>George R. Packard III

>

It is not surprising that we are badly informed about Japan. Our press coverage of the major power in Asia and the fourth greatest industrial power in the world is absurdly inadequate. Only one of the regular American correspondents in Tokyo can speak and read Japanese usefully. American editors seem determined to limit all stories on Japan to the exotic, inscrutable or threatening. Scholarly works, with few exceptions, are becoming increasingly specialized. Despite new attention to East Asia in college and high school courses, it is still hard for the layman to find out what he needs to know about our most important and difficult Asian ally.
The Japanese, it should be added, have done little better. Members of their press corps in Washington speak English badly as a rule, and reach few important sources. Their editors favor critics of the Administration without giving equal space to majority views. Japanese visitors tend to be subjective and emotional when they record their impressions of the United States, and scholars are either specialized like our own or committed to a viewpoint before they arrive. Because of the Occupation and our continuing physical presence in Japan, it is easy for Japanese to feel they know us when often they are dealing in false images.
It may be that we can each survive our misapprehensions, letting the diplomats try to untangle the knots, but it would seem better to try to get the picture in focus now than to face a new round of frustrations later on.

2 thoughts on “>George R. Packard III

  1. s.A

    >(密約は必要なものだったか) 米国は核の傘で日本を守る一方、日本人の核アレルギーも理解していた。米海軍は核の存在を肯定も否定もしない方針だったから日本が事前協議を求めても応じなかったろう。安保闘争を再現させないためには核持ち込みを秘しておくのが当時は最良の選択だった。

    (ライシャワー氏はなぜ証言したのか) 最初は63年に『大平正芳外相と話し合って公にする』と国務省に提案したが、拒否された。歴史家として長く隠し続けるのはよくないと感じていた。死後に密約が明らかになり、うそつきだったと思われるのも嫌がっていた。長い時がたち、日本人が密約を結んだ理由を理解できるようになったとも感じたようだ。

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *