This recognition proves historically more than enough the infertility of emotional one-sided theory

The following is the continuation of the previous chapter.

However, in Western countries, the majority of the people took the idea of deploying a new Intermediate-Range Nuclear missiles on the west side to counter the threat of the SS 20 of the Soviet Union, keeping deterrence and equilibrium.

It is the best way to keep peace and stability, because the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) unite and take defense measures against the Soviet threats, it was also a synchronization with the policy at each government level.

As a result, the deployment of the new Intermediate-Range Nuclear missiles in the five Western European countries is over.

It was around 1984.

Naturally, the Soviet Union, initially violently protested, boycotted disarmament related negotiations with the US and European side.

However, the West did not shake.

Infertility of nuclear abolition theory

To my surprise, however, in 1986 the Soviet Union proposed to eliminate mutual use of SS 20 and Western Intermediate-Range Nuclear missiles.

At that time Western Europe, consensus became a consensus that the deployment of missiles in Europe and the United States was the crucial factor leading to concessions and softening of the Soviet Union.

Correcting the imbalance of nuclear deterrence against the Soviet Union with new missile deployment has become a vital trial for the determination and unity of Western Europe.

"Correcting the imbalance of nuclear deterrence against the Soviet Union with new missile deployment has become a vital trial for the determination and unity of Western Europe.

But Western Europe does not breathe even pressure of Soviet Union, conciliation, anti-nuclear movement in the country, and accomplished it.

That was what pulled out the concessions of the Soviet Union. "(Editorial of the Financial Times in the UK)

"The concessions of the Soviet Union proved complete breakdown of the argument of a unilateral disarmament people in Western European anti-nuclear movements, that it was decision to deterrence and equilibrium of NATO, not anti-nuclear movement, to have removed SS20." Sunday Times editorial)

This recognition proves historically more than enough the infertility of emotional one-sided theory of nuclear abolition still advocated by the Asahi Newspaper.

This draft continues.

It was later discovered that the Soviet government also supported anti-nuclear movement in

The following is the continuation of the previous chapter.

The US side has proceeded with plans to deploy two kinds of Intermediate-Range Nuclear missiles in countries in the UK, Italy, West Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium with the government of the five countries.

It was planned to deploy 572 groups of ballistic missile Pershing II and Tomahawk of cruise missiles.

Fierce opposition to this deployment occurred in Western European countries.

It is so-called anti-nuclear movement.

‘If you deploy a new missile, you harden the Soviet Union, run it further to the military expansion, the nuclear war crisis got higher, peace and disarmament go away’ was argued by anti-nuclear theorists.

The Asahi Shimbun also continued to send approval from Japan to this claim.

It was later discovered that the Soviet government also supported anti-nuclear movement in various ways on the Western side.

This draft continues.

took actions opposite to that of the Asahi Shimbun's claim against the Soviet Union

The following is the continuation of the previous chapter.

Historical nuclear disarmament

Then, in what way, under what circumstances will the reduction and disposal of nuclear weapons occur in the real world?

I would like to raise here the success of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty of Abolishment Treaty between US and the Soviet Union, which I got a detailed report and coverage of myself.

The agreement on the dismantlement of nuclear weapons was exactly succeeded by the fact that the West, including the United States, took actions opposite to that of the Asahi Shimbun's claim against the Soviet Union.

In December 1987 about 30 years ago, President Reagan of America at that time and Gorbachev Communist Party Secretary of the Soviet Union signed this Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in Washington.

As a result, all 2692 Intermediate-Range Nuclear missiles, ground-launched from the range of 500 kilometers to 5500 kilos that were held at that time by the two countries were literally abandoned.

The base of waste was 1864 on the Soviet Union and 846 on the US side.

This agreement was the largest historical nuclear disarmament in the sense that the entire category of nuclear weapons called terrestrial deployed Intermediate-Range Nuclear missiles will be lost.

Why did such revolutionary nuclear disposal have been realized? From around 1977 when the east-west Cold War intensified, the Soviet Union started deploying a new Intermediate-Range Nuclear missile called SS20.

A range of 5000 kilometers, it is possible to move, three nuclear warheads can be launched from one unit, and the accuracy of hit is high, which is a serious threat to the side of the United States and Europe.

There was no similar Intermediate-Range Nuclear missile at that time in the US and European side, and with the emergence of SS 20 the equilibrium of nuclear deterrence between the United States and the Soviet Union was greatly collapsed.

