「ほっ」と。キャンペーン

ミサイル移転―なし崩しではいけない

2011/03/01
--The Asahi Shimbun, Feb. 28
EDITORIAL: Debate needed before policy switch on weapons exports
ミサイル移転―なし崩しではいけない

Japan and the United States are trying to pave the way for the first sale of jointly developed weapons to third countries.
 日米が共同開発した最新の武器を、米国以外の第三国に初めて売るための準備が両国間で進んでいる。

The weapons involved are advanced missile interceptors for ballistic missile defense (BMD). The two countries started joint research and development of the interceptors in 1999, following North Korea's firing of a ballistic missile over Japan in 1998.
 北朝鮮の弾道ミサイル発射をきっかけに、日米が1999年から共同研究・開発を重ねてきた弾道ミサイル防衛(BMD)用の能力向上型の迎撃ミサイルである。

Japan has been in charge of developing four components, including a nose cone to protect the warhead and rocket motors. Development of the missile is scheduled to be completed in 2014.
 弾頭部の保護部品やロケットモーターなど四つの構成品を日本が担当、2014年の完成をめざしている。

In January, Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa told his U.S. counterpart, Robert Gates, that the Japanese government will make a decision by year-end on its policy concerning sales of the interceptors to third countries.
 北沢俊美防衛相は、1月の日米防衛相会談で、第三国への移転方針の中身について「年内に結論を出す」と表明した。

This undoubtedly represents a major change of course for Japan, which has long adhered to a self-imposed ban on arms exports under the three policy principles concerning the issue.
武器輸出三原則を掲げ、ほぼ全面禁輸の方針をとってきた日本にとって、大きな転換点といえよう。

The government, however, has yet to offer a sufficient explanation about why it is changing its weapons policy.
 なぜこんな流れになったのか。政府の説明は十分ではない。

It should talk to the public about this important policy shift in plain and candid language, thereby generating national debate on the issue.
わかりやすく率直に国民に語り、議論を起こさなければならない。

Originally, the joint Japan-U.S. research and development project started in response to North Korea's ballistic missile program.
 日米の研究開発は当初、北朝鮮の弾道ミサイル開発に備えることを目的にしていた。

However, a big turning point for the project came in September 2009, when the U.S. administration of President Barack Obama decided to deploy the interceptor missiles in Europe to thwart long-range ballistic missile attacks by Iran.
ところが09年9月、オバマ政権がイランの弾道ミサイルに対処するため、この迎撃ミサイルを欧州配備すると決めたことが転機になった。

In 2006, Tokyo and Washington exchanged diplomatic documents on the joint missile project, which banned the transfer of the interceptor to third parties or its use for purposes other than originally intended without Japan's advance agreement.
The current administration intends to interpret the documents in a way that will allow the weapon to be transferred to third countries if Japan agrees in advance.
 日米両国は06年の交換公文で「日本の事前同意のない目的外利用や第三国移転を禁止する」としていたが、今回それを「同意すれば移転できる」と読み替えるというわけである。

The ministries and agencies concerned will soon lay down the principles for the transfer of the interceptor to third countries that specify under what conditions and to which countries it can be sold. Rigorous procedures should be ensured.
 関係省庁が近くどのような条件で、どのような国々に移転を認めるかなどの基準作りに着手する。厳格な手続きを求めたい。

Still, a raft of issues needs to be addressed. For example, what kind of criteria should be used to determine which countries can receive the interceptor? How can Japan maintain its independence in decision-making?
 考慮すべき論点は多い。移転先をどんな尺度で絞り込むのか。日本の主体性をどう確保するのか。

Although BMD is generally viewed as a defensive weapon system, Japanese policymakers must keep in mind that the missile technology could be diverted to produce an offensive weapon as well.
BMDは「防御兵器」とされるが、ミサイル技術は攻撃兵器に転用される危険があることにも十分な留意が必要だ。

To complicate the situation, disagreements between the United States and Russia over the envisioned deployment of BMD in Europe are becoming increasingly pronounced.
 またBMD欧州配備をめぐっては、米ロの見解の違いが際だちつつある。

If the move undermines the arms reduction talks between the two countries, that would hurt international public interest as well as Japan's national interest.
今回の動きが米ロの核軍縮に響くようなことになれば、日本の国益も国際公益も損なわれる。

Is the Japanese government paying enough attention to these viewpoints?
こうした視点を日本政府は踏まえているだろうか。

With this defense policy shift, Japan is sailing into uncharted waters. The only reliable guide is, after all, the three principles on arms exports.
 過去に経験のない作業だが、よりどころになるのは、やはり武器輸出三原則しかない。

But the three principles, which were established during the Cold War era, don't reflect the radical changes in the world and the remarkable progress in military technology in recent years.
ところが冷戦時代にできた三原則には、今のような国際情勢の変化や軍事技術の進歩は織り込まれていない。

Late last year, the administration of Prime Minister Naoto Kan considered relaxing the three principles for the new national defense program guidelines announced in December. But the administration postponed its decision on the issue because it was seeking a political alliance with the pacifist-leaning Social Democratic Party. The debate was put on hold.
 菅直人政権は昨年末、「防衛計画の大綱」策定に向けて三原則の緩和を検討した。ところが社民党との連携を優先させて結論を先送りしたため、議論は中断した形で終わってしまった。

The government should make clear its policy for dealing with the first-ever transfer of Japanese arms technology to third countries.
 武器の初の第三国移転にどのような姿勢で臨むのか。

In order to prevent gradual erosion in its commitment to the three principles on arms exports, the government should reopen the debate on the principles and delve into the issues raised by the missile defense program.
武器輸出三原則のなし崩し的な転換を避けるためにも、三原則をめぐる議論を再開し、問題点を突きつめるべきである。

The government needs to carefully consider these issues from a broad perspective based on its vision for Japan's diplomatic future.
日本外交が今後進むべき方向を熟慮しつつ、視野の広い検討を重ねなければならない。
[PR]

by kiyoshimat | 2011-03-02 07:21 | 英字新聞

<< An obsession wi... Do emoticons ch... >>