Obama and Hiroshima: Why Won’t He Face the Atomic Bombings?

Published in Asahi Shimbun
(Japan) on 28 September 2011
by Editorial (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Andrew Gonzalez. Edited by Heidi Kaufmann.
Even with diplomatic relations that normally go well, there are some problems that are difficult to approach. With Japan-U.S. relations, the atomic bombings are one such example.

More than 200,000 people lost their lives in the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and even now, many others continue to suffer from the aftereffects. From Japan’s point of view, it was an unforgivable, indiscriminate attack, but the U.S. justifies it as an action that was necessary to hasten the conclusion of the war.

These opposing views of the bombings could be called a “historical thorn” that pierces to the core of Japan-U.S. relations, including the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty.

As with any difficult problem, some are trying to remove this thorn, while others choose to leave it alone.

Part of this issue can be seen in a diplomatic cable obtained by the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks. In August 2009, then-Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Mitoji Yabunaka held a conference with U.S. Ambassador to Japan John Roos in advance of U.S. President Barack Obama’s first Japan visit. At that conference, Yabunaka reportedly said that it was “not yet the right time” for President Obama to visit Hiroshima.

In April of that year, President Obama called for a “world without nuclear weapons” at a speech in Prague. Upon hearing that speech, expectations for a presidential visit to Hiroshima ran high, particularly among people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

President Obama ultimately did not visit Hiroshima, but the U.S. clearly showed great concern. Was it because Vice Minister Yabunaka conveyed a negative opinion? It’s impossible to comprehend.

“Please come here and learn the truth, for the sake of the children, our future.” These were the words spoken by the late Reiko Numada, who experienced the atomic bombing and passed away this summer, in her anticipation of the president’s visit.

This is precisely the message that Japan, as the victim of the atomic bombing, should send out to the world. The role of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is supposed to be to communicate that message.

Of course, even if the vice minister had more strongly recommended that President Obama visit Hiroshima, there was considerable opposition from U.S. conservatives. There is no way to know if the visit would have ever actually happened.

That being said, if President Obama had visited Hiroshima, the question of whether Japan had fulfilled its responsibility to Asia to make amends for World War II might have been raised again, both domestically and abroad.

In either case, the issue had the potential to cause an uproar in the government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. However, avoiding the situation altogether is not a sound course of action.

By 2008, then-U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi had already visited Hiroshima and laid flowers, while her Japanese counterpart, Yohei Kono, did the same in a visit to Pearl Harbor. With these kinds of efforts already made, if Japan and the U.S. work together to make a presidential visit to Hiroshima happen, they will surely be able to confront the atomic bombings more directly.

This time, a problem caused by a Ministry of Foreign Affairs official’s statement happened to bring about the issue, but at any rate, the message was confirmed once again: This “historical thorn” can only be removed by the government as a whole.



大統領と広島―なぜ原爆と向き合わぬ

 ふだんはうまくいっている外交関係にも、触れ方が難しい問題はある。たとえば、日本と米国における原爆だ。

 広島・長崎では20万人以上が犠牲になり、いまも多くの人々が後遺症に苦しんでいる。日本側から見れば、許せない無差別攻撃だ。だが、米側は戦争終結を早めるために必要だったと正当化する。

 原爆観の対立は、安保条約を結ぶ日米関係の底深く刺さった「歴史のトゲ」といえる。

 難題だけに、トゲを抜こうとする人もいれば、あえて関わろうとしない人もいる。

 内部告発サイト「ウィキリークス」が入手していた米外交文書で、この問題の一端がのぞいた。09年8月、オバマ米大統領の初来日を前に、当時の薮中三十二外務次官がルース駐日大使と会談した。薮中氏は、大統領の広島訪問は「時期尚早」と伝えた、というのだ。

 その年の4月、オバマ大統領はプラハで「核なき世界」を訴えていた。その演説を受けて、大統領の広島訪問を期待する声が、被爆地を中心に盛り上がっていたころだ。

 結局、大統領は広島に行かなかったが、米側が強い関心を抱いていたのは事実だ。外務次官が消極的な見解を伝えたのだとしたら、どういうことなのか。理解できない。

 「ここに来て事実を知ってください。未来を生きる子どものために」。この夏に亡くなった被爆の語り部、沼田鈴子さんは大統領への期待をそう言葉にしたことがある。

 これこそ、被爆国日本が世界に発すべきメッセージだ。外務省はその広報役のはずだ。

 もちろん、外務次官が広島行きを強く勧めても、米国内の保守派の反発は大きく、実現したかどうかはわからない。

 同時に、もし実現すれば、日本はアジアに対する戦争責任を果たしたのか否かが、国内外で問い直されたかもしれない。

 どちらも、政権や外務省には波乱要因に映っていた可能性がある。だからといって、避けて通るのは健全ではない。

 すでに08年には、当時のペロシ米下院議長が広島を、河野洋平衆院議長がハワイの真珠湾を訪ねて献花した実例もあった。こんな努力の先に、大統領の広島訪問が実現できるならば、日米両国は原爆ともっと正面から向き合えるに違いない。

 今回たまたま、政権交代期の外務官僚の発言が問題になったことで、改めて確信する。「歴史のトゲ」は政治全体で抜いていくしかないのだ、と。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Austria: Donald Is Disappointed in Vladimir

Germany: It’s Not Europe’s Fault

Mexico: Urgent and Important

Canada: No, the Fed Was Not ‘Independent’ before Trump

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Topics

Austria: Donald Is Disappointed in Vladimir

Austria: If This Is Madness, There is a Method to It

Germany: It’s Not Europe’s Fault

Germany: Donald Trump’s Failure

Canada: No, the Fed Was Not ‘Independent’ before Trump

Spain: State Capitalism in the US

Mexico: Urgent and Important

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Related Articles

Nigeria: 80 Years after Hiroshima, Nagasaki Atomic Bombings: Any Lesson?

Taiwan: Trump’s Japan Negotiation Strategy: Implications for Taiwan

India: Trump’s Tariffs Have Hit South Korea and Japan: India Has Been Wise in Charting a Cautious Path

Japan: Iran Ceasefire Agreement: The Danger of Peace by Force

Japan: Trump’s 100 Days: A Future with No Visible Change So Far