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
大量破壊兵器
大量破壊兵器
先月、イラクが核査察を拒否したことを理由に、アメリカとイギリスはイラクを攻撃した
「核がないことを目で確認するまで認めない」というアメリカの姿勢は、日本の非核運動にうまく利用できると筆者は考えている…
Weapons of Mass Destruction
By DOUGLAS LUMMIS
War is legal killing. But under international law, it is legal only when it is primarily members of military organizations who kill each other. The intentional or wanton killing of noncombatants is a war crime. That is the purpose of military uniforms and insignia: They enable soldiers to distinguish enemy soldiers, who they are permitted to kill, from civilians, who they must try not to harm.
Weapons of mass destruction make nonsense of this basic law. "Mass destruction" means just that: Every living thing within a certain area is killed. A bullet, carefully aimed, may find the heart of an individual soldier. But poison gas cannot distinguish soldier from civilian; it kills whatever breathes.
The U.S. government is worried that Iraq may have weapons of mass destruction. And the United States is not willing to accept Iraq's word on the matter. It says: We won't believe it until we see it. It wants Iraq to permit a United Nations inspection team to search everywhere such weapons might be hidden. And recently when Iraq refused entry to certain sites, the United States and Great Britain bombed the country (incidentally killing a lot of noncombatants).
Now here is something to think about. Of all weapons of mass destruction, the most destructive is the nuclear bomb. The Japanese government has a policy — the Three Non-nuclear Principles — under which no one may bring nuclear weapons into this country. But no one knows whether the United States obeys this policy. The United States itself won't say. Government spokespersons always give the same answer: "It is our policy neither to affirm or deny the presence of nuclear weapons in any specific location." Saying this forces potential enemies to assume that there ARE nuclear weapons in Japan. That's how the "nuclear umbrella" works. Nevertheless, the Japanese government insists that the United States does not keep nuclear weapons here. On what basis?
I suggest a good rule for judging this would be the one the United States is using in Iraq: Don't believe it until you see it.
In 1975 the city of Kobe instituted a policy requiring all ships entering Kobe Harbor to submit a document certifying that they carried no nuclear weapons. Since then no U.S. warship has entered Kobe Harbor. Now the government of Kochi Prefecture is planning to adopt a similar policy (which, interestingly, the Foreign Ministry is trying to block).
These are positive moves. But why not go one step further? Many local government assemblies in Japan have passed non-nuclear declarations. But to my knowledge none has insisted on the right to send inspection teams into places where such weapons might be hidden. If you live in an area where there are U.S. bases (e.g. Hokkaido, Tokyo, Kanagawa or Yamaguchi) why not propose that your local government assembly establish such an inspection team? How could U.S. government leaders object? It was they who set the precedent.
War is legal killing. But under international law, it is legal only when it is primarily members of military organizations who kill each other. The intentional or wanton killing of noncombatants is a war crime. That is the purpose of military uniforms and insignia: They enable soldiers to distinguish enemy soldiers, who they are permitted to kill, from civilians, who they must try not to harm.
Weapons of mass destruction make nonsense of this basic law. "Mass destruction" means just that: Every living thing within a certain area is killed. A bullet, carefully aimed, may find the heart of an individual soldier. But poison gas cannot distinguish soldier from civilian; it kills whatever breathes.
The U.S. government is worried that Iraq may have weapons of mass destruction. And the United States is not willing to accept Iraq's word on the matter. It says: We won't believe it until we see it. It wants Iraq to permit a United Nations inspection team to search everywhere such weapons might be hidden. And recently when Iraq refused entry to certain sites, the United States and Great Britain bombed the country (incidentally killing a lot of noncombatants).
Now here is something to think about. Of all weapons of mass destruction, the most destructive is the nuclear bomb. The Japanese government has a policy — the Three Non-nuclear Principles — under which no one may bring nuclear weapons into this country. But no one knows whether the United States obeys this policy. The United States itself won't say. Government spokespersons always give the same answer: "It is our policy neither to affirm or deny the presence of nuclear weapons in any specific location." Saying this forces potential enemies to assume that there ARE nuclear weapons in Japan. That's how the "nuclear umbrella" works. Nevertheless, the Japanese government insists that the United States does not keep nuclear weapons here. On what basis?
I suggest a good rule for judging this would be the one the United States is using in Iraq: Don't believe it until you see it.
In 1975 the city of Kobe instituted a policy requiring all ships entering Kobe Harbor to submit a document certifying that they carried no nuclear weapons. Since then no U.S. warship has entered Kobe Harbor. Now the government of Kochi Prefecture is planning to adopt a similar policy (which, interestingly, the Foreign Ministry is trying to block).
These are positive moves. But why not go one step further? Many local government assemblies in Japan have passed non-nuclear declarations. But to my knowledge none has insisted on the right to send inspection teams into places where such weapons might be hidden. If you live in an area where there are U.S. bases (e.g. Hokkaido, Tokyo, Kanagawa or Yamaguchi) why not propose that your local government assembly establish such an inspection team? How could U.S. government leaders object? It was they who set the precedent.
Shukan ST: Jan. 22, 1999
(C) All rights reserved
- international law
- 国際法
- primarily
- 主に
- intentional
- 故意の
- wanton
- いわれのない、勝手放題の
- noncombatants
- 非戦闘員
- insignia
- 記章
- distinguish 〜 from 〜
- 〜 と 〜 を区別する
- civilians
- 民間人
- make nonsense of 〜
- 〜 を台無しにする
- bullet
- 銃弾
- 〜 carefully aimed
- 慎重に照準を合わせた 〜
- poison gas
- 毒ガス
- whatever breathes
- 呼吸するものすべて
- on the matter
- その件に関しては
- inspection team
- 査察団
- entry
- 立ち入り
- bombed
- 空爆した
- incidentally
- たまたま
- destructive
- 破壊的な
- nuclear bomb
- 核爆弾
- Three Non-nuclear Principles
- 非核三原則(核兵器を製造しない、保有しない、持ち込みを認めないという、日本政府の3つの原則。1968年、佐藤栄作首相が国会で表明)
- obeys
- 従う
- spokespersons
- 広報担当者
- neither to affirm or deny the presence of 〜
- 〜 が存在することを肯定も否定もしない
- specific
- 特定の
- forces 〜 to assume that 〜
- 〜 に 〜 と想定させる
- potential enemies
- 敵になる可能性のある国
- nuclear umbrella
- 核の傘(核兵器保有国アメリカが、核兵器によって同盟国日本の安全を守る保障のこと)
- insists
- 言い張る
- On what basis?
- 何を根拠にしているのだろうか?
- good rule for judging this
- それを判断するよい方法
- instituted
- 制定した(1975年3月、神戸市議会は「核兵器積載艦艇の神戸港入港拒否に関する決議」という非核自治体宣言を行なった)
- submit a document certifying that 〜
- 〜 ということを証明する文書を提出する
- warship
- 戦艦
- adopt
- 採用する
- Foreign Ministry
- 外務省
- block
- 妨げる
- local government assemblies
- 地方自治体の集会(98年9月現在、日本は24府県595市21特別地区1370町344村が非核宣言を行なっている。さらに毎年、「日本非核宣言自治体協議会」が全国大会を開催している)
- set the precedent
- 先例をつくった