Opinion Patriot Koizumi By Scott T. Hards	フレームで見る  英文をプリントする  脚注をプリントする
愛国心の強い小泉首相 小泉首相の靖国神社参拝に対して野党やアジア各国から批判の声が上がったが、戦没者や戦争で被害を受けた人たちのために祈ったり、平和を願うことが違憲なのだろうか。戦後年以上たった今でもこの問題が外交上の重要課題としていつも論議を呼んでいるのはおかしいのではないか。

I was surprised and a bit disappointed by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's Aug. 13 visit to Yasukuni Shrine. While elated that he made the visit, I wish he would have stuck with the traditional schedule of paying respects on Aug. 15.

Koizumi's visit generated howls of protest from voices both domestic and foreign. Faced with his incredible popularity, opposition parties here in Japan are desperate for any weapon to use against him. So according to them, his visit was "unconstitutional," as it violated the clause requiring separation of state and religion. Some legal scholars have made the same argument.

Interestingly, the U.S. Constitution has the same clause in it, and nobody complains when the U.S. president goes to church and prays. In fact, freedom of religion is guaranteed by both countries' constitutions.

And to me, it's clear that rules separating church and state were written not to prevent a politician from offering a prayer for the dead, but to prevent things like present-day Afghanistan. I'm not a lawyer, so I'll let the experts fight over this one, but if Japan's Constitution really does make it illegal for the nation's leader to pray for the country's war dead at a shrine, then Japan's Constitution needs to be changed.

Externally, criticism of the visit came from China and Korea. Their claims centered on Yasukuni's enshrinement of the "class-A war criminals" among the souls remembered there. But Koizumi has repeatedly stated that his visit is not to pray for any particular individual, but rather all war victims. There are 14 war criminals there, vs. the souls of nearly 2.5 million others. I think it's the latter group that should be in the spotlight.

Further, Koizumi has gone out of his way time and again to indicate that his visit was a prayer for peace. If China and Korea choose not to believe him, and assign their own meaning to his visit, then that's their problem. Certainly, maintaining good relations with its Asian neighbors is important for Japan. But kowtowing to their every demand just to keep feathers unruffled, particularly when their arguments are groundless, is not the way to build strong relations.

After all, what actual and ma terial harm has Koizumi's visit caused these countries? Nothing. It's interesting to note that nations like the Philippines, which also suffered brutal Japanese aggression in World War II, have been virtually silent on the matter. Considering that his visit comes at a time when Japan is slashing its official development assistance contributions to China, and wrestling with Korea over fishing rights and textbooks, it's easy to imagine that these nations' true motives for their indignation may lie somewhere besides class-A war criminals.

Of course China and Korea did suffer horribly under Japan some 60 years ago. But that's the point: We're talking about something that took place more than half a century ago. How long are we going to keep listening when they shout "we were victims!" every time a dispute with Japan arises?

As I've written here before, it's far past the time when World War II should be allowed to play a major role in present-day international politics. It appears that Junichiro Koizumi understands that.

Shukan ST: Sept. 14, 2001

(C) All rights reserved