消費税
八厘十厘 税は上げども 年金の早期支給だに なきぞ悲しき
Vice President Mike Pence's Remarks on the Administration's Policy Towards China in Hudson Institute on October 4, 2018
Vice President Mike Pence's Remarks on the Administration's Policy Towards China
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Ken, for that kind introduction. To the Members of the Board of Trustees, to Dr. Michael Pillsbury, to our distinguished guests, and to all of you who, true to your mission in this place, “think about the future in unconventional ways” –- it is an honor to be back at the Hudson Institute.
For more than a half a century, this Institute has dedicated itself to “advancing global security, prosperity, and freedom.” And while Hudson’s hometowns have changed over the years, one thing has been constant: You have always advanced that vital truth, that American leadership lights the way.
And today, speaking of leadership, allow me to begin by bringing greetings from a great champion of American leadership at home and abroad –- I bring greetings from the 45th President of the United States of America, President Donald Trump. (Applause.)
From early in this administration, President Trump has made our relationship with China and President Xi a priority. On April 6th of last year, President Trump welcomed President Xi to Mar-a-Lago. On November 8th of last year, President Trump traveled to Beijing, where China’s leader welcomed him warmly.
Over the course of the past two years, our President has forged a strong personal relationship with the President of the People’s Republic of China, and they’ve worked closely on issues of common interest, most importantly the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
But I come before you today because the American people deserve to know that, as we speak, Beijing is employing a whole-of-government approach, using political, economic, and military tools, as well as propaganda, to advance its influence and benefit its interests in the United States.
China is also applying this power in more proactive ways than ever before, to exert influence and interfere in the domestic policy and politics of this country.
Under President Trump’s leadership, the United States has taken decisive action to respond to China with American action, applying the principles and the policies long advocated in these halls.
In our National Security Strategy that the President Trump released last December, he described a new era of “great power competition.” Foreign nations have begun to, as we wrote, “reassert their influence regionally and globally,” and they are “contesting [America’s] geopolitical advantages and trying [in essence] to change the international order in their favor.”
In this strategy, President Trump made clear that the United States of America has adopted a new approach to China. We seek a relationship grounded in fairness, reciprocity, and respect for sovereignty, and we have taken strong and swift action to achieve that goal.
As the President said last year on his visit to China, in his words, “we have an opportunity to strengthen the relationship between our two countries and improve the lives of our citizens.” Our vision of the future is built on the best parts of our past, when America and China reached out to one another in a spirit of openness and friendship.
When our young nation went searching in the wake of the Revolutionary War for new markets for our exports, the Chinese people welcomed American traders laden with ginseng and fur.
When China suffered through indignities and exploitations during her so-called “Century of Humiliation,” America refused to join in, and advocated the “Open Door” policy, so that we could have freer trade with China, and preserve their sovereignty.
When American missionaries brought the good news to China’s shores, they were moved by the rich culture of an ancient and vibrant people. And not only did they spread their faith, but those same missionaries founded some of China’s first and finest universities.
When the Second World War arose, we stood together as allies in the fight against imperialism. And in that war’s aftermath, America ensured that China became a charter member of the United Nations, and a great shaper of the post-war world.
But soon after it took power in 1949, the Chinese Communist Party began to pursue authoritarian expansionism. It is remarkable to think that only five years after our nations had fought together, we fought each other in the mountains and valleys of the Korean Peninsula. My own father saw combat on that frontier of freedom.
But not even the brutal Korean War could diminish our mutual desire to restore the ties that for so long had bound our peoples together. China’s estrangement from the United States ended in 1972, and, soon after, we re-established diplomatic relations and began to open our economies to one another, and American universities began training a new generation of Chinese engineers, business leaders, scholars, and officials.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, we assumed that a free China was inevitable. Heady with optimism at the turn of the 21st Century, America agreed to give Beijing open access to our economy, and we brought China into the World Trade Organization.
Previous administrations made this choice in the hope that freedom in China would expand in all of its forms -– not just economically, but politically, with a newfound respect for classical liberal principles, private property, personal liberty, religious freedom — the entire family of human rights. But that hope has gone unfulfilled.
The dream of freedom remains distant for the Chinese people. And while Beijing still pays lip service to “reform and opening,” Deng Xiaoping’s famous policy now rings hollow.
Over the past 17 years, China’s GDP has grown nine-fold; it’s become the second-largest economy in the world. Much of this success was driven by American investment in China. And the Chinese Communist Party has also used an arsenal of policies inconsistent with free and fair trade, including tariffs, quotas, currency manipulation, forced technology transfer, intellectual property theft, and industrial subsidies that are handed out like candy to foreign investment. These policies have built Beijing’s manufacturing base, at the expense of its competitors -– especially the United States of America.
China’s actions have contributed to a trade deficit with the United States that last year ran to $375 billion –- nearly half of our global trade deficit. As President Trump said just this week, in his words, “We rebuilt China” over the last 25 years.
Now, through the “Made in China 2025” plan, the Communist Party has set its sights on controlling 90 percent of the world’s most advanced industries, including robotics, biotechnology, and artificial intelligence.
To win the commanding heights of the 21st century economy, Beijing has directed its bureaucrats and businesses to obtain American intellectual property –- the foundation of our economic leadership -– by any means necessary.
Beijing now requires many American businesses to hand over their trade secrets as the cost of doing business in China. It also coordinates and sponsors the acquisition of American firms to gain ownership of their creations. Worst of all, Chinese security agencies have masterminded the wholesale theft of American technology –- including cutting-edge military blueprints. And using that stolen technology, the Chinese Communist Party is turning plowshares into swords on a massive scale.
China now spends as much on its military as the rest of Asia combined, and Beijing has prioritized capabilities to erode America’s military advantages on land, at sea, in the air, and in space. China wants nothing less than to push the United States of America from the Western Pacific and attempt to prevent us from coming to the aid of our allies. But they will fail.
