カテゴリー: English Articles

Japanese : https://i-rich.org/?p=2054

International Resarch Institute of Controversical Histories
Senior Researcher Shunichi Fujiki

A body called “Japan Alliance for Truth about Comfort Women” was established on July 29, 2013.

This author had been working on the comfort women issue in various ways before that event and knew about the creation of the new body but wondered why it was necessary to establish a new one when there were already so many.

It was around the time when I was in the United States and stayed overnight to visit the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for the confirmation of the United States archives, on the ground of which we intended to prevent the installation of a comfort woman statue (Statue of a Girl of Peace) slated in the city of Glendale, California, in cooperation with Mr. Tony Marano (a.k.a. Texas Daddy) who lived in Texas.

In September 2013, when I was back in Japan after having completed my investigation in the United States, Mr. Sato Kazuo, secretary of this action body contacted me and asked if I would join the body. Mr. Sato told me that one group organized a panel exhibit of the comfort women issue while another investigated the issue, but since each was acting separately, there was loss in momentum, and that in order to bring the separate efforts together, his organization held a monthly meeting, serving as a window for information sharing, mainly in the form of a mailing list.

Thinking that through information sharing, it would be possible to act more effectively than as an individual body working on its own, I accepted to join this action body, as a representative of Texas Daddy in Japan and personally as a secretary of this body.

The birth of the International Research Institute of Controversial Histories (iRICH)

It goes without saying that the Japan Alliance for Truth about Comfort Women had harvested many fruits since its establishment. During a meeting held at the early stage of the foundation, we discussed the problem that the comfort women were called sexual slaves at the United Nations and that this term was disseminated to the world and then decided to form an investigation team, “Japan Alliance for Truth about Comfort Women United Nations Investigation Team.” This author became a member of the team and participated in the meeting of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women held in July 2014.

To our great surprise, what they discussed at the UN was not only the comfort women issue, but almost everything, ranging from the LGBT issue, which was hardly ever talked about in Japan, to gay couples’ trouble getting into the public housing, the same-sex marriage, Okinawa issue, Ainu issue, “Buraku (segregated village)” issue, the issue of Korean schools in Japan and the most extreme was a claim that the Japanese Imperial Household commits discrimination against women. These were brought to the United Nations by leftist NGOs, including the one organized by the Japan Federation of Bar Associations. We witnessed scenes at which these NGOs were brainwashing the UN Committee members who had little information about Japan.

We also came to learn that Mr. Kaido Yuichi, head of the Japan Federation of. Bar Associations (JFBA) and de facto husband of Ms. Fukushima Mizuho, member of the Japanese House of Councilors, acted like a tour guide for more than a hundred Japanese NGO members and controlled the speech sphere in the United Nations at his will.

This author was totally appalled to find that besides the comfort women issue, these other issues were secretly brought to the United Nations and Japanese domestic laws were drastically changed by these forces. They started acting in the United Nations nearly forty years ago and have been spreading false information that Japan is a terrible country, both domestically and internationally.

Upon returning to Japan from the United Nations, this author reported at the immediate monthly meeting about this situation and proposed to set up an international committee within our alliance body so that when issues other than the comfort women issue come up, we would be able to fully cope with them, without being restricted by the appellation carrying “comfort women.” My proposal was duly accepted.

Later, in November 2017, the international committee became iRICH International Research Institute of Controversial Histories and then it obtained the status of General Incorporated Association in April 2022.

Ten years since our action started

It’s been full ten years since we went to the United Nations for the first time in 2014. During these years, we attended annually almost all meetings related to human rights, held three to five times at the United Nations European Headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. We also attended meetings held at the New York Headquarters.

We participated as a team, session by session, and in some cases this author attended alone. Even during the Covid-19 pandemic disaster, we never failed to attend meetings whenever there was a meeting at the United Nations, going through PCR testing many times.

During this period, related to the comfort women issue, besides this author, Sugita Mio, member of the House of Representatives (at that time, out of office), Ms. Yamamoto Yumiko of Nadeshiko Action (Director of this Institute), Mr. Fujioka Nobukatsu (Senior Researcher at this Institute), Mr. Matsuki Kunitoshi (Senior Researcher at this Institute), Mr. Tony Marano (Texas Daddy) and others energetically took part in coping with the issue.

We have worked with many great people: related to the abduction and comfort women issues, Mr. Fujii Mitsuhiko (Refutation Project) also acted at the United Nations several times; related to Okinawa issue, Mr. Nakamura Satoru (Senior Researcher at this Institute) of the Japan Okinawa Policy Study Forum and Ms. Ganaha Masako; related to the Ainu issue, Mr. Sawada Kenichi (Senior Researcher at this Institute) and Mr. Onodera Masaru (former member of Hokkaido Legislative Assembly); related to the mobilized workers and comfort women issues, Dr. Lee woo-youn, researcher at Naksungdae Institute of Economic Research and Korean scholar on Japan; and related to China’s pressure over Hong Kong, we invited activists from Hong Kong and Japan. Thus, we have devoted ourselves to activities to protect Japan in our capacity as civilians.

For the first several years, we had much financial assistance from benefactors and then have continued to work on our own financial strength and have also received support from individuals.