The Soviet Union deployed SS20 to 300 units, 400 units, mainly in the European area of its own country, at a rapid pitch.

Panic attacked the US and European side.

President Carter of the time at that time and Prime Minister Schmidt of the West Germany decided ‘double decision’ as a countermeasure.

It requested the Soviet Union to withdraw SS20 to the last, if it does not come true, the US and Europe also proposed deploying the Intermediate-Range Nuclear missile in five Western European countries from 1983 and keeping the equilibrium.

This draft continues.

いまもなお朝日新聞が唱える情緒的で一方的な核廃絶論の不毛を、歴史的にもいやというほど立証しているのだ

以下は前章の続きである。

だが西欧諸国では、国民の多数派はソ連のSS20の脅威に対抗するには、西側も新たな中距離核ミサイルを配備して、抑止と均衡を保つ、という考え方をとった。

ソ連の脅威に対しては北大西洋条約機構（ＮＡＴＯ）が団結して防衛措置をとることが、平和や安定を保つ最善の方法だという、各国政府レベルでの政策への同調でもあった。 

その結果、西欧5ヵ国での新たな中距離核ミサイルの配備が終わる。1984年ごろのことだった。

ソ連は当然、当初は激しく反発して、米欧側との軍縮関連の交渉などをボイコットした。

だが、西側は揺るがなかった。

核廃絶論の不毛さ 

ところが驚いたことに、1986年にはソ連はSS20と西側中距離核ミサイルとの相互の全廃を提案してきたのだ。

当時の西欧では、欧米のミサイル配備こそがソ連の譲歩と軟化を招く決定的な要因になったという認識がコンセンサスとなった。 

「ソ連に対する核抑止」の不均衡を新型ミサイル配備で是正することは、西欧の決意と団結にとって死活的な試練となった。だが、西欧はソ連の圧力や懐柔、国内の反核運動にもめげず、それをなしとげた。そのことこそが、ソ連の譲歩を引き出したのだ」（イギリスのフィナンシャル・タイムズ社説） 

「ソ連の譲歩は西欧の反核運動の一方的軍縮論者の主張の完全な破綻を証明した。SS20を撤去させたのは、反核運動ではなくＮＡＴＯの抑止と均衡への決意だったのだ」（同サンデー・タイムズ社説） 

このような認識は、いまもなお朝日新聞が唱える情緒的で一方的な核廃絶論の不毛を、歴史的にもいやというほど立証しているのだ。

この稿続く。

ソ連政府も、西欧側で反核運動を多様な形で支援していたことが後に判明した。

以下は前章の続きである。

アメリカ側は二種類の中距離核ミサイルをイギリス、イタリア、西ドイツ、オランダ、ベルギーの各国に配備する計画を同5ヵ国の政府の了解を得て、進めた。

弾道ミサイルのパーシングⅡ型と巡航ミサイルのトマホーク合わせて572基を配備する計画だった。 

この配備に対して、ヨーロッパの西側諸国で激しい反対が起きた。

いわゆる反核の動きである。

「新たなミサイルを配備すれば、ソ連を硬化させ、さらに軍拡に走らせ、核戦争の危機が高まって、平和も軍縮も遠のく」というのが反核論者の主張だった。

朝日新聞も日本からこの主張への賛同を送り続けた。

ソ連政府も、西欧側で反核運動を多様な形で支援していたことが後に判明した。 

この稿続く。

 

