澳大利亚前外交官关于 沈阳闯馆事件的评论

云卷云舒

新手上路
注册
2002-04-01
消息
124
荣誉分数
0
声望点数
0
不能忘记,日本人侵华,就是从东北的一次外交事件找借
口的。


Japan at its inconsistent worst

By GREGORY CLARK

Japan's overheated reaction to the May 8 North Korean refugee incident at the Japanese consulate-general in Shenyang, northeast China, is worrying.

Emotions began to flow with vivid video footage of two men running into the consulate building while Chinese policemen stationed at the entrance grappled with two women and a child following them. The fact that the police penetrated about a meter into the consulate premises was condemned as a blatant violation of Japanese sovereignty. China's inhuman attitude to refugees was also condemned.

The same video shows a consulate official quietly collecting debris at the gate and politely handing it over to the police. This alone makes it obvious that consulate staff were not too worried about either the sovereignty violation or the lack of humanism. Indeed, given Japan's consistent record of only granting asylum, and then most reluctantly, to refugees who make it to Japan, the attitude of the vice consul was hardly surprising.

Even more relevant was the fact that the two men who had managed to get inside the consulate building were somehow quietly escorted out of the premises 20 minutes later by the police. Here it can only be assumed that consulate officials must have cooperated with the Chinese police, and Beijing later confirms that this was so.

But by this time the illogic of the commentators had gone into overdrive. On the one hand, we were told that Beijing was lying, since it is quite inconceivable that any Japanese official would ever allow Chinese police to enter Japanese sovereign territory. At the same time, commentators maintained, the behavior of the officials proved conclusively the weak-kneed nature of Japanese diplomats, the Japanese foreign ministry and Japanese diplomacy in general. Those responsible should be dismissed, they said, and Japan should take a crash course in crisis management.

Even the normally impartial NHK made a fool of itself by giving top news prominence to an alleged Japanese expert on Korea warning darkly how the eyes of the world were on Japan and condemning its supposedly weak response. But a quick switch to the BBC and CNN news broadcasts at that moment would not have turned up even a mention of the incident, let alone a commentary.

Worse was to come. Soon after the Foreign Ministry on Monday issued an allegedly thorough report insisting that Japanese consulate officials had opposed the removal of the refugees, we discovered than just four hours before the incident the Japanese ambassador to China had warned his staff about the need to do everything possible to keep North Korean refugees from getting into embassy premises. The ministry report made no mention of this warning. Even worse, it made no mention of how the Shenyang consulate official in charge of security had received and rejected a document from the refugees setting out their claim for asylum. It was left to Beijing to tell us this highly relevant detail.

But even this did not change commentators' stance: The ambassador did not mean what he was supposed to have said, we were told. He, too, should be dismissed. The consulate official rejected the asylum document only because he could not read English, and the document was not important anyway.

In any case, the fact remained that Japanese sovereignty had been violated. That in itself meant Tokyo was entitled to protest strongly and demand a Chinese apology, we were told.

The sovereignty issue shows Japan at its inconsistent worst. In principle, guards for diplomatic premises have to be stationed outside, and can only enter when invited. They are also supposed to stop intruders. As anyone who has worked at an embassy or consulate, including myself in Moscow in the 1960s, can tell you, this creates a very difficult situation: Either you go the very undesirable route of keeping your gates firmly locked and letting the guards outside decide who comes in; or else you go the very expensive route of stationing your own people at the entrance to decide who can come in (as the United States does).

In practice, most compromise, as the Japanese do. They leave the gates open and hope that the guards will do the sensible thing. The Shenyang guards did just that. Suddenly faced with a clear-cut attempt at intrusion, they tried to catch as many as possible at the entrance. They waited for permission to take out those who had made it inside.

In this sense they were better behaved than the Japanese police guards stationed outside the Chinese Embassy in Tokyo who in 1998 went well inside the premises, without permission, to chase an intruder. In the early 1980s, Japanese police guards made a similar intrusion into the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo in a vain bid to drag out a North Korean defector.

Details like these -- the 1998 precedent especially -- should put an abrupt end to any talk about sovereignty violations, particularly today when Tokyo makes such a fuss about the dangers of terrorists attacking its premises. So why are the details so easily ignored by so many, and not just by the predictable anti-China hawks? Newspaper editorials in unison have condemned Beijing. Not one of Japan's many opinion makers has dared to challenge the obvious distortions.

Even though the facts of the incident are fairly clear now, there is no hint of self-reflection or apology from the Japanese side. On the contrary, media and other attention now turn to Tokyo's self-proclaimed victory in persuading Beijing to let the five refugees go to a third country.

As we see with the contrived Northern Territories dispute, once the Japanese mind gets set in a certain emotional direction, objective facts and common sense get pushed aside, particularly when disliked foreigners are involved.

An ugly nationalism may also be involved, with both the prime minister and the chief Cabinet secretary implying separately that anyone who believed the Beijing version of events rather than Tokyo's version was unpatriotic.

In the same Shenyang area of China more than half a century ago, the Japanese military secretly staged the incidents that led Japan into its brutal invasion of China and its disastrous war in the Pacific. At that time, too, a key factor was the way Japanese public opinion could be so easily swayed into believing that those devious Chinese were at fault. Pure-hearted Japan was of course blameless.