There are many reasons for our consistent activities at the United Nations and we act mainly because it is necessary to obtain information regarding leftist operations at the UN, refute them on the spot and prevent the UN from issuing wrong recommendations, inform the Japanese people of such adverse operations and take prompt measures against them.

In addition, our efforts include establishing prestigious status for conservative Japanese NGOs within the United Nations.

The bond among the leftist frequent visitors to the United Nations is considerably firm. Judging from my ten-year experience at the UN, I have noticed that the leftist groups have two kinds of objectives.

First, they aim to advertise the individual or groups’ names by asserting that they successfully induce the UN into issuing recommendations or Japan into changing its domestic laws. And second, they aim to destroy Japan as a state, using funds provided within or outside Japan or appropriating Japan’s national budget or groups’ money.

We can give as an extreme example of the first case, a group led by lawyer Ms. Ito Kazuko of Human Rights Now, which brought an issue to the United Nations, in their capacity as lawyers, claiming that performance of group gymnastics during an elementary school sports day constitutes child abuse. Against their assertion, this author refuted them, saying, “The performance has been maintained since the Meiji era as physical and mental training for children,” “Needless to say, teachers attend the performers with much care and once they discern any danger, they try to reduce the tiers of a human pyramid,” “In view of fearing lest children should get injured, it is far safter to have them stop riding a bicycle.” Ms. Ito’s assertion was absurd to such an extent. Of course, no U.N. recommendation was issued following her assertion. If a recommendation had been issued and a law had been revised as she required, lawyer Ito would have risen in the public esteem more than a lawyer who just made a new precedent. During these exchanges at the UN, I found out that in its actions, her group cooperated with a certain Japanese mass medium.

Second, there are those who question the Imperial House Law and those against the U.S. military base in Okinawa.

When Okinawan activist Yamashiro Hiroji came to the United Nations, this author refuted Mr. Yamashiro on the spot and prevented a UN recommendation from being issued.

The Sankei Newspaper of June 18, 2017, reported as follows:

“Defendant Yamashiro appealed in front of the crowd of about fifty media and NGO people, saying, “It is no doubt that the improper treatment against us was warning or threat to the Okinawans resisting the Government’s political pressure.”

“However, when asked about the video showing defendant Yamashiro and others inflicting violence upon staff of Okinawa Defense Agency of the Ministry of Defense, defendant Yamashiro evaded the question, saying, ‘I am being advertised as if I were No.1 terrorist in Japan.’ He seemed embarrassed having the fact revealed that he was a ‘perpetrator.’ It was the moment when a lie disseminated by some Japanese through the United Nations was refuted.”

In October last year, Okinawan Governor Tamaki Denny asked Citizens' Diplomatic Centre for the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Japanese leftist NGO, for support using the Prefectural taxpayers’ money and made a speech at the Human Rights Council. This author was singularly participating in the meeting and exposed the governor’s lie and deception on the spot. Of course, no UN recommendation came to be issued related to this matter.

The leftist powers have been conducting such activities for forty years. Since this author began regularly visiting the United Nations, in a group or on my own, we have continued working, refuting issues these leftist groups bring to the UN and preventing the UN from issuing inadequate recommendations. If we had not continued working, there would have been many things far beyond our understanding.

At one time, South Korea attempted to register the official U.S. military documents written in 1944 related to the comfort women issue to the UN-affiliated UNESCO’s “Memory of the World.” Against this attempt, Director Yamamoto and others came up with a plan to apply for registration of the same documents under a different interpretation and carried it out successfully. In addition, the Japanese Government led by Prime Minister Abe stopped submitting Japan’s contribution to UNESCO, proposing to reform UNESCO, which was duly realized. This was because the United Nations and its affiliated organs are supposed only to provide the platform for consideration but not to judge which side is correct when it comes to historical issues.

In our opinion, it is no exaggeration to think that our various activities brought about the correction and apology regarding the false reporting of the comfort women issue on the part of the Asahi Newspaper.

Devitalized current leftist activities at the United Nations Human Rights Council

Originally, it cost us 350,000 to 400,000 yen per person to attend a meeting at the United Nations. Currently, under the weak yen, it costs us dearly to act in Switzerland, where prices are highest under the inflated economy. At present, the cost is 800, 000 to 1,000,000 yen per person. Leftist groups have access to abundant money while we, the orthodox campaigners, have to cover our own expenses. We are supported by assistance from benefactors and public donations. Therefore, we cannot afford to engage in activities unless they bring fruits. The leftist groups, based on lies and distorted data they bring to the United Nations, brainwash and lead the ill-informed UN Committee members to issue various recommendations at their will. They could accomplish these results due to their abundant monetary resources.

Maybe, however, as the results of our activities over the decades or because they have judged that the cost effectiveness does not work as well as before, the leftist activities at the United Nations have been remarkably devitalized since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic.

The self-proclaimed disciple of the then lawyer Totsuka Etsuro, who succeeded in defining comfort women as “sexual slaves”, former Professor Maeda Akira of Tokyo Zokei University (currently Professor Emeritus of the University and lecturer at Korean University in Japan) participated in the Human Rights Council to the last, incessantly fabricating stories but has not shown up in the Human Rights Council in recent years.

Besides the Human Rights Council, the United Nations holds the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), which takes place every four or five years against all member countries, in addition to respective UN Convention, Treaty and Covenant-related committees.