まさにアメリカをはじめとする西側が、ソ連に対して朝日新聞の主張とは正反対の措置をとったことにより成功したのである

以下は前章の続きである。

歴史的な核軍縮　

では、現実の世界では核兵器の削減や廃棄はどのようにして、どんな条件下で起きるのか。

私は自分自身がその詳しい取材や報道にあたった米ソ両国間の中距離核戦力（ＩＮＦ）全廃条約の成功について、ここで提起したい。

この核兵器廃棄の合意は、まさにアメリカをはじめとする西側が、ソ連に対して朝日新聞の主張とは正反対の措置をとったことにより成功したのである。　

約30年前の1987年12月、当時のアメリカのレーガン大統領とソ連のゴルバチョフ共産党書記長は、ワシントンでこの全廃条約に調印した。　

その結果、米ソ両国がその時点で保有していた射程500キロから5500キロまでの地上発射の中距離核ミサイル合計2692基が、すべて文字どおり廃棄されたのだった。

廃棄の基数はソ連側が1864、米側が846だった。

この合意は地上配備の中距離核ミサイルという核兵器の一つのカテゴリー全体がなくなるという意味で、最大規模の歴史的な核軍縮だった。　

そんな画期的な核廃棄が、なぜ実現したのか。　

東西冷戦の激化する1977年ごろから、ソ連はSS20と呼ばれる新型の中距離核ミサイルの配備を始めた。

射程5000キロ、移動が可能、1基から3個の核弾頭を発射できて、命中精度も高く、米欧側には重大な脅威となった。

米欧側には当時、同種の中距離核ミサイルがなく、SS20の出現で米ソ間の核抑止の均衡が大きく崩れることになった。　

ソ連はSS20を自国内の欧州地城を中心に300基、400基と、急ピッチで配備していった。

米欧側はパニックに襲われた。

当時のアメリカのカーター大統領や、西ドイツのシュミット首相が対抗策として「二重決定」を決めた。

ソ連側にあくまでSS20の撤去を求め、それが実現しなければ、米欧側も1983年から中距離核ミサイルを西欧5ヵ国内に配備して、均衡を保つという案だった。

この稿続く。

Nevertheless, the Asahi Shimbun draws the figure of the figment as if the nation that

The following is the continuation of the previous chapter. In case

The flaw of the tone of 3rd Asahi Shimbun is the point which has a figment in the means to the goal, the nuclear abolition.

In these two editorials as well, explain Japan to emphasize being a nation that was the victim of atomic bombs for nuclear reduction and abolition, turning away to nuclear deterrence.

It also emphasizes that 'there is a mission to take the lead in nuclear disarmament around the world' as 'a country that knows the nuclear inhumane nature.'

However, no matter how much Japan appeals to the atomic bomb experience as a non-nuclear-weapon state, there is no instance that nuclear weapon states show sympathy in humanitarian terms and unilaterally reduce their nuclear powers.

If Japan of the nation that was victim of atomic bombs explains the misery of the nucleus to North Korea in the neighboring country, does the north stop nucleus development?

There are no such signs at all.

Nevertheless, the Asahi Shimbun draws the figure of the figment as if the nation that was the victim of atomic bombs includes the magic power of the nuclear curtailment in Japan.

The Asahi Shimbun treats the enemy of peace, the enemy of Hibakusha, which does not synchronize with its fiction.

I want you to give me a break such a figment.

This draft continues.

被爆国の日本が隣国の北朝鮮に核の悲惨さを説けば、北は核開発を止めるのか。

以下は前章の続きである。　

第3の朝日新聞の論調の欠陥は、核廃絶という目標への手段に虚構がある点である。　

この2つの社説でも核削減や廃絶のためには日本は核抑止に背を向けて、被爆国だということを強調せよ、と説く。

「核の非人道性を知る国」として「世界の核軍縮を率先する使命がある」とも力説する。　

だが、日本がいくら非核国として被爆体験を訴えても、核保有国が人道面での共感を示し、自国の核を一方的に削減する、という実例は皆無である。

被爆国の日本が隣国の北朝鮮に核の悲惨さを説けば、北は核開発を止めるのか。

そんな兆しはツユほどもない。　

なのに、朝日新聞は日本が被爆国として核削減のマジックパワーがあるかのような虚構の図を描く。

その虚構に同調しない側は平和の敵、被爆者の敵の扱いをする。

こんな虚構はもういい加減にしてほしい。

この稿続く。

If so, the question of whether the Asahi Shimbun is the ally of Japan and the United States or

The following is the continuation of the previous chapter.

The second point is to reverse the enemies and ally.

The Asahi Shimbun thinks that only the movement on the US side is dangerous.

Such as 'threatening the security of the world' 'expanding risk of nuclear' 'Hibakusha increasing crisis feeling', the Asahi publicizes as if only American nuclear weapons pose a threat or danger to the whole world.

And the Asahi imposes a sense of crisis for Japan.

However, the nuclear forces of the United States are the nuclear of allies to the last for Japan.

No matter what happens, the Trump regime will never shoot a nuclear missile in Japan of its allies.

The reinforcement of the nuclear force of America is suppression to the nuclear force of the countries which regard both Japan and United States persistently with hostility, being underlying and tangibly, e.g. China and Russia.

However, Asahi Shimbun does the discussion to suppose that the nucleus in America at the supporter is a risk and a menace to Japan from beginning to end.

On the other hand, it does not explain the dangers of nuclear weapons of the enemy China and North Korea to Japan.

