中国の民主化をどうすればいいか、検討しよう。 Ｆより 日本が無反応であるが、日本ができることはするべきである。中国 に侵略したことは事実であり、その事実は認めるしかない。しかし 、現在も日本は中国に危害を加える国家として教育しているのは、 善隣友好の原則を踏みにじることであり、この教育を停止して、日 本との友好的な戦後を歴史教育に入れることが必要である。 その上で、中国と当面の対応を話すべきでしょうね。Ａ級戦犯を祭 った靖国神社参拝が問題なら、Ａ級戦犯の柱は、別の神社に祭るこ とも考えることが必要でしょうね。国家神道の中心でもある靖国神 社は、神社本庁にも加入していない。資金はある。別院を建てるこ とは可能でしょうから、昭和天皇のお近くにＡ級戦犯の人たちの神 社を立てようではありませんか？？ 中国の内政問題を日本へではなく、不満を中国政府に向けさせるこ とが重要である。特に、貧富の差の対応が遅れている。この矛盾点 を刺激して、民衆を誘導することが重要である。そこから言論の自 由の確保が得られることになる。 言論の自由が確保できると、その次が自由な選挙の実施を要求する フェーズになるのでしょうね。 ＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝ キルギスに波及した民主化政変 警戒されていた米系諸団体の援助／政変のカギ握る地方秘密情報部員 時事総研客員研究員 中澤孝之 （世界日報）掲載許可 15年で独裁化したアカエフ氏 中央アジアの国キルギスのアカエフ政権があっけなく倒れた。グルジアの「バラ革命」、 ウクライナの「オレンジ革命（カプチーノ革命とも）」に次いで、キルギスでの「イエ ロー革命」の可能性が取り沙汰されていた。その通りとなった。事後は「チューリップ 革命」と呼ばれる。しかし、前の二例と違い、これが果たして民主化革命と言えるかど うか。貧困と汚職・腐敗、失業増大、同族政治とアカエフ一族への富の集中などに対す る国民の不満が、「不正選挙」をきっかけとして一挙に爆発し、アカエフ大統領を退陣 に追い込んだのである。 アスカル・アカエフ前大統領はもともとは政治に無縁な物理学者だった。九〇年政治に 関与し始め、翌年のソ連解体の前後には「中央アジアで最も民主的かつ開明的な指導者」 と評された。九四年クリントン米政権関係者からは「中央アジアのトーマス・ジェファ ーソン」と称賛された。「中央アジアのスイス」を目指すが彼の口癖だった。アカエフ 氏は同時に大変な親日家でもあった。九三年四月に公式実務訪問して以来、九八年十月 と昨年四月に来日した。昨年、東京での演説で、同国の市場経済改革と民主主義改革の 成果を自賛していた。しかし、一人の人間が十五年間も頂点に立つと、独裁的な傾向が 強まるのは世の常だ。アカエフ氏とて例外ではなかった。 同氏は近年、外からの民主主義の押し付けにも警戒心を隠さなかった。昨年八月初め、 首都ビシケクでの「二十一世紀のユーラシア会議」の席上、アカエフ大統領（当時）は、 「民主主義の輸出」を「ボリシェビキ革命の輸出」にたとえ、「押し付けの民主主義の 輸出」に警告。さらに「もちろん民主主義の発展は一番のテーマであり、時代の使命で あるが、ユーラシアは様々な文明が重なり合う大陸であり、国民の力は国内で醸成され るべきものである」と力説した。 政変後のグルジアから工作員 ロシアに逃れたアカエフ氏は、デモ隊ヘの実力行使の命令を出すことなく、すんなりと 出国したのは、「内戦を防ぐためだった」と自己弁護した。科学者としての理性が許さ なかったのであろう。ただし、政権転覆に関しては「憲法違反のクーデターである」と 野党勢力を厳しく批判するとともに、外国機関の関与をほのめかした。さらに三月末、 西側メディアとの初の会見で、「反憲法的クーデターの背後に米国が存在していた」と 名指しで米国を批判。具体的には、米民主党系の国家民主研究所（ＮＤＩ）、フリーダ ム・ハウス（ＦＨ）などが野党勢力に財政的な支援をし、人的訓練を施していたと付け 加えた。外国からの支援と言えば、三月二十五日に暴動が発生した際に、グルジアの工 作員たちが、ウクライナの場合と同じく、キルギスでも反体制派とともに活動している 証拠があると「ナイト・リッダー」系新聞は伝えた。 ところで、三月三十日付「ニューヨーク・タイムズ」（ＮＴ）と四月一日付の英紙「ガ ーディアン」（Ｇ）はともに、キルギス政変に米国が深く関与していた事実を報じた。 両紙の報道を紹介すると、ヤング駐ビシケク米国大使はこの数カ月、米国がキルギス内 政に干渉しているとのアカエフ政権の批判を否定するのに懸命だったが、そのヤング大 使すらキルギスは中央アジアで最大の被支援国であることを認めている（Ｇ）。人口五 百万足らずのこの国に九二年以来、米国は七億四千六百万ドル支出し、昨年だけで米自 由支援法（九二年上院採択）に基づいて三千百万ドルをつぎ込んだ。うち千二百万ドル がキルギス民主化計画に費やされた。その結果、同大使がいみじくも言う「米国スポン サーのＮＧＯ」がこの国にひしめいているという（Ｇ）。米国ＮＧＯ組織の辞書には 「内政干渉」という項目はないようだ。 とりわけＦＨの活動は顕著で、ウールジー元ＣＩＡ長官率いるＦＨは「ウクライナのオ レンジ革命の主力スポンサー」（Ｇ）で、〇三年十一月にはビシケクに印刷所「独立プ レス」を設立、その後約六十の反体制派系の新聞や雑誌の印刷を引き受けた。役員には マッケイン共和党議員、レイク元国家安全保障会議顧問が名を連ねている。また、地元 ＮＧＯ「民主主義と市民社会連合会」のバイソロフ会長はＮＴに、「米国の支援がなけ れば、アカエフ追放は“絶対に不可能”だった」と明言した。 旧ソ連圏に影響を強める米国 同連合会はＮＤＩを通じて米政府から資金提供を受けているという。このＮＤＩはキル ギス国内に二十カ所のセンターを置き、ロシア語、キルギス語、ウズベク語の印刷物を 配布している。また、ウクライナの場合と同様、キルギスでも政変のカギを握っていた のは地方の秘密情報部員で、彼らの忠誠心は容易に買収された（Ｇ）。米共和党系の国 際共和研究所（ＩＲＩ）も同国で活動しているが、さらに興味深いのは、米政府の資金 で設立されたビシケクのアメリカン大学の役割だ。その公然たる使命は市民社会の発展 を促進することのほかに、学生やＮＧＯ組織のリーダーを米国に留学させることで、新 しく首相に就任したクルマンベク・バキエフ氏（大統領代行）もその米国留学生の一人 だとＮＴは報じた。 隣国ウズベキスタンの政府当局は昨年、ジョージ・ソロス氏の「開かれた社会研究所」 （ＯＳＩ）事務所を強制閉鎖したが、最近はキルギス情勢を教訓としてＩＲＩなど米Ｎ ＧＯの再登録取り消しなどを検討していると伝えられる。 Kenzo Yamaoka ＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝ 『亜空間通信』993号(2005/04/14) 【アメリカはユーラシア大陸支配の基地を各所に確保する方針（911事件直後のわが 観測が的中）】 911事件直後のわが予言的観測は以下である。 ------------------------------------------------------------ http://www.jca.apc.org/?altmedka/akuukan-01-11-102.html 『亜空間通信』102号(2001/11/17) 【国内現存タリバン政権『崩壊』表現は二重基準で親米傀儡新植民地政権の手先】 [中略] 私の予測は、すでに英文で紹介し、目下、全文を訳出中であるが、「10年の戦争の 秘密の計画」の報道例： http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,2001320010-2001325231,00.html THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 20 2001 Secret plans for 10-year war BY MICHAEL EVANS, DEFENCE EDITOR が存在するように、長期にわたる米軍駐留場所の確保である。