Now that we can hardly see leftist activists at the Human Rights Council, it can be judged that the leftists are losing their momentum. Possibly, however, they may try to concentrate their activities on the UPR and respective convention committees. Still, we must be watchful and prepared to cope with them adequately from now on in case they become active again.

“The issue of how the Science Council of Japan should be” is now to be settled

[Japanese] https://i-rich.org/?p=1833

Tsukasa Shirakawa

It was announced that the Government has decided to change the status of the Science Council of Japan from the current national organ to an independent organization with corporate status by Chairman Matsumura of the National Public Safety Commission during a press interview held on December 22, 2023. The pending issue since the Suga Yoshihide Cabinet refused to appoint part of members in December 2020 has now begun to move toward a certain resolution.

The Science Council of Japan has conflicted with the Government over the selection of its members many times. The Council is a national organ and the power to appoint its members belongs to the Prime Minister. However, the Council has never accepted having their recommended candidates rejected. So, if the Council is to be independent from the State, its membership selection will be up to the Council and there will be no more conflict.

The Science Council of Japan has been receiving one-billion yen in support from the Government, but this amount will be reduced from now on. For the time being, the Council will try to vary its financial basis while receiving financial support. At the same time, the Council will consider the system to clarify its management.

The Science Council of Japan has not agreed to the decision, and possibly it will be necessary to accept part of the Council’s opinion regarding the decided change. However, it is very unlikely that the decision itself will be turned over.

The truth about the “appointment refusal issue” and its unexpected fallout  

Prior to the “issue of the appointment refusal” by the Suga Yoshihide Cabinet, it was the then Prime Minister Abe Shinzo that was preparing for the reform of the Science Council of Japan. The two sides clashed two times. The first time was in 2016, when three posts were vacant among the membership, and to fill the vacancy, Prime Minister Abe asked two posts to be filled by the second candidates. The second time was in 2018. Then, out of 11 posts to be refilled, Prime Minister Abe asked one post to be filled by the second candidate. After much tug of war, both cases were settled when the Council gave up refilling the posts.

What we must heed here is that the Science Council of Japan puts up two candidates for each post, but in fact they only recognize the first candidate. The Council pursued this method for decades and fiercely resisted against any attempt to remove the first candidate by the Government, Ministry of Education or related organizations of the Council. Outwardly, there are two candidates for each post, but in fact, it was nothing but the appointment by the Council.

During the semi-selection held every three years to reselect half of the members, the same method has been taken.

During the reselection of members in 2017, following the then Prime Minister Abe’s request, the Science Council of Japan was to recommend 110 candidates for the membership capacity of 105, leaving five for the Prime Minister to refuse. In fact, however, the Science Council of Japan had designated “105 candidates to be appointed” and had no intention to appoint the remaining five nominal candidates.

In the background of the “appointment refusal” incident in 2020, there was a fact that then the Science Council of Japan unprecedentedly recommended exactly 105 candidates.

Plainly speaking, breaking the promise made with the former Prime Minister, the Council daringly challenged the then Prime Minister Suga Yoshihide. In response to the daring challenge, Prime Minister Suga refused “six candidates” beyond the conventional five.

However, this issue brought an unexpected fallout. That is, the connection between the Science Council of Japan and the Communist Party came to be generally known. Prime Minister Suga got exposed to a barrage of criticism from the Oppositions and the mass media regarding this issue. At the same time, both the Science Council of Japan and the Communist Party went on exclusively criticizing the Government, totally forgetting to effectively take care of the largest issue of the moment, the covid 19 pandemic.

The more the Communist Party became concerned about the Science Council of Japan, the more apparently their close relationship became revealed, and the more people came to feel repulsive toward the Science Council of Japan.

Why it is necessary for the Science Council of Japan to be independent from the Governmnet     

The Science Council of Japan stated in a letter dated July 25, 2023, addressed to Minister of State for Special Missions Kobayashi (in charge of scientific technologies policy) that “it is difficult to clearly separate military and civilian study from non-military study. In response to this recognition, most of the mass media reported that “the Science Council of Japan admitted military study.”

As soon as this report appeared, the Science Council of Japan asserted that it maintains the position advocated in 1950. Later, the Council stated again that it is difficult to separate military and civil technologies. Still, it became clear that the Council has no intention to abandon “postwar pacifism.” Even today, the Council is controlled by the postwar pacifist ideology and has no intention to fully carry out its task as a national organ.

From the very beginning of its foundation, the Science Council has consistently maintained that military study may cause a war and publicly stated that the Science Council of Japan shall not engage in military study, three times, in 1950, 1967 and 2017.

However, military-civil technology includes the Internet, AI and drones which are essential for future economic development. Japan falls behind the United States and other countries in these fields and China is beginning to advance further than Japan. Unless both State and civilians work together, Japan cannot cope with the global competition.

In addition, the Science Council of Japan concluded a Memorandum of Cooperation with the Chinese Science Technology Association and has indirect personal exchange with the military science academy directly under the Association and the People’s Liberation Army. If it is to cooperate with the organization, there is a fear lest it should contribute to the Chinese military technology.

While the Science Council of Japan is working cooperatively in Chinese military study, it refuses to be cooperative in Japanese military study. If the Science Council of Japan is such harmful organization toward Japan, it is perfectly natural that it should be independent from the State. We hope that the Science Council of Japan will become independent from the Japanese Government as soon as possible.