In fact it effectively ignores the meaning of America's Extended Deterrence, which is deadly critical for Japan's defense.

If so, the question of whether the Asahi Shimbun is the ally of Japan and the United States or the side of the hostile side of the two countries comes to reality.

This draft continues.

First of all, there is an increase in nuclear threats of China and Russia.

The following is the continuation of the previous chapter.

Three major defects

However, the Asahi Shimbun hits this new strategy of the Trump regime anyway.

It is said that it is ‘folly that goes against history’.

Let me introduce the main part of the February 4 editorial.

"It is content that can blow cold water to international public opinion warning for a world without nuclear weapons. It also goes against the history of nuclear disarmament and can threaten the security of the world"

"The idea that the other country will be frightened and the deterrence will rise if it has an easy-to-use nuclear seems to have lost reason"

"The president's attitude that lucks the imagination of the destruction that nuclear weapons invite, and tries to fill their own superiority with armed force is the greatest concern"

The editorial that beats the Japanese government on 7th February of the Asahi Shimbun was the following outline.

"Is this the attitude that should be taken by the Japanese government, the world's only war-bombed country? From the attitude of following US nuclear army expansion, we cannot see a certain level of intention to become ‘a world without nuclear weapons’."

“The guidelines are guided by the idea of strengthening the attitude of using nuclear weapons and deterring opponents. The development of a small nucleus enhances ease of use and demonstrates the possibility of responding to nuclear attacks other than nuclear weapons”

"As a country that knows the inhumane nature of nuclear weapons, Japan has a mission to take the lead in nuclear disarmament in the world. Nevertheless, the current Japanese government is not thinking about nuclear issues only within the narrow framework of the US alliance”

"Because it is an alliance, stop the nuclear army expansion of the Trump regime, and calmly explore the breakthrough of the North Korean problem. Cooperate with A-bomb survivor groups and raise the diplomatic dissemination capability aiming at the abolition of nuclear weapons. That effort is called for”

Well, these two editorials symbolize to respond to the new guidelines of the trump regime of the Asahi newspaper, there are at least three major defects.

You can call it big biased coverage or distortion.

The first is that it mistakes the causes and results of the movement on the US side.

President Trump emphasized that this measure is a response to the increasing threat of China and Russia's nuclear weapons.

He pointed out a statement of the first use of nuclear weapons in Russia and China the fact that it continues steadily on nuclear arms expansion, it is the only official nuclear possession country.

The threat of North Korea's nuclear weapons and missiles is of course also of course.

First of all, there is an increase in nuclear threats of China and Russia.

It is caused by the expansion of the nuclear army of China and Russia.

Movement on the American side is the result.

However, the Asahi Shimbun will not mention the threat of nuclear weapons for the United States, either in the editorial or other series of related articles.

The Asahi Shimbun draws so that only the United States suddenly began nuclear arms expansion without permission.

The cause and the result are reversed.

This draft continues.

To prevent the use of nuclear weapons of a specific state and political use,

The following is the continuation of the previous chapter.

Taro Kono officially announced the welcome enthusiasm that ‘the clarification of the effectiveness of deterrence by the United States and the expansion deterrence to the allies including Japan’ was made by the foreign minister's name.

As is well known, nuclear deterrence is to suppress nuclear attacks and intimidation of potential enemy countries by nuclear forces.

To prevent the use of nuclear weapons of a specific state and political use, if the opponent side retains the ability to counterattack and retaliate with the same nuclear weapons, it will maximize its effect in deterring actual nuclear warfare.

During the period of the East-West Cold War, where the US and Soviet countries held large quantities of nuclear weapons and confronted, this nuclear deterrent worked perfectly and the war between nuclear powers did not happen.

Expansion deterrence means that nuclear weapons states such as the United States,

If non-nuclear allies like Japan also suffer nuclear attacks and intimidation, it is a strategy to protect the allies without fail by vowing to reprimand against that attacking country.

It will use nuclear deterrence not only for my country but also for safety of my allies.

Often also called ‘nuclear umbrella’.

So, nuclear-weapon states in a conflict relationship, if the ability of nuclear attacks is reliably maintained, mutual deterrence will increase and the crisis of nuclear war will be more distant.

It is ironic reality.

The Trump regime showed this time that the threat of nuclear weapons in Russia and China has increased due to the reduction and neglect of nuclear weapons during the former Obama administration.

It is a recognition that Russia and China are born with the situation that it is easy for Russia and China to attack and threaten nuclear weapons against the United States and its allied countries.