Beijing is also using its power like never before. Chinese ships routinely patrol around the Senkaku Islands, which are administered by Japan. And while China’s leader stood in the Rose Garden at the White House in 2015 and said that his country had, and I quote, “no intention to militarize” the South China Sea. Today, Beijing has deployed advanced anti-ship and anti-air missiles atop an archipelago of military bases constructed on artificial islands.
China’s aggression was on display this week, when a Chinese naval vessel came within 45 yards of the USS Decatur as it conducted freedom-of-navigation operations in the South China Sea, forcing our ship to quickly maneuver to avoid collision. Despite such reckless harassment, the United States Navy will continue to fly, sail, and operate wherever international law allows and our national interests demand. We will not be intimidated and we will not stand down. (Applause.)
America had hoped that economic liberalization would bring China into a greater partnership with us and with the world. Instead, China has chosen economic aggression, which has in turn emboldened its growing military.
Nor, as we had hoped, has Beijing moved toward greater freedom for its own people. For a time, Beijing inched toward greater liberty and respect for human rights. But in recent years, China has taken a sharp U-turn toward control and oppression of its own people.
Today, China has built an unparalleled surveillance state, and it’s growing more expansive and intrusive – often with the help of U.S. technology. What they call the “Great Firewall of China” likewise grows higher, drastically restricting the free flow of information to the Chinese people.
And by 2020, China’s rulers aim to implement an Orwellian system premised on controlling virtually every facet of human life — the so-called “Social Credit Score.” In the words of that program’s official blueprint, it will “allow the trustworthy to roam everywhere under heaven, while making it hard for the discredited to take a single step.”
And when it comes to religious freedom, a new wave of persecution is crashing down on Chinese Christians, Buddhists, and Muslims.
Last month, Beijing shut down one of China’s largest underground churches. Across the country, authorities are tearing down crosses, burning bibles, and imprisoning believers. And Beijing has now reached a deal with the Vatican that gives the avowedly atheist Communist Party a direct role in appointing Catholic bishops. For China’s Christians, these are desperate times.
Beijing is also cracking down on Buddhism. Over the past decade, more than 150 Tibetan Buddhist monks have lit themselves on fire to protest China’s repression of their beliefs and their culture. And in Xinjiang, the Communist Party has imprisoned as many as one million Muslim Uyghurs in government camps where they endure around-the-clock brainwashing. Survivors of the camps have described their experiences as a deliberate attempt by Beijing to strangle Uyghur culture and stamp out the Muslim faith.
As history attests though, a country that oppresses its own people rarely stops there. And Beijing also aims to extend its reach across the wider world. As Hudson’s own Dr. Michael Pillsbury has written, “China has opposed the actions and goals of the U.S. government. Indeed, China is building its own relationships with America’s allies and enemies that contradict any peaceful or productive intentions of Beijing.”
In fact, China uses so-called “debt diplomacy” to expand its influence.
Today, that country is offering hundreds of billions of dollars in infrastructure loans to governments from Asia to Africa to Europe and even Latin America. Yet the terms of those loans are opaque at best, and the benefits invariably flow overwhelmingly to Beijing.
Just ask Sri Lanka, which took on massive debt to let Chinese state companies build a port of questionable commercial value. Two years ago, that country could no longer afford its payments, so Beijing pressured Sri Lanka to deliver the new port directly into Chinese hands. It may soon become a forward military base for China’s growing blue-water navy.
Within our own hemisphere, Beijing has extended a lifeline to the corrupt and incompetent Maduro regime in Venezuela that’s been oppressing its own people. They pledged $5 billion in questionable loans to be repaid with oil. China is also that country’s single largest creditor, saddling the Venezuelan people with more than $50 billion in debt, even as their democracy vanishes. Beijing is also impacting some nations’ politics by providing direct support to parties and candidates who promise to accommodate China’s strategic objectives.
And since last year alone, the Chinese Communist Party has convinced three Latin American nations to sever ties with Taipei and recognize Beijing.
These actions threaten the stability of the Taiwan Strait, and the United States of America condemns these actions. And while our administration will continue to respect our One China Policy, as reflected in the three joint communiqués and the Taiwan Relations Act, America will always believe that Taiwan’s embrace of democracy shows a better path for all the Chinese people. (Applause.)
Now these are only a few of the ways that China has sought to advance its strategic interests across the world, with growing intensity and sophistication. Yet previous administrations all but ignored China’s actions. And in many cases, they abetted them. But those days are over.
Under President Trump’s leadership, the United States of America has been defending our interests with renewed American strength.
We’ve been making the strongest military in the history of the world stronger still. Earlier this year, President Trump signed into law the largest increase in our national defense since the days of Ronald Reagan -– $716 billion to extend the strength of the American military to every domain.
We’re modernizing our nuclear arsenal. We’re fielding and developing new cutting-edge fighters and bombers. We’re building a new generation of aircraft carriers and warships. We’re investing as never before in our armed forces. And this includes initiating the process to establish the United States Space Force to ensure our continued dominance in space, and we’ve taken action to authorize increased capability in the cyber world to build deterrence against our adversaries.
At President Trump’s direction, we’re also implementing tariffs on $250 billion in Chinese goods, with the highest tariffs specifically targeting the advanced industries that Beijing is trying to capture and control. And as the President has also made clear, we will levy even more tariffs, with the possibility of substantially more than doubling that number, unless a fair and reciprocal deal is made. (Applause.)
These actions — exercises in American strength — have had a major impact. China’s largest stock exchange fell by 25 percent in the first nine months of this year, in large part because our administration has been standing strong against Beijing’s trade practices.
As President Trump has made clear, we don’t want China’s markets to suffer. In fact, we want them to thrive. But the United States wants Beijing to pursue trade policies that are free, fair, and reciprocal. And we will continue to stand and demand that they do. (Applause.)