カスピ海周辺の石油 ガス資源が狙いの的だが、中央アジアの位置を囲碁にたとえれば、ユーラシア大陸の 天元に当る。天元の一石というのは、碁盤の真ん中の戦略的要所に、バシッと一発打 ち込むことである。 [後略] ------------------------------------------------------------ 以下が最新のアジアタイムズの分析である。 ------------------------------------------------------------ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/GC30Ag01.html Central Asia Mar 30, 2005 US scatters bases to control Eurasia By Ramtanu Maitra The United States is beefing up its military presence in Afghanistan, at the same time encircling Iran. Washington will set up nine new bases in Afghanistan in the provinces of Helmand, Herat, Nimrouz, Balkh, Khost and Paktia. Reports also make it clear that the decision to set up new US military bases was made during Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's visit to Kabul last December. Subsequently, Afghan President Hamid Karzai accepted the Pentagon diktat. Not that Karzai had a choice: US intelligence is of the view that he will not be able to hold on to his throne beyond June unless the US Army can speed up training of a large number of Afghan army recruits and protect Kabul. Even today, the inner core of Karzai's security is run by the US State Department with personnel provided by private US contractors. Admittedly, Afghanistan is far from stable, even after four years of US presence. Still, the establishment of a rash of bases would seem to be overkill. Indeed, according to observers, the base expansion could be part of a US global military plan calling for small but flexible bases that make it easy to ferry supplies and can be used in due time as a springboard to assert a presence far beyond Afghanistan. Afghanistan under control? On February 23, according to the official Bakhter News Agency, 196 American military instructors arrived in Kabul. These instructors are scheduled to be in Afghanistan until the end of 2006. According to General H Head, commander of the US Phoenix Joint Working Force, the objective of the team is to expedite the educational and training programs of Afghan army personnel. The plan to protect Karzai and the new-found "democracy" in Afghanistan rests on the creation of a well-trained 70,000-man Afghan National Army (ANA) by the end of 2006. As of now, 20,000 ANA personnel help out 17,000-plus US troops and some 5,000-plus North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) troops currently based in Afghanistan. In addition, on February 28, in a move to bring a large number of militiamen into the ANA quickly, Karzai appointed General Abdur Rashid Dostum, a regional Uzbek-Afghan warlord of disrepute, as his personal military chief of staff. The list of what is wrong with Dostum is too long for this article, but he is important to Karzai and the Pentagon. Dostum has at least 30,000 militiamen, members of his Jumbush-e-Milli, under him. A quick change of their uniforms would increase the ANA by 30,000 at a minimal cost. Moreover, Dostum's men do not need military training (what they do need is some understanding of and respect for law and order). Another important factor that comes into play with this union is the Pentagon-Karzai plan to counter the other major north Afghan ethnic grouping, the Tajik-Afghans. Since the presidential election took place in Afghanistan last October, Washington has conveyed repeatedly that the poison