The Revisionist Fallacy in The Japanese Media1-Case Studies of Denial
of Nazi Gas Chambers and NHK's Report on Japanese & Jews Relations
by Takesato Watanabe
Professor of Journalism Department, Doshisha University,
Kyoto 602-8580, Japan
# For Hyoron Shakaikagaku (Social Scienes Review, Doshisha University,
Japan), No. 59, pp.1-45, issued on March 20, 1999.
渡辺武達『メディアの中の歴史修正主義ーーナチ〈ガス室〉否定とＮＨＫ『視点・論点』ユダヤ人論のケース・スタディ』同志社大学人文学会『評論・社会科学』59号、1999年3月20日刊
For its February 1995 issue, Marco Polo, a monthly published by Bungei
Shunju Press Co., featured the article, “The Post-War World's Greatest Taboo:
The Nazi Gas Chambers Never Existed," written by Masanori Nishioka, an internist2).
It did not show any clear evidence to deny an academically proved and universally
accepted fact, and it easily turned out to be a propaganda piece, but the
author's crass challenge to the accepted facts of history promptly provoked
criticism from all circles of society not only in Japan but also of the
world.
The publisher initially fought back by having the then-editor in chif,
Kazuyoshi Hanada, argue that Marco Polo was exercising its right to freedom
of speech. Mr. Hanada-who would go on to assume the editorship of UNO!,
a women's magazine published by The Asahi Shimbun group-added that opposing
views would be allotted equal space in the monthly, though he did not specify
when.
Yet Bungei Shunju was quick to backpedal from its position when human
rights groups of worldwide renown such as the Simon Wiesenthal Center joined
the chorus of censure. It called a press conference and apologised and
then Marco Polo was subsequently discontinued without settling the questions
posed by its own publisher, whose answers serve as a crucial premise in
any rational understanding of the modern world. These are:
One, the validity of assertions denying that the Nazi gas chambers
ever existed; and two, the applicability as well as significance of freedom
of speech in interpreting history. This raised the question about whether
or not the opinion which is not based on the correct information or fully
proven and well accepted facts is permitted in the name of “freedom of speech"
for the mass media.
Throughout its existence, Bungei Shunju has felt the need to publish
anything as long as it either boosts circulation or helps to manipulate
public opinion favorable to the political and economic authorities and powers
by belittling common citizens3). In the Marco Polo debacle, the publisher
outwardly claimed to be the victim, blaming the monthly's demise on the
pressure exerted by advertisers that were controlled by Jewish capital.
As a pretext, it sounds fairly legitimate, and disapproval by advertising
sponsors was no doubt a factor. Yet, analysis of Bungei Shunju periodicals
underscores a point we should always bear in mind: The publisher-as with
Shinchosha, another publishing company in Japan-has maintained strong ties
to the state security apparatus, and those two media firms have often engaged
in the dissemination of government-inspired disinformation to their readership
(Yoshihara, 1977, Saito, 1982 & Kamei, 1983).
Indeed, Bungei Shunju was crafty enough to offer another explanation
for closing down Marco Polo to satisfy those with revisionist or conspiracy
history preferences, knowing that they would not be convinced with the financial
justification alone. In a speech given at a media conference held on June
10, 1996, for example, Bungei Shunju senior managing editor Mitsuyoshi Okazaki
insisted that the Marco Polo article was factual, and described Jewish organizations
of all kinds as “terrorist groups."
Mr. Okazaki further observed: “Marco Polo was not discontinued because
the feature it carried was untrue or due to the subsequent loss in advertising
revenue. The decision was a result of information obtained from a certain
source that Japanese business expatriates may be targeted for terrorist
attacks outside Japan." (I-Media, Vol. 152)
One can only wonder who this “certain source" was. What his statements
do reveal, however, is the unequivocal fact that Bungei Shunju as a company
is capable of duplicitous behavior and constant self-justification.
This paper will examine the emergent trends of historical revisionism-also
known as “historical liberalism" in Japan-found in Germany as well as among
certain elements in my country, Japan that advocate a sweeping denial of
the Holocaust and genocidal gassing. It will also review the fraudulent
nature of and disturbing historical backdrop to such theories in the context
of improving both the media's mission to have a social function and the media
literacy of the general public.
Freedom of Speech in the Media and Socially Accepted Facts
The First Amendment, enacted in 1791, of the American Constitution
was the first written document describing the concept of freedom of speech4).
One of its drafters, Thomas Jefferson, noted, “Given the choice between
government without newspapers or newspapers without government, I would
choose the latter without hesitation." He was convinced that the press should
be unhindered in its criticism of the government, the supreme seat of power
in society, in order to protect the foundations of democracy.
A vast number of news gathering organizations in Japan today are acting
to the contrary, and are quite willing to exploit the principle as a means
to deflect any criticism directed at them. At the same time, freedom of
speech in the truest sense represents the doctrinary and ethical mandate
to prevent both violations of human rights and the dissemination of inaccurate
information.
It was an act of frenzied commercialism, not freedom of speech, when
the press, acting only on leaks provided by law enforcement officials, wrongly
accused Yoshiyuki Kono of perpetrating the sarin nerve gas attack which
took place in Matsumoto City, Nagano, Japan in June 1994. An abundance
of similar instances can be found in articles published in periodicals like
Shinchosha weeklies Shukan Shincho and Focus that have exposed Mr. Kono's
family lineage as the source of “the crime", the private life of a murdered
woman worker of a public utility, and photographs of a juvenile then suspected
of the homicide of another minor. By feeding the base curiosities of their
audience, the Japanese media unquestionably aids and abets the state in its
intrinsic proclivity toward obscurantism.
Press criticism of those in power, given the media's fundamental function
to provide the basic tools to assist the public in making sound judgements
as members of society, must be composed of impeccable truths and facts.
It is vital that the media-generated information encourage people to participate
in building a better society. These are the conditions for what should constitute
media accountability as it serves the public's right to know.
The Holocaust, including the massacre of non-Aryans other than Jews,
from political dissenters and the mentally ill to homosexuals, Jehovah's
witnesses and others,is a proven enough historical event. And because how
we look at such events critically influences our understanding of human history,
the deliberate distortion and falsification of facts which pertain to these
events cannot be tolerated.
Facts can generally be classified under the following categories:
First, facts of indisputable nature, the acceptance of which is fundamental
in forming rational perspectives on science and society. These include
mathematical principles like one and one makes two, and information such
as Tokyo being Japan's current capital, or that atomic bombs were dropped
on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The second category of facts are those open to a variety of interpretation
and argument, among them being the relationship between Article 9 of the
Japanese Constitution and the Self-Defense Forces, or the efficacy of single-seat
constituencies in a democracy, for example.
The Nazi massacre of Jews through gassing is an unequivocal fact proven
by reliable documentation, testimonials and a vast volume of detailed academic
research such as The Annihilation of European Jews, by Raul Hilberg (original,
1961 and Japanese edition, 1998). Therefore one comes to the conclusion
that any attempt to distort or deny the fact has nothing to do with the exercise
of the freedom of speech.
The first edition of Hilberg's book was published in 1961. The Japanese
translation is the latest, specially-revised edition for it. In their commentary,
the translators write: “This work is widely recognized as one of the foremost
studies on the Holocaust. It has not, however, merited much political plaudit
in Israel as it touches upon the loss of moral behavior on the part of the
Jewish Council leadership-namely, the `cooperation' certain Jews extended
to the Nazis out of want to survive. Readers will find in this book a determined
will to reveal historical truths." In particular, Chapter Nine “Extermination
Camps" and Appendix B “Jewish Death Statistics" serve as incontrovertible
evidence that the Nazi-perpetrated Holocaust actually occurred.
Why then could the refutation of such historical truths possibly emerge
so frequently and rampantly? Let us first analysis the structure of the
Holocaust and then review the background and mechanism of these revisionistic
trends in the following paragraphs.
Motives for the Jewish Massacre
Two causes were instrumental in the attempt at genocide: One was Hitler's
perverse preoccupation with the idea of Aryan supremacy and institution
of policies legalizing discrimination against Jews. The second was triggered
by the growing Nazi fear of Jewish reprisals as the fortunes of war began
to shift toward the Allies.
In Mein Kampf (Volume 1, 1925), Hitler, in comparing Jews to Aryans,
dehumanized the former by noting that they “are nothing more than parasites
that invariably leech off another race. . . They were sometimes expelled
by the races they abused. Yet their proliferation is a phenomenon typically
found in all parasites. They are constantly seeking a new body to leech
off for the sake of the survival of their own race." (Japan's Kadokawa Bunko
edition, Vol. 1, p.434)
The systematic slaughter of Jewish population in Europe is a historical
reality that took place between 1933, when Hitler was appointed chancellor
of the Weimar Republic, and his suicide in 1945. It was this fact that
led German President Weizsacker, in his 1985 address to parliament commemorating
the 40th anniversary of Germany's defeat, to reflect upon the horrific errors
of the past committed by his country. After expressing profound contrition
for the “six million Jews who perished in concentration camps" and “countless"
of other minorities and dissenters who were killed by the Nazis, the president
went on to urge the establishment of lasting global peace.
Moreover, it is precisely because the Holocaust had begun to occur
that Chiune Sugihara, at the time deputy consul of the Japanese consulate
in Lithuania, had issued visas to some 6,000 Jews in August and September
1940(Hilberg, 1961). Those who applied feared for their lives following
the Nazi invasion of Poland, which Germany and the Soviet Union had secretly
agreed to partition. Soviet authorities demanded Sugihara leave Lithuania,
annexed earlier by the Soviet Union, while Japanese Foreign Minister Yosuke
Matsuoka repeatedly refused to respond to Sugihara's correspondence (as documented
by the telegraphs he received from the Ministry on August 14 and 16 in 19405)).
In spite of this most trying of circumstances, Sugihara felt compelled
to act against the Foreign Ministry's wishes and continued to approve transit
visas to Jews out of humanitarian reasons. Had those Jews not been truly
alarmed, they most certainly would not have fled the advancing Nazis halfway
around the world, from Europe on through Siberia and the Pacific. Indeed,
many of those who were unable to obtain visas were subsequently murdered-further
proof that the Holocaust's net of butchery was cast far and wide.
Japan concluded the anti-communism agreement with Nazi Germany in 1936
and that was one of the causes for the Japanese government not to officially
permit Sugihara's repeated requests.
In spite of these facts many articles and reports which are not based
upon academically approved documents and logic often appear in the Japanese
media, and whenever the media are criticized on these cases they say that
they have the right to “freedom of speech and expression."6）
Historical Revisionism of NHK TV Education's “Views and Opinions"
For its “Views and Opinions" (Shiten-Ronten『視点・論点』) program of April
29, 1998, NHK Educational Channel 3 (Japanese Public Television, Educational)
featured a commentary by Professor Shoichi Watanabe of Sophia University.
