small property owners or merchants, they were strongly against socialism. They did not have a clear idea of what a desirable regime could be, therefore the demand for the destruction of the present state of affairs appealed to them.
In general, if a society faced a crisis one could see the rise of fascism. In Europe the economic crisis was one of the causes of fascism, but many people in difficulty were not capable of organizing their own movement. In Japan, farmers with difficulties were represented by young officers from the same social base and whose interests coincided with the military, the traditional middle class, and the extreme nationalists.

6. How “Fascism from Below” Leads to “Fascist from Above”

1) Manchurian Incident

Ｍeasures to deal with the world wide economic crisis of the l930’s included the increase of military expenditure to establish a foothold in East Asia, and efforts to expand into the continent became more aggressive. In this context the Manchurian Incident of 1931 was important: Staff officers of Japan’s Army stationed in the North Eastern part of China (Kwantung Army) had been looking for a pretext to commence military action. They put explosives on the rail of the South Manchurian Railway in Liutiao hu. (柳条湖、near Shenyang)　 controlled by Japan. The damage was slight but the Japanese military blamed the Chinese army and immediately ordered an attack. Within a few days cities along the railway were occupied and within 5 months most of Manchuria came under the control of the Japanese army.

These actions by military commanders and officers were a serious offense under military　criminal law and punishable by death as the action was not ordered by the government or the top military leaders. However, no one was punished. The government repeatedly announced the non-escalation of military actions to appease international criticism but it did not prevent the escalation. Rather, it continuously approved aggressive military acts. One fait accomli followed another and hostilities escalated. The government attitude reflected the will of the ruling classes including Zaibatsu, the monopoly capitalists, as a means to deal with the internal and external crisis faced by Japan.

The League of Nations condemned Japan’s invasion of Manchuria, and in response Japan left the League of Nations in 1933. This withdrawal publicly announced Japan’s decision to engage in aggressive expansion policies without considering the danger of international isolation. After intermittent military operations, the Marco Polo Bridge incident occurred in July l937, beginning a full-fledged war which was then called the Sino-Japanese Incident, an undeclared war with China.

2) A Series of Coup Attempts -

On May 15, 1932 Inukai Takeshi, the Prime Minister,（犬養毅）, was killed at his official residence in Tokyo by rebellious navy officers. (May 15th Incident) This led to the growth of more right-wing associations. In 1933 as many as 501 associations existed and more than half of them had been formed since 1932.( Fujimura, p. 150.) Other incidents followed, including several coup attempts.

In 1936 a full-fledged military revolt in Tokyo led by military officers shook the civilian government. For a few days rebellious troops occupied the residence of the Prime Minister and key government buildings. The Finance Minister and the Inspector General of Military Training were assassinated. The mutiny was not immediately crushed because Araki Sadao and other army leaders gave signs of approval and support. The Emperor, as the absolute authority, was personally against the coup of February 26 as his ministers and officials had been assassinated or assaulted. These events illustrated the confused situation among the nation’s top leaders in the face of serious revolt.

Once the insurrection was under control military leaders blamed everything on the rebellious officers and civilians. Over a dozen rebel leaders were tried in a military tribunal in Camera and executed.　As the government tried to deal with these and other insubordinations, power increasingly slipped from the hands of party politicians into those of men who might be better able to control or work with the militarists.

3) Decline of Democracy and the Establishment of Fascist Regime

Foremost among these new leaders was Prince Konoe Fumimaro (近衛文麿), who then served as prime minister. He favored a strong foreign policy and intervention in China, views that made him popular among many army officers. In July 1937 Prime Minister Konoe said: “I think North China is vital, particularly for our economic development.”(Quoted in Ienaga, The Pacific War, p.69) This comment reflects the prevailing view of Japan’s ruling elite. Deeply anxious over the loss of markets due to tariff barriers and desperate for a solution to the crisis confronting Japanese capitalism, they wanted to control North China.　In other words, to keep Manchukuo a puppet state and to prevent China from becoming communist were the absolute minimum objectives of the military and Japan’s civilian leaders. There was a broad consensus about these goals.

Military expansion abroad required repression at home. As an authoritarian regime, fascism in Japan was imposed from above by political leaders, the military and bureaucrats, aided by their junior partners, the civilian rightists.

The Konoe government tried to reorganize the political system to mobilize the nation for the war efforts. All political parties were spontaneously dissolved and the “Imperial Rule Assistance Association” (大政翼賛会IRAA) was founded in 1940. It did not functioned efficiently as a political organization, rather it became a control mechanism of people’s daily lives.

The Nazis destroyed the Weimar Republic and established a dictatorship in 1933 but no such clear break with the past occurred in Japan. The Meiji Constitution was never revised or suspended and the Diet became impotent but it continued to exist.

The only major legal shift was the 1938 enactment of the National Mobilization Law（国家総動員法）. Although it could be regarded as unconstitutional, this law allowed the government to issue emergency decrees, i.e., its sweeping provisions broadened the state’s administrative authority, imposing new duties on citizens and curtailing civil rights.

Despite the differences, Japanese Fascism compared to Germany was no less effective in destroying political freedom. Threats and use of physical force by the police and Kempeitai were the ultimate weapons. Marxists, Christian pacifists and anyone considered even slightly opposed to the war were arrested and incarcerated under regulations that in effect voided the Criminal Prosecution Law. Some prisoners were tortured and physically mistreated. Others were held indefinitely. Political prisoners were pressured to make false confessions and to recant their political beliefs.

Conclusion:

Even without a fascist party having mass support or the ability to seize power, we can see how a fascist regime could nevertheless be established. Young officers and right wing civilians played the role of forerunners in the process of establishing a fascist regime. Political and military leaders and others from the ruling class did not openly support drastic measures to change the existing system, but they actively or tacitly undermined institutions based on parliamentary democracy in order to deal with external and internal crisis. The government with its powerful police bureaucracy was efficient in suppressing any dissidents who opposed the total mobilization of citizens for the war effort.

Nowadays, most of us can easily see the irrational nature of neo-Nazi type right wing movements and it may seem that the danger of “fascism from below” belongs to the past. On the other hand, we can also note that there is a continuing trend towards curtailing the democratic rights of citizens in the name of public security. In this sense, ongoing vigilance is necessary in order to prevent governments from sliding into the direction of “fascism from above” as it happened in Japan in the 1930’s ☺

Reference:

Banno Junji. Showashi no Ketteiteki Shunkan. Chikuma Shinsho. Tokyo. 2004.
Fujimura Michio. Nihon Gendaishi (Sekai Gendaishi 1). Yamakawa Shuppansha, Tokyo, 1981.
Ienaga Saburo. The Pacific War, 1931-1945. Pantheon Books, NewYork, 1978.
Eizawa Koji. Nihono no Fashizumu. Kyouikusha, Tokyo, 1988.
Maruyama Masao. Gendai Seiji no Shiso to Kodo. Miraisha, Tokyo, 1956/57.
Toyama, Shigeki et.al., Showa Shi. Iwanami Shinsho, Tokyo, 1959.