From the article of 'Petrel'
No.663 / January 25, 1998

Please send us your opinion and the impression about this article without reservation.

Ban landmine as an opportunity to contribute to the militarism.

Civilist submitting to militarism.


Munakata and Chou dialoge about the treat of ban landmine on Asahi News Paper. Toshiyuki Munakata is the former executive of Self-Defense Forces (SDF) and the professor of the University now. Mrs Chou is civilist and belongs to the NGO.

We have an interest in this opposition. And we can find the essential problem in this discussion. We introduce the content of@opposition and make sure of our viewpoint.

First, Munakata who is a representative of the bourgeois militarism insist that the landmine is very effective for the defense of the state and should not be prohibitive. According to his opinion the landmine is not offensive but passive weapon, mostly gentle weapon. Because the landmine is buried under the ground and effective only for invader. In addition this is very effective for the defense of Japan against the enemy because Japan has a long seacoast. Japan should use this weapon frequently. Now Japan has one million landmines. If we decide to do away with these landmines, the cost of doing away would be very high. And it is necessary for Japan to develop new effective weapon in place of landmine. He say like these.

And he say as follows too. "Landmine is very important to defend Japan. SDF cannot protect without landmines because Japan has the principle of only protection for the foreign enemy@and has no air craft carrier, no long way recket and no strategic bomber which can reach the enemy country and can kill many persons. SDF will be at a loss without the landmine. The landmine is only hope to defend Japan with less member of SDF. If SDF is forced to protect without the landmine, the number of victims increase two or three times. Don't you think that the lives of solders of SDF are important?"

Opposite to this opinion, Mrs. Chou insist as follows. The special feature of landmine is cruel and indiscriminate, not gentle and not peaceful. After the end of the war landmines is continuiting to kill the person because these are not removed.

The Chou's opinion explaining the risk of landmine remained under the ground showes only humanistic viewpoint. She canÕt understand the reality of the bourgeois militarism at all and insist easily from the stand of pacificism and petit-bourgeoisie. This is the reason why her opinion naturally can't gear into the bourgeois militarism.

And Munakata object to her's criticism as follownings. "The current landmine is the scattering type and more safety because this become uneffective after the some period. We can treat the landmine after the war through changing the function of landmine. Hers warring is not important. Hers opinion dose not contribute to concern about entirely ban landmine. These landmine were installed irresponsibly. This is the reason why landmines are continuing to kill the person in Yugoslavia and Canbogia after the end of the war. If landmines are installed responsibly, the problem does not happen. Though West and East Germany installed many landmines in both sides of the wall, no problems happened after removing the wall. Landmines were installed under the responsible control and removed compeletely after removing the wall. This fact shows that the problem is not due to the landmine and due to the method of installation.@Moreover West and East Germany could not invade each other because of the installed landmine. This fact shows that landmine can avoid the war and save many lifes."

Of coase his opinion is not true, but many person would have an agreement to his opinion. Against his opinion, the opinion of civilist is not sharpe and have no persuative power. She can only say that SDF can protect the country through the weapons with high technologies or imformations without landmine. In this point she is the epigonen of militarism. Civilist has no class spirit.

Again she say as followings. "Fifteen retired military officers in America are complaining of ban landmine to The president Mr. Clinton. And there is a report in that landmine is not necessary weapon." But Munakata say agasinist this opinion that this is the special feature in America and America do not need the landmine to protect the country because the front is in foreign countries.

And at last he threaten the civilist and workers. He said as followings. If Japan can't have the protective weapon, It is necessary for Japan to make and develop the aggressive weapon as the substitution. The budget of military force for protection should be expand.

Civilist will be confused and only implore as followings. "That situation like you say is not our hope. We donÕt hope that new weapon product more terrible results. The responsibility of NGO which is connecting to ban landmine is not to bring such a terrible situation." Civilist do not know that landmine is not important weapon for Japanese SDF and SDF has already many terrible weapons except for the landmine. For example fighting craft is one of the most terrible weapons rather than the landmine in a sence. And civilist forget that military officer in America who do not need the landmine is the eager supporte¹hof nuclear weapons. And The laūine is not major weapon.

The bourgeois mi,i}arist want to use these opinion to get the new?Eapon in place of the landmine through saying that ban landmine is the serious problem for the protection of Japan.

Our simple civilist hang around over the hand of the bourgeois militarist and will be used throughly by the bourgeois militarist.