Sadly, China’s rulers, thus far, have refused to take that path. The American people deserve to know: In response to the strong stand that President Trump has taken, Beijing is pursuing a comprehensive and coordinated campaign to undermine support for the President, our agenda, and our nation’s most cherished ideals.
I want to tell you today what we know about China’s actions here at home — some of which we’ve gleaned from intelligence assessments, some of which are publicly available. But all of which are fact.
As I said before, as we speak, Beijing is employing a whole-of-government approach to advance its influence and benefit its interests. It’s employing this power in more proactive and coercive ways to interfere in the domestic policies of this country and to interfere in the politics of the United States.
The Chinese Communist Party is rewarding or coercing American businesses, movie studios, universities, think tanks, scholars, journalists, and local, state, and federal officials.
And worst of all, China has initiated an unprecedented effort to influence American public opinion, the 2018 elections, and the environment leading into the 2020 presidential elections. To put it bluntly, President Trump’s leadership is working; and China wants a different American President.
There can be no doubt: China is meddling in America’s democracy. As President Trump said just last week, we have, in his words, “found that China has been attempting to interfere in our upcoming [midterm] election[s].”
Our intelligence community says that “China is targeting U.S. state and local governments and officials to exploit any divisions between federal and local levels on policy. It’s using wedge issues, like trade tariffs, to advance Beijing’s political influence.”
In June, Beijing itself circulated a sensitive document, entitled "Propaganda and Censorship Notice.” It laid out its strategy. It stated that China must, in their words, “strike accurately and carefully, splitting apart different domestic groups” in the United States of America.
To that end, Beijing has mobilized covert actors, front groups, and propaganda outlets to shift Americans’ perception of Chinese policy. As a senior career member of our intelligence community told me just this week, what the Russians are doing pales in comparison to what China is doing across this country. And the American people deserve to know it.
Senior Chinese officials have also tried to influence business leaders to encourage them to condemn our trade actions, leveraging their desire to maintain their operations in China. In one recent example, China threatened to deny a business license for a major U.S. corporation if they refused to speak out against our administration’s policies.
And when it comes to influencing the midterms, you need only look at Beijing’s tariffs in response to ours. The tariffs imposed by China to date specifically targeted industries and states that would play an important role in the 2018 election. By one estimate, more than 80 percent of U.S. counties targeted by China voted for President Trump and I in 2016; now China wants to turn these voters against our administration.
And China is also directly appealing to the American voters. Last week, the Chinese government paid to have a multi-page supplement inserted into the Des Moines Register –- the paper of record of the home state of our Ambassador to China, and a pivotal state in 2018 and 2020. The supplement, designed to look like the news articles, cast our trade policies as reckless and harmful to Iowans.
Fortunately, Americans aren’t buying it. For example, American farmers are standing with this President and are seeing real results from the strong stands that he’s taken, including this week’s U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, where we’ve substantially opened North American markets to U.S. products. The USMCA is a great win for American farmers and American manufacturers. (Applause.)
But China’s actions aren’t focused solely on influencing our policies and politics. Beijing is also taking steps to exploit its economic leverage, and the allure of their large marketplace, to advance its influence over American businesses.
Beijing now requires American joint ventures that operate in China to establish what they call “party organizations” within their company, giving the Communist Party a voice –- and perhaps a veto -– in hiring and investment decisions.
Chinese authorities have also threatened U.S. companies that depict Taiwan as a distinct geographic entity, or that stray from Chinese policy on Tibet. Beijing compelled Delta Airlines to publicly apologize for not calling Taiwan a “province of China” on its website. And it pressured Marriott to fire a U.S. employee who merely liked a tweet about Tibet.
And Beijing routinely demands that Hollywood portray China in a strictly positive light. It punishes studios and producers that don’t. Beijing’s censors are quick to edit or outlaw movies that criticize China, even in minor ways. For the movie, “World War Z,” they had to cut the script’s mention of a virus because it originated in China. The movie, “Red Dawn” was digitally edited to make the villains North Korean, not Chinese.
But beyond business and entertainment, the Chinese Communist Party is also spending billions of dollars on propaganda outlets in the United States and, frankly, around the world.
China Radio International now broadcasts Beijing-friendly programs on over 30 U.S. outlets, many in major American cities. The China Global Television Network reaches more than 75 million Americans, and it gets its marching orders directly from its Communist Party masters. As China’s top leader put it during a visit to the network’s headquarters, and I quote, “The media run by the Party and the government are propaganda fronts and must have the Party as their surname.”
It’s for those reasons and that reality that, last month, the Department of Justice ordered that network to register as a foreign agent.
The Communist Party has also threatened and detained the Chinese family members of American journalists who pry too deep. And it’s blocked the websites of U.S. media organizations and made it harder for our journalists to get visas. This happened after the New York Times published investigative reports about the wealth of some of China’s leaders.
But the media isn’t the only place where the Chinese Communist Party seeks to foster a culture of censorship. The same is true across academia.
I mean, look no further than the Chinese Students and Scholars Association, of which there are more than 150 branches across America’s campuses.
These groups help organize social events for some of the more than 430,000 Chinese nationals studying in the United States. They also alert Chinese consulates and embassies when Chinese students, and American schools, stray from the Communist Party line.
At the University of Maryland, a Chinese student recently spoke at her graduation of what she called, and I quote, the “fresh air of free speech” in America. The Communist Party’s official newspaper swiftly chastised her. She became the victim of a firestorm of criticism on China’s tightly-controlled social media, and her family back home was harassed. As for the university itself, its exchange program with China — one of the nation’s most extensive — suddenly turned from a flood to a trickle.
China exerts academic pressure in other ways, as well. Beijing provides generous funding to universities, think tanks, and scholars, with the understanding that they will avoid ideas that the Communist Party finds dangerous or offensive. China experts in particular know that their visas will be delayed or denied if their research contradicts Beijing’s talking points.