Entitled “A New Perspective on the Relationship Between the Japanese and
Jews,"7) the broadcast, as the following summary of its contents makes clear,
paints a highly revisionist assessment of historical truth. It should also
be pointed out that NHK's timing was equally suspect: The show was aired
on the day Emperor Showa whose image is often seen in books, articles, TV
programs, etc. was born. I will refer to this matter later.
Among the more erroneous propositions cited by the commentator were:
One. Japan was never party to practices of racial discrimination since
World War I.
Two. In contrast to the governments of Britain and the United States in
World War II, Japan did not adopt discriminatory measures toward the Jewish
people.
Three. The issuing of transit visas for several thousands of Jewish refugees
issued by Chiune Sugihara8), then Deputy Consul of the Japanese Consulate
in Lithuania, was done under the instructions of the Japanese Foreign Ministry.
Four. Prominent Jewish businesses-owners and their group (zaibatsu), and
Jewish academicians have yet to emigrate to Japan because of its heavy tax
burden, so revisions to the Japanese tax system should therefore be made
to encourage such emigration.
Japan's wartime government was manifestedly unsympathetic to the plight
of non-Japanese. But in this commentary broadcast by NHK, Professor Shoichi
Watanabe made a number of statements to the contrary. These assertions
are clearly erroneous and among the most blatant was: Mr. Sugihara issued
transit visas to numerous Jews at the direction of the Foreign Ministry.
As for the first premise, one need only to review the treatment of
the local populace in the colonized Korean peninsula and China by the Japanese
Imperial Army to reject it.
The second one is false because Jewish people from around the world
settled in the U. S. in great numbers, while Japan merely issued transit visas.
In reality, the Japanese government, under pressure from Nazi Germany as
well as its own military, had come to view the Jews as a diplomatic nuisance.
The third assertion is also groundless: Mr. Sugihara issued the visas
in Lithuania out of personal conviction and a sense of responsibility, in
spite of Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka's repeated rejections by telegraph.
Ample documentation from that period has survived to prove the government's
unwillingness to issue visas to Jewish refugees who fled from Poland. And
also there is another fact to prove this, that the then Prime Minister of
Japan Kiichi Miyazawa officially apologized in the Japanese Diet in 1992,
for railroading Mr. Sugihara into resigning after the war because he disobeyed
ministerial instruction not to issue the visa at Lithuania. And in addition
Parliamentary Vice Foreign Minister Muneo Suzki, after Miyazawa's speech,
went to see Mrs. Sugihara and apologized for the misdeed of the Japanese
Foreign Ministry.
The fourth premise is simply ludicrous. Professor Shoichi Watanabe
not only characterizes successful Jews in a stereotypical fashion so that
their main concern is money and the notion that things should be changed merely
for appearances' sake is inimical to the interests of both Jews and Japanese.
Such a way of thinking also makes mockery of now universally accepted principles
such as genuine global harmony, peace and human equality.
As the transcript reveals (see Note: 7), Professor Shoichi Watanabe's
point of view is nothing less than an attempt to rewrite history. So I
have urged NHK, which is ultimately accountable for the contents aired on
its broadcast, to provide a viable counterpoint at the very least (May 16,
1998). Yet they seek to shirk the issue entirely by responding that “NHK
cannot be responsible for the televised comments because it was not involved
its research nor production." (June 5, 1998)
Such facts reveal that this historical revisionism by NHK (Japanese
governmental TV) is closely related to other types of historical revisionism
like the denial of Nazi Gas Chambers, the Nankin Massacre by the Japanese
military, appraisal of Hideki Tojo as a humanist and as a hero who protected
Japanese emperor system etc., often appearing in the Japanese mass media,
behind which I find some joint movements to manipulate Japanese public opinion.
When I took issue with Professor Watanabe's statements by requesting
NHK to air a rebuttal, Satoshi Horiguchi of the network's Commentary Committee
replied in writing after consulting with his superior, who consulted with
NHK President Katsuji Ebisawa himself. He essentially rejected my request,
noting that NHK could neither refute a commentator's viewpoint nor be held
responsible for the contents of the program it broadcasts. This response
is the one which almost all academics of media and communication studies
surely find difficult to comprehend9). This answer is completely wrong especially
in the understanding and daily practices of “editorial right".
I say so because the Japanese Broadcast Law defines the responsibilities
of broadcasters for the programs they air (Article 1, Purposes) and in addition
Article 4.2, revised in 1997, holds a network responsible for broadcasts
that violate the human rights of individuals or airs fraudulent information:
“When a broadcaster finds untruthful items in its broadcasts, it shall air
a correction or retraction within two days of their discovery with the facilities
equivalent to the one used in the original broadcast in an appropriate manner."
Nevertheless, a recent Japanese film, “Pride-The Fateful Moment," (produced
Toei Movie Co. in 1998) thoroughly denied the fact that the Rape of Nanking
took place. Revisionist theories like those embraced by Professor Watanabe
were woven into the script, primarily because the film's production committee
chairman, Hideaki Kase, has long asserted, as has the Sophia professor,
that the war in the Pacific had contributed to the emancipation of Asian
countries from the yoke of western imperialism such as that of the UK and
France. Subscribers to such views contemptuously denigrate pacifist theories
anchored to the facts of history as a form of “historical masochism."
Therefore particular concern should be paid to the extensive network
and deeply-rooted motives that drive historical revisionists (historical
liberalists) and their supporters in Japan. These people are powerful enough
not only to produce a full-length feature film, but exploit a public television
broadcast, to further their ends, which is proved by the analysis of this
NHK's case.
To return to the Holocaust, then: Hitler's program of mass murder was
one of the most destructive and insensate acts in human history. The systematic
killing through gassing was the culmination of policies implemented by the
Third Reich that began with the enactment of the anti-semitic Nuremberg
Law in 1935. Gas chambers were built not only in Nazi-occupied territory,
but in Germany as well: Sachsenhausen, Neuengamme, Ravensbruck, Stutthof
and Mauthausen are all infamous as killing fields on German soil (Hilberg,
Special Edition for Japan, 1998).
A veritable library of documentation have been amassed which conclusively
proves that the gas chambers at such concentration camps as Auschwitz-Birkenau
were designed, constructed and utilized for the sole purpose of perpetrating
genocide(Bastian, 1994). Testimonies of those who collaborated in the gassing
of prisoners are available in an abundance of published literature, including
Shoah. Other documents from gas chamber blueprints and their construction
budgets to construction journals kept by contractors, have also been discovered
by Holocaust scholars such as Till Bastian. Needless to say, Raul Hilberg,
Till Bastian and other researchers have thoroughly rebutted the specious
arguments of historical revisionists.
The Nazi Gassing Massacre
The Nazis employed two methods of gassing. One was to load Jews on
to a truck with a hermetically-sealed cargo compartment and asphyxiate them
with exhaust fumes. It was originally used in German-occupied territories
of the former Soviet Union. The other method involves the cyanide gas,
Zyklon-B, and the gas chamber (Hilberg, 1961 & Ruby, 1995).
In the initial phases of the Holocaust, Jews were primarily shot to
death. But Nazi officers found it inefficient; in fact, the volume of shed
blood drove some executioners neurotic and so the use of exhaust fumes followed.
The latter avoided bleeding and the need for bullets. It allowed a greater
number of people to be killed, and the corpses could be conveniently trucked
away for disposal immediately following execution. It was the method of
choice at Auschwitz until September 3, 1941, when Zyklon-B, developed by
a typhus & pest-control company, was first used in Block No. 11 (Bogusz,
1962).
The systematic mass murder by gassing and the disposal of corpses through
cremation were carried out in the following manner:
“Vast numbers of innocent people were packed so tightly that they were
falling atop one another. . . Ten minutes after the doors had been shut,
the temperature inside rose to an appropriate level for cyanide gas to vaporize.
. . Zyklon-B, or cyanide gas soaked in diatomite at a 20 percent concentrate,
was used for this act of German barbarism." (Ruby, 1995)
The writings left by Rudolf Hoss, who directed the killings at Auschwitz,
provide detailed figures of the deaths by Zyklon-B (Hoss, 1963). For an
idea of the quantity of nerve gas produced, the Polish Medical Association
reported that 19,000 kilograms of Zyklon-B was supplied to Auschwitz, according
to the records of the manufacturer, the Tesch and Stubenow Company of Dessau.
Jozef Bogusz writes that, “non-Aryans were exterminated as vermin."
The use and distribution of Zyklon-B was supervised in this way:
“SS doctors. . . observed the gassing through a peephole in the chamber
door, one which the gas could not leak through. The door was opened only
after the doctors signaled that all the victims were dead. Every SS doctor
attached to the concentration camps took part in this operation. SS doctors
delivered Zyklon-B on ambulances painted with red crosses with the help of
medical orderlies of the SDG (the Nazi intelligence agency). . . SS commander
Dr. Ernst Robert van Kravitz supervised the allocation of the gas to each
concentration camp." (Bogusz, 1962)
The Fallacy of Historical Revisionists
The position of historical revisionists especially concerning the Holocaust
may be summarized as:
One, there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz;
Two, the Holocaust never occurred; and
Three, the argument that six million Jews were killed is a product of a
superbly crafted and orchestrated disinformation campaign by Israel and its
Zionism.
These three points have been fully refuted. I believe the first and
second are blatant contradictions to established fact. My position on the
third is this: While the Holocaust and attempted genocide of the Jews by
Hitler regime definitely took place, and although the ultimate toll of victims
may well have reached six million, it could be argued that it may be a little
smaller than that and that not all deaths were attributable to gassing.
My view is predicated on a number of reasons:
First, the Third Reich paid fastidious attention to conference minutes
and terminology so as to leave no direct documentation of the Holocaust.
Second, not much physical substantiation remained because the Nazis burned
what documents existed that linked them to their crimes, and destroyed the
gas chambers as well as incinerators, just as the Imperial Headquarters
of Japan and Unit 731, which conducted chemical and bacteriological experiments
on Allied prisoners of war in China, did immediately prior to Japan's defeat.
Third, since other countries do not maintain as meticulous registration
records of the population as Japan, it is all the more so for foreigners in
a foreign country, as many Jews found themselves to be at the time when they
were unable to give precise figures of the Jewish populace who were murdered
by the Nazis. A similar instance can be found in the massacre of several
thousand Korean residents in Japan by the local population after the 1923
earthquake in the Tokyo area.
Fourth, the number of deaths at Auschwitz was placed at 1.5 million people
in 1994, a reduction reflecting a natural tendency of victims to overstate
their predicament, something which might occur for other camps in the future.
Fifth, the victimized party invariably seeks to extract the maximum political
advantage from their grievance. The existence of Jewish collaborators as
revealed by Hilberg was intentionally suppressed, thereby helping to undermine
the Jewish cause in the eyes of suspicious revisionists.
Lastly, when the Soviet Union recaptured German-occupied territory,
it confiscated numerous documents related to the Holocaust. When Poland became
a Soviet satellite, Soviet propagandists took great liberty with the severity
of Nazi atrocities committed in that country to further their own political
designs.
According to a 1995 study by Luby, based on documents returned to Poland
and Germany after the Soviet Union's collapse, 5.46 million people were
imprisoned in Nazi concentration camps, and a total of 4.34 million perished
in them, a mortality rate of 79.45 percent. It stands that the number of
those who were gassed to death in the camps would be less than these figures,
and a fairly large part of the deaths was caused by the diseases from terrible
living conditions in the camps. A more convincing estimate may be to put
the death toll by gassing at more than one million, though there is obviously
no moral difference between one million and four million in that they both
constitute genocide. Moreover, a lower figure would in no way inhibit the
veracity and tragedy of the Holocaust.
I argue about the number of gassing deaths because the Israeli government
along with the United Kingdom and United States, who have supported the
young nation on the issue of Palestine, has obviously exaggerated Nazi atrocities
as a political tool to gain international recognition for the state of Israel.
The former Soviet Union also benefited in that its struggle against fascism
helped it to secure a leadership role in the postwar socialist bloc. That
the Kremlin did so by making wildly exaggerated claims about Nazi barbarism
still serves as cause for criticism from historical revisionists and “hate-criminals".10)
Not that propaganda activities and orchestration of historical facts
are rare. They have been employed in issues as diverse and divisive as
Palestine and Cambodia in the past as well as present. I once estimated
the number of Cambodians willfully killed by the Khmer Rouge regime to be
several hundred thousand, excluding those who died of starvation and illness11).
Yet newspaper correspondents like Kazuhisa Ikawa (then a member of the Asahi
Shimbun editorial board), who sided with Socialist Vietnam in the clash
between the nations, filed sensationalistic dispatches of Khmer Rouge atrocities.
One of his reports tells that the “plains of Cambodia are filled with the
remains of massacre victims", in spite of the fact that even an amount of
corpses equal to the entire population of the world could not fill it.
Propaganda, obviously, is not a tool wielded just by Israel and its
supporters, but any one with power tries to do it so as to gain more support
from others and to keep its power in any form. And of course there are several
more reasons that such a historical revisionism repeatedly appears in the
mass media.
In present day Japan the term “social information" is gaining circulation
in the revisionist lexicon. It purportedly defines a set of informational
values which stand apart from the empirical facts as established by natural
science, and interpreted to transcend ideology in the post-modern sense.
It also lends theoretical credence to the revisionist argument that denies
the Nazi gas chambers, the Rape of Nanking and the fallacy that there were
no mistakes in the policies during the period of Showa Emperor Hirohito.
The problem is that many of those who adhere to the tenets of social
information are eventually co-opted by the holders of political and economic
power. Their interpretation of the concept helps rationalize their flawed
justifications, and ultimately prods them to seek the revision of history.
Such belief, however, has already been confuted. I thus define social information
as public information required to build a society founded on civil sovereignty.
Everyone who denies the existence of Nazi gassing seems to rely upon
the Roichter Report, no matter how solidly substantiated the counter-argument
may be. Their denial may be theoretically possible because a portion of
a chamber wall did not contain traces of Zyklon-B after being tested 44 years
later. But it is extremely illogical. If that kind of logic is permitted,
one may as well insist that witnesses were hallucinating or that existing
documents were thoroughly misinterpreted.
It would be like telling those who experienced the atomic destruction
of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that they could not have seen what actually happened
because they had to have shut their eyes at the critical instant. The moment
of detonation is not the issue. The United States did develop a nuclear
weapon and loaded it on a B-29 dubbed the “Enola Gay"; it then took off from
Tenyan Base, dropped the bomb on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 and on Nagasaki
three days later and more than 200,000 people were killed as a consequence.
One does not require witnesses at the very moment of detonation to affirm
that American atomic bombs were used to destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Japanese “Historical Liberalism" and Its Supporting Network
Now in Japan the “Society for Historical Liberalism" (Jiyushugi-shikan
Kenkyu Kai) led by Tokyo University Professor Nobukatsu Fujioka, and the
“Society to Make New History Textbooks" (Atarasii Rekishi Kyokasho wo Tsukuru
Kai) led by Tokyo Denki Tsushin University Professor Kanji Nishio, are two
major organs of historical liberalism and one of the leading figures of the
latter, a comics' writer who is influential among the young, named Yoshinori
Kobayashi admits here the existence of the Holocaust by the Nazi but he tries
to justify the last war of aggression at any cost:
“Nazi-Germany waged war against European countries and in addition
it was carrying out the Holocaust against Jews. The genocide should be
criticized as a crime against humanity... Japan was involved in the war
just as the USA, the UK, France, the Soviet Union and Holland were, but
our war was to liberate Asian countries from yokes of those white peoples.
And Japan committed war crimes as those countries did, concluded peace and
paid reparations as a country. Japan's compensation for it is already over
but still there are some insane Japanese who repeatedly refer to the cruel
deeds of the past committed by the Japanese military..." (Kobayashi “A,"
1998, p.126).
Kobayashi even tells a lie, which is clear from the chapter we have
seen from the analysis of the NHK program “Views and Opinions":
“Anti-Japan mass media deny the Sankei Shimbun Report (March 30, 1998)
and spread conventional propaganda that Chiune Sugihara issued visas by
his own will, but actually there was official document named “Countermeasures
against Jews" stating that Japan would not segregate Jews, and there were
not any telegrams against the Sugihara's deed..." (Kobayashi “A", 1998,
p.38).
We can easily understand these people's way of misinforming the readers
-and how illogical they are- when Kobayashi even says the following:
“The Jewish scientists from Germany who sought asylum in the United
States thought that the US should develop the atomic bomb earlier than the
Nazis, but they have never referred to Germany as the target of the bomb.
. . The target of it was Japan from the beginning. . . Those scientists and
the US government had to use the bomb on the Japanese who were just like yellow
monkeys for them...and the US used tactics intentionally blurring the treatment
of the imperial system so as to earn time to use the A-bomb over Japan...
Japan saved twenty thousand Jews but they helped the US make atomic bombs
and massacred so many Japanese at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. . . and so it is
completely unreasonable for the US, which massacred Japanese as an experiment,
and the US and China having such terrible weapons, criticize Japanese war
responsibility" (Kobayashi “A" 1998, pp. 337-338).
Kobayashi also praises the will and deeds of Japanese soldiers who
died believing in “Hakkoichiu" (八紘一宇) where sokoku (祖国・home-country), kyodo
(郷土・home-land), kazoku (家族・family), and Tenno (天皇・Emperor) are respected.
It is OK to respect “home-country, home-land and family" but he should know
that all of these three actually became victims of the last key word “emperor."
With such erroneous logic and understanding of history Kobayashi and others
gathered under the flag of historical liberalism criticize the contents
of current school history textbooks and are very eager to change them.
Japanese school textbooks from elementary school to senior high school
are institutionally checked by the Ministry of Education and as a result
of this, although it may seems for us that the descriptions of the wrong
doings of past Japanese militarism are not adequate, the group of Fujioka,
Nishio and Kobayashi etc. with the help of the Japanese conservative power
elite, have put pressure on the Education Ministry even to delete some expression
on things such as the Nanjing Massacre, the Japanese invasion of China and
other Asian countries or the massacre of thousands of Koreans in the chaos
of the Kanto Earthquake around the Tokyo Area in 1923. Moreover they refer
to the last incident saying that in the midst of the massacre a Japanese
police station chief named Tsunekichi Ohkawa saved three hundred Koreans
kept in the station from the people wanting to kill them (Fujioka, 1996,
pp.126-128), and try to emphasize the good nature of Japanese character.
Now we have fully understood that Japanese historical revisionists
assert only one side of the historical incident and disregard or sometimes
even neglect the main facts of the case so as to rationalize anything in
the past from a point of view that does not damage the good reputation of
the Showa Emperor Hirohito.
According the to Simon Wiesenthal Center, the various components of
the ideology of Holocaust denial include: German nationalism, neo-Nazism,
anti-communism, anti-Zionism and anti-semitism. Deniers subscribe to an ideological
framework, which contains at least three components:
1. racial determinism (i.e., biological race determines culture, intellectual
capacity and moral worth);
2. the doctrine of White superiority;
3. the rehabilitation of Nazism and its leaders.
（A Simon Wiesenthal Center Report, 1994, p.7）
Any modern country has some social element of ultra-nationalism or
right-wing extremists and the above mentioned analysis might be applied
to Japanese historical liberalism and revisionism but we should also take
notice that the characteristic of the Japanese case is that the central core
of society itself, economic and political, is involved, or, dare I say that
they are leading the movement from behind, because they want to escape public
criticism on their war responsibility, which might be proved through the
analysis of the prospectus and the list of supporters of their organization
and their movements.
A group of people who are gathered together under the flag of “Historical
Liberalism" (Jiyushugi-shikan) held a press conference on December 2nd,
1996 and made an appeal for the necessity of to improve school textbooks
about Japanese history and started their activities by organizing the “Society
To Make A New Textbook of Japanese History" on January 30th, 1997. The purpose
of the society is that “history school textbooks at present are based on
the view of class struggles and they see history only from the view point
of people who have resisted rulers and, especially in recent times, they
tell about the so-called sex-slaves of wars and Nanjing Massacre as if they
were facts... The textbooks we make intend to give a self-portrait of Japan
and the Japanese in the global view with decency and balance. . . and to
make children to have confidence and responsibility, and contribute to world
peace and prosperity." And it also states that “If the present history
education in Japan continues, our children and grandchildren might lose their
homeland and suffer hard experiences of a people without a country."
Officials of the Society To Make A New Textbook of Japanese History
as of November 1998 are: Kanji Nishio (President, Professor of Tokyo Denki
University), Nobukatsu Fujioka (Vice President, Professor of Tokyo University),
Ita Namikawa (Vice President, Commentator of Nippon Broadcasting Co.), Susumu
Nishibe (Trustee, Former Professor of Tokyo University and Chief Editor of
Hatsugensha monthly at present), Tadashi Koga (Supervisory Auditor, President
of Toho Rayon Co.).
The list of members, which numbers 6,964 as of October 1998, of the
Society includes: Takeshi Inagaki (Former Editorial Staff of Asahi Shimbun),
Rokuro Ishikawa (Honorary President of Kajima Construction Co.), Hisahiko
Okazaki (Former Japanese Ambassador to Thailand and Former Bureau Chief of
Information and Research of the Japanese Foreign Ministry), Daizo Kusayanagi
(Commentator), Kentaro Hayashi (Former President of Tokyo University), Keitaro
Hasegawa (Commentator), Hirotatsu Fujiwara (Former Professor of Meiji University)
etc.
Any campaign taking place in the society beyond the size of face-to-face
communication needs the mass media without exception and here too The Sankei
Shimbun Newspaper Company supports this movement and has decided even to
publish their textbooks through their affiliated publishing company Fusosha
Press. According to Yoshinori Kobayashi, already more than 200,000 people
reserved the textbooks. It is important here to keep in mind that this Sankei
Shimbun always appear as the supporter of the right-wing extremists from
the media side: to give one example, its morning edition of March 30th 1998,
reported that “Chiue Sugihara issued visas to the Polish Jews in Lithuania
by the directive of Japanese Foreign Ministry, which clearly shows the fact
that The Sankei, the Japanese historical liberalists including Sophia University
professor Shoichi Watanabe, the producer of “Pride" Hideaki Kase, and Yoshinori
Kobayashi etc. are closely connected in their undemocratic beliefs.
Democracy in the framework of our modern age is denied in this movement:
Kanji Nishio, President, told in his speech of the symposium with Nobukatsu
Fujioka, Yoshinori Kobayashi and others held in Tokyo on June 30th 1997
that his group also considers the drawbacks of democracy, questions it in
the belief that democracy is not always the best political system and says
so in their new textbooks (Kobayashi “B," 1998, p.39). This way of understanding
of democracy is so dangerous, though I myself admit present democracy is
not perfect. As any person is fundamentally equal, on which idea democracy
is based, and he or she can speak with the same human rights, which brought
about the parliamentary system when the size of the society became bigger
than that possible by direct human-talks. One of the characteristics of
this group's idea is to deny the validity of direct democracy even when it's
about settling the problems of community environment, which means that they
do not believe in the wisdom and power of the people.
Another characteristic of their movement, as we have seen, is re-evaluation
of the imperial system and the the emperor. As many researches and surveys
done in Japan show, the Japanese power structure acquires its legitimacy
through the imperial system, which is always depicted in the media as favorably
as possible so as to gain the support of the people. Such a media technique,
always revealing its pro-imperium, extreme right-wing notions of historical
revisionism, can be examined in a concrete case through the life of Ryuzo
Sejima, perhaps one of Japan's more powerful postwar figures, whose influence
predates the war:
Sejima, born in Toyama prefecture in 1911, was a graduate of the Imperial
Army's military academy and distinguished himself as a staff officer in
the Japanese expeditionary forces occupying China. With Japan's capitulation
in 1945, he was interned as a prisoner of war in Mongolia and Siberia for
11 years in total. After his repatriation to Japan, Sejima was employed
by the trading conglomerate C. Itoh Corporation, and quickly rose through
its ranks, ultimately serving as its chairman. Corporate success also spelled
growing political clout: he served on a number of high-profile state commissions,
including those seeking to reform the Japanese educational, administrative
and fiscal systems, and gained considerable prominence for his de facto
leadership of them. His wartime connections with fellow officers are believed
to have played a major, albeit covert, role in the successful conclusion
of Japan's war reparation negotiations with South Korea and Indonesia (Kyodo
News Agency, 1996). At present, he acts as a special advisor to C. Itoh
and chairs the Inamori Foundation (founded by Kazuo Inamori, chief executive
of Kyocera Corporation). Sejima also serves as the chief lay representative
of Nishi-Hongan-ji Temple, one of Japan's oldest Buddhist sects, which also
shows the strong relations between Japanese mainstream religion and the imperial
system.
Interviewed by a newspaper, Sejima noted the following on religion
and patriotism:
“There isn't any contradiction in my religious beliefs and my duty
as a citizen to execute war. The teachings of Shinran, known as the founder
of Jodo Shinshu School of Buddhism, have become part of my body and soul,
just as eating three meals a day is part of life. Likewise, I see no discrepancy
between my faith and my postwar duties in the service of my trading company
and government." (The Kyoto Shimbun, July 21, 1998, evening edition)
The ties that link Japan's established religious sects to the power
structure are as abstruse yet meaningful as they are historical. Higashi-Hongan-ji,
for instance, also subscribes to Jodo Shinshu, and therefore is closely
affiliated in religious doctrine with Nishi-Hongan-ji, whose parish Sejima
represents. The wife of Higashi-Hongan-ji's chief priest is the younger
sister of the deceased emperor. Another example is the Tendai sect, perhaps
the earliest Buddhist school of thought to be imported to Japan. Because
its priests were dispatched under imperial patronage to China to study Buddhism
more than ten centuries ago, the sect has traditionally been among the staunchest
supporters of the Imperial Family. To this day, the sect reports to the Imperial
Household Agency whenever its disciples successfully undergo its most rigorous
esoteric practice Sennichi-Kaiho, and the agency in turn issues certificates
recognizing their success.
The Tendai and the Hongan-ji sects, the latter ironically founded as
an instrument of social reform by Shinran for the sake of the masses, asserting
that neither good nor evil acts should deny individuals the right to enter
paradise, are but two illustrations of religion's intimacy with the imperial
system. Even those who once opposed the power structure are eventually
co-opted. The idealistic young disciples of Sen-no-Rikyu, who founded the
tea ceremony cult to which they belonged, literally staked their lives resisting
Toyotomi Hideyoshi, whose Shogunate unified Japan and later led its first
invasion of the Korean Peninsula at the end of the 15th century. Yet the
descendants of their cult are now part of the privileged elite, having married
into the imperial family.
There remains in Japan today an age-old social dynamic: association
with the imperial system consolidates one's standing in society. As do countless
of other Japanese institutions in want of recognition, the Inamori Foundation,
which ranks among the largest of its kind, funded by JY20 billion (some
$160 million) from Kazuo Inamori's private coffers, invites a member of
the Imperial Family for its annual endowment ceremony. The ritual is virtually
repeated at every major public event worthy of note. The dynamic is equally
conspicuous and influential through the alumni of Gakushuin University,
the prestigious teaching grounds of the Imperial Family, and its affiliated
schools.
This framework was kept intact even after the Japanese defeat in World
War II, when the Allied Occupation under instruction of the U.S. government
adopted a policy absolving Emperor Hirohito of his complicity in the war
so as to facilitate its control over the country. The decision prefaced the
preservation of the imperial system in postwar Japan, and with it the system's
deeply rooted influence over Japanese social life including religion. That
the two remain viable and inter-linked can be seen in the 1997 Ministry of
Education directive mandating the singing of the national anthem, with its
lyrics of adulation for the emperor, in all elementary and middle schools.
And in here the linkage between Sejima's group and historical liberalists
who assert that the imperial system and democracy coexist is completed.
Needless to say, all of these make so big a difference in creating barriers
of understanding between Japanese and those of other Asian countries which
were invaded by Japan during the last war (Konaka, 1997).
Conclusion
What is of critical importance here is for the Japanese to discern
that those in power are quietly weaving a fabric of disinformation as evidenced
by the revisionist attempts as mentioned earlier to thwart citizens from
exercising their right to govern and therefore enable the powerful to maintain
their hold on power. These revisionists are “Goyo-bunkajin" or “Goyo-gakusha"
who sell themselves to gain benefits from power and we must constantly remind
ourselves to improve our media literacy, the ability to critically analyze
information generated by the media conglomerates and use the media as the
tool for the benefit of the people, so that we can participate in the policymaking
process in this Age of Information by strengthening the lateral links of
communication between concerned citizens.
Notes:
１） This article was originally prepared for a monthly “The Daisan-Bunmei",
September 1998 Issue and was later revised for the speech at the Simon Wiesenthal
Center at Los Angeles on October 27, 1998.
２） Nishioka, Masanori revised his article and published a book entitled
“Truth of Gas Chambers of Auschwitz", Nisshinhodo, 1997．西岡昌紀『アウシュウイッツ「ガス室」の真実』日新報道，1997年．After
the Marco Polo issue, Aiji Kimura published a book entitled “Points To Be
Discussed About Auschwitz", Liberuta Press, 1995 which also denies the Nazi
Gas Chambers together with the Holocaust and even Genocide．木村愛二『アウシュヴィッツの争点』リベルタ出版，1995年．And
both Nishioka and Kimura are cooperating to denounce the facts of Auschwitz.
And recently this Aiji Kimura translated Roger Garaudy's “Les Mythes fondateurs
de la politique israelienne" into Japanese asロジェ・ガロディ，木村愛二訳『偽イスラエル神話』，れんが書房新社，1998,
which denies not only the existence of Nazi-Gas Chamber but also other activities
of The Third Reich, and for whose publication the author was prosecuted
and found guilty in France.
３） One of the typical examples of this is the negative campaign by The
Shukan Bunshun(Weekly Bunshun) November 19th 1998 issue, which is criticizing
Naoto Kan, the political opposition party leader for his scandal with his
girl friend. The Bunshun spent five months to write the scandal, which
should have been treated as a private matter between the two of them or
discussed among the three including his wife. The Shukan Shincho (Shinchosha's
weekly) has the same nature and it once reported about the victims of The
Minamata disease as the pseudo patients seeking for only compensation money
through the battle in the court. It also wrote an extensive article, in
July 1994, on Mr. Yoshiyuki Kouno's family background titled, “The Bizarre
Family Tree where the Poisonous Gas incident had its origin." And Mr. Kouno
and his family's privacy were thus violated, and the public was led to believe
that he was an indiscriminate murderer until the March 1995 Tokyo subway
gas attack made clear that he was, in fact, an innocent victim.
４） Amendment One of the Constitution of the United States of America
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
５） The telegraph to Chiune Sugihara from Japanese Foreign Minister Yosuke
Matsuoka dated August 14th, 1940 tells:
Re: Transit Visa For Sixteen Jews Who Emigrate to Latin America:
Concerning the matter of the stay of the above mentioned Jewish group
in Japan I will discuss after they arrive in Japan. And I will request
you to note that only those who can get such visas should be limited to
those who have visas to the destination. The Japanese Immigration Office
will not permit even the landing of them on Japan to those who do not possess
such visas through due process.
The telegraph to Chiune Sugihara from Japanese Foreign Minister Yosuke
Matsuoka dated August 16th, 1940 tells:
Re: How To Treat Refugees
There are some who do not have enough money or who do not have entry
visas for the USA or Canada as the destination, among the Lithuanians to
whom you issued transit visas for Japan, and the Japanese Immigration Office
will not give them permit to enter Japan. So I request you not to issue
entry visa to seemingly refugees unless they finished due process of entry
to the destination and at the same time, unless they have enough money for
the travel and the stay in our country.
Most of the Jews from Poland could not get their money returned from
banks where they had made deposits, because banks controlled by Nazi Germany
did not permit it, which means that most of them were not better than “refugees"
when they came to Lithuania. And so if Chiune Sugihara had not issued the
visas against the directives of the Minister, almost all the Jews who came
to the Japanese Consulate in the summer of 1940 would have been the victims
of Nazis.
６） In Japan there is no specified law on the freedom of speech, which
defines more than the very abstract clause of Article Twenty One of the
Constitution of Japan, which borrows the clause from the U. S. Constitution,
Amendment One. So the Japanese mass media, especailly tabloid papers and
weekly magazines have violated privacy saying that they have right to “freedom
of speech".
７） April 29, 1998 NHK TV Education's Program “Views and Opinions" (21:50-22:00):
A Verbatim Transcript of Sophia University Professor Shoichi Watanabe's
“A New Perspective on the Relationship Between the Japanese and Jews"
Transcript Begins:
“The Jews and the Japanese" was the magnus opus of the late Shichihei
Yamamoto; it was a comparative thesis of the two peoples. I would like to
speak on the relationship of the two here today.
While Jews and Japanese have rarely interacted with one another, I
believe it is true that their relationship has been quite cordial.
Let me cite one instance: the foreign currency necessary for Japan
to prepare for the Russo-Japanese War, in other words, the sum it had to borrow
from abroad to facilitate its war effort was some 10 million pounds Sterling.
And the only country which Japan could acquire such funds at the time was
England. The vice chairman of the Bank of Japan, Korekiyo Takahashi, traveled
to London to raise the money, but he was only able to acquire half the amount
needed. At a banquet one evening, however, Mr. Takahashi related his woes
to a man who happened to be seated next to him. The next day, that same man
came to visit the vice chairman with the news that he was willing to loan
the remaining £5 million.
This man's name was Schiff, and he happened to manage Kuhnlieb, a
Jewish-owned bank based in America. It is said that Mr. Schiff informed
Korekiyo Takahashi that he was genuinely concerned about the plight of the
Jews in Europe, that he was worried about their fate, and that Russia was
the most anti-Semitic of all European countries.
Their encounter just happened to coincide with a pogrom in Odessa,
which resulted in the murder of a number of Jews. Mr. Schiff explained that,
since Japan was at war with Russia, he would like to do his part to help the
Japanese and so he promptly offered the £5 million. The loan enabled Japan
to financially strengthen its preparations for the ensuing conflict. That
a nameless Jewish banker provided such sum to the vice chairman of the Bank
of Japan was, in my view, extremely significant.
In World War II, moreover, Jews were being relentlessly persecuted
by the Nazis. The Third Reich sought Japan's cooperation in shutting out the
Jews, but it refused. Japan replied that as a country advocating that racial
discrimination be discontinued since the peace treaty ending World War I,
it would uphold its policy and not discriminate against the Jewish people.
I thank the Sankei Shimbun Newspaper for its recent coverage of this.
The Japanese government provided asylum to approximately 20,000 Jews who
fled the Holocaust through the Siberian Railway. Nazi Germany had repeatedly
requested that the exodus be halted, but Japan went on with it, accepted
the Jews and helped save their lives. These refugees arrived in Tsuruga,
Japan from Vladivostok, moved to Kobe and then to Shanghai. In this way,
the lives of thousands of Jews were rescued. All told, the number of Jews
extricated by the Japanese government amounts to the tens of thousands.
On the other hand, although there may have been many people in England
and America who sympathized with the plight of the Jewish people, there
were cases in which these two countries refused to come forward and help
Jews; they just stood by and watched them be murdered.
For instance, at the height of the Nazi persecution, some 1,000 Jews
sought to escape to safety from Hamburg on the St. Louis. However, neither
England nor the U. S. allowed the ship to enter port: After two months of
sailing to and fro under the watchful eye of the Coast Guard, the St. Louis
was forced to return to Germany. The German Jews on the ship were sent to
concentration camps and ultimately to Auschwitz.
So the only sovereign nation which clearly did not persecute the Jews,
perhaps the only country to provide preferential treatment to these people
then was Japan. Yet Japan has been subject to the worst abuse in the postwar
period, largely because there has been a misconception that, as a signatory
of the Tripartite Pact, our country was somehow involved in the same persecution
of Jews as the Nazis. Yet the opposite is true: Japan was the only country,
in spite of protests from its allies, to truly extend humanitarian aid to
the Jews. This actually happened.
Incidentally, when I took my family to England, I was able to meet
my landlord. He was an old Jewish man who fought as a soldier in World War
II. After we signed the rental agreement, we shared a cup of tea and he said,
“I understand that the Japanese never touched the assets of Jews during
the war." He seemed quite impressed by this.
Of course, the Japanese didn't know the difference between a person
of Jewish descent and any other foreigner, and due to the Japanese government's
standing policy against racial discrimination, we never confiscated Jewish-owned
assets. This fact should have provided postwar Japan with enormous diplomatic
advantage. The only thing is, after its defeat in World War II, Japan never
recognized its wartime treatment of Jews could be exploited to achieve its
foreign policy objectives.
One Japanese in Lithuania issued several thousand visas to Jewish
refugees. But this man did not do so on his own; the visas were issued in
accordance with standing policy of the Japanese government at the time.
This man, a Mr. Sugihara, is widely respected by the Jewish people and there
is even a street named after him in Israel. That in itself is fine and he
is really famous among Jews. In fact, among the numerous Jewish refugees
who could escape by Sugihara's help was a man who would later become the
Israeli foreign minister.
Why didn't Japan actively seek to use such Japanese in its postwar
diplomatic efforts? The manner in which Japan interfaced with the Jewish people
after the following and the way it did not fully utilize the diplomatic resources
that it had well; I see them as being fairly inefficient. Moreover, in 1940,
when Japan signed the Tripartite Pact, Kuhnlieb, the bank which lent money
to Korekiyo Takahashi for the Russo-Japanese War, sent two envoys who were
rabbis to Japan. Yet they were given the cold shoulder by the Japanese, and
they left without having discussed anything of importance. If Korekiyo Takahashi
had not been assassinated in the February 26 Incident, and if Japan had been
able to come to terms with Kuhnlieb, then the country may have been able
to find a way out of the oil embargo [without resorting to hostilities, triggering