[Japanese] https://i-rich.org/?p=1751

President
International Research Institute of Controversial Histories

Sugihara Seishiro

It is said that there are three pillars in the European and American civilizations. They are Greek philosophy, Christianity and Roman law.

Related to Roman law, a proverb says, “Law is to be discovered, but not to be made.” In gist, law is the pursuit of justice.

Under the Chinese civilization, law is a mere tool that those holding power use to rule the people and therefore, those in power may make whatever law they wish and use it in whatever way they like.

European and American laws have been derived from Roman law and ultimately exist to pursue justice. Thereby, the word “right” meaning “correct” also means “privilege.” However, this concept was not based on law, and it was necessary to back it with power. The word “right” refers to “right hand” and represents power. So, it refers to justice backed by power.

Thus, law in the European and American sense exists not at the mercy of an arbitrary power but as an authority by itself. Consequently, law is included in the concept of the “rule of law” or “nomocracy,” and such law governs the present world.

Consequently, under the “rule of law,” various principles came to be born. For instance, when a law is made to impose punishment, the principle of non-retroactivity meaning that the law shall not be applied retrospectively is one of the well-known legal principles.

Under those principles, regarding the relationship between the people and the State, the principle of independence of the three powers (legislative, executive, and judicial) is to be upheld. Through adequate checks and balances among the judicial, legislative, and executive powers, justice and order of law are secured.

Since the Meiji Era, Japan has sincerely learned from European and American judicial systems and endeavored to follow the “rule of law” and has now become a country perfectly observing the “rule of law.” However, recently, within the last few years, incidents occurred, making us apprehensive that the “rule of law” may be collapsing. We can perceive the omen of the collapsing rule of law, which poses a historical crisis of the “rule of law.”

On December 10, 2022, related to the issue of the former Unification Church, the so-called Saving Victims Law, officially, Law on Illegal Solicitation of Donations by Corporations, was enacted.

This law was enacted amid the tumult asking for the dissolution of the former Unification Church. However, in terms of the “rule of law,” whatever rigid law may have been enacted to dissolve the former Unification Church, the application of this law should be limited to the cases after the enforcement of this law. This fact was not fully disseminated by the executive office amongst the tumult. Should this fact been disseminated earlier, such chaotic situation could have been avoided.

Prime Minister Kishida changed his interpretation overnight, stating that civil law can be considered among factors for the dissolution of the Church. As long as change of interpretation on the part of the executive branch is within the range permitted by law, under the “rule of law,” it cannot digress from law. However, without pointing out the principle of the “rule of law,” he suddenly mentioned the change of interpretation as if aiming to further complicate the issue. This is a kind of digression that exceeds the powers allocated to the executive branch.

On June 16, 2023, the so-called LGBT Law, officially, Law on the Promotion of the People’s Understanding of the Diversity about the Sexual Preference and Gender Identity, was enacted by the Diet.

In terms of the “rule of law,” this law lacks “legislative fact” that necessitates the legislation of the law. Under such judicial circumstances, the enactment of such a law may destroy the order that the majority of the people have enjoyed and shake the stability of justice and order of law, leading to the destruction of the people’s peace, security and happiness. As a legislation, such law is digression of the “rule of law.”

On July 11, 2023, the Supreme Court made a decision allowing the plaintiff with gender identity disorder, who works for the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and is married with a wife and child(ren), physically looks like a man, has not undergone the requisite gender reassignment surgery due to health-related reasons and claims to be a woman, to use any women’s restroom within the Ministry.

By this decision, the claim made by the plaintiff with gender identity disorder has been satisfied and as far as this person’s right is concerned, it is protected. On the other hand, as for the majority of female workers at the Ministry, their right to use women’s restrooms in peace and quiet which has been enjoyed so far came to be violated.

In the first place, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry had the person in question to use the restrictively specified women’s restroom within the Ministry but did not prohibit the person from using any of the women’s restrooms.

On the part of the Supreme Court, it is not their mission to directly resolve the inconvenience of the plaintiff. Rather, considering the right of the majority of female workers to use women’s restrooms in peace and quiet, the Ministry restricted the use of women’s restrooms by the plaintiff. Then, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether this restrictive measure taken by the Ministry against the plaintiff was within the legal range. It is against the justice of the law to destroy the order the majority of people enjoy and violate the rights of the majority.

In addition, if a person in such an unusual situation is to be protected, it is only possible by discussing the issue and making new rules that cover all of those in the same situation. However, it is the work of the Diet to make new rules through discussion.

Judiciary’s task is to decide whether an issue brought up in a lawsuit is legal or not, based on the existing laws, regulations, and customs and through such process, it decides the final interpretation of the respective laws and regulations.

In the judiciary, it is against the “rule of law” to save certain individuals by destroying the order that has been enjoyed by the majority of the people.

The Supreme Court is the highest court in our country, which must endeavor to maintain the importance of the traditional order and ensure the stability of the State.

Thus far, I have pointed out the cases that, if ignored, may lead to the collapse of the “rule of law” on the part of the judicial, legislative, and executive branches and this should be my warning about the possible collapse of the “rule of law.”