And even scholars and groups who avoid Chinese funding are targeted by that country, as the Hudson Institute found out firsthand. After you offered to host a speaker Beijing didn’t like, your website suffered a major cyber-attack, originating from Shanghai. The Hudson Institute knows better than most that the Chinese Communist Party is trying to undermine academic freedom and the freedom of speech in America today.
These and other actions, taken as a whole, constitute an intensifying effort to shift American public opinion and policy away from the “America First” leadership of President Donald Trump.
But our message to China’s rulers is this: This President will not back down. (Applause.) The American people will not be swayed. And we will continue to stand strong for our security and our economy, even as we hope for improved relations with Beijing.
Our administration is going to continue to act decisively to protect America’s interests, American jobs, and American security.
As we rebuild our military, we will continue to assert American interests across the Indo-Pacific.
As we respond to China’s trade practices, we will continue to demand an economic relationship with China that is free, fair, and reciprocal. We will demand that Beijing break down its trade barriers, fulfill its obligations, fully open its economy — just as we have opened ours.
We’ll continue to take action against Beijing until the theft of American intellectual property ends once and for all. And we will continue to stand strong until Beijing stops the predatory practice of forced technology transfer. We will protect the private property interests of American enterprise. (Applause.)
And to advance our vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific, we’re building new and stronger bonds with nations that share our values across the region, from India to Samoa. Our relationships will flow from a spirit of respect built on partnership, not domination.
We’re forging new trade deals on a bilateral basis, just as last week President Trump signed an improved trade deal with South Korea. And we will soon begin historic negotiations for a bilateral free-trade deal with Japan. (Applause.)
I’m also pleased to report that we’re streamlining international development and finance programs. We’ll be giving foreign nations a just and transparent alternative to China’s debt-trap diplomacy. In fact, this week, President Trump will sign the BUILD Act into law.
Next month, it will be my privilege to represent the United States in Singapore and Papua New Guinea, at ASEAN and APEC. There, we will unveil new measures and programs to support a free and open Indo-Pacific. And on behalf of the President, I will deliver the message that America’s commitment to the Indo-Pacific has never been stronger. (Applause.)
Closer to home, to protect our interests, we’ve recently strengthened CFIUS — the Committee on Foreign Investment — heightening our scrutiny of Chinese investment in America to protect our national security from Beijing’s predatory actions.
And when it comes to Beijing’s malign influence and interference in American politics and policy, we will continue to expose it, no matter the form it takes. We will work with leaders at every level of society to defend our national interests and most cherished ideals. The American people will play the decisive role — and, in fact, they already are.
As we gather here, a new consensus is rising across America. More business leaders are thinking beyond the next quarter, and thinking twice before diving into the Chinese market if it means turning over their intellectual property or abetting Beijing’s oppression. But more must follow suit. For example, Google should immediately end development of the “Dragonfly” app that will strengthen Communist Party censorship and compromise the privacy of Chinese customers. (Applause.)
It’s also great to see more journalists reporting the truth without fear or favor, digging deep to find where China is interfering in our society, and why. And we hope that American and global news organizations will continue to join this effort on an increasing basis.
More scholars are also speaking out forcefully and defending academic freedom, and more universities and think tanks are mustering the courage to turn away Beijing’s easy money, recognizing that every dollar comes with a corresponding demand. And we’re confident that their ranks will grow.
And across the nation, the American people are growing in vigilance, with a newfound appreciation for our administration’s actions and the President’s leadership to reset America’s economic and strategic relationship with China. Americans stand strong behind a President that’s putting America first.
And under President Trump’s leadership, I can assure you, America will stay the course. China should know that the American people and their elected officials in both parties are resolved.
As our National Security Strategy states: We should remember that “Competition does not always mean hostility,” nor does it have to. The President has made clear, we want a constructive relationship with Beijing where our prosperity and security grow together, not apart. While Beijing has been moving further away from this vision, China’s rulers can still change course and return to the spirit of reform and opening that characterize the beginning of this relationship decades ago. The American people want nothing more; and the Chinese people deserve nothing less.
The great Chinese storyteller Lu Xun often lamented that his country, and he wrote, “has either looked down at foreigners as brutes, or up to them as saints,” but never “as equals.” Today, America is reaching out our hand to China. And we hope that soon, Beijing will reach back with deeds, not words, and with renewed respect for America. But be assured: we will not relent until our relationship with China is grounded in fairness, reciprocity, and respect for our sovereignty. (Applause.)
There is an ancient Chinese proverb that reads, “Men see only the present, but heaven sees the future.” As we go forward, let us pursue a future of peace and prosperity with resolve and faith. Faith in President Trump’s leadership and vision, and the relationship that he has forged with China’s president. Faith in the enduring friendship between the American people and the Chinese people. And Faith that heaven sees the future — and by God’s grace, America and China will meet that future together.
Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)
END
チャイナは、共産党が支配する人治国家。コネが生命と財産の拠りどころ
【チャイナから撤退すべき理由】
共産国（党）では、組織の上にある者が下を支配しやすい構造になっているので、少しでも上の階層の者とコネクションを作っておかなければ、権利は守れません。
もしコネなしに他人の恨みを買うことになれば（コネがあっても相手に更に有力なコネがあると）、あらゆる不利益を受け、最後には財産権や生命すら簡単に脅かされてしまいます。
つまり、政変が起きればあなたの全ての権利がたちどころに危険に曝されるのです。例外はありません、あの習近平ですら同じなのです。
いい しげる - 【チャイナから撤退すべき理由】... | Facebook
日本における法の支配 MEMO
成文化された法のほかに、人間社会にはその社会を成り立たせる「規範」が存在する。人間社会を成り立たせている道徳や伝統や宗教や習俗があって、その秩序が脅かされる時に「それをしてはいけない」「こうあるべきだ」という「規範」が意識される。個人の生命や自由を奪う刑罰については、その行使は国家権力に委ねられ、明文によってあらかじめ罪となるべき行為とその罰が定められていなければならないが、すべての「規範」が明文法として存在しているわけではなく、不文法として意識されているものも多い。
他人に対する敬意、特に年長者に対する敬意。弱者に対する配慮。信仰や崇拝の対象物への慮り。歴史的文化的価値観の尊重。人間としての尊厳。社会としての尊厳等々。
人間社会は明文法と不文法を問わず、それらの「規範」によって秩序が維持されている。
それらの「規範」は、社会を統べる（法）である。
いい しげる - 「日本における法の支配」とは何かを憲法学者は問い直す必要がある。... | Facebook
「日本における法の支配」とは何かを憲法学者は問い直す必要がある。
日本人が現在までに、その歴史と文化に基づいて獲得した権利義務の価値観（法）に拠って、統治する者も統治される者も従うべきである。そこに矛盾が生じるなら議会によって新たに明文法が制定されねばならない。
憲法は「日本国民は、正当に選挙された国会における代表者を通じて行動し、われらとわれらの子孫のために」「この憲法を確定する」「そもそも国政は、国民の厳粛な信託によるものであつて、その権威は国民に由来し、その権力は国民の代表者がこれを行使し、その福利は国民がこれを享受する」と前文で謳っている。
日本人の文化的価値観（法）が何ものかによって脅かされるなら、国民の代表を通じて、明文法を定め「法」に対する脅威を排除すべきだ。そう思う。
今年中に北海道だけで地域電源として独立した電源を確保せよ
【老朽火力だけがトラブル源ではない】
北海道電力と政府は「万一トラブルが起きても必要な電力を確保できる」とみて、北海道胆振地震発生から続けて来た「2割節電」目標を解除したが、その解除措置の説明には本州と北海道を結ぶ「北本連系設備」60万ｋWが最初から積み上げの数値に含まれている状態だ。
つまり、今回ブラックアウトした電源の一つである「北本連系設備」60万ｋWのトラブル一つ起きれば、対策見直しは必至となる。
本来は、北海道だけで地域電源として独立した電源を確保できなければ安定供給とは言えないだろう。電力系統からの電気は、そのバックアップであるはずだ。
ちなみに泊原発が運転を停止し電力逼迫状態となった2012年には火力発電所の計画外停止や出力抑制のトラブルは北海道電力管内だけで91件あった。（北電報告書より）
#原発再起動
画像は昨日(2018-9-15)の読売。
上記はFBに投稿した意見を補足して書き直したもの
MEMO【外國人土地法】は、現在でも有効な法律である。
【外國人土地法】は、現在でも有効な法律である。
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
第一條 帝國臣民又ハ帝國法人ニ対シ土地ニ関スル権利ノ享有ニ付禁止ヲ為シ又ハ条件若ハ制限ヲ附スル国ニ属スル外國人又ハ外國法人ニ対シテハ勅令ヲ以テ帝國ニ於ケル土地ニ関スル権利ノ享有ニ付同一若ハ類似ノ禁止ヲ為シ又ハ同一若ハ類似ノ条件若ハ制限ヲ附スルコトヲ得。
略意：
日本人・日本法人による土地の権利の享有を制限している国に属する外国人・外国法人に対しては、日本における土地の権利の享有について、その外国人・外国法人が属する国が制限している内容と同様の制限を勅令によってかけることができる
捕捉：
「勅令」部分は、日本国憲法施行の際現に効力を有する命令の規定の効力等に関する法律 第2条第１項 の規定により、「政令」と読み替えられるので、現内閣が政令を定めさえすればその政令施行の日から法の運用が可能である。
法務省は、WTO協定を踏まえ「外国人であることを理由に、土地取得を一律に制限することは難しい」としているらしいが、相互主義についての観点、安全保障上の観点が抜け落ちており不当だ。
下記の答弁とWTO条約付属書ーBサービスの貿易に関する一般協定 第十七条 内国民待遇を吟味願いたい。
WTOでは、安全保障上の規制はWTOの範囲外としていることも忘れてはならない。例えば戦略物資や技術・ノウハウの国外流出等については国内法で対応可能である。土地についても防衛上の規制は充分可能であるはずだ。
外国資本による土地取得に対する規制の必要性に関する質問主意書：質問本文：参議院
五 財政金融委員会において、安倍総理は、「外国人の国境離島等に対する取得、あるいは自衛隊の施設の近傍に対する土地の取得について制限を掛けるべきではないかという議論があったのでございますが、ＷＴＯ上、外国人に対して、外国人であるという、あるいは法人であるということによって制限は掛けることはできないということでございまして、一方、中国は、この適用の、ＷＴＯに加盟する段階でこれは留保しているということになっております」と答弁している。
１ 「ＷＴＯ上、外国人に対して、外国人であるという、あるいは法人であるということによって制限は掛けることはできない」とする答弁の根拠は何か。
２ 安全保障上の観点から、外国資本による土地取得に対して規制をかけることも、ＷＴＯ協定や二国間の投資協定などの国際条約に照らして、不可能なのか、政府の見解を示されたい。
３ 外国資本による土地取得に対して態度を留保せずにＷＴＯに加盟した国のうち、安全保障上の観点から、外国人や外国資本による土地取得に対して規制をかけている国が存在しているか明らかにされたい。また、二国間協定における外国資本による我が国の土地取引に対する規制の取扱いにつき明らかにされたい。
外国資本による土地取得に対する規制の必要性に関する質問に対する答弁書：答弁本文：参議院
五の１について
御指摘の答弁は、世界貿易機関を設立するマラケシュ協定（平成六年条約第十五号）附属書一Ｂのサービスの貿易に関する一般協定第十七条が、他の加盟国のサービス及びサービス提供者に対する内国民待遇について規定していることに基づき、述べたものである。