fangs of al-Qaeda have been uprooted and the Taliban is split. There was also reliable news suggesting that a section of Taliban leaders have accepted the leadership of two fellow Pashtuns, Karzai and US Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, and are making their way into the Kabul government. With al-Qaeda defanged and the Taliban split, one would tend to believe that the Afghan situation is well under control. But then, how does one explain that a bomb went off in the southern city of Kandahar, killing five people on March 17, the very day US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice landed in Kabul on her first visit to Afghanistan? And why has Karzai pushed back the dates for Afghanistan's historical parliamentary elections, originally planned for 2004, and then to May 2005, now to September 2005? One thing that is certainly not under control, and is surely the source of many threats to the region, is opium production. During the US occupation, opium production grew at a much faster rate than Washington's, and Karzai's, enemies weakened. In 2003, US-occupied Afghanistan produced 4,200 tons of opium. In 2004, US-occupied and semi-democratic Afghanistan produced a record 4,950 tons, breaking the all-time high of 4,600 tons produced under the Taliban in the year 2000. Though the problem is known to the world, the Pentagon refuses to deal with it. It is not the military's job to eradicate poppy fields, says the Pentagon. Indeed, it would antagonize the warlords who remain the mainstays of the Pentagon in Afghanistan, say observers. Back on the base When all is said and done, one cannot but wonder why the new military bases are being set up. Given that al-Qaeda is only a shadow of the past, the Taliban leaders are queuing up to join the Kabul government, and the US military is not interested in tackling the opium explosion, why are the bases needed? A ray of light was shed on this question during the recent trip to Afghanistan by five US senators, led by John McCain. On February 22, McCain, accompanied by Senators Hillary Clinton, Susan Collins, Lindsey Graham and Russ Feingold, held talks with Karzai. After the talks, McCain, the No 2 Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he was committed to a "strategic partnership that we believe must endure for many, many years". McCain told reporters in Kabul that America's strategic partnership with Afghanistan should include "permanent bases" for US military forces. A spokesman for the Afghan president told news reporters that establishing permanent US bases required approval from the yet-to-be-created Afghan parliament. Later, perhaps realizing that the image that Washington would like to project of Afghanistan is that of a sovereign nation, McCain's office amended his comments with a clarification: "The US will need to remain in Afghanistan to help the country rid itself of the last vestiges of Taliban and al-Qaeda." His office also indicated that what McCain meant was that the US needs to make a long-term commitment, not necessarily "permanent" bases. On March 16, General Richard Myers, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said no decision had been reached on whether to seek permanent bases on Afghan soil. "But clearly we've developed good relationships and good partnerships in this part of the world, not only in Afghanistan," he added, also mentioning existing