[Please refer to this author’s book Basic Theory on Judiciary—Its Structure of the Rule of Law (Published by Kyodo Shuppan, 1973)

International Research Institute for Controversial Histories

Senior researcher

Yoshiaki Yano

日本語

Conflicts in the Middle East are raging once again. The war between Hamas and Israel is escalating. The historical background and its misinterpretation by the Great Powers concerned have caused complicated consequences.

During the Islamic Ottoman dynasty, in the present-day Israel, Jews and Christians lived in peaceful harmony under the Islamic rule.

However, at the end of the 19th century, the Zionist movement started, and groups of Jews started entering Palestine to settle in “God’s promised land.” But the Ottoman Empire did not particularly regulate their settlement.

After World War I, as the Ottoman Empire was in the process of dissolving, the Middle East region was divided into areas under the rule of several Western Great Powers. The United Kingdom, one of the belligerent powers of the War, concluded the Hussein-McMahon agreement in 1915, while the war was still going on, and promised the independence of the region where Arabs resided in exchange for the cooperation of the Arabic States in the war against the Turkish Ottoman Empire.

On the other hand, in May 1916, the United Kingdom made a secret agreement with its allies France and Russia, regarding the control over the Ottoman Empire after the War.

Moreover, in November 1917, the British Government issued the Balfour Declaration, pledging its agreement and support for the establishment in Palestine of a “National Home” for the Jewish people.

This triple-tongued diplomacy on the part of the United Kingdom, which made pledges that contradicted one another, is said to have been the fundamental factor creating the present-day Palestinian issue.

However, the Arab State designated in the Hussein-McMahon agreement did not include Palestine and some say that the two agreements did not contradict each other.

The Balfour Declaration clearly safeguarded the rights of Palestine’s indigenous non-Jewish residents while establishing a “National Home” for the Jewish people in Palestine.

Based on the Balfour Declaration, in 1922, the League of Nations adopted the resolution of the British Mandate for Palestine. At that time, the residents in Palestine were mostly Arabs and even under the mandatory rule, in view of the right of people’s self-determination, Arabs’ sovereignty should have been respected.

However, as the Zionist movement rose further, more and more Jews came to buy land and settle in Palestine and the conflicts between the Arab Palestinian residents and the Jewish settlement and Jewish settlers became more frequent.

The confrontation between the two peoples under the mandate turned into conflicts between States after the United Nations’ resolution to divide Palestine after World War II.

In the background of this resolution lay the massacre of Jews by Nazi Germany during World War II. Before and during the War, many Jewish refugees headed for Palestine and the movement to support the establishment of a state for homeless Jews in Palestine became widespread among the Allied Nations.

Decisively important was the lobbying by Jewish American residents in the Congress of the United States of America, the most powerful victor of the War. In 1947, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the resolution recommending the termination of the British Mandate for Palestine and the partition of Palestine to create two independent Arab and Jewish states, and a Special International Regime for the city of Jerusalem.

It turned out that the United Nations resolution allowed a different people to establish a respective new State in another’s land, almost equivalent to allowing invaders to conquer the land, which is against international law. This is exactly what became the root of the current conflicts in the Middle East.

In fact, on the next day after the State of Israel was proclaimed in 1948, the surrounding Arab States, not recognizing the Israeli independence, started military attacks against Israel. This was the first Middle East War. Israel won the war and after ceasefire through the United Nations mediation consolidated its status as an independent State and came to occupy a larger portion of the land than initially allocated in the Partition Resolution by the United Nations.

While Israel occupied the Palestinian region, more than 700,000 Palestinian people became refugees, which created the current Palestinian refugee issue.

After that, Middle East Wars between Israel and the surrounding Arab States took place three more times, and each time Israel won, expanding its territory further.

On the part of Palestine, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was formed in 1964, asserting its goal of Palestinian self-determination, but in the Lebanese civil war in 1982, the PLO was ousted from Lebanon and its influence gradually diminished. In 1988, after deciding to establish a Palestinian State in the West Bank of the Jordan River and in the Gaza Strip, co-existing with Israel, the PLO adopted the Palestine Declaration of Independence.

In 1993, the Oslo Accords were signed, according to which the Government of Israel and the PLO recognized each other and an interim Palestine autonomy in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank was established. The PLO promised to abandon its armed struggle, but the newly established Hamas, acting as a destroyer of peace, launched suicidal terrorist bombings, aggravating the domestic conflicts with the interim government.

Hamas won the Palestine legislative election in 2006 and after the Battle for Gaza in 2007 became the governing authority in the Gaza Strip. Hamas is an organization that follows the principles of Sunni Islamic fundamentalism and Palestinian nationalism.

During the Syrian civil war, attempting to oust the Asad Government, Hamas fought against Hizballah, supported by the United States and Israel. Hizballah is a Shia Islam militia, based in southern Lebanon, supported by Iran.

In recent years, however, Hamas has been concentrating on armed struggle against Israel, promoting the strategic cooperation with Hizballah, and receiving support in terms of weapons and training.

The current conflict with Israel, triggered by the unexpected attack by Hamas, opened a new battle front in connection with the ongoing war in Ukraine, which benefits strategically Russia and China, although they are not directly involved in the conflict. Some commentators even think that support for Hamas came from Russia and China.

Another assumption based on the conflict is that Israel and the United States may launch a preemptive strike against Iran, which is reportedly close to obtaining enriched uranium that could be used to build a nuclear weapon.

