August 6, 1945, 8:15 a.m. What words can express the tragedy of an atomic bomb exploding over Hiroshima. Screams from the inferno, insane chaos, hell. Still not nearly enough. Horrifying scenes of human destruction that transcend this world.

The A-bomb represents two basic crimes. First, the massive and indiscriminate killing of not just soldiers but also young children and other noncombatants. The other was the cruel and inhumane radiation, damage that penetrated too deeply into the body, thus eating away also at the mind with never-ending fear. For both of these reasons, such a bomb must never again be dropped over the heads of human beings.

It is said that by the end of 1945, the A-bomb had killed 140,000 people, plus or minus 10,000. We still lack a truly accurate count of the dead. This year for the first time a volume for the "Many Unknown" will be placed in the Cenotaph for the A-bomb Victims. The fact that this volume of the register can never be filled shows a part of the tragedy.

I suspect that Japan is failing to reflect on this negative history and is becoming a "nation that can wage war." Going beyond the framework of the Peace Constitution, which should be respected, can we not hear the footsteps of war? We must never forget the heaps of corpses and the misery of Hiroshima that lie at the end of that road.

Therefore, we must make the 61st anniversary of the atomic bombing a "new start day" for pledging again,"No more Hiroshimas" and "No more war."

Protect the Spirit of Article 9

Our Constitution was adopted 60 years ago. Its consistent commitment to peace and other principles are wavering in the controversy over changing it. The Liberal Democratic Party has disclosed a proposal for the new constitution. The controversial Clause 2 of Article 9 says "renounce the right to maintain a military force and wage war." In the LDP proposal, this becomes "maintain a self-defense force." This change clearly opens the Constitution to wide differences of interpretation regarding the expansion of military forces and seeks to institutionalize in writing our defacto transformation into a "military nation." The proposal from the Democratic Party of Japan refers to a "limited right of self-defense," with an eye toward allowing the use of military forces overseas.

But war reduced Japan to a burnt plain. Hiroshima was obliterated by an atomic bomb, and Hiroshima was a military city sending hundreds of thousands of soldiers overseas. We know the gravity of lost life as both perpetrator and victim. The renunciation of war in Article 9 and the prohibition against a military force were born of the tragedies of war and the atomic bombings.

Now, with North Korea's missile tests and tensions increasing in Northeast Asia, the aggressive idea that we should "fight them over there or we'll be fighting them over here" is rearing its ugly head. As seen in the Iraq War, we are already sending self-defense troops to battlefields in the name of international contribution. If we institutionalize in our Constitution the idea that we are a military nation, the spirit of Article 9 will be lost, and we will be unable to stop the momentum toward war. We must never abandon our perfectly natural commitments to "never again starting a war" and "never using military force overseas."

The Deteriorating US-Japan Security Treaty

The final report of the US military restructuring agreed to by our national government described a major departure from previous security treaty policies. The new policies strengthen the US-Japanese alliance, and the plans for involving the Self-Defense Force in US military world strategy are nothing other than "military integration." Soon Japan will have its own US military headquarters to handle the theater that extends from the Korean Peninsula to the Middle East. Will Self-Defense Force activities in association with this headquarters violate our Constitution's prohibition on "collective self-defense?" This goes beyond the scope of the "far east" framework stipulated in the US-Japan Security Treaty.

Many large aircraft carriers will soon be re-assigned to the US base in Iwakuni, very close to Hiroshima. Iwakuni is set to become one of the largest bases in the Far East. There is even a possibility that the nuclear-powered warships stationed in Yokosuka will invade the Seto Inland Sea to transport soldiers just offshore from the A-bombed city. The fighter jets that the ships carry will fly off to fight in foreign battlefields. In emergency situations, will these aircraft carriers not actually be carrying nuclear weapons? Will we be able to abide by our three non-nuclear principles? Our basic defense policy should not collapse and change so easily in the face of US desire.

The world has abandoned nuclear disarmament and is headed toward a crisis of proliferation. Long after the Cold War, we still have approx. 30,000 nuclear warheads. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is on the verge of collapse. North Korea has withdrawn and declared itself a nuclear-weapon state. Iran is firmly committed to its nuclear program. Non-members India and Pakistan both have nuclear weapons, and Israel, too, is a suspected nuclear-weapon state.

At issue here is US nuclear policy. Closing its eyes to India's military use, the US has concluded a nuclear power agreement with India to assist its "peaceful use." The transparent hidden agenda of this overt double standard is to contain China and Pakistan. Worse yet, since the terrorist attacks of September 11, the US has been persistently pursuing smaller and more usable nuclear weapons. The danger that such a small nuclear weapon will be used is steadily increasing.

First, Disarm

However, there are two sides to the NPT regime. One is the prevention of proliferation, the other is disarmament. First, the nuclear superpower the US and the other nuclear-weapon states should fulfill their obligation to disarm. After that, they can easily get the international community to agree to prevent further proliferation. And verification is needed, of course. Japan, the only nation that knows the horror and idiocy of nuclear weapons, should not follow the lead of the US in this matter. We are duty-bound to demand that the nuclear-weapon states walk the path toward nuclear abolition. With the Cold War, we should be rejecting the nuclear deterrence policies of other countries and using all our diplomatic influence to direct all nations toward disarmament.

The hibakusha, the living witnesses to damage done by nuclear weapons, are aging. Their average has exceeded 73. It has been a half-century since Hidankyo was formed. Many outlying chapters have terminated activities due to old age. The generation without direct exposure to hibakusha is gradually moving, but the spirit of opposition to nuclear weapons and war must never age.

The generation without A-bomb experience must inherit the "starting point." We need the hibakusha now more than ever to talk about "that day." We need them to leave something behind in writing, just a line or two, about the tragedy under the mushroom cloud. For our children and grandchildren. More than half of the children in Hiroshima City cannot say exactly when the atomic bomb was dropped. This "I don't know" is dangerous. It is essential that we pass it on.

The younger generations must confront the experiences of the hibakusha. From that encounter, they will see the brilliance and sanctity of human life. We must all learn to see the horror before us on the path to war. Nuclear weapons and war steal precious human lives. We don't need them. We must make August 6 a day for thinking about all this, starting right where we are.