五の２について
お尋ねの「安全保障上の観点から、外国資本による土地取得に対して規制をかけること」の具体的内容が必ずしも明らかではなく、お答えすることは困難である。
五の３の前段について
お尋ねの「外国資本による土地取得に対して態度を留保せずにＷＴＯに加盟した国」の趣旨や「安全保障上の観点から、外国人や外国資本による土地取得に対して規制をかけている国」の具体的内容が必ずしも明らかではなく、また、土地取引に関し、第三国がどのような観点から規制を設けているかの詳細について、我が国として承知する立場にないため、お答えすることは困難である。
五の３の後段について
我が国が近年締結した多くの投資協定又は経済連携協定においては、相手国において、日本国の国民又は法人が土地の取得又は賃貸借を禁止又は制限されている場合には、日本国における相手国の国民又は法人による土地の取得又は賃貸借について、同一又は類似の禁止又は制限を課することができるなどとされている。
第十七条 内国民待遇
１．加盟国は、その約束表に記載した分野において、かつ、当該約束表に定める条件及び制限に従い、サービスの提供に影響を及ぼすすべての措置に関し、他の加盟国のサービス及びサービス提供者に対し、自国の同種のサービス及びサービス提供者に与える待遇よりも不利でない待遇を与える(注)。
注 この条の規定に基づいて行われる特定の約束は、加盟国に対し、関連するサービス又はサービス提供者が自国のものでないことにより生ずる競争上の固有の不利益を補償することを要求するものと解してはならない。
２．加盟国は、他の加盟国のサービス及びサービス提供者に対し自国の同種のサービス及びサービス提供者に与える待遇と形式的に同一の待遇を与えるか形式的に異なる待遇を与えるかを問わず、1の義務を履行することができる。
３．加盟国が他の加盟国のサービス又はサービス提供者に対して与える形式的に同一の又は形式的に異なる待遇により競争条件が当該他の加盟国の同種のサービス又はサービス提供者と比較して当該加盟国のサービス又はサービス提供者にとって有利となる場合には、当該待遇は、当該加盟国のサービス又はサービス提供者に与える待遇よりも不利であると認める。
出典：産経ニュース｜©2016 The Sankei Shimbun & SANKEI DIGITAL All rights reserved.
泊発電所の外部電源喪失と言う報道についての虚実
泊は設計通り停電に耐え、内部電源（非常用D/G）に切り替わった。
泊が、震度2で電源喪失寸前だったとし「経産省と北電の災害対策はお粗末」と報道した朝日。お粗末以前の無知蒙昧。
この指摘は下記のFBに投稿したものだ。説明と証拠保全のためBlogにも書いておく。
経緯：
北海道胆振東部地震による停電で、北海道電力泊原子力発電所１～３号機（泊村、停止中）が一時、外部電源を喪失した。
2018年9月6日午前3時25分に外部からの電源供給が止まり、約９時間半後の同日午後1時までに復旧した。３基とも原子炉は空。使用済み燃料プールに計１５２７本の燃料があるため、非常用ディーゼル発電機で冷却を続けていたもの。
問題の記事：https://dot.asahi.com/dot/2018090600047.html?page=2
捕捉説明：
ちなみに原発の外部電源を喪失させない方法は運転することである。
発電中の発電所は、原発に限らず、発電している電気を変電設備を通して「所内電源」としている。つまり発電所内で必要な電力を内部電源（自家用）として持っている。
しかし、泊発電所は現在発電していないので外部から電力を取り入れていたわけだ。
そして、発電所に限らず、大きな変電所でも全停電時のために「予備電源」というものを持っている。その代表的なものがディーゼル発電機だ。所内電源確保用の予備電源用ディーゼル発電機は「非常用DG」と呼ばれる。
全停電の中で泊発電所で燃料を冷却していたのも、その「非常用DG」だ。泊発電所では、それが全停電時に設計通り安全に稼働したということである。
ちなみに、苫東厚真火力発電所でも所内電源確保用の予備電源は当然あるが、報道によると、再起動には設備修繕と外部電源が必要で、復旧には1週間以上かかるということだ。
島国日本ではバランスの良い恒常電源を地域ごとに確保すべき
電力網は災害時に弱点 北海道停電、広域融通も不発 ：日本経済新聞
この日経の記事の捕捉をする。
日本列島と言う大小の島々からなる島国であることを無視する噴飯ものの記事だ。
北海道と本州を結ぶ連系線と交直変換設備については「北本連系設備」と言われるもので、２０１９年３月までに30万ｋWを新たに増強し90万kW になる予定だった。
さて、この交直変換設備だが、本州から北海道に電気を送るために交流で流れる電気を本州側で一旦直流に変換し北海道で改めて交流に戻してやるというものだ。
問題はこの設備の北海道側が停電してしまったことだ。原因は泊原発の停止で苫東厚真火力が道内電力の4割を賄うと言う１極依存の電源構成にあることは明白だ。
日経の記事は欧州の送電線網に触れて「北海道電に限らず、電力各社は原発再稼働を目指すあまりに、火力など既存の電力設備への投資が後手に回っている」と書くが、比較的大きな４つの島と中小あわせて6,852島の島国である日本における議論ではない。噴飯ものだ。記者は日本が大陸にあるとでも思っているのだろう。
地域間の電力網の連携は重要だが、地域内でバランスの良い恒常電源を確保することこそが電力の安全保障上、根本的基礎となるべきである。その基礎の上に電力網の連携があって万全というものだ。
化石燃料が温暖化の元凶であると指摘を受ける中で水力や地熱と言った地域で使える非化石燃料系の恒常電源の確保を検討しつつも、原発再稼働は待ったなしと考える。
The Asahi Shimbun Conceals the apology article that Comfort Women's Coverage was NOT True.
The noindex robots meta tag, content="noindex, nofollow, no archive" was used in the web site for search functions not to detect the Asahi Shimbun apology article.
The language code ' content="ja_JP" ' means "for the Japanese readers in Japan"
It should be content="en", "for the English readers" if Asahi Shimbun cordially want to express its honest apology for the English readers.