On the other hand, the Biden Administration released $ 6 billon-worth of the frozen Iranian assets. It cannot be denied that part of that money went to Hamas through Hizballah.

It is not clear, either, why the Biden Administration released as much as $ 6 billion of frozen Iranian assets, or whether weapons left deserted in Afghanistan or part of the weapons to be sent to Ukraine found its way into the hands of Hamas.

Some speculate that since Russia seems to be winning in the Ukraine War despite the past expectations, the U.S. Jewish international financial capital is trying to make profit by waging a new war in the Middle East.

Thus, the historical background leading to the outbreak of the war in the Middle East this time and the misunderstanding by the Superpowers of the realities inside and outside the region are so complicated that it is not at all a simple question of which one is ally or foe or which one is right or wrong.

It is urgent for each country to correctly analyze the situation and make the utmost effort to secure its national interest and particularly national security, without being swallowed up in the violent current of these bizarre and complicated international circumstances.

The region surrounding Japan is as militarily tense as Ukraine and the Middle East. Japan must have its own independent national security policy and carry out informational activities.

Particularly, Japan depends on the Middle East for more than 90% of its crude oil import. If the safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz should be threatened, Japan would be directly hit. Japan has 240 days’ oil stockpile maintained by the state and private companies. If the conflict should linger on, the Japanese economy would be hard hit. Japan should strengthen its energy security and particularly, restart its nuclear power facilities soon enough.

The conflict may suddenly spread and it is urgent to secure the safety of the Japanese residents and companies in the region and to have them safely and promptly return home to Japan. Reexamining the five principles to participate in the U.N. Peace Keeping Operations (PKO), the Japan Self Defense Forces should be authorized to use the necessary weapons in carrying out their missions in the conflict regions.

The biggest threat is China’s advance to the Senkaku Islands and Taiwan, using the void of power in the Northeast Asia. The state control of the Chinese economy tightens further and the dictatorship of Xi Jinping is further consolidated after consecutive ousting of high government officials and it appears that there are signs of progressing preparations for war, including efforts to enhance the nuclear forces and stockpile more nuclear weapons. Japan should speedily enhance its defense force, prepare for a possible attack on the Senkaku Islands and strengthen its own nuclear deterrent power.

International Research Institute for Controversial Histories

Guest Fellow

Tsukasa Shirakawa

日本語

1. The origin of the SCJ’s Galapagos-like pacifism

The Science Council of Japan was established in 1949 under the rule of the Allied Forces General Headquarters (GHQ), when everything held affirmative prior to the Pacific War was negated without reason. This very atmosphere turned the national academy fundamentally aiming to support Japan’s science and technology into a propaganda organ with Galapagos-like pacifism .

The then Prime Minister Yoshida Shigeru was dissatisfied with the Science Council of Japan because while using the Government budget, all the SCJ did was to criticize the government and engage in political confrontations. So, Yoshida tried to change it from a government organ to a private one. But the SCJ’s first President Kameyama Naoto, citing the GHQ foremost, checked Yoshida and thus, eventually the time was up for Yoshida’s efforts.

Initially, when he took office, General Douglas MacArthur of the GHQ was very enthusiastic about the demilitarization of Japan. In thought and academic aspects, he was most attentive to two issues: the purge of public officials, which started in 1945, and the establishment of the Science Council of Japan.

2. The Science Council of Japan was filled with leftists

In the purge of public officials, many statesmen who held conservative views, journalists, business leaders, scholars and teachers were expelled from their jobs. Among those expelled, there were many people indispensable in the task of restoring Japan in the postwar years. It was only since 1950 that those indispensable workers gradually came to be exempt from the purge.

On the other hand, in the Science Council of Japan, from the very beginning, the subsidiary of the Communist Party named Democratic Scientists’ Association (DSA) was dominant. Against the re-armament, the Science Council of Japan issued a statement to the effect that the Council shall not engage in any study that may contribute to the development of military technologies. Incidentally, this statement was repeated as the statement of study of military security in 2017. Regarding national security, the SCJ has not changed its standing for sixty-six years.

The DSA lost support after it criticized Stalin in 1965 and practically ceased to exist in the 1960s. However, the Japan Scientists’ Association (JSA) succeeded it. The JSA is partially influenced by the Japanese Communist Party and the latter has kept certain influence over the Science Council of Japan, using this academic organization.

After DSA ceased to exist, its branch of jurists called “legal sub-committee” continues to operate even today and acts as a brain for the pro-Constitution movement or as an organization of activists. Incidentally, among the six SCJ members “who were denied appointment,” three of them, Mr. Matsumiya Takaaki, Mr. Okada Masanori and Mr. Ozawa Ryuichi are related to the legal subcommittee of the Democratic Scientists’ Association.

We should bear it in mind that although GHQ gave birth to the Science Council of Japan, it did not expand it. MacArthur himself gradually lessened his initial prejudice against Japan and finally started rearming it. On the other hand, the Science Council of Japan accepted MacArthur’s initial prejudice as it was and has preserved it.

I just mentioned that the first President Kameyama name-dropped GHQ in protesting against Prime Minister Yoshida’s intention to make the SCJ private. The Science Council of Japan has been very much proud of the fact that it came into being through GHQ, which was more powerful than the Japanese Government, while ideologically influenced by the Communist Party. This sense of pride seems to make the Science Council of Japan always act arrogantly in dealing with the Japanese Government.