US bases in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. A military pattern But this is mere word play. Media reports coming out of the South Asian subcontinent point to a US intent that goes beyond bringing Afghanistan under control, to playing a determining role in the vast Eurasian region. In fact, one can argue that the landing of US troops in Afghanistan in the winter of 2001 was a deliberate policy to set up forward bases at the crossroads of three major areas: the Middle East, Central Asia and South Asia. Not only is the area energy-rich, but it is also the meeting point of three growing powers - China, India and Russia. On February 23, the day after McCain called for "permanent bases" in Afghanistan, a senior political analyst and chief editor of the Kabul Journal, Mohammad Hassan Wulasmal, said, "The US wants to dominate Iran, Uzbekistan and China by using Afghanistan as a military base." Other recent developments cohere with a US Air Force strategy to expand its operational scope across Afghanistan and the Caspian Sea region - with its vital oil reserves and natural resources: Central Asia, all of Iran, the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz and the northern Arabian Sea up to Yemen's Socotra Islands. This may also provide the US a commanding position in relation to Pakistan, India and the western fringes of China. The base set up at Manas outside Bishkek, the capital of Kyrgyzstan - where, according to Central Asian reports, about 3,000 US troops are based - looks to be part of the same military pattern. It embodies a major commitment to maintain not just air operations over Afghanistan for the foreseeable future, but also a robust military presence in the region well after the war. Prior to setting up the Manas Air Base, the US paid off the Uzbek government handsomely to set up an air base in Qarshi Hanabad. Qarshi Hanabad holds about 1,500 US soldiers, and agreements have been made for the use of Tajik and Kazakh airfields for military operations. Even neutral Turkmenistan has granted permission for military overflights. Ostensibly, the leaders of these Central Asian nations are providing military facilities to the US to help them eradicate the Islamic and other sorts of terrorists that threaten their nations. These developments, particularly setting up bases in Manas and Qarshi Hanabad, are not an attempt by the US to find an exit strategy for Afghanistan, but the opposite: establishing a military presence. Encircling Iran On February 28, Asia Times Online pointed out that construction work had begun on a new NATO base in Herat, western Afghanistan (US digs in deeper in Afghanistan ). Another Asia Times Online article said US officials had confirmed that they would like more military bases in the country, in addition to the use of bases in Pakistan (see The remaking of al-Qaeda , February 25). Last December, US Army spokesman Major Mark McCann said the United States was building four military bases in Afghanistan that would only be used by the Afghan National Army. On that occasion, McCann stated, "We are building a base in Herat. It is true." McCann added that Herat was one of four bases being built; the others were in the southern province of Kandahar, the southeastern city of Gardez in Paktia province, and Mazar-i-Sharif, the northern city controlling the main route to central Afghanistan. The US already has three