パウエルMoiさんへ送れなかったので･･･
文字数制限を大幅に超えたため、楽天のメールシステムでは送れず。本当は著作権に引っかかりそうなのでためらったのですが、FTのホームページではプレミアムになっているのでFT購読者以外は読めない。なので、参考程度に。有難い助言ですね。本当にうざい。Is Asia repeating Europe’s mistakes? By Karl Kaiser Published: October 18 2005 20:30 | Last updated: October 18 2005 20:30Just like Europe in the late 19th century, east Asia is experiencing a period of extraordinary industrialisation, economic growth and arms build-up. Warships have been deployed to mark positions on territorial disputes, chauvinism and national stereotyping abound and crucial countries fail to deal adequately with or learn from the past. In Europe such developments ended in disaster. Is Asia repeating Europe’s mistakes? Europe overcame its war-prone past through the process of community building and today has established internal peace by working in unison towards two goals. The first was economic integration, an approach that Asia now emulates with extraordinary success, resulting in an unprecedented degree of intra-regional trade, transnational investment and networks of multinational production based on division of labour and outsourcing. Chinese-Japanese trade now amounts to $212bn annually.But the newly gained economic interdependence is no guarantee against conflicts escalating into disaster. Given the region’s present economic interdependence, war in Asia would be even more disruptive, costly and anachronistic than it was in 20th century Europe. But will that prevent governments from unleashing a military conflict?Do not forget that the first world war broke out at the moment of Europe’s most advanced international trade integration and that, as Europeans know all too well, chauvinism is capable of drowning all rationality. Europe became an area of peace by complementing economic co-operation with political measures of community building, a field in which Asia is failing increasingly. Europeans put their relations on a radically different footing by basing their policies on three premises: first, every nation must honestly and credibly face its wrongdoings and failures of the past; second, a clear distinction must be made between the actual guilty parties and the nations they came from; and, third, between the guilt of the perpetrators, now mostly dead, and those who as the surviving generation are responsible for preventing a repetition.It is perhaps understandable that facing historical facts is painful for some, but it is hard to understand why the honour and memory of people long dead is more important than the future of the living and their chance to live in peace and prosperity.The reconciliation between France and Germany and later between Germany and Poland paved the way for others to follow. Much was done jointly, for example by establishing common commissions to review schoolbooks, organisation of youth exchange or by promoting city partnerships. Demonstrative gestures and credible acts of asking for forgiveness were crucial. In this respect China, Japan and Korea should play a role similar to that of France, Germany and Poland.What mattered particularly in Europe and what is missing in Asia now is a transnational consensus among governments and societal elites to combat nationalism as it existed in Europe. On the contrary, nationalist tendencies are being fostered by governments. In the mistaken belief that such policy creates short-term domestic gains, they neglect the long-term cost of conflict they are likely to induce. Europeans owe their success partly to governments choosing to ignore voices of extremism in partner countries as expressions of minorities which should not detract from or derail co-operation and reconciliation. In Asia today, such voices are often assumed to be representative of the other country, thus engendering a vicious cycle of mutually re-enforcing nationalisms.Moreover, as Europe’s experience shows, the process of reconciliation and political co-operation is not a one- way street. Positive gestures should be acknowledged and rewarded by the other side. On the 60th anniversary of the end of the second world war, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan did not visit Yasukuni Shrine, which commemorates Japan’s war-dead. Instead, by attending a secular ceremony with Emperor Akihito and extending an apology to Japan’s wartime victims while expressing the need to join hands for peace with the neighbours, he did exactly what many Asians had hoped and asked for. But this gesture will only have the desirable effect if the outstretched hand is seized and neighbours such as China and South Korea react positively.Using the leeway afforded him by the large majority established in the last elections, Mr Koizumi could now make a courageous and decisive step in this direction. Though his visit to Yasukuni Shrine this week took place in a toned down and semi-official manner, it has regrettably pointed in the opposite direction and unleashed the predictable cycle of accusations and resentment.Asia’s achievements towards economic integration and interdependence are now threatened by rising political tensions and nationalism in the region. Acts of reconciliation and co-operation by governments and elites are therefore urgently necessary to protect and strengthen community building. As Asia becomes ever more important to global peace and the international economy, the rest of the world sincerely hopes for such a development.The writer is Ralph Straus visiting professor at Harvard University and was director of the German Council on Foreign Relations
出産・子育て
ファッション
美容・コスメ
健康・ダイエット
生活・インテリア
料理・食べ物
ドリンク・お酒
ペット
趣味・ゲーム
映画・ＴＶ
音楽
読書・コミック
旅行・海外情報
園芸
スポーツ
アウトドア・釣り
車・バイク
パソコン・家電
そのほか
すべてのジャンル