the Pacific War].
That is why there are no points of contention between Japan and Jewish
people: indeed, relations between the two are very good. In the future,
I believe it would be in Japan's best interests if we could build a society
in which even one of the immensely wealthy Jewish families would want to
emigrate to our country, so that we may be able to raise the quality of life
in Japan. I say this because, while Jews know that they will never be persecuted
in Japan, not one prominent Jewish family has come to settle here. This is
because our tax system places a heavier burden on citizens than in other
countries. And we know of no Jewish Nobel laureates who wish to naturalize.
For Japan to become truly happy and prosperous, we must remake our country
so that wealthy Jews and academically distinguished Jews would like to live
in Japan. (end)
The original Japanese full text follows:
NHK教育テレビ，1998年4月29日（21:50―22:00）放送『視点・論点』発言内容
（「新・日本人とユダヤ人」 話者：上智大学教授 渡部昇一氏）
☆以下はビデオテープを原文に忠実に起こしたものです。
『ユダヤ人と日本人』といいますと，今は亡き山本七平さんの名著がありますが，山本さんは日本人とユダヤ人を比較して論じられたわけですが，私はユダヤ人と日本人の関係について述べてみたいと思います。
日本人とユダヤ人の関係は余り接点はなかったんでありますが，本当のことをいえば，お互いに「いい関係」だったと思うんです。日露戦争の時に，とりあえず戦争を始めて，滑り出しをよくするために，日本が必要とした外貨，借金するお金ですね，これは約1000万ポンドでありました。これを日本が調達できる国は当時はイギリスしかありませんでしたので，当時の日銀副総裁でありました高橋是清はロンドンに行って集め始めるわけです。しかし，どうしても500万ポンドしか集まらない。ところが，たまたまパーティー・食事会の隣に座っていた人と話し合って，自分の今の状況なんかを話していたら，翌日にその人から「残りの500万ポンド引き受けましょう」と，こう言ってきたそうなんですね。この人はシフという人で，クーンリーヴというアメリカのユダヤ人系の銀行の責任者でありました。そのシフさんが高橋是清に語ったところによりますと，自分はヨーロッパのユダヤ人の運命について非常に関心があるんだ，心配しているんだと，今いちばんユダヤ人をいじめているのはロシアである。ちょうどその頃オデッサでユダヤ人迫害・殺人なんかがありました。日本はそのロシアと戦っているんだから，私に助けさせてもらいます，という形でポンと残りの500万ポンドを調達してくれて，それで日本は日露戦争に財政的にスムーズに滑り出し得たわけです。高橋是清という日銀副総裁も名前を知らなかったようなユダヤ人の銀行家がポンと出してくれた，これは大きいことですね。
それから，戦争中のことです。ナチスは大変ユダヤ人を迫害いたしました。それで，日本にも「協力してユダヤ人を締め出すように」とか，いろいろ言ってきたんでありますが，日本の当時の政府は，日本は第1次大戦の講和条約の時も「人種差別はしない」ということを主張した国でありますから，「われわれはユダヤ人を差別しないんだ」という方針をずっと維持いたしました。これは最近産経新聞で大きく取り上げてくださったんですが，たとえばシベリヤ鉄道から約2万人のユダヤ人が逃げてきました。これを，ドイツ政府からの度重なる「やめてくれ」という要請にもかかわらず，あえて引き受けて，入れて助けてあげているんですね。それからまた，ウラジオストックから敦賀に上陸しまして，そこから神戸に行って，またそこから上海に行く，といった形で助かった人もまた何千人かおります。全部で数万人の人が日本のおかげで助かったわけです。それは，当時の状況は，イギリスにもアメリカにもユダヤ人に同情する人はいっぱい居たでしょうけれども，ユダヤ人を積極的に助けないで，かえって見殺しにしたというケースもあります。たとえば，ナチスの迫害が非常に高まった頃，ハンブルグからセントルイス号という船で約1000人近いユダヤ人が逃げようとしました。ところが，イギリスもアメリカもそのセントルイス号を港に着けさせてくれなかったんですね。沿岸警備隊が出てきまして，それでむなしく2ヶ月ぐらいほっついたあげく，その船はまたドイツに戻ってきて，そこに乗っていたドイツ人は強制収容所・最終的にはアウシュヴィッツあたりに行ったようであります。ですから，当時の独立国ではっきりユダヤ人を迫害しない，そしてどちらかといえば優遇しておった唯一の国が日本人だったわけです。これは，戦後日本がいちばん迷惑を被っているのは，ドイツと三国同盟を結んだもんですから，なんかナチスのユダヤ人迫害と同じようなことを日本もやったんじゃないか，というような誤解があるわけですが，そうじゃなくて本当にユダヤ人に対して人道的な措置を，しかも同盟国からの抗議にもかかわらず，やったのは日本だけだったと，こういうことがあるわけです。
そういえば，私がイギリスへ家族を連れて行きました時に，家主さんがおりました。この方はユダヤ人の老人でありました。戦争中は軍人だったそうですが，この人が家を貸すという契約書を終わった後で，お茶を飲みながら私に言ったのは，「戦争中日本人はユダヤ人の財産には指一本触れなかったそうだな」と言ってね，えらく感心してくれているんですよ。まあ，日本人にしてみればユダヤ人か外人かわかりませんので，日本政府の指示が外人は差別しないという方針でしたから，もちろんユダヤ人の財産を奪うなんてことはなかったわけでありますが，こういうのは大変私は戦後の日本の外交的な財産になっていると思うんです。ただ，日本はどうも戦後ですね，日本がユダヤ人に対して戦争中にやったことを外交資産として十分意識しなかった，利用しなかったんじゃないかなと思います。リトアニアから数千人のユダヤ人にビザを書いたという人がいらっしゃいました。この人なども，やはり自分の独断でやったというよりは当時の日本政府の方針に従ってやったわけです。この方が杉原さんという方ですが，ユダヤで大変重んじられて，そういう名前を付けた通りまでできたそうですが，それ自体はいいことでありますが，この方なんかもそれだけユダヤ人の間で有名で，そのとき助かった人の中にはイスラエルで外務大臣にもなった人もいたようですが，そうした人をなぜ戦後，積極的に外交にお使いにならなかったのか，ちょっと日本の戦後のユダヤ人に対する接触の仕方といいますか，外交資産の使い方がもったいなかったというように思います。そして昭和15年，日本が三国同盟を結んだ時も，クーンリーヴという銀行ですね，日露戦争の時に高橋是清にお金を貸した銀行の紹介で，日本にはお使いの人が，神父さんですけれども，2人ばかり来ていますけれども，どうも受け皿がなくてですね，十分話しがなくて帰ったようであります。そのとき，もし高橋是清が2・26事件で暗殺されることなく生きておったら，またクーンリーヴの銀行と話して，そうすれば話がついて，日本もまた石油問題なんかにうまく解決できた道もあったのかもしれません。
ですから，日本とユダヤ人には何の争いどころか，非常にいい関係でありますので，私は今後もですね，日本の社会の生活の質を高めるために，ユダヤ人の大財閥の一族のひとりぐらいが，「日本の国籍を取りたいなあ」と言ってくるような日本社会をつくりましたら，これは本当に日本はいいのではないかと思います。というのは，日本では絶対ユダヤ人が迫害されないことを知っておりましても，なかなか日本国籍を取ります財閥の一族はいませんですね。これはやはり日本の税制その他が良くない。それから，ユダヤ人でノーベル賞をもらった人もなかなか日本の国籍を取ってくれない。このユダヤ人の学者や財閥関係の人も国籍を取りたいような国にすること，これが日本の本当の幸せなんじゃないだろうかと，こういうふうに思っているしだいです。（了）
I raised several questions about the speech above. The following
is my first letter to NHK's President Kastuji Ebisawa and the answer to
it in the original text.（日本放送協会への質問）
NHK会長海老澤勝二様 同教育テレビ『視点・論点』担当者様
1998年5月16日
渡辺武達
520-0016 大津市比叡平2-22-3
電話：077-529-2614 Fax:077-529-2440
e-mail:twatanab@mail.doshisha.ac.jp
いつもすばらしいお仕事をご苦労さまでございます。平日午後9時50分からの10分という短い番組ではありますが視聴させていただき学ばせていただいています。
ところで一つ疑問がありお手紙を差し上げます。
1998年4月29日（水曜日）に放映されました貴番組には上智大学教授の肩書きで，渡部昇一氏を起用され「新・日本人とユダヤ人」というタイトルでの放映をされておられます。私はビデオをとって確認しているので間違いはありませんが，そのなかで，渡部氏は「戦争中の日本政府によるユダヤ人への暖かい配慮」──そんなものはじつはなかった──についてふれ，そうした外務省の努力とプラスの遺産を生かせなどと主張されました。そしてその具体例として，当時の在リトアニアの日本領事館に赴任していた外交官・杉原氏（千畝領事代理）が「外務省の方針により多くのユダヤ人に通過ビザを出した」という論旨をのべておられます。
しかしそれは事実とは異なります。
杉原千畝氏は，ソ連当局からの立ち退き要求と日本国外務省からの発給拒否回答という非情にもかかわらず，1940年7月末から1カ月にわたって，独ソ不可侵条約の裏の「ポーランド分割秘密協定」の結果，ポーランドに侵入したドイツ軍の暴虐に追われ生命の危険にさらされた計6000人ものユダヤ人に「独自の人道的判断で日本の通過ビザを出し」，外務省の方針に従わなかったというその行為のために戦後も日本の外務省からは差別を受けています。このことは同氏夫人，杉原幸子氏の著書『六千人の命のビザ』（朝日ソノラマ，1990年）をはじめとする資料・証言などで明らかです。
NHK番組でNHKが依頼した話し手がこういう嘘を言っては困ります。つきましてはこの件に関連し以下の点についてお答えいただきますようここにお願い申しあげます。
1. NHKは渡部昇一氏の主張を間違いだと認められるのか。
2．もし間違いなら，NHKの起用責任と当日みていた視聴者への訂正放送の必要が出てくるがそれをどうされるのか。
3．渡部昇一氏はドイツ関係でいえば，その著『ドイツ参謀本部』でも，剽窃が指摘されている。また南京大虐殺問題でもそれは「なかった」と主張されているがそれらの歴史的に，また学者の主張としても問題である発言をするひとをなぜNHKは起用されたのか。
以上，今月中にお答えいただければうれしく存じます。なにとぞよろしくお願い申しあげます。貴局のますますのご発展をお祈りいたします。
以上
Answer from Satoshi Horiguchi in charge of the program, representing
NHK（日本放送協会からの回答）
1998.6.5（金）
渡辺武達 様
前略
平素はNHKに格別のご厚情を賜り厚く御礼申し上げます。また先般はわざわざご来局いただきありがとうございました。さて，その際，文書による回答をというご要請をいただきました。あれから上司ともども協議し，その後の経過も含めてご報告申し上げます。
4月29日放送分の杉原千畝氏に関連する個所についてですが，「視点論点」はこの番組名のとおり，できるだけ広く各界の先生方のお考えを自由な立場で述べていただくことを旨とする番組で，テーマの選択及び内容についてはあくまで出演者の立場を尊重し，NHK自らの取材に基づく番組とは一線を画するという立場をとっております。
論者の渡部昇一氏に間い合わせましたところ，「当時の日本国の方針である（ママ）が，最近の資料で明らかになっています。」というご返事をいただいたのみで，論者は今なおご主張を変えられておりません。
せっかくのお申し越しでございますす（ママ）が，私どもとしまして論者個人の資格での発言ご意見について当否を判断できる立場にはございません。
しかしながら，渡辺先生のご指摘の内容はきわめて重要なことでありますので，今後当番組を放送していくうえで十分配意して番組に生かしてまいりたいと考えております。以上ご賢察のうえなにとぞご理解いただけたらと存じます。
このたびは貴重なご指摘ありがとうございました。今後ともよろしくご指導ご鞭撻のほどお願い申し上げます。取り急ぎご報告申し上げます。草々
視点・論点担当
堀口悟士
８） For detailed reference of Chiune Sugihara's trials and triumph in
Lithuania, see “Rokusen Nin No Inochi No Visa" (Visas for Life) by Yukiko
Sugihara, the late Deputy Consul's wife, published by Asahi Sonorama, Tokyo
1990, and “In Search of Sugihara" by Hillel Levin, published by The Free Press
New York, 1996 (Japanese Edition translated by Kiyoshi Suwa & Teruhisa
Shino, published by Shimizu Shoin, Tokyo, 1998 as “千畝".
９） This was written in the answer dated June 5, 1998 as the response
to my inquiry dated May 16, 1998.
１０） It is legally punishable to criticize someone on the grounds of
his or her race, religion, sex, belief etc. and to speak openly or to publish
such materials containing what is called “hate-speech" and those who commit
such a crime are called “hate-criminals". Such hate-crime is not punished
in Japan unlike in Germany, France, Austria or USA.
