真珠湾７０年―危機の時代へ三つの教訓

3 continuing lessons from the Pearl Harbor attack
真珠湾７０年―危機の時代へ三つの教訓
↓
1) The first lesson is that we must not seek any simple, quick solution to a problem in times of crisis.
1)　ひとつは、危機の時代には、単純な解決を性急に求めないことだ。
2) The second lesson to learn from history is that we must respect the diversity of thought, especially in times of crisis.
2)　ふたつめは、危機の時代にこそ、意見の多様性を尊重することだ。
3) The third lesson is that we must look at ourselves objectively when we turn our eyes to the rest of the world.
3)　三つめは、世界に目を向けるときは、あわせて他者の視座でわが身を見ることだ。

久々に朝日新聞の力作だと思います。
（スラチャイ）

--The Asahi Shimbun, Dec. 7
EDITORIAL: 3 continuing lessons from the Pearl Harbor attack
真珠湾７０年―危機の時代へ三つの教訓

December 07, 2011 Dec. 8 (Japan time) marks the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of the Pacific War.
　太平洋戦争の開戦から、あすで７０年になる。

News of a surprise attack on the U.S. Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii on Dec. 7, 1941, by a task force of the Imperial Japanese Navy threw the Japanese people into wild elation.
　日本の機動部隊が、ハワイ・真珠湾の米太平洋艦隊を急襲した知らせに、国民は熱狂した。

Novelist Sei Ito (1905-1969) noted to the effect: "Yes! This is the way to go." Actor Musei Tokugawa (1894-1971) recalled, "I felt my whole body tingle with excitement."
「ああこれでいい。これで大丈夫だ」（小説家の伊藤整）、「身体がキューッとなる感じ」（俳優の徳川夢声）。

But that day was the beginning of Japan's downfall, which ended with its unconditional surrender three years and eight months later.
だが、それは３年８カ月後の全面敗北に至る転落の始まりだった。

The Pearl Harbor attack has been discussed extensively.
　真珠湾はさまざまに総括されてきた。

In Japan, the recurring question has been why the nation was so foolhardy as to go to war with the United States, whose strength was vastly superior.
日本では、圧倒的に強い米国に無謀な戦争を挑んだ理由が問われた。

Was this to blame on the out-of-control military? Or did political confusion of the time play a factor? Or did the media fan jingoistic feelings that were already surging around the nation?
軍部の暴走か、政治の混迷に原因があるのか。メディアが火に油を注いだ国民の熱狂のためか。

In his address before Congress, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882-1945) called the day "a date which will live in infamy."
　米国にとっては「不名誉の日」（ルーズベルト大統領の戦争教書演説）である。

For the Americans, Pearl Harbor became an object lesson in how a country can fall flat on its face for underestimating its opponent.
相手をあなどった結果の失態として語り継がれる。

During the Cold War, the lesson was applied to America's relationship with the Soviet Union. The Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks were likened to Pearl Harbor.
冷戦時代にはソ連に備える教訓となり、２００１年の同時多発テロは新たな「真珠湾」とされた。

International order's breaking point
■国際秩序の破断点

History is always reviewed in the light of the present.
　歴史はたえず現在に照らして問い直される。

How should we interpret Pearl Harbor today amid the escalation of the European debt crisis and concerns about the future of democracy?
ならば、欧州発の経済危機がとどまるところを知らず、民主主義の未来が危ぶまれつつある今日、真珠湾はどんな意味を持つのか。

Let us put the start of the Pacific War in a broader historical context, rather than look at it as an error in judgment by the Japanese government or an outcome of Tokyo's falling-out with Washington.
　ひとつの視点として、開戦を日本政府の判断の過ちや、日米対立の産物ととらえるだけでなく、もう少し広く歴史を見渡して位置づけてみる。

Seen in that light, one could say that Pearl Harbor represented the point where the international order, which was already in bad shape since the Great Depression of 1929, finally broke down in the Asia-Pacific region.
　すると、真珠湾は１９２９年の大恐慌から混迷を深めた国際秩序が、アジア・太平洋地域でもついにこわれてしまった破断点だったといえるだろう。

The world's major powers formed exclusive economic blocs to protect their interests, and that led to World War II.
　当時は、列強各国が権益を守るためにブロック経済に走り、戦争を招いたのだ。

Nowadays, there are more diverse frameworks of international cooperation, such as the Group of 8 and the G-20, and the necessity of international policy coordination in many fields is much better understood than in the past.
　それに比べて、いまはＧ８、Ｇ２０といった多様な国際連携の枠組みがある。多くの分野で政策協調の必要性も広く理解されている。

On the other hand, the World Trade Organization has come to a standstill, and this could cause member nations to rush into forming economic blocs. In this age of the Internet, a local crisis can immediately develop into a global crisis, and there is no refuge for anyone.
　だが一方では、世界貿易機関（ＷＴＯ）が立ち往生し、へたをすると各国がブロック経済へと突き進む恐れもある。インターネットの時代、危機は瞬時に世界を駆けめぐり、破局から避難できる場所はどこにもない。

Historically, there is no such thing as a recurring drama.
　歴史上、同じドラマが起こることはない。

But it is also a fact that history repeats similar mistakes.
だが、歴史が似たような過ちを繰り返すのも事実だ。