The result of that recognition was this ‘review of nuclear regime’.

It can be said that this is a new strategy with considerable logic.

This draft continues.

The security theory of Asahi Shimbun is dangerous for the country, Japan,

The following is from the labor of the Mr. Yoshihisa Komori who was carried on the monthly magazine WiLL current issue.
It isn't necessary to say that it is one of the journalists that Mr. Yoshihisa Komori is genuine.
In addition to being one of the speech persons who investigate the fault of Asahi Shimbun and continue to tell the truth, in the work which may give People's Honor Award, it isn't necessary to say Japan about continuing to do the Japanese people, too.
Emphasis in sentences other than heading is me.
It is obstinate, it does not learn their lesson, never feel apologetic
Asahi Shimbun's distorted view on security
It criticizes Trump 'the nuclear strategy' reconsideration but it is dumbness about North Korea, China, Russia.
Of surely 'if you are not prepared you do not have to worry' of Asahi Shimbun?
The defense opposition
The security theory of Asahi Shimbun is dangerous for the country, Japan, ―
I considered the Security Treaty theory which Asahi Shimbun insists on from the times of the Vietnam War and the cold war.
The claim is the tendency that anything anyway opposes after all for America in Japan and the ally to strengthen a defensive strength.
The long years of the about 40 years, too, I came in touch with the menace and the crisis of the actual security in each place in the world as the international news writer of the Mainichi Newspapers and the Sankei Shimbun and made an effort toward the report of the actual state.
In the meantime, the Asahi Shimbun has consistently opposed, which Japan and the United States strengthen self-defense measures in order to deter the threats, which are approaching to our own camp.
And then, Asahi Shimbun treated the side of USSR and China which runs to the expansion in armaments as 'the peace loving influence', ignoring a menace to Japan-U.S. union almost.
As for the defense of Japan, the posture of such Asahi Shimbun could be generalized with 'if you are not prepared you do not have to worry'.
If it does an ordinary human being and it does an ordinary state, 'if you are prepared you do not have to worry' is a principle of course.
However, Asahi Shimbun always expressed opposition to 'the preparation' of the defense of Japan.
Therefore, Asahi Shimbun cannot help concluding that it is very dangerous existence for the security in Japan.
When I saw the latest paper of Asahi Shimbun, I was keenly aware that there is nothing to learn from history as well as from reality.
It read the editorial of the index, 'the nuclear strategy in the U.S.' 'the stupidity which retrogresses in the history' of the morning edition with February 4th, 2018, and it was.
This article continues.

In order to know the danger and fiction of the Asahi Shimbun's claim, it is essential to grasp

The following is the continuation of the previous chapter.

The content was a complete opposition to ‘Nuclear Strategy Review’ (NPR) which the American Trump regime issued on February 2.

Asahi Shimbun was criticizing intensely Japanese Government to welcome 'it reconsiders nuclear strategy' as the reinforcement of the nuclear deterrent for the defense of the inn in the editorial of the index of 'the nuclear strategy and Japan' 'is this the talk of the nation was the victim of atomic bombs' of the morning edition on February 7th.

Well, let's first introduce the outline of ‘reviewing nuclear strategy’.

In the media of Japan it seems that mostly it is expressed as ‘reviewing the nuclear strategy regime’.

However, the original literal translation is ‘nuclear regime’.

In order to know the danger and fiction of the Asahi Shimbun's claim, it is essential to grasp the actual state of the target of that claim.

The main points of the presentation were as follows.

· The threat of nuclear weapons from the outside increased for the United States and its allies.

In particular, Russia talks about limited first use of nuclear weapons, China to increase nuclear force and expand regional hegemony, and the threat of North Korea to advance the development of nuclear and ballistic missiles are serious.

For effective deterrence of these diverse threats and enhancement of expansion deterrence to allies,

Reduce the explosive power of warheads of submarine launch ballistic missiles (SLBM), operate as nuclear grapeshot and redeploy surface ship launched cruise missile (SLCM) with nuclear warheads.

· As a nuclear policy for the next five to ten years, we are planning to modernize the ‘three nuclear pillars’ consisting of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), SLBM, And strategic bombers and the command and control system to ensure the reliability of nuclear deterrent to make full use of it.

· To prepare for nuclear threats such as China and Russia, making a claim in 'the world without the nuclear weapon' of the Obama administration recede,

We will strengthen ‘flexible and diverse nuclear forces’ to rebuild nuclear deterrence of the United States itself and expansion deterrence to alliance countries such as Japan.