operational bases inside Afghanistan; the main logistical center for the US-led coalition in Afghanistan is Bagram Air Field north of Kabul - known by US military forces as "BAF". Observers point out that Bagram is not a full-fledged air base. Other key US-run logistical centers in Afghanistan include Kandahar Air Field, or "KAF", in southern Afghanistan and Shindand Air Field in the western province of Herat. Shindand is about 100 kilometers from the border with Iran, a location that makes it controversial. Moreover, according to the US-based think-tank Global Security, Shindand is the largest air base in Afghanistan. The US is spending US$83 million to upgrade its bases at Bagram and Kandahar. Both are being equipped with new runways. US Brigadier General Jim Hunt, the commander of US air operations in Afghanistan, said at a news conference in Kabul Monday, "We are continuously improving runways, taxiways, navigation aids, airfield lighting, billeting and other facilities to support our demanding mission." The proximity of Shindand to Iran could give Tehran cause for concern, says Paul Beaver, an independent defense analyst based in London. Beaver points out that with US ships in the Persian Gulf and Shindand sitting next to Iran, Tehran has a reason to claim that Washington is in the process of encircling Iran. But the US plays down the potential of Shindand, saying it will not remain with the US for long. Still, it has not been lost on Iranian strategists that the base in the province of Herat is a link in a formidable chain of new facilities the US is in the process of drawing around their country. Shindand is not Tehran's only worry. In Pakistan, the Pervez Musharraf government has allowed the commercial airport at Jacobabad, about 420km north of Karachi and 420km southeast of Kandahar, as one of three Pakistani bases used by US and allied forces to support their campaign in Afghanistan. The other bases are at Dalbandin and Pasni. Under the terms of an agreement with Pakistan, the allied forces can use these bases for search and rescue missions, but are not permitted to use them to stage attacks on Taliban targets. Both Jacobabad and Pasni bases have been sealed off and a five-kilometer cordon set up around the bases by Pakistani security forces. Reports of increased US operations in Pakistan go back to March 2004, when two air bases - Dalbandin and Shahbaz - in Pakistan were the focus for extensive movements to provide logistical support for Special Forces and intelligence operations. Shahbaz Air Base near Jacobabad appeared to be the key to the United States' 2004 spring offensive. At Jacobabad, C-17 transports were reportedly involved in the daily deliveries of supplies. A report in the Pakistani newspaper the Daily Times on March 10, 2004, claimed that the air base was under US control, with an inner ring of facilities off limits to Pakistan's military. Ramtanu Maitra writes for a number of international journals and is a regular contributor to the Washington-based EIR and the New Delhi-based Indian Defence Review. He also writes for Aakrosh, India's defense-tied quarterly journal. ------------------------------------------------------------ (Copyright 2005 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us for information on sales, syndication and republishing.) ------------------------------------------------------------ 以上。 木村愛二：国際電網空間総合雑誌『憎まれ愚痴』編集長