１１） The article I contributed to The Asahi Shimbun Newspaper, March
22nd 1980, was later compiled into the anthology of Cambodian Massacre and
News Reports" as本多勝一編『虐殺と報道』（すずさわ書店，1980年 Katsuichi Honda ed.: Gyakusatsu-to-Hodo,
Suzusawa Press, Tokyo, 1980, pp.101-105)
References
Bastian, Till, 1994: Auschwitz und die “Auschwitz-Luge", C. H. Beck'sche
Verlagsbuchhandlung
（Japanese Edition with new contribution of articles translated by Yuji
Ishida, Haruhiko Hoshino & Yoshikazu Shibano, published by Hakusuisha,
Tokyo, 1995）ティル・バスティアン著，石田勇治・星乃治彦・芝野由和訳『アウシュヴィッツとアウシュヴィッツの嘘』白水社，1995年
Bogusz, Jozef, 1962: Auschwitz, State Medical Publishers, Warsaw（Japanese
Edition translated by Mitsuo Kaneda, published by Japan Medical Journal,
Tokyo 1982）ユゼフ・ボグシュ編，金田光雄訳『医学評論・アウシュビッツ』日本医事新報社，1982年
Buckley, Jr., William, 1992: In Search of Anti-Semitism, Continuum New
York
Buruma, Lan, 1994: Wages of Guilt, Memories of War in Germany and Japan,
Farraar, Strau and Goroux, New York（Japanese edition，イアン・ブルマ著，石井信平訳『戦争の記憶―日本人とドイツ人』TBSブリタニカ，1994年）
Fujioka, Nobukatsu & Society for Historical Liberalism, ed., 1996:
Japanse History Not Written In The School Texdbooks, The Sankei Shimbun
News Service（Original Japanese edition，藤岡信勝・自由主義史観研究会『教科書が教えない歴史』産経新聞ニュースサービス，1996年）
Hilberg, Raul, 1961（Special Edition for Japan 1998）: The Destruction of
the European Jews, Franklin Watts（Japanese Edition translated by Yukio Mochida,
Kazumi Harada & Shigeko Inoue, published by Kashiwa Shobo Press, 1998）ラウル・ヒルバーグ著，望田幸男・原田一美・井上茂子訳『ヨーロッパ・ユダヤ人の絶滅』柏書房，1998年
Hitler, Adolf, 1925: Mein Kampf（Japanese Edition “Waga-Toso" translated
by Ichiro Hirano & Shigeru Shojaku, published by Kadokawa Press, Tokyo,
1973）
Kamei, Atsushi, 1983: Inside-Story of Weekly Shincho, Daisanbunmei Press（Original
Japanese edition，亀井淳『週刊新潮の内幕』第三文明社，1983年）
Kobayashi , Yoshinori，“A”，1998: On the War, Special Declaration of Gohmanism,
Gentosha（Original Japanese edition，小林よしのり『ゴーマニズム宣言・SPECIAL・戦争論』幻冬社，1998年）
Kobayashi , Yoshinori，“B”，1998: Campain for Making New School Textbooks
of History, Fusosha, Tokyo（Original Japanese edition，小林よしのり『新しい歴史教科書を「つくる会」という運動がある』扶桑社，1998年）
Konaka, Yotaro, ed., 1997: Japan in the School Textbooks of Foreign Countries,
Goma Shobo Press（Original Japanese edition，小中陽太郎編『外国の教科書に日本はどう書かれているか』ごま書房，1997年）
Kyodo News Agency, 1996: Chinmoku no File, Kyodo News Agency, Tokyo（Original
Japanese edition，共同通信社会部『沈黙のファイル』共同通信社，1996年）
Hoss, Rudolf, 1963: Kommandant in Auschwitz, Deutcher Taschenbuch Verlag（Japanese
Edition translated by Keiji Kataoka, published by The Simul Press, Tokyo,
1972）ルドルフ・ヘス著，片岡啓治訳『アウシュヴィッツ収容所──私は人間の尊厳を傷つけた・・・所長ルドルフ・ヘスの告白懺悔録』サイマル出版会，1972年
Lanzmann, Claude, 1985: Shoah（Movie, Japanese Book Edition translated by
Taketomo Takahashi published by Sakuhinsha, Tokyo, 1995）クロード・ランズマン著，高橋武智訳『ショアー』作品社，1995年
Levin, Hillel, 1996: In Search of Sugihara, The Free Press New York（Japanese
Edition translated by Kiyoshi Suwa & Teruhisa Shino, published by Shimizu
Shoin, Tokyo, 1998）
Lipstadt, Deborah, 1993: Denying the Holocaust−The Growing Assault on Truth
and Memory, The Free Press New York
Miyazawa Masanori, 1982: On the Japanese Articles of Jews, 2nd Edition,
Shinsensha, Tokyo（Original Japanese Edition “Yudayajin Ronko" 宮沢正典『ユダヤ人論考──日本における論議の追跡』第二版，新泉社，1982年。
Osawa, Takeo, 1995: Hitler & Jews, Kodansha Press, Tokyo（Original Japanese
Edition “Hitler-to-Yudayajin"）大澤武男『ヒトラーとユダヤ人』講談社現代新書，1995年。
Perl, William, 1989: The Holocaust Conspiracy: an International Policy
of Genocide, Shapolsky Publishers New York
Ruby, Marcel, 1995 : Le Livre Dela Deportation, Editions Robert Laffonnt,
S.A., Paris（Japanese Edition translated by Kenji Sugano, published by Chikuma
Press, 1998）マルセル・リビュー著，菅野賢治郎訳『ナチ強制・絶滅収容所──一八施設内の生と死』筑摩書房，1998年
Saito, Michikazu and others, 1982: Oh, Poor! Bungei Shunju, Daisanbunmei
Press（Original Japanese edition，斉藤道一・高崎隆治・柳田邦夫『危うし！？文芸春秋』第三文明社，1982年）
Simon Wiesenthal Center, 1994: A Simon Wiesenthal Report, Holocaust Denial:
Bigotry in the Guise of Scholarship, Simon Wiesenthal Center
Sugihara, Yukiko, 1990: Visas for Life, Asahi Sonorama, Tokyo（Original
Japanese Edition “Rokusennin-no-Inochi-no-Visa" 杉原幸子『六千人の命のビザ』朝日ソノラマ，1990年
Yoshihara, Koichiro, ed., 1977: On The Relations of Weekly Bunshun and
Japanese Cabinet Information Agency, Banseisha Press（Original Japanese edition，吉原公一郎『週刊文春と内閣調査室』晩聲社，1977年）
About the author:
Professor Takesato Watanabe got MA in Journalism and Media Studies at Doshisha
University, Kyoto, Japan in 1969 and is currently teaching Journalism and
Mass Communication at Doshisha University. He is also the organizer of Doshisha
Society for Journalism and Media Studies. For more information, write to
him. His mailing address: Media and Journalism Depertment, Doshisha University,
Kyoto 602-8580, Japan
Phone: 81-29-2614 Fax: 81-775-29-2440
E-mail:twatanab＠mail.doshisha.ac.jp
日本の読者の皆さまへ
同志社大学教授 渡辺武達
本稿は，ナチによるユダヤ人（正確には非アーリア人一般）虐殺問題を題材にして「歴史修正主義」を批判する立場から，いわゆる「ネオナチ」グループと歴史修正主義者たちの運動とその活動内容が，「自由主義史観」などと自称しながら，日本でも大きな力を持ち出した構造をメディア論として展開したものである。
直接的な動機は私じしんが月刊誌『パンプキン』1997年12月号において「諸研究によって歴史の事実として証明されたナチの犯罪やガス室の存在を全否定する主張は言論の自由の範囲外である」が「そうした主張が出たからといってその論者をドイツの司法当局に告発するのもいただけない」という論旨の評論（後注1）を，まさにこの言論状況の枠組みのなかで起きたジャーナリスト・木村愛二氏と『週刊金曜日』の編集者・本多勝一氏らとのあいだの「事件」に関連して書いたところ，「ナチ・ガス室」などをシオニズムの謀略として否定する木村氏から論争を仕掛けられた。
「歴史見直し論者」を自称する木村氏が何をいおうと無視することも可能だが，私があえて本論を書くにいたった理由は以下のとおりである。
第一に，私を名指しての木村氏からの批判が，個人的に400字原稿用紙80枚ほどの反論を送ったにもかかわらず，その後も執拗であったこと。第二に，英文本論でも書いたように，文藝春秋発行の『マルコポーロ』誌（1995年2月号）が内科医・西岡昌紀氏による「戦後世界史最大のタブー。ナチ”ガス室”はなかった」と題した，刺激的な「プロパガンダ」を掲載したが，その西岡氏からも木村氏を介して質問状が寄せられたこと。
西岡論文そのものは世界史の常識に挑戦するものにしては論証が「がさつ」であったから各所で一斉の非難が起き，結局，雑誌そのものの廃刊という決着がはかられた。が，その氏が2年後の97年，『マルコポーロ』論文を補筆し，一書にまとめるということが起きた。またマルコポーロ以後，木村愛二氏による『アウシュヴィッツの争点』が西岡論文を支援する社会的脈絡で発行され，昨（98）年，「その発行が理由となってフランスで有罪・罰金刑判決を受けたロジェ・ガロディ『偽イスラエル神話』（れんが書房新社，原著は1996年刊）が同氏の訳によって刊行された（本論注2参照）。
そして今度はNHKまでがこのユダヤ民族とナチ問題に関連し，日本政府のとった態度の解説として，歴史的事実をねじまげる「歴史修正主義・自由主義史観」そのものの主張を電波を使って放映し（教育テレビ『視点・論点』），私に批判されると，放送法の目的条項と間違い放送訂正条項を無視し，編集権そのものを放棄したうえに，なりふりかまわず歴史捏造に加担しだすという，メディアと反動右翼思想の結託が日本のメディア界でも表面化してきた。
