Koizumi's visit to Yasukuni Shrine has been reported widely, applauded broadly and criticized harshly among the nations since Aug. 15, the surrender day. I am neither for nor against the visit, or I don't care about such a thing. If I say that, I might have any criticism for my unconsciousness of the past invasion by Japanese militalism. Of course, I have learned the history of Japanese militalism' s aggression. And the history has been taught well at school in Japan although it is criticized by the intellectuals of the China, the Republic of Korea and the left-wingers of Japan that the history is taught wrongly in Japan.
As Ichiro Ozawa, the representative of the Democratic Party of Japan, said on TV yesterday and Prime Minister Koizumi has been saying, the past aggression and ruthless battle against the U.S. and the Britain is wrong and then leaders of Japanese militalism, who have been the Class-A war criminals and honored to Yasukuni Shrine, has been responsible for them. I think so, too. Koizumi, Ozawa and a candidate for next prime minister, Shinzo Abe, all say that such past war will never be repeated again. Even Mr. Abe hopes for no war although he is doubtful of the Tokyo trials which punished then Japanese leaders and said to be a hawkish militalist. (In that point, I don't think so. Mr. Abe is a very considerate and prudent statesman.)
It has been reported to be a big problem that the Prime Minister Koizumi went to Yasukuni Shrine, which is said to justify the history of invasion and define it as a battle for the Asians' independence from being controlled under the Western Power. However Koizumi insisted that he visited Yasukuni not to justify the past aggression but to respect the war dead. To the Chinese and Korean people, it may seem to be an applause of the aggression. To Koizumi, it is never that.
In part Koizumi is reported to have less interest in the diplomacy with the Asian countries because his visit made much worse the political relationship with them. And Koichi Kato, a member of the Diet who has insisted on building a friendship with China and raised an objection against Koizumi's visit, suffered from his house being burned by a member of the right-wing group in Tokyo. About this atrocious case, Makoto Sataka, a left-leaning commentator, said on TV that Koizumi's visit stimulated the fervor of the right-wingers and led to Mr.Kato's house being burned. This comment seems to me that Koizumi burned Mr.Kato's house. I think that this case is a problem of terrorism against the freedom of speech rather than the visit. Mr.Sataka's comment has a logical jump.
Is the visit problematic? I think it is more problematic that the visit has been reported heavily on TV, in the newspapers and through the internet than that the visit harms the hearts of Chinese and the Republic of Korea. It is a big problem that the visit is reported heavily to hurt the deplomatic relations with the Asian countries. Certainly the visit will make worse the feelings that Chinese and Koreans have toward Japan. However publicly exaggerating the visit would also make worse the relationship with China and Korea and be problematic.
By not raising it as a big diplomatic problem, it would take less time to discuss the issue and more time to make a strategic plan for building the peaceful community in the Asian area in the future. Discussing wether the visit is appropriate or not is not fruitful but harmful because it needs to dig into the historical facts and religious matters. Discussing for building peaceful and wealthy community is much more gainful for our future world.
No comments:
Post a Comment