3. The organization ailed by the “Pre-war Syndrome”

The year 1965, when Japan Scientists’ Association was born, was the “era of the students’ movement.” The Japanese Communist Party was promoting a peace movement with the goal to stop nuclear bombing and further accelerated it into a movement opposing the Vietnam War.

Part of the Science Council of Japan still carries the mentality of the students’ movement deeply soaked in pacifism and leftist ideology, which were present even in its prime age. This is clear from the scenes of scholars who “were denied assignment” loudly expressing themselves in front of the TV cameras.

Listening to anti-Government statements voiced by the Science Council of Japan, we can see its morbid, short-circuited thinking that connects everything to the pre-war situation or claims that “whatever conservative administration does leads to militarism.” I call it “Pre-war Syndrome.”

When statesmen of the ruling party try to enhance the national security policy, those who have internalized the pre-war syndrome hear “military boots” resounding from nowhere and become hot with flames of justice, thinking “unless we do something against it, Japan will become militarist.” This is the source of energy that keeps Galapagos-like pacifism going to this day within the Science Council of Japan.

4. The right to appoint resides in the Prime Minister

As the theoretical grounds for criticizing Prime Minister Suga Yoshihide’s refusal of appointment in 2020, it was mentioned that Niwa Hyosuke, Chief of Home Affairs of the Nakasone Cabinet, responded that “it is mere nominal recommendation and those recommended by the Council will not be refused and will be nominally appointed.”

In the background of this response, there was a change in the membership nomination. The SCJ members used to be elected among recommended candidates, but then the procedure was changed to a system of recommendation by the sitting SCJ members. By the latter method, it became easier for the Science Council of Japan to arbitrarily select its members.

However, the status of the member of the Science Council of Japan is special national civil servant to be appointed by the Prime Minister, which is clearly stated in the Science Council of Japan Law. It is the duty of a civil servant to follow the appointment by the Prime Minister. There is no need to account for the personnel appointment.

In addition, the final report of the Council for Science and Technology in 2003, based on the Fundamental Law on Reform of Central Ministries, Agencies and others, states, “As to the form of establishment, the way academies in major European and American states are is considered to be ideal, and regarding the Science Council of Japan, we will evaluate the progress in the reform within the next decade and discuss adequate way of establishment.” Following this, the Science Council of Japan should be reformed in one way or another by 2013.

5. The Science Council of Japan should promptly be dissolved 

Surveying proposals made by the Science Council of Japan so far, we cannot find any example of its significant social contribution that the entire nation can duly appreciate. In 2000, there was a case of fabrication in the field of archaeological society. The Science Council of Japan failed to propose any solution. In recent years, there have been many anti-Government proposals and when it comes to the covid disaster, the SCJ did not come up with any proposal. The Science Council of Japan, having assembled the top brains in Japan and being versed in overseas information and knowledge, has been busy protesting against the issue of the refused appointment, but failed to produce any proposal as a government organ during the hardest time for the Japanese people. A billion yen out of the precious tax money is annually spent on the SCJ. The Science Council of Japan seems not to feel duly responsible for meeting the people’s expectations.

In addition, the Science Council of Japan holds certain influence over the examination members of the Science Council of Japan Promotion Foundation in deciding the allocation of \237.7 billion scientific research fees for the fiscal 2021 as authorities in various fields of science. Through its enormous influence in allocating the scientific research fees, the SCJ controls the entire academic society, driving the academic world toward left, marring the Government’s national security policy and making Japan fall behind other countries in dealing with national security.

Moreover, some members of the Science Council of Japan are related to the so-called “seven schools of national defense” of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, some apply to the “One Thousand People Plan” by the Chinese Government recruiting foreigners, and there is a case in which Japanese cooperated in Chinese military study, while opposing Japan’s own military study.

Most of physics and engineering scientists’ specialties span both military and civilian fields. However, the Science Council of Japan is so insistent on being a propaganda organization firmly opposing military study on its own that not a few scientists find it difficult to carry out their study in Japan. The SCJ is led by assertions of those in humanities study and pro-Communist Party members while members in physics and chemistry are obliged to follow them. Thus, only partial assertions made by ultra-left SCJ members turn out to be the assertions representing the entire Science Council of Japan.

In historical examination of the Science Council of Japan, we must say that the SCJ is too much influenced by the Japanese Communist Party, which has a mere one percent support rate among the Japanese voters. The Japanese Government should promptly start dissolving the Science Council of Japan for the sake of Japan’s national security and other important issues.   

International Research Institute for Controversial Histories

advisor

Nishikawa Kyoko

Japanese Version

The overpowering sense of existence of Prime Minister Abe being felt anew

It’s been a year since Prime Minister Abe was brutally shot to death. The tremendous sense of loss has been not a bit appeased all this while, and the greatness of his existence has been felt each day. As if in correspondence with the loss, it seems that the world is moving toward an undesirable and eerie direction. Once the world stood in the honeymoon mood between Prime Minister Abe and President Trump, without major conflicts and well-balanced with the leaders of advanced countries respecting each other. Only one country, China, tried to expand its military power, aggressively moving in the South China Sea, the East China Sea and around Japan. From that time onward, the U.S. China policy has been drastically changed and the sense of a threat coming from China has been rapidly spreading among the advanced countries.