Following two are the Articles which Asahi Shimbun did NOT want the readers, especially English ones, to search.
++++++
1.
Testimony about 'forcible taking away of women on Jeju Island': Judged to be fabrication because supporting evidence not found
2014年8月22日10時00分
Question: There was a man who testified in books and meetings that he had used violence to forcibly take away women on the Korean Peninsula, which was Japan's colony, to make them serve as comfort women during the war. The Asahi Shimbun ran articles about the man from the 1980s until the early 1990s. However, some people have pointed out that his testimony was a fabrication.
* * *
The man's name was Seiji Yoshida. In his books and on other occasions, he said that he headed the mobilization section at the Shimonoseki branch of the Yamaguchi Prefectural Romu Hokokukai labor organization that was in control of day laborers.
The Asahi Shimbun has run, as far as it can confirm, at least 16 articles about Yoshida. The first appeared in the Sept. 2, 1982, morning edition in the city news page published by the Osaka head office. The article was about a speech that he gave in Osaka in which he said, "I 'hunted up' 200 young Korean women on Jeju Island."
The reporter, 66, who wrote the article, was in the City News Section at the Osaka head office at that time.
The reporter said, "I had absolutely no doubts about the contents of his talk because it was very specific and detailed."
In the early 1990s, other newspapers also ran articles about what Yoshida said at meetings and on other occasions.
In the April 30, 1992, morning edition of the Sankei Shimbun, an article raised doubts about Yoshida's testimony based on the results of an investigation conducted by Ikuhiko Hata on Jeju. Weekly magazines also began publishing articles pointing to "Suspicion of 'fabrication.'"
A reporter, 53, in the City News Section at the Tokyo head office was instructed by his editor to meet with Yoshida immediately after the Sankei article ran. The reporter asked Yoshida to introduce relevant individuals and submit data to corroborate his testimony, but the reporter said Yoshida rejected the request.
During news gathering to prepare for the March 31, 1997, special coverage, Yoshida refused to meet with a reporter, 57, in the City News Section at the Tokyo head office. When the reporter asked over the phone about reports that suspected the testimony was a fabrication, Yoshida responded, "I wrote about my experiences as they were."
Although news gathering was also conducted on Jeju and no corroborating evidence could be obtained, the special coverage said "no confirmation has been made about the authenticity" because there was no conclusive proof that Yoshida's testimony was false. The Asahi has not written about Yoshida since.
However, in November 2012, Shinzo Abe, who was then president of the Liberal Democratic Party, said at a debate among party leaders hosted by the Japan National Press Club, "The problem has become much bigger because false reporting by The Asahi Shimbun has led to the spreading of a book throughout Japan, which has been taken as fact, even though it was created by a man named Seiji Yoshida who is like a con man."
Some newspapers and magazines have repeated criticism of The Asahi Shimbun.
In April and May 2014, The Asahi Shimbun interviewed a total of about 40 people in their late 70s to 90s living on Jeju. However, no evidence was obtained that supported the writings by Yoshida about forcible taking away.
In a town on the northwestern part of the island where Yoshida claimed to have taken away several dozens of women working at a plant making dried fish, there was only one factory in the village that handled fish. The son of the local man who was involved in factory management, now deceased, said, "Only canned products were made there. I never heard from my father about women workers being taken away."
Yoshida wrote that the factory roof was "thatched." Video images that captured conditions at that time were obtained by Norifumi Kawahara, a professor of historical geography at Ritsumeikan University who has conducted research on the fishing industry in South Korea at that time. The images showed the roof to be made of tin and tile.
In June 1993, Kang Jeong-suk, a former researcher at the Korean Research Institute for Chongshindae, conducted research on Jeju based on the writings of Yoshida. "I heard from several elderly people at each of the locations I visited, but I did not come across any testimony that matched the writings," Kang said.
Yoshida wrote in his book he went to Jeju in May 1943 based on a mobilization order from the Western District Army. He also wrote that the contents of the order were left in the diary of his wife (now deceased). However, Yoshida's oldest son, 64, was interviewed for this special coverage, and it was learned that the wife never kept a diary. The son said Yoshida died in July 2000.
When Yoshida met in May 1993 with Yoshiaki Yoshimi, a Chuo University professor, and others, Yoshida explained that "there were occasions when I changed the dates and locations (where he forcibly took the women)." Moreover, Yoshida refused to present the diary in which the contents of the mobilization order were contained. That led Yoshimi to point out, "I had no choice but to confirm that we could not use his testimony." (Note 1)
Masaru Tonomura, an associate professor at the University of Tokyo who is knowledgeable about mobilization matters on the Korean Peninsula during the war, said the Romu Hokokukai that Yoshida claimed he worked for was created through instructions given by the Health and Welfare Ministry as well as the Home Ministry.
"Given the chain of command, it is inconceivable for the military to issue the mobilization order, and for employees to go directly to the Korean Peninsula," Tonomura said.
Yoshida also explained that in May 1943, when he claimed to have forcibly taken away the women, the "Army unit headquarters" "maintained military rule" on Jeju. Regarding that point, Kazu Nagai, a professor of modern and contemporary Japanese history at Kyoto University, pointed out that documents of the former Army showed that a large Army force only gathered on Jeju after April 1945.
"The contents of his writing cannot be considered to be true," Nagai said.
Note 1: Yoshiaki Yoshimi and Fumiko Kawata, compilers, " 'Jugun Ianfu' wo Meguru 30 no Uso to Shinjutsu" (30 lies and truths surrounding 'military comfort women') (Otsuki Shoten 1997)
To our readers
We have made the judgment that the testimony that Yoshida forcibly took away comfort women on Jeju was a fabrication. We retract our articles on him. We were unable to uncover the falseness of his testimony at the time the articles were published. Although additional research was conducted on Jeju, we were unable to obtain any information that corroborated his testimony. Interviews with researchers have also turned up a number of contradictions regarding the core elements of his testimony.