That is because humans are often incapable of controlling their desires, political ambitions and technology.
人間はしばしば、みずからの欲望や政治的なパワー、技術力を制御できなくなってしまうからだ。

Domestic, international stability go together
■内外の安定は一体

The progress of Japan's modernization was made possible by stability at home and peace in the world.
　近代日本の歩みは、国内の安定と国際的な平和が一体的に支え合っていたことを教えてくれる。

The policy of international cooperation that characterized Japanese diplomacy during the two decades of the Taisho Era (1912-1926) mirrored the state of the post-World War I world.
大正デモクラシーから２０年代の協調外交は、第１次大戦後の国際情勢を映していた。

Japan's attainment of post-World War II prosperity was proof that the nation was able to enjoy peace under the strong leadership of the United States during the Cold War years.
第２次大戦後の繁栄は、冷戦期の米国の強い先導力のもと、日本が平和を享受できた証しだ。

Put another way, Japan becomes unstable when international relations begin to deteriorate.
　逆に言えば、国際関係にさざ波が立つと、日本は不安定になる。

Pearl Harbor happened when political turmoil at home was compounded by crises abroad.
そこに国内政治の揺らぎが重なり、内外の危機が共振し合った先に、真珠湾があった。

In present-day Japan, the failure of the historic regime change of 2009 to renovate Japanese politics has deepened the public's sense of disappointment. In diplomacy, Japan has to contend with the destabilization of Asia due to America's diminishing influence and China's emergence.
　いまの日本は、内では政権交代が政治を刷新できずに国民の失望を深め、外では米国の影響力低下と中国の台頭によるアジアの不安定化に直面している。

Faced with uncertainties both at home and abroad, now is the time for us to learn three lessons from history leading up to Pearl Harbor.
　内外とも混迷するいまだからこそ、私たちは真珠湾に至った歴史から三つの教訓を学ぶべきだと考える。

The first lesson is that we must not seek any simple, quick solution to a problem in times of crisis.
　ひとつは、危機の時代には、単純な解決を性急に求めないことだ。

In prewar Japan, the disintegration of party politics resulted in the military seizing dictatorial power.
戦前は政党政治の迷走の果てに、軍部による独裁的な政治に行き着いた。

In that process, the people turned to militarism as a means for getting their nation out of a jam.
その過程で、国民は武断政治に活路を見いだそうとしていた。

Since Junichiro Koizumi became prime minister in 2001, the public has become used to "theatrical" politics characterized by decisive, clever slogans that have a strong populist appeal.
　いまの政治も小泉首相以来、断定的な言葉で世論の受けを狙う「劇場型」が幅を利かす。

But there can never be a clear-cut solution to any complex issue involving conflicting interests.
複雑に利害が絡み合う問題は、一刀両断にはできない。

We must not forget that resolving such an issue requires thorough preparation, patience and a determination to follow it through.
周到な準備と粘り強い実行力が要ることを忘れてはならない。

Respect opinions of others
■他者の視座を持って

The second lesson to learn from history is that we must respect the diversity of thought, especially in times of crisis.
　ふたつめは、危機の時代にこそ、意見の多様性を尊重することだ。

Before and during World War II, society was all too ready to denounce people who voiced their own opinions as "traitors to the country," and that killed freedom of thought and expression.
かつて、異論を唱えるものに「非国民」とレッテルを貼る風潮が、自由にものを語りあう空気を社会から奪った。

We must watch out for people who make "brave" assertions and refuse to listen to or accept different opinions. And we must shun the sort of nationalism that fans hatred.
　相手の言い分に耳を傾けない勇ましい議論や、異なる見解を封じ、憎悪をあおるナショナリズムには警戒すべきだ。

Respecting minority opinions broadens our options.
少数者の意見を尊重することが、選択肢を広げていくのだ。

The third lesson is that we must look at ourselves objectively when we turn our eyes to the rest of the world.
　三つめは、世界に目を向けるときは、あわせて他者の視座でわが身を見ることだ。

Kiyoshi Kiyosawa (1890-1945), a journalist who criticized myopic foreign policy opinions before and during the war, noted: "Japan's greatest handicap is its inability to explain its partner's position on international issues. Its own position is the only position Japan can understand."
　「日本で最大の不自由は、国際問題において、対手（あいて）の立場を説明することができない一事だ。日本には自分の立場しかない」。視野の狭い外交論議を批判した戦前・戦中のジャーナリスト清沢洌（きよし）の言葉である。

His observation was completely accurate, given that Japan drove itself into the Pacific War because it underestimated Chinese nationalism and misread America's intentions.
　中国ナショナリズムの軽視と米国の意図の読み違いが、日本を戦争に追い込んだことを考えれば、この言葉は重い。

Today, Japan's survival hinges on understanding China's motive behind its rapid expansion and deciding how best to rebuild the Japan-U.S. relationship.
　まさにいまも、強大化する中国の意図をどう見すえ、米国との関係をどう再構築するのかが、この国の死活的な問題になっている。

On the 70th anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack, which the U.S. historian Samuel E. Morrison (1887-1976) called "a grand strategic blunder" for Japan, let us remind ourselves of the above three lessons.
　米歴史家モリソンが「戦略的な愚行」と呼んだ真珠湾攻撃から７０年の日に、改めて三つの教訓を胸に刻む。