My Diaries on the war in Iraq (4)
Written between March 29, 2003 and April 6 


In Japan, once something had been done, it becomes an accomplished fact, and this then becomes an established procedure. 

# March 29, 2003 (Saturday)
The governmental aircraft carrying relief goods for the refugees in Iraq has departed Japanese soil. This is the first time the governmental aircraft had been used under Japanese International Peace Cooperation Law. This means that Japan, which cannot appeal to arms under the Constitution, will offer its support in an "urgent" and "humanitarian" way. But the question is, what necessary procedures will be followed in deciding such support.
We must remember that in this country, once something had been done, it becomes an accomplished fact, and soon after, it becomes an established procedure. The refugees confirmed in countries surrounding Iraq is not great in numbers. Civil carriers are still flying to and from Amman.
The aircraft carrying the Japanese flag is also carrying 50 members of the Japanese Air Self-Defense Force. According to a Defense Agency official, the real meaning of this dispatch is to fly the Japanese flag in the Middle East. The said official seems to misunderstanding the whole thing.
Prime Minister Koizumi expressed Japan's support for the American attack to Iraq, however, this was not even resolved by the Japanese National Diet. But even though knowing that the Diet might have backed Mr. Koizumi's decision, I still was surprised by the fact that the Japanese Prime Minister had so much authority.
The following words are from my book "Introduction to Adlerian Psychology".
" What I had learned from Adler was the importance of democracy; democracy as an essence, not the so-called democracy one uses as a political slogan. We must remember that Hitler's Nazis regime was born under Weimar Constitution, which is considered a model of a democratic constitution. This clearly shows that even democracy can easily destroy itself even under democratic procedures. How can we prevent such a foolish tragedy from happening again?
The essence of democracy is in the procedures and none else. The democracy itself has no substance. Thus, people can make mistakes. Common sense can also be completely wrong at times. We must always be alert, paying attention to the world so as not to let democracy destroy itself. To do so, we must not let anyone force us to believe that something is right; we must not accept anything unconditionally. We must think with our own hearts and mind to make the right decision at the right time. If we fail to do so, our democracy can easily be degraded and become a so-called 'mobocracy'".
Although "people can make mistakes", "common sense can also be completely wrong at times" are my words, it unpleasantly reminds me of Mr.Koizumi's past comment stating that history proves the point that in many cases it was not right to be swayed by public opinion. Mr. Koizumi, who had been given nearly full support of the country at his inauguration, is now jeopardizing the country. I wonder how the people will decide in the next general local elections.

# March 31, 2003 (Monday)
The governmental aircraft carrying relief goods for the refugees in Iraq has landed at the Amman airport. I obtained this news from "asahi.com", the web site run by Asahi Shimbun. The paper version carried the news but it was given only a small space. One can get the full version of the news on the net, not being restricted by the paper space.
The article pointed out that there were voices pointing out that the tents the Japanese government sent to Amman could be bought at much cheaper cost in Jordan and Turkey, questioning the reason for sending them spending so much transportation cost. Asked to comment, the Japanese Ambassador in Jordan was reported as saying that no matter the high costs, Japan may need to show its position in aiding the refugees.
With no refugees at the refugee camps, the tents are said to be stored in a warehouse located in the outskirts of Amman. Government should never take actions for show, however, the Defense Agency thinks otherwise. As I wrote yesterday, the agency thinks that the real meaning of this dispatch is to fly the Japanese flag in the Middle East.
The question is, why was it necessary to send the members of the Self-Defense Forces to transport high-cost tents? Am I the only one who feels an aim, an objective other than displaying ones vanity.

# April 1, 2003(Tuesday)
Peter Arnett was dismissed by NBC and National Geographic TV for making critical remarks on America's attack on Iraq while appearing on Iraqi National TV. To think that the media had once supported Mr. Arnett as a reporter who was risking his life to cover the situation in Baghdad.... According to "asahi.com", even the common sense that journalists will always voice their opinions on the media will not be tolerated by the public under the present situation in which the American people, realizing that the war may drag on, are losing their patience.
Kenji Muro, critic and writer living in California, in an interview with Shunsuke Tsurumi had pointed out that the basic journalistic approach is to accept the diversity of one's sense of values. " But now in the U.S., even the journalists are frantically searching for the 'one and only justice' ". ("Interview with Shunsuke Tsurumi", p.331, Shobunsha)
Muro calls the journalism that confronts major journalism such as CNN, the "meta-journalism": the journalism on journalism. Tsurumi adds, " I think "journals" are more important than journalism: the eyes and documentation needed to complete one's journals....One might say that being the only one of an minority is not journalism, but I think otherwise. Journalism is the critical eyes that focus on the society, and those eyes always belong to individuals (pp.335, 337).
After September 11, 20 percent (or should I say only 20 percent) of the Americans were against retaliatory attack on Iraq. Tsurumi points out that "during the Vietnam war, the 20 percent increased gradually and in the end, it became the force that ended the war" (p337).
We must see to it that it will be like this in this present war.
Muro quotes Howard Zinn, a historian, from an interview right after September 11. "This is a very grave incident. Each and every Americans should think as if he/she was the president of the United States and take the next step; what is important is to respond, not react."(pp.332-3)


