Ref.>"Why the Greater East Asia War Naming Controversy is a Non-Issue"
>"朝日、自衛隊が大東亜戦争と表現したと大騒ぎも大撃沈 →「大東亜と閣議決定していた」：安倍内閣が答弁書"
>"東京新聞記者、朝日報道に乗っかり、陸自の「大東亜戦争」呼称を批判「占領軍の命令で「大東亜戦争」の呼称は禁止」⇒ それ、1952年に失効されてますよ！取材不足ですか？"
-----------------------------------------
>【言葉狩り】話題の「大東亜戦争」問題を産経論説委員はどう見るのか。読者が求める正しい報道とは【渡辺哲也 SP対談】渡邉哲也×阿比留瑠比
↓(See detail of this article)、八重山日報の記事の翻訳（Translation of an article of the Yaeyama Nippo)
Translation; [Beam from the eyes! (165)] (by Osamu Tajima). Liberation from the "Pacific War"
>"[目からビーム！]（165）. 「太平洋戦争」からの解放"
>《陸上自衛隊幹部が靖国神社を集団参拝する際に、陸上幕僚幹部が作成した文書で、靖国神社の文章をほぼ引き写して「大東亜戦争」という呼称を肯定的に使っていたことが13日、「赤旗」の調べで分かった。旧日本軍との連続性を示す危険な逆行だ。
[On April 13, it turned out by an investigation by the "Akahata" that, when the Ground SDF executives made a group visit to Yasukuni Shrine, in a document prepared by the Ground Staff executives, it almost copied the text from Yasukuni Shrine and used the term "Greater East Asia War" in a positive way. This is a dangerous reversal that shows continuity with the former Japanese forces].
> 志位和夫日本共産党中央委員会議長の X（ツイッター）である。
> 簡単にいえば、「大東亜戦争」という呼称を使うな、戦後 GHQが決めた「太平洋戦争」を使えということか。
> 共産党のスタンスは基本的に反米だが、こと歴史認識においては GHQ史観の忠実な下僕らしい。
It's a X-post by Kazuo Shii, chairperson of the Central Committee of the Japanese Communist Party.
To put it simply, it seems that he wants to say that they shouldn't use the name "Greater East Asia War" but use the term "Pacific War," which was fixed by the GHQ after the end of WW2.
Basically speaking, the stance of the JCP is anti-U.S. However, especially in terms of historical view, it seems to be a faithful servant of the GHQ historical view.
> 日本は SF平和条約で主権を回復している。
> GHQの押し付けである「太平洋戦争」を捨て本来の正しい名称である「大東亜戦争」を堂々使用すべきではないのか。
> 自衛隊を旧軍の後継とするのも当然のことで、自衛隊をあたかも憲法の私生児にして放置してきた戦後歴代政権に問題がある。
> 一日も早く憲法を改正し、正式な家族として迎え入れるべきだ。
Japan has regained its sovereignty through the "SF Peace Treaty."
We should abandoned the "Pacific War," which was imposed by the GHQ, and use the original and correct name "Greater East Asia War" without hesitation, shouldn't we!?
It’s only natural too that we recognize the SDF as the successor to the former forces, the successive postwar governments, which have left the SDF as if it were illegitimate child of the Constitutionare, are therefore problematized.
We should revise the Constitution ASAP and welcome them as an official member of the family.
> 石原慎太郎氏の都知事時代、いわゆる「三国人発言」が問題となったことがある。
> もともと「第三国人」とは、戦勝国民でもなく敗戦国民でもないという GHQの判断で在留の朝鮮人、台湾人を指すために使った行政用語であり、これ自体に差別の意味合いはない。
> それどころか、当の朝鮮人の一部も「三国人」を使っていた。
> 林浩奎（イム・ホーギュ）という在日韓国人が書いた「>"第三国人の商法"」というビジネス書さえある。
During Shintaro Ishihara's Tokyo governor period, his so-called "3rd country persons remark" was problematized.
"3rd country persons" was originally an administrative term used to refer to Koreans and Taiwanese residents in Japan, based on the GHQ's judgment that they were neither victorious nor defeated nationals. This in itself therefore doesn't imply discrimination.
On the contrary, some Koreans themselves also used the term "3rd country persons."
There is even a business book called "The way of business of 3rd-country persons" written by a S. Korean resident in Japan called "Rim Hoh-kyu."
> GHQが作った「太平洋戦争」の語を無条件、無批判で使用しろというなら同じく GHQが作った「第三国人」という言葉も歴史用語として解禁したらどうだろう。
> 少なくとも敗戦直後のカオスを語る上で、彼ら三国人は無視できない存在なのだから。
If the term "Pacific War," which was created by the GHQ, should be used unconditionally and uncritically, why not also remove ban of the term "3rd country persons," also coined by the GHQ, as a historical term?
The reason why is that, at the very least, those 3rd country persons can't be ignored when talking about the chaos immediately after the defeat.
> 話を戻す。
> そもそも「太平洋戦争」では、あの戦争の本当の意味が伝わらない。
> 日本を中心とするアジアと西欧帝国主義の戦い、それが「大東亜戦争」なのである。
> 軍官民が一体となって戦った沖縄戦の真実も見えなくなってしまう。
Back to the topic.
In the 1st place, the "Pacific War" doesn't convey the true meaning of that war.
The battle between Asia, centered on Japan, and Western imperialism -- it was the "Greater East Asia War."
It makes the truth of the Battle of Okinawa, in which the military, public & private sectors were united and fought, be invisible.
> QHQ史観に与するということは、広島長崎の原爆投下による大量虐殺を「戦争を終結させるための正義の行為」とする彼らの主張をそのまま受け入れよという事に等しい。
> 沖縄でいえば、アメリカ軍を解放軍とした『>"鉄の暴風"』史観がまさにこれだろう。
> その語のもとを作った沖縄タイムスが今では反米基地の旗振り役となっているのだから、アメリカもさぞや苦笑いをしているのではないか。
Participating in the QHQ historical view is equivalent to accepting their argument that the genocides caused by the atomic bombing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was "an act of justice to end the war" as it is.
In the case of Okinawa, this is probably the [Iron Storm] historical view, which describes U.S Forces as a liberation army.
As the Okinawa Times, which coined the source of the term, is now the flag-waving for anti-U.S. bases, that the U.S. probably smiles bitterly.
> GHQ史観から解放されるためにも「大東亜戦争」という名称を取り戻すべきなのだ。
The name "Greater East Asia War" should be regained in order to free ourselves from the GHQ historical view too.