Seeing such global circumstances, I cannot help but feel how great the presence of Prime Minister had been. In the strong and trustful relationship with President Trump, Prime Minister Abe supposedly told the U.S. President on every available occasion what a perilous threat China is and how dangerous China’s self-righteous political stand is. He probably informed him that at present, China’s expansionism constantly creates the threat of military invasion, regarding Japan as an imaginary enemy and that this situation is extremely dangerous to the United States.

In the postwar years, the United States policy toward China was consistently China-friendly, including the one of the Republican Party. China has been receiving enormous amounts of economic aid from both the United States and Japan and at present has acquired huge economic and military powers. China has now become a monster, nearly overpowering the United States and demonstrating its overwhelming presence to the world. The world owed much to Prime Minister Abe, who endeavored to let the major world leaders recognize the menace of China. But he is gone now. The war in Ukraine is getting more and more complicated and chaotic, Russia and China are getting closer to each other, and Japan finds itself in the extremely difficult position amid the two.

Non-commonsense claims rapidly spread today

In the world successively plagued by the corona-virus disaster and the war in Ukraine, the trend of globalism has become vividly conspicuous. Globalism, at the first glance, may look beautiful, but at its root, it is close to communism and is a movement aiming to steer things into one direction. It seems that the destination of globalism is rootlessness, confusion, emptiness and loss of identity as a human. Losing the sense of a state, more like in terms of reducing the state to individuals, individuals rather than the whole, minority rather than majority, extraordinary rather than ordinary, and so forth---the society that up to now has been well-balanced on such traditional relationships has recently changed into a society with the emphasis on just one side, putting ordinary existence and common sense into an awkward position. The mass media and those with social status cater today to people who loudly assert their non-commonsense claims, and their non-commonsense views are pushed aggressively to the center. I wonder since when have the Japanese people became such a deplorable nation. The Japanese people used to be very considerate of each other.

The typical incident riding on this recent trend was the enactment of the law to enhance the understanding of LGBT. I was totally appalled at the passing of this LGBT bill. The bill has been discussed and the attempt to enact the law has been made over the last seven years and while Prime Minister Abe was alive, the conservative Diet members of the Liberal Democratic Party had been fending off the movement. However, after Prime Minister Abe was killed, entering this year, suddenly and speedily, the bill was passed, led by supposedly conservative Diet members, ignoring many opposing voices within the Party. The excuse of those Diet members for leading the passing of the bill was that the LDP had taken over the opposition parties’ radical bill, considerably amending and correcting the wordings, in response to questions and concerns raised by the conservative group and simply held by the public. However, before such an excuse, there is a fact that even the United States has been very careful anticipating problems involved and has not passed the LGBT related bill at the Federal level. Why, then, did Japan pass the bill, in advance of the rest of the world? I feel that this is very dubious and inadequate. I would like to hear what Prime Minister Kishida really believes to be right.

The movement of the LGBT related legislation is advanced rather at the municipal level. Including Tokyo as a starter, fifty municipals across the country have enacted ordinance to prohibit discriminatory treatment based on sexual orientation or identity. The speed of the trend is amazing. The trend to enact this bill, using the “verbal tool” of anti-discrimination, further leads to the destruction of the marital system by the introduction of the partnership system. At the root of this chain of movements lies the promotion of political correctness, leading to the destruction of the entire order concerned with the identity of the Japanese people, such as Japanese traditions, culture, customs, common sense that have been nurtured over our long history. This is not a reform. A reform does not change the essential axis of the matter but changes the methods. However, the recent movement can be termed as white revolution, riding on the current of globalism. Without using arms, leading the human mind and thinking at the base of all the fields of human activities to a certain direction. I think this can be called mental revolution or a trend of thought control.

The Supreme Court should reach the judgment, considering the common sense of the public in the broad perspective

In less than a month after the LGBT bill was passed, on this July 11, the Supreme Court returned a verdict in the small court, recognizing the plaintiff’s complaint that the transgender worker of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry be allowed to freely use women’s restrooms in the workplace. It was reportedly the unanimous decision of the five judges. What can I say? I thought judges are to reach judgment, in consideration of the public common sense and in the broad perspective, but, alas, they are not. They seem to live in a narrow and small world.

This year, in Saitama Prefecture, which enacted ordinance related to LGBT in 2022, they conducted a survey of public comments on making the basic plan. A total of 417 comments were turned in, 80% of which were against the plan. I think this is the exact consensus of ordinary Japanese. I only hope that the education for understanding LGBT at schools may not go too far, ignoring what parents, pupils and students feel. I used to fight against people trying to promote extreme sex education in Tokyo Metropolis. I cannot help thinking that advocates of the LGBT movement seem to have the same ideas as those advocates of sexual education I met in the past.

From the ancient times, countries with monotheism like Christianity and Islam have been very strict as their precept in dealing with sexual matters and homosexuality used to be severely punished as a crime. Therefore, the movement of LGBT tended to be radical. Comparing with monotheistic countries, Japan has been worshipping nature gods, which can be termed as polytheism and this kind of matter must have been dealt with in an extremely lenient, generous and open-minded way. Throughout our long history, various people have coexisted in a properly harmonious way. Therefore, it is totally unsuitable that Japan, having a history of such mature and moderate sexual responses, was the first to enact the “Promotion of LGBT Understanding Law” in the world.