このページはフレーム対応ブラウザ用に作成されています。下のリンクは非フレーム使用ページですのでそちらをご覧ください。
この記事をプリントする
絶好の機会を逸して…
5月末、天皇、皇后両陛下は27年ぶりに英国を訪問した。歓迎式典後のパレードには、大勢の人が沿道に詰めかけ手を振った。しかし、旧日本軍の元捕虜が馬車に背を向けるなど抗議の意志を示す一幕も…
There is a certain truth to that but the British veterans feel so deeply about this issue because they believe that Japan has failed to apologize adequately for the past. They also claim individual compensation. The Japanese government says officially that all claims to compensation were cleared in the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951.
My problem in covering this story for the BBC was that I understood both sides of the story. I sympathize with the veterans for their suffering. I appreciate the Japanese government's position that it has made amends and continued to make gestures of reconciliation. I know that many people in Japan suffered terribly during World War II as well.
But although the Japanese government knew the Emperor would encounter hostility in Britain they missed their greatest opportunity to pull off a public relations coup. They refused to grant representatives of the prisoners of war an audience with the Emperor. What did they fear? These old men are not dangerous they just wanted to put their case to the highest representative of Japan that they could.
The Japanese government said that the Emperor could not get involved in political issues as a symbol of Japan. But if he goes as the head of state on a state visit to Britain some would argue that he is involved in a political activity. The British Queen makes political statements as a representative of the government. She fulfills a symbolically political role, especially when she travels abroad.
In an interesting parallel, she was forced to apologize for the Amritsar massacre on her latest visit to India. It was an event that had happened before she was born. She had no direct responsibility but as head of state it was deemed suitable for her to apologize.One Japanese newspaper, The Yomiuri, argued that there were plenty of incidents in Britain's colonial history that it could be expected to apologize for. This raises the issue of how far back into history anyone is expected to go to make amends for the past. I would feel that at a government level if people who suffered are still alive then an apology is in order. If however, no one who actually suffered is still alive, an apology rings of insincerity.
By those standards, the Emperor could be expected to apologize to the former POWs. That I think is the most pertinent point. These men and women are old. They do not have much longer to live and they are still haunted by memories of their suffering. Anyone in that situation deserves a dignified apology. The Emperor mentioned his sympathy for their suffering at a state banquet with the Queen. He would have done better for Japan if he could have told them the same face to face.
On his recent visit to Britain the Emperor encountered a hostile reception from some former prisoners of war (POWs). The protest overshadowed his entire visit and as a result some Japanese may have gained the impression that the British harbor resentment and are incapable of forgiving past wrongs.
There is a certain truth to that but the British veterans feel so deeply about this issue because they believe that Japan has failed to apologize adequately for the past. They also claim individual compensation. The Japanese government says officially that all claims to compensation were cleared in the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951.
My problem in covering this story for the BBC was that I understood both sides of the story. I sympathize with the veterans for their suffering. I appreciate the Japanese government's position that it has made amends and continued to make gestures of reconciliation. I know that many people in Japan suffered terribly during World War II as well.
But although the Japanese government knew the Emperor would encounter hostility in Britain they missed their greatest opportunity to pull off a public relations coup. They refused to grant representatives of the prisoners of war an audience with the Emperor. What did they fear? These old men are not dangerous they just wanted to put their case to the highest representative of Japan that they could.
The Japanese government said that the Emperor could not get involved in political issues as a symbol of Japan. But if he goes as the head of state on a state visit to Britain some would argue that he is involved in a political activity. The British Queen makes political statements as a representative of the government. She fulfills a symbolically political role, especially when she travels abroad.
In an interesting parallel, she was forced to apologize for the Amritsar massacre on her latest visit to India. It was an event that had happened before she was born. She had no direct responsibility but as head of state it was deemed suitable for her to apologize.One Japanese newspaper, The Yomiuri, argued that there were plenty of incidents in Britain's colonial history that it could be expected to apologize for. This raises the issue of how far back into history anyone is expected to go to make amends for the past. I would feel that at a government level if people who suffered are still alive then an apology is in order. If however, no one who actually suffered is still alive, an apology rings of insincerity.
By those standards, the Emperor could be expected to apologize to the former POWs. That I think is the most pertinent point. These men and women are old. They do not have much longer to live and they are still haunted by memories of their suffering. Anyone in that situation deserves a dignified apology. The Emperor mentioned his sympathy for their suffering at a state banquet with the Queen. He would have done better for Japan if he could have told them the same face to face.
Shukan ST: July 3, 1998
(C) All rights reserved
- encountered a hostile reception
- 冷たい歓迎を受けた
- prisoners of war
- 旧日本軍捕虜(=POWs)
- overshadowed 〜
- 〜 を曇らせた
- may have gained the impression that 〜
- 〜 という印象を受けたかもしれない
- harbor resentment
- 憤りを抱いている
- forgiving past wrongs
- 過去の過ちを許すこと
- There is a certain truth to that
- それはある意味では本当のことだ
- veterans
- 退役軍人
- feel so deeply about 〜
- 〜 について強い感情を抱いている
- issue
- 問題
- apologize adequately for 〜
- 〜 に十分な謝罪をする
- claim
- 要求する
- individual compensation
- 個人補償
- were cleared
- 清算された
- San Francisco Peace Treaty
- サンフランシスコ講和条約(欧州が懸念した日本の軍国主義復活への厳しい制限条項を含む)
- My problem in covering this story for the BBC was that 〜
- これを BBC で報道するうえで苦労したのは〜だった
- sympathize with 〜
- 〜に同情する
- suffering
- 苦しみ
- appreciate
- 理解する
- has made amends
- 修正してきた
- make gestures of reconciliation
- 和解の意思表示をする
- encounter hostility
- 敵意にぶつかる
- missed their greatest opportunity to 〜
- 〜する絶好の機会を逃した
- pull off a public relations coup
- うまい広報活動をやってのける
- grant 〜 an audience with 〜
- 〜に〜との謁見を許可する
- representatives
- 代表者
- put their case to the highest representative of Japan
- 日本の最高位の代表者(天皇)に自分たちの事情を訴える
- get involved in 〜
- 〜にかかわる
- a symbol of Japan
- 日本の象徴
- head of state
- 国家元首
- state visit
- 国家訪問
- makes political statements
- 政治的発言をする
- fulfills a symbolically political role
- 象徴としての政治的役割を果たしている
- In an interesting parallel
- 興味深い比較として
- Amritsar massacre
- アムリッツァルの虐殺(第一次世界大戦後、1919年発令の治安維持法への抗議に沸くインド・パンジャーブ州アムリッツァルで起きた英軍隊による大量住民虐殺。1,500人以上の死傷者が出た)
- was deemed suitable for her to 〜
- 〜するのは彼女にとってふさわしいとみなされた
- plenty of incidents
- 多くの出来事
- colonial history
- 植民地時代の歴史
- raises the issue of 〜
- 〜という問題を提供する
- how far back into history anyone is expected to go
- どれほど歴史をさかのぼればいいのか
- is in order
- 適切である
- rings of insincerity
- 誠意のないものに聞こえる
- pertinent
- 理にかなった
- (are)haunted by 〜
- 〜に悩まされている
- deserves 〜
- 〜に値する
- dignified
- 威厳のある
- state banquet
- 公式晩さん会
- face to face
- (旧日本軍の捕虜に)面と向かって