# April 2, 2003 (Wednesday)
I've decided to participate in the "ONWAR", a campaign linking multiple web sites that is trying to create a platform to discuss matters of war. To join, you only have to place an icon ONWAR on your web site.
The words written on the top page goes like this. "Participating sites are absolutely free in the choice of the kind of their contribution, and the connection would be a loose one that consists only of links set up among the participating sites, indicated by an icon we'd distribute to them. There won't be such exaggerated actions as issuing common statements."
I've received several responses already, some wishing to make direct links to my site.

Brigade General Vincent Brooks of the U.S. Central Command commenting on firing of arms against civilians, is reported as saying that it was regrettable but cannot be avoided in times of war.
Secretary of Defense Ramsfeld revealed that chemical weapons would be introduced in the war fields. He stated that chemical weapons will be used against the enemy soldiers who have hidden in caves and also when soldiers are mingled with women and children.
How merciless and terrible can one be to fellow mankind?
I remember reading about David Halberstam who covered the Vietnam War as a special correspondent for New York Times to Saigon in a booklet entitled "Battlefield Coverage" by Toru Takeda published from Chikuma-shobo. By coincidence, Peter Arnett was also a correspondent of the Associated Press Saigon Office and the two covered many incidents together.
One day a groundless rumor had spread that Halberstam cried out in deep sorrow over a photograph of Vietcong's' dead bodies piled one upon the other. The unfounded rumor was a slander to injure Halberstam's reputation indicating that his was inclined toward the Vietcongs. As a man who virtue being hardboiled, it was intolerable for Halberstam at that time to be accused to have shed tears in the first place.
However, later on his life, Halberstam changed his mind. Takeda quotes from Arnett's book "Live from the Battlefield: From Vietnam to Baghdad, 35 Years in the World's War Zones"(1993). Jack Langs, who became the NYT correspondent to Saigon after Halberstam, reported the incident to New York. Arnett in his book wrote that Langs' report went on like this. The rumor was ungrounded and untrue, however, it should have been true, not only for Halberstam but also for other correspondents. Whether he is an American soldier or a Vietcong, it seems natural for a human to shed tears seeing so many corpses piled one upon the other. Future Americans of the next generation will not disdain a person who had shed tears for the dead soldiers in the battlefield, but will honor and respect that person for the very tears he or she had shed.
How I wish Arnett's prediction was right.


#April 3, 2003 (Thursday)
Following news and reports on the war everyday, you become suspicious and confused: what is the truth? You start asking yourself, is this a cover-up? Can this be distorted? A forged news? Journalism is to report from what one sees with his or her own eyes. However, what one sees is not always the truth. This always is a theme for philosophy.
Sakai Tanaka of whom I have referred so many times, points out that many so-called journalists often interview people on the scene without even obtaining basic information. And this distorts the report, failing to see the true nature of the issue("Battlefield Coverage" by Toru Takeda p170).
So, Tanaka decides to make extensive investigation on the net. Many of the information obtained through the net maybe false, some may also well be slanderous. But trivial new such as dismissal of a reporter for composing photos reveals what is going on the world.
I was shocked by the photographs of children suffering from the effects of depleted uranium bullets. Takashi Morizumi, a photojournalist who has his own site, took the photos. I got to know him through "NOWAR" campaign. His photos were published in 2002 as "Children of the Gulf War".
According to the column "One-Coin Etsuraku-do" written for "asahi.com" by Etsuo Takenobu, President Bush does not even watch TV.