2.
Confusion with 'volunteer corps': Insufficient research at that time led to comfort women and volunteer corps seen as the same
2014年8月22日10時00分
Question: Some articles that appeared in The Asahi Shimbun in the early 1990s regarding comfort women from the Korean Peninsula said the women were mobilized under the name of "women volunteer corps." Although it is now clear that comfort women and women volunteer corps were different, why did such an error occur?
* * *
"Women volunteer corps" refer to the "women volunteer labor corps" that were organized to mobilize women as a work force during the war in Japan proper as well as in the former colonies on the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan. With the August 1944 "women volunteer labor order," the corps became a system based on the National Mobilization Law.
Even before then, such corps were organized at schools and in local communities. On the Korean Peninsula, as many as 4,000 students at elementary schools and girls' high schools are said to have been mobilized to work at munitions factories in Japan proper until the end of the war. (Note 1) With the objective of using the women as a work force, the corps were different from comfort women who were made to serve as sexual partners for military personnel.
However, in 1991, when attention was focused on the comfort women issue, the Asahi confused the two. In the Dec. 10, 1991, morning edition, an article about comfort women from the Korean Peninsula said "they were mobilized to the front lines of combat under such names as 'women volunteer corps' from immediately before the start of World War II and were forced into prostitution at comfort stations serving Japanese military personnel."
In the Jan. 11, 1992, morning edition, an article said "with the start of the Pacific War, mainly Korean women were forcibly taken away under the name of volunteer corps. The numbers are said to be between 80,000 and 200,000."
The reason for the confusion was insufficient research. There were very few specialists researching comfort women, so there was insufficient digging up of history. While the Asahi did publish articles about former Japanese volunteer corps members who worked at factories in Japan, research on the volunteer corps on the Korean Peninsula was not at an advanced stage.
A reference material used by Asahi reporters was titled "Chosen wo Shiru Jiten" (Encyclopedia to learn about Korea) (first edition published by Heibonsha Ltd. in 1986). Regarding comfort women, the volume explained "from 1943, about 200,000 Korean women were mobilized as workers under the name of 'women volunteer corps,' and of that number between 50,000 and 70,000 young single women were made into comfort women."
The author of that entry was Setsuko Miyata, a researcher of modern Korean history. Looking back, she said, "Because I could not locate a researcher of comfort women, I could only quote from existing works."
Miyata quoted from a work by Kako Senda titled "Jugun Ianfu" (Military comfort women). That book has a passage that says "the women were gathered under the name of 'volunteer corps' … . Of the total of 200,000 gathered (estimates in South Korea), it is said 'between 50,000 and 70,000' were made into comfort women."
The term "volunteer corps" was used in the sense of "comfort women" in newspaper coverage in Korea in 1946. In explanatory documents related to the July 1944 Cabinet decision to amend the government organization of the Government General of Korea, a passage mentions the spread of "groundless rumors" that unwed women were being requisitioned to serve as comfort women.
While no example has been confirmed of volunteer corps members being made systematically into comfort women, there is the view that a distrust of Japanese colonial authority resulted in an equating of the two, fanning fear from during the war. (Note 2)
Some say one factor behind the confusion is the fact that one group supporting former comfort women has included the word for volunteer corps in its Korean name. (The group's English name is the Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan.)
In January 1992, shortly before Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa visited South Korea, a South Korean news agency released an article about the discovery of a school roster that showed a 12-year-old Korean girl who went to an elementary school was mobilized to join the volunteer corps. That led to the misunderstanding that "Japan had made even elementary school students into comfort women" and worsened anti-Japanese sentiment.
Since 1993, The Asahi Shimbun has made efforts to avoid confusing the two. The chief of the Seoul bureau, 72, of that time said, "That's partly because interviews by citizens groups uncovered a situation in which women who worked at munitions factories in Japan as members of the volunteer corps suffered because they were mistakenly viewed as 'having been taken advantage of for sexual comfort of the Japanese military.'"
Note 1: Soji Takasaki "'Hanto Joshi Kinro Teishintai' ni tsuite" (A Study on the "Korean Girls Volunteer Corps") on Digital Museum "The Comfort Women Issue and the Asian Women's Fund"
Note 2: Takeshi Fujinaga "Senjiki Chosen ni okeru 'Ianfu' Doin no 'Ryugen' 'Zogen' wo megutte" (Related to 'rumors' and 'made-up words' about mobilizing 'comfort women' in wartime Korea) in the volume compiled by Toshihiko Matsuda, etc. titled "Chiiki Shakai kara Miru Teikoku Nihon to Shokuminchi Chosen/Taiwan/Manshu" (Imperial Japan and the colonies Korea, Taiwan and Manchuria as viewed from local society) (Shibunkaku Co. 2013)
To our readers
Women volunteer corps refer to the "women volunteer labor corps" that were mobilized to work at munitions factories and at other locations during the war. They are completely different from comfort women. The term was used mistakenly because research on the comfort women issue was not at an advanced stage at that time and because there was confusion between comfort women and volunteer corps members even in reference materials used by reporters.
The articles in this blog are quoted from the Asahi Shimbun above mentioned web site for purpose of criticism. "Section 30(1) of the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (apparently in transposition of Article 5(3)(d) of the EU Copyright Directive on "quotations") allows "fair dealing" with a copyright work for the purpose of criticism or review, provided that it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement. (from wikipedia on 'Quotation')"
このブログの記事は朝日新聞のWebサイトから、批評のために引用したものです。著作権法第32条で「公表された著作物は、引用して利用することができる。この場合において、その引用は、公正な慣行に合致するものであり、かつ、報道、批評、研究その他の引用の目的上正当な範囲内で行なわれるものでなければならない。」と規定されている目的に沿ったものです。
#ComfortWomenPropagandaDeception #SouthKorea #Hypocrisy #ComfortWomen #AcademicFreedomNowInKorea
