| |
 |
|
|
Speech by the Archbishop of Nagasaki, the Most Reverend Joseph S. Takami, SS |
On March 12, 2007, Pax Christi USA co-sponsored, along with Woodstock Theological Center and the Georgetown University President's Office and Theology Department, a lecture by Archbishop Joseph M. Takami of Nagasaki and Sister Filo Hirota on "Political Non-violence and the Threat of a Remilitarized Asia Pacific." The text from Archbishop Takami appears below.
A JAPANESE REFLECTION ON GLOBAL PEACE
Joseph M. Takami, S.S.
Archbishop of Nagasaki
Georgetown University
March 12, 2007
Good evening. Thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to share our concerns for peace and security in the Asia Pacific Region. My special thanks to Georgetown University, Department of Theology, Woodstock Theological Center and Office of the President and Pax Christi USA. I also would like to express my gratitude to American people for their help they gave after the War to reconstruct the country. My parish priest was an American who stayed with us until I was twelve years old. His presence in my life as a child has made me feel always close to American people. What I would like to tell you this evening comes from my heart as a Japanese Catholic who survived the atomic bomb in my mother’s womb in Nagasaki sixty years ago. Let me tell you briefly about myself so that you can understand where my commitment for peace and non-violence comes from.
My personal history as Tainai hibakusha
Within a week from August 9, 1945, four members of my immediate family including my grandmother and two aunts died. After 12 years, a cousin, died. I can never forget the tragic and violent death of this young man of 16 years old. Though the justification for dropping the bombs on the non-combatant population of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to save over one million lives of American soldiers, the Japanese Imperial Army in August of 1945, had been practically defeated and did not have any capability to strike back. I grew up listening and witnessing so many stories full of pain, sufferings and destruction. At the same time, the direct experience of the atomic bomb taught us a precious lesson of non-violence as a way of life, a conviction, a belief and a non-negotiable commitment.
In 1981, His Holiness John Paul II visited Japan. His Hiroshima peace message continues to inspire and direct our commitment to non-violence. He said:
War is the work of man. War is destruction of human life. War is death. To remember the past is to commit oneself to the future. To remember Hiroshima is to abhor nuclear war. To remember Hiroshima is to commit oneself to peace. To remember what the people of this city suffered is to renew our faith in man, in his capacity to do what is good, in his freedom to choose what is right, in his determination to turn disaster into a new beginning.
Indeed, war is destruction of human life and all forms of life. As we commit ourselves to the future, we, Japanese, have to remember the past not only as a victim but also as an aggressor. Japan victimized millions of civilians especially in the neighboring countries of Asia Pacific. Aggressive colonization of these countries is characterized by racism and hatred. Racism blinds us to see the other as a human being just like us. How can we justify mass killing of innocent lives if we look at them as human beings just like us?
It is from this conviction as a Tainai Hibakusha (the AB victim inside uterus) that I would like to develop the topic for this evening: "Political Non-Violence and the Threat of a Remilitarized Asia Pacific."
The on-going reality of Japan’s militarization poses a grave threat to the Asia Pacific Region, as does also the effort of the U.S. government to consolidate Japan as a willing partner in its global War on Terror.
Under the 1960 US-Japan Security Treaty, the United States was “granted the use by its land, air and naval forces of facilities and areas in Japan” only “for the purpose of contributing to the security of Japan and the maintenance of international peace and security in the Far East.” Today, the U.S. maintains 135 military installations in Japan in 27 municipalities, occupying over 1,100 km2. The Japanese government covers all expenses except the salary of the U.S. personnel stationed there, whose number is around 40,000.
At present we are witnessing a radical and qualitative change in the U.S.-Japan relationship. The bilateral agreements “U.S.–Japan Alliance: Transformation and Realignment for the Future” of October 2005 and the “Roadmap for Realignment Implementation” worked out at the U.S.-Japan Security Consultative Committee in May 2006, signed by the “two-plus-two”, namely, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs Machimura and Minister of State for Defense Ohno, concretized a process of redefinition of the U.S. –Japan military alliance which had already begun around the mid-1990s. The Clinton-Hashimoto joint statement in 1996 made it clear that, though the Cold War had ended, the U.S. would maintain its military presence in Asia-Pacific and that the Japanese commitment to this strategy will continue to constitute the corner stone of this security setup in Asia Pacific. The major change made under the new arrangement is that the alliance is to cover the “Arc of Instability” running from Korea to the Middle East and beyond. Contrary to the limitations of the 1960 treaty, Japan has been made a major hub for American military operations all over the world, transforming the Japanese military forces into part of the globally deployed U.S. military forces. The legality of this process is extremely dubious since the contents of the new arrangements are of a nature that should require a formal revision of the treaty through democratic procedures.
The “Transformation and Realignment” document lists a whole gamut of strengthened military cooperation ranging from Japan’s commitment to full participation in ballistic missile defense, counter- terrorism, search and destroy operations, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance operations, through response to attacks by weapons of mass destruction and joint use of bases and facilities in Japan with the Self Defense Forces to the U.S. use of seaport and airport facilities, roads, water spaces, airspaces, and frequency bands.
Another aspect of grave concern is the unification of Japan’s Self Defence Forces and U.S. forces under the U.S. command. The document “U.S.-Japan Alliance: Transformation and Realignment for the Future” emphasizes “U.S. Forces and the SDF will establish a bilateral and joint operations center at Yokota base. The shared use of this center will ensure constant connectivity, coordination, and interoperability among U.S. forces in Japan and the SDF.” Given the power relations between the U.S. and Japanese military which are to be interconnected, there is little doubt that these “joint operations” must end up as operations that are totally commanded by the United States. One of the top priority tasks assigned to Japan under this arrangement is Japanese participation in the ballistic missile defense system.
The ongoing transformation and realignment of the U.S. military presence in Asia Pacific will include another major move, namely, the proposed transfer of the global headquarters of the First Army from Washington State to the Camp Zama near Tokyo which will command global operations of U.S. Army expeditionary task forces. The SDF will also establish the headquarters of a Ground SDF Central Readiness Force Command in the Camp Zama, “thereby strengthening the coordination between the headquarters.”
Click here for part two of this speech.
back |
|
|
|
|