# April 4, 2003 ( Friday )
Living in Japan, it is hard for me to imagine what it would be like to live under wartime conditions. The only experience I have that can barely be compared to it is being deprived of food and water when a flood hit my house. The house was and still is located near a river and it would get flooded every year. Embankment had been constructed since then, but at that time, our family suffered for many months not being able to use the rooms on the first floor. For my friends at school, typhoon season was nothing to fret about, but for my family and others who lived near the river, the suffering lasted much longer.
According to the news, the power supply is down in Baghdad. Some reports say the U.S. did not target powerhouses; others report that it was the Iraqi government that cut off the powers. It does not matter who had caused it. It is the civilians, the ordinary people that are suffering.
The U.S. forces has seized the Sadam International Airport and renamed it "Baghdad International". Some may have wanted to rename it "Bush International Airport".
The Shogakukan, one of the major publishing companies in Japan, conducted a questionnaire survey of Iraqi war on the company's young club members. Of the 529 who answered, 79 percent said they were against the war, 8 percent said they were somewhat against the war. These are a few of the comments. "I cried when I saw little children hurt by the bombs." "I can't understand why they couldn't solve the problem by negotiation. It's like watching little kids quarreling."
These questions should be sent to Mr. Koizumi who, even now thinks that the U.S. decision to resort to arms was a right move. I wonder what he would say. Perhaps he may answer, "Kids should not stick their heads into adult matters." If a natural disaster, such as an earthquake occurs, people would start talking about possible trauma and the need for mental care. Bombing of the cities is no different; it's like being hit by an earthquake everyday for 2 long weeks. Nobody knows when this war will end but there are some who are already talking about reconstructing the country. They should be ashamed of themselves.


# April 5, 2003 ( Saturday )
An interesting interview caught my eye. Sakai Tanaka was commenting on being objective.
" I learned a lot from the articles written by U.S. and European journalists. On the other hand, Japanese journalists, even those who were on the battlegrounds, rarely voiced their opinions. He or she would be in dangerous environment; he may well be affected by radiation (of depleted uranium bullets), but will never express their private feelings and sentiments. They would say that journalists should always be objective, the articles must never be subjective. I think Japanese mass media is misinterpreting the meaning of being objective. Western media has a certain ethical code they must follow, but other than that, journalists are free to write whatever they investigate."
I am disappointed with the present coverage of Iraqi war by Japanese mass media. It's only reporting the military situation there. Maybe they are afraid of something.
I came across the homepage run by Inada Nada. He is a writer and psychologist specializing in alcoholism. In his essay entitled " For the time being, I...", he points out that Prime Minister Koizumi is an America-holic. I must agree with him.
I visited the site of a popular psychologist "Dr. Phil" and was surprised to find that he did not think it necessary to explain in detail if a small child asks about the Iraqi war. He adds that if a child, watching TV, starts asking questions, one should explain from the standpoint of good and evil --- there are bad people in the world that hurt others, so America is trying to stop the bad people from coming here to do the same thing again, and so on. It made me think about his action as a psychologist; is it right for a psychologist to confirm a certain political view and furthermore advise parents to teach children in this way. In my opinion, the way of thinking shown by children of whom I wrote about yesterday, are more healthy and sound.


# April 6, 2003( Sunday )
According to New York Times, American soldiers who have entered Baghdad are reported as saying that they cannot distinguish between civilians and Iraqi soldiers. Civilian casualties cannot be avoided if battles erupt in the street. There have been reports of over 3,000 deaths in Baghdad already.
I read yesterday there had been some talk of declaring victory before even seizing Baghdad. I wonder what had happened to all those weapons of mass destruction that U.S. so strongly stressed at the beginning of this war. According to BBC, transport squad of U.S. and Kurd forces were hit by friendly fire from an U.S. Aircraft. At least 10 soldiers had died. John Simpton, the BBC correspondent who was injured said the bomb dropped from the U.S. aircraft hit the ground only 4 meters away from where he had been standing. He explained the scene as "like hell". During the TV broadcast, Simpton cried out "quiet!" to an American soldier. He thought the soldier was trying to stop the broadcast. When he realized that the soldier was not trying to stop him, Simpton went on broadcasting. "Ah, I'm alright. Am I bleeding ?" "You're cu." "I thought you were trying to stop me from being on air. I think I have some bomb fragments in my leg, but that's all."
The news is full of reports of wrong target bombings and friendly fires. The military officials comments are either "we are investigating on the matter", "we have not confirmed the report yet", or "the bombing was made by the Iraqis". Battles on the streets are expected to increase which will certainly lead to more civilian casualties.
Dr. Phil, the popular psychologist that I had wrote about yesterday, says that once war begins, comments made by anti-war activists can become a sound bite for enemy press. I have always believed that in order to stop fighting, people should always return to the simple feeling of sympathy, not wanting to see anyone being hurt or killed.
A Japanese living in New York, in his journal wrote about the time he participated in an anti-war demonstration. He told about this to his friend who was visiting him from Japan and had become speechless when asked, what he had done at the demonstration. Who would think that he went to the demonstration just to take photographs? 

Posted: 火 - 3月 9, 2004 at 04:30 午前          

©