· As a condition that the United States will use nuclear weapons, ‘We will consider nuclear use only under extreme circumstances for the defense of the vital interests of the United States and its allies,’ and in principle follow the policy of the former Obama administration.

In response to the new nuclear strategy of the trump regime as above, the Japanese government showed high appreciation.

This draft continues.

朝日新聞は日米両国の味方なのか、その両国を敵視する側の味方なのか、という疑問までが現実味を帯びてくる

以下は前章の続きである。

第2は、敵と味方を逆転させている点である。　

朝日新聞は、もっぱらアメリカ側の動きだけを危険だとする。

「世界の安全を脅かす」「核のリスク拡大」「被爆地　募る危機感」など、アメリカの核兵器だけが全世界に脅威や危険をもたらすかのように喧伝する。

日本にとっての危機感をあおる。　

ところが、アメリカの核戦力は日本にとってはあくまで味方の核なのである。

どんなことがあっても、トランプ政権が同盟国の日本に核ミサイルを撃ち込んでくることはないだろう。

アメリカの核戦力の増強は、あくまで日米両国を顕在的、潜在的に敵視する諸国、たとえば、中国やロシアの核への抑えなのだ。　

ところが、朝日新聞はその味方のアメリカの核を日本への危険や脅威だとする議論に終始する。

その反面、敵である中国や北朝鮮の核の日本への危険性を説かない。

そのうえで日本の防衛にとって致命的に重要なアメリカの拡大抑止の意味を事実上、無視するのだ。

であれば、朝日新聞は日米両国の味方なのか、その両国を敵視する側の味方なのか、という疑問までが現実味を帯びてくる。

この稿続く。

この二つの社説に象徴される朝日新聞のトランプ政権の新指針への反応には、少なくとも3つの大きな欠陥がある

以下は前章の続きである。

3つの大きな欠陥　

ところが朝日新聞は、このトランプ政権の新戦略をとにかく叩くのである。

「歴史に逆行する愚行」だと断じるのだ。

その2月4日の社説の主要部分を紹介しよう。　

《核兵器のない世界を願う国際世論に冷水を浴びせる内容だ。核軍縮の歴史にも逆行し、世界の安全を脅かしかねない》《使いやすい核を持てば相手国がおびえて、抑止力が高まるという考え方は、理性を失ったかのようだ》《核兵器が招く破滅への想像力を欠き、武力で自国の優越心を満たそうとする大統領の姿勢こそが、最大の懸念である》　

朝日新聞の2月7日の日本政府を叩く社説は以下の骨子だった。《これが世界唯一の戦争被爆国である日本政府のとるべき態度か。米国の核軍拡に追従する姿勢からは、「核なき世界」をめざす意思の片鱗も見えない》《指針は、核を使う姿勢を強めて相手を抑止する発想に貫かれている。小型の核の開発で使いやすさを高め、核以外の攻撃にも核で応じる可能性を示した》《核の非人道性を身をもって知る国として、日本には世界の核軍縮を率先する使命がある。なのに、対米同盟の狭い枠内でしか核問題を考えていないのが今の日本政府の姿だ》《同盟国だからこそトランプ政権の核軍拡に歯止めをかけ、冷静に北朝鮮問題の打開を探る。被爆者団体と協調し、核廃絶をめざす外交の発信力を高める。その努力が求められている》　

さて、この二つの社説に象徴される朝日新聞のトランプ政権の新指針への反応には、少なくとも3つの大きな欠陥がある。

大きな偏向とか、ゆがみと呼んでもよい。　

その第1は、アメリカ側の動きの原因と結果を錯誤している点である。　

トランプ大統領は、今回の措置はあくまで中国やロシアの核の脅威の増大への対応だと強調した。

ロシアの核兵器の先制使用の言明や中国が公式の核保有国で唯一、核軍拡を着々と続けている事実をも指摘した。

北朝鮮の核とミサイルの脅威ももちろんである。

まず、最初に中国やロシアの核脅威の増大あり、なのである。

中露の核軍拡が原因なのだ。

アメリカ側の動きはその結果となる。　

だが、朝日新聞は社説でも他の一連の関連記事でも、アメリカにとっての核の脅威にはまず触れない。

アメリカだけが、いきなり勝手に核軍拡を始めたように描くのだ。

原因と結果を逆にしているのである。　

この稿続く。