私は「メディアは人びとの適切な社会的判断のための基礎資料を提供する」というメディア・アカウンタビリティ（社会的存在理由の説明責任）論をもっており，その立場から木村氏には詳細な反論を送り，同時にその要旨を月刊誌『第三文明』1998年9月号に「ナチ〈ガス室〉否定と「歴史修正主義」の虚妄」と題して発表した。
また98年10月27日には，在ロサンゼルスのユダヤ系人権擁護組織，サイモン・ヴィーゼンタール・センター（ホロコースト博物館）に招かれ，「日本のメディアと歴史修正主義」と題し講演した。本稿はその草稿に手を加えたものである。
なお，本論にも注として日本語原文と英訳をいれた「NHK教育テレビ・『視点・論点』の歴史捏造問題の大枠について，関連資料とともに以下に記す。
NHK『視点・論点』歴史捏造問題について
資料一
NHKは教育テレビで本（1998）年4月29日，『視点・論点』（解説委員室製作担当）において，ゲストに上智大学教授の渡部昇一氏を迎え，「新・日本人とユダヤ人」（関東関西とも，視聴率は1.8％で，推定約120万人が視聴）と題する，概略つぎのような内容の歴史捏造番組を制作し，放映した。これは意図的に昭和天皇の誕生日に放映設定していることにも謀略性がある。具体的な「デタラメ放送内容」は以下のとおりである。
〓日本は第一次大戦時から人種差別主義をとってこなかった。
〓第二次大戦中も英米などとは違って，日本政府はユダヤ人を差別しなかった。
〓リトアニアでユダヤ人数千人にビザを発給した杉原千畝氏の行為は日本政府の外交方針であった。
〓ユダヤ人の財閥やノーベル賞学者たちが日本国籍をとらないのは，日本の税金が高いためであり，税税を改め，そういうユダヤ人たちに「日本人」になってもらおう。
〓の間違いについては，日本（軍）が朝鮮半島や中国で何をしたかをみれば一目瞭然である。
〓については，アメリカへ渡り居住したユダヤ人は多いが，日本の場合は通過ビザだけで，居住権を前提としていない。日本はドイツの干渉と日本軍部の方針により，ユダヤ人の存在を「やっかいもの」と考えていたというのが事情である。
〓については，当時の外務大臣松岡洋右からの拒否電報にもかかわらず，杉原氏は自己の信念と責任でビザを発給しており，日本政府はできるだけポーランドから逃げてきたユダヤ人たちにビザを出したくなかったという歴史的資料（電報記録や研究）がある。
〓については，金や力だけでものを考えることをユダヤ人も好まないし，日本社会のためにもならないと同時に，それは世界の平和と人間の平等思想に反する社会観である。
この番組内における渡部昇一氏の発言内容はまさに「歴史を捏造する」ものであり，私は放送責任者であるNHKにその訂正をもとめた。しかしながらNHKは会長の承認の下に「NHK自らが取材し，製作した番組ではないから・・・」などという無責任きわまりない態度に出ている。これはNHKによる歴史修正主義への連動としても見過ごすことができないものである。
なお，ナチスによるユダヤ人のガス室大量殺害については本文でもあげたように，ラウル・ヒルバーグ著，望田幸男・原田一美・井上茂子訳『ヨーロッパ・ユダヤ人の絶滅』（柏書房，1998年）が確かな史料と証言を緻密に検証したものとして推奨できる。杉原千畝氏の在リトアニア日本領事代理時代のことについては，同氏夫人の著書『六千人の命のビザ』（朝日ソノラマ，1990年），とヒレル・レビン著，諏訪澄・篠輝久訳『千畝』（清水書院，1998年）が参考になる。
資料二
元・在リトアニア日本領事代理杉原千畝氏によるユダヤ人へのビザ発給問題の経緯
杉原問題 外務省と政府の対応
1．杉原千畝のビザ発給は外務省の命令違反であった。このことは外務大臣松岡洋右からの電報が，十分な滞在費と日本を出国して第三国へいく費用をもっていることを条件とし，かつ杉原ビザによってウラジオストークへ来て，敦賀に渡ろうとしたユダヤ人たちが着の身着のままであり，そのことを叱責する松岡の電報もあることから明らかになる。
2．しかし，戦争中の混乱で，杉原氏は本省の方針に背いたことをすぐさま咎められることもなく，次のような仕方でむしろ昇進している。しかし，戦後，抑留からの帰国後は外務省の態度は一変し，リトアニア時代のことが確実に作用し，人減らし（リストラ）の対象にされることになる。
リトアニア領事代理→チェコスロバキア領事→ケーニスベルク日本総領事（1941年）→ブカレスト日本総領事（1942年）→終戦（1945年）→ブカレスト郊外の強制収容所→日本帰国（1947年）→リストラを断行中の外務省から戦時中の業務命令違反によるビザ発給もその原因となり，辞職を迫られた→外務省辞職（1948年）
1969年，杉原千畝はイスラエルの宗教大臣より勲章を授与される。また1985年，イスラエル政府から「諸国民の正義の人章（ヤド・バシェム章）を授与される。また1991年には，50年ぶりに独立を回復したリトアニアに，杉原千畝記念碑が建立され，旧首都のカナウス市内に「スギハラ通り」が設けられた。
こうして外国でのスギハラ評価が定まってくると，リトアニアとの外交関係の成立を迫られた日本政府は，国会において杉原の名誉回復をおこない，当時の宮沢喜一総理（現大蔵大臣）はこうのべたが，このいい方自体が当時の外務省の見解を隠すもので興味深い。
「彼の行った判断と行為は，当時のナチスによるユダヤ人の迫害という，いわば極限的な局面において人道的かつ勇気あるものであった」
つづいて，外務省を代表して鈴木宗男政務次官（当時）が，杉原にたいする50年前の外務省の処分を誤りと認め，杉原の遺族に対して公式に謝罪した。
以上のことから，資料的にも，日本政府の公式見解としても，杉原千畝がリトアニア領事代理を務めていた当時の外務省が「一般ユダヤ人にビザを出さない」という方針をもち，そのことによって戦後，杉原を辞職に追い込み，そのことの間違いをリトアニアとの外交関係の樹立に先立って認めざるを得なくなった経緯が証明される，つまり，NHK『視点・論点』における上智大学教授・渡部昇一氏による本件主張が誤りであることが判明するであろう。
資料三
私・渡辺武達の「歴史修正主義と自由主義史観」の定義はつぎのようである（山口功二・渡辺武達編『メディア用語を学ぶ人のために』世界思想社，1999年刊行収録の拙論から引用）
歴史修正主義・自由主義史観（historical revisionism, historical liberalism）
歴史的事実を歪め，都合のよいように歴史を書き換える思想とやり方のことで，欧米では歴史修正主義と呼称されるが，日本では「自由主義史観」と自称している。欧米ではヒトラー時代のユダヤ人を主なターゲットとしたホロコースト・ジェノサイド，はては「ガス室」の存在までを否定する「ホロコースト歴史修正主義」が代表的。日本にもナチ問題での影響はあるが，主として「南京大虐殺」「朝鮮人従軍慰安婦」などの存在否定や朝鮮や中国にたいする過去の日本の行為を正当化しようとする。そして事実の検証をへて学問的にも認められた従来の歴史観を「自虐史観」とよんで攻撃，戦争責任を免れようとする既存勢力と歴史を系統的に学んでいない若者に支持され，一定の社会的力を持ち出している。
日本の自由主義史観論者としては東大教授の藤岡信勝（『「自虐史観」の病理』文藝春秋，1997年），上智大教授の渡部昇一（『まさしく歴史は繰りかえす』クレスト社，1998年），評論家の加瀬英明（『21世紀日本は沈む太陽になるのか』広済堂出版，1998年），漫画家の小林よしのり（『新ゴ−マニズム宣言special・戦争論』幻冬舎，1998年）などがおり，アジア諸国への侵攻は英米仏などの植民地主義からの解放のため（例：英によるインド支配）であった，太平洋戦争の発端は米国のアジア支配にあるなどとし，「大東亜共栄圏構想」を肯定しようとする。そうした立場から財界人なども加わった「新しい歴史教科書をつくる会」（西尾幹二会長）を結成し，文部省に教科書記述の変更を働きかけたり，同趣旨のシンポジウムなどを開催している。
歴史記述をはじめ，あらゆる情報は時代と場所と観点の変更により，さらには新資料の発見等によりその内容評価が変わる。また言論・表現の自由論からいっても，事実に基づき，かつ個人の人権を侵害しないかぎりあらゆる言説は是認されるべきだが，日本の自由主義史観の場合，事実によって検証され文部省の検定をへた教科書さえしばしば問題とし，中国「侵略」記述を「進出」に書き替えることを求めたり，そうした記述を短縮，あるいは削除しようとする。また彼らの運動はメディアをも対象としており，最近の例では98年4月29日，NHK教育テレビにおいて放映された『視点・論点』（解説委員室製作担当）などがある。
この番組は文藝春秋発行の『マルコポーロ』誌，95年2月号の西岡昌紀「戦後世界史最大のタブー。ナチ”ガス室”はなかった」と題した「プロパガンダ」記事につづくものだが，これが昭和天皇の誕生日である4月29日（現・緑の日）に放映された作為の背景には昭和天皇の「御代」の美化のこころみがあり，日本の歴史修正主義の特徴である。この番組には視聴者からの批判が寄せられたが，それにたいしNHKは海老澤勝二会長の承認の下に「NHK自らが取材し，製作した番組ではないから・・・」などと，自らの放送事業者として編集権を放棄したかのような無責任ぶりを露呈した。
いつの世にもそうした右翼的言辞はあるし，メディアの一部にはそうした立場を「売り」にするものもある。が，最近では文藝春秋・新潮社・講談社などから産経新聞・フジテレビ・扶桑社といった系列を巻き込み，新聞とテレビと出版社が連携したりする現象がその特徴としてある。その動きは15年戦争（太平洋戦争）とその首謀者の一人である東條英機を英雄視し，昭和天皇の戦争責任を免除する映画『プライド』（伊藤俊也監督，東映製作）が先述した加瀬英明（製作委員長）と渡部昇一（日印親善協会会長）が制作委員長となって世に送り出されたり（1998年），その動きが郵政省の特殊法人で，準国営放送のNHK番組にまで影響を拡大していることにその政治力学構造がかいま見える。
ドイツやフランスでは，ナチズムやホロコーストを是認し，それをメディア，その他の公の場で表現することは映像・活字をとわず刑法上の有罪となる。米国では，人種・国籍・宗教などを攻撃理由とするヘイト・クライム（憎悪犯罪）は連邦犯罪とみなされる。州レベルでもヘイト・クライム防止法を成立させているがそこに同性愛者への批判防止までふくめているのが21州もある（98年11月現在）。このように，欧米では歴史を歪曲したり，人種や宗教によって攻撃する手法は「ヘイト・スピーチ」（憎悪言論）とよばれ，刑法上の犯罪になることが多いが，日本では野放し状態であるのは言論の自由の意味についての社会的合意がないためであろう。【参考】ティル・バスティアン著，石田勇治・星及治彦・芝野由和訳『アウシュヴィッツとアウシュビッツのウソ』白水社，1995年；吉見義明『「従軍慰安婦」をめぐる30のウソと真実』大月書店，1997年。
資料四
以下は，このNHKの歴史捏造問題と私・渡辺武達のアメリカでの講演について報じる毎日新聞（1998年10月27日付け夕刊，中部本社版）
（次ページ掲載）
☆後注1 『パンプキン』1997年12月号掲載「メディア・ウオッチング」原稿
言論の自由の原点
同志社大学教授 渡辺武達
最近，『湾岸報道に偽りあり』などの著者として知られる木村愛二氏がジャーナリズム関係者のあいだでしばしば話題になる。反権力を売り物にしてきた氏がナチの大虐殺を否定するかのような本を書いたのと，そのことに関連して『週刊金曜日』の関係者からドイツ刑法に違反するとしてドイツの司法当局へ告発されたからである。
私がメディア研究者としてはっきりいえることは，現在の日本の主流メディアのほとんどが言論・表現の自由ということを「意図的」に誤解，ないしは曲解しているため，その弊害が一般にも出てきているということだ。
大学で私のゼミに登録した学生たちも，日本国憲法二十一条における「言論・出版の自由」と「検閲の禁止」規定を知っているから，『フォーカス』や『週刊新潮』（ともに新潮社刊）が神戸事件の少年容疑者の顔写真を掲載したり，『週刊現代』などがインターネットからの転載でダイアナ妃の事故直後の血みどろ写真（実はニセ合成写真）を掲載しても，表現の自由のうちではないかと思いがちである。
しかし半年も現代メディアとジャーナリズムについての勉強をすると，言論・表現の自由はメディアが市民の知る権利を守るために忌憚のない権力批判報道をおこなうことであり，〓他人を傷つける言論をゆるすものではないことがわかってくる（プライバシーと人権侵害の禁止）。また，最大風速五十メートルの巨大台風が近づいているのにもしテレビやラジオで，備えなど必要ないといえば，小型漁船などの物損や乗組員の被害は甚大なものとなるから，〓メディアに意図的「うそ」をつく自由はゆるされるはずもない。さらに，〓一人ひとりの人間の平等性と男女の共生社会に向かう方向性に対立するような社会差別助長の言論もだめである。くわえて〓女性の身体を切りきざむだけといった残虐暴力表現やレープを肯定し，女を男の慰みものとしか見ないようなポルノとセックス表現も，言論・表現の自由の範疇に入れられない。
数年前，文藝春秋発行の『マルコポーロ』誌が「ナチにガス室はなかった」という記事を掲載，問題となり，廃刊となった（九五年二月号）。この虚偽表現についての心からの反省のない「メディアの犯罪」はSGIによってもウオールストリート・ジャーナル，アジア版への意見広告として告発された（九六年十二月）。理由は，毒ガスの製造工場，運搬手段，運搬者，ガスの管理者・使用者，そして殺害された人びとのおよその数と名前まで資料によって明らかになっていることを「ソ連とユダヤ人たちがつるんでおこなった捏造」であるという論を，日常会話ならともかく，一般市販メディアで主張すること，またそうした主張をさせるメディアの責任が問われたのであった。
私は商売と政権政党への奉仕のために何でもする新潮社や文藝春秋を反人権出版社と断ずる。しかし，日本のメディア関係者が日本人による「誤解表現」をドイツの司法当局に訴えるやり方にも賛同できない。
（以上）
（同志社大学人文学会『評論・社会科学』第59号，1999年3月20日発行に掲載）