=====================================
Gregory Clark is a former Australian diplomat and honorary president of Tama University. He was also a member of former Foreign Minister Makiko Tanaka's private discussion group on foreign policy matters.
 
1931年9月18日晚上,日本帝国主义强行驻扎在我国东北的“关东军”,按照预定的阴谋,将沈阳北郊柳条湖附近
南满铁路的一段路轨炸毁,反诬中国军队破坏铁路,袭击日本军队。以此为借口,日军当即向沈阳进攻,6小时
后,将沈阳全城占领,酿成震惊中外的“九・一八”事变。
 
对芦沟桥事件之严正声明

蒋中正

国正在外求和平,内求统一的时候,突然发生了芦沟桥事变,不但我举国民众悲愤不置,
世界舆论也都异常震惊。此事发展结果,不仅是中国存亡的问题,而将是世界人类祸福之
所系。诸位关心国难,对此事件,当然是特别关切,兹将关于此事件之几点要义,为诸君
坦白说明之。


蒋介石在庐山说「地无分南北,年不分老幼,皆有守土抗战之责!」
  第一,中国民族本是酷爱和平,国民政府的外交政策,向来主张对内求自存,对外求
共存。本年二月三中全会宣言,于此更有明确的宣示,近两年来的对日外交,一秉此旨,
向前努力,希望把过去各种轨外的乱态,统统纳入外交的正轨,去谋正当解决,这种苦心
与事实,国内大都可共见。我常觉得,我们要应付国难,首先要认识自己国家的地位。我
国是弱国,对自己国家力量要有忠实估计,国家为进行建设,绝对的需要和平,过去数年
中,不惜委曲忍痛,对外保持和平,即是此理。前年五全大会,本人外交报告所谓:“和
平未到根本绝望时期,决不放弃和平,牺牲未到最后关头,决不轻言牺牲”,跟着今年二
月三中全会对于“最后关头”的解释,充分表示我们对和平的爱护。我们既是一个弱国,
如果临到最后关头,便只有拚全民族的生命,以求国家生存;那时节再不容许我们中途妥
协,须知中途妥协的条件,便是整个投降、整个灭亡的条件。全国国民最要认清,所谓最
后关头的意义,最后关头一至,我们只有牺牲到底,抗战到底,“唯有牺牲到底”的决心
,才能博得最后的胜利。若是彷徨不定,妄想苟安,便会陷民族于万劫不复之地!

  第二,这次芦沟桥事件发生以后,或有人以为是偶然突发的,但一月来对付舆论,或
外交上直接间接的表示,都使我们觉到事变的征兆。而且在事变发生的前后,还传播着种
种的新闻,说是什么要扩大塘沽协定的范围,要扩大冀东伪组织,要驱逐第二十九军,要
逼宋哲元离开,诸如此类的传闻,不胜枚举。可想这一次事件,并不是偶然,从这次事变
的经过,知道人家处心积虑的谋我之亟,和平已非轻易可以求得;眼前如果要求平安无事
,只有让人家军队无限制的出入于我国的国土,而我们本国军队反要忍受限制,不能在本
国土地内自由驻在,或是人家向中国军队开枪,而我们不能还枪。换言之,就是人为刀俎
,我为鱼肉!我们已快要临到这个人世悲惨之境地。这在世界上稍有人格的民族,都无法
忍受的。我们东四省失陷,已有了6年之久,续之以塘沽协定,现在冲突地点已到了北平
门口的芦沟桥。如果芦沟桥可以受人压迫强占,那么我们百年故都,北方政治文化的中心
与军事重镇北平,就要变成沈阳第二!今日的北平,若果变成昔日的沈阳,今日的冀察,
亦将成为昔日的东四省。北平若可变成沈阳,南京又何尝不会变成北平!所以芦沟桥事变
的推演,是关系中国国家整个的问题,此事能否结束,就是最后关头的境界。

第三,万一真到了无可避免的最后关头,我们当然只有牺牲,只有抗战!但我们态度只
是应战,而不是求战;应战,是应付最后关头,因为我们是弱国,又因为拥护和平是我们
的国策,所以不可求战;我们固然是一个弱国,但不能不保持我们民族的生命,不能不负
起祖宗先民所遗留给我们历史上的责任,所以,到了必不得已时,我们不能不应战。至于
战争既无之后,则因为我们是弱国,再没有妥协的机会,如果放弃尺寸土地与主权,便是
中华民族的千古罪人!那时便只有拚全民族的生命,求我们最后的胜利。

  第四,芦沟桥事件能否不扩大为中日战争,全系于日本政府的态度,和平希望绝续之
关键,全系于日本军队之行动,在和平根本绝望之前一秒钟,我们还是希望和平的,希望
由和平的外交方法,求得芦事的解决。但是我们的立场有极明显的四点:

  (一)任何解决,不得侵害中国主权与领土之完整;

  (二)冀察行政组织,不容任何不合法之改变;

  (三)中央政府所派地方官吏,如冀察政务委员会委员长宋哲元等,不能任人要求撤
换;

  (四)第二十九军现在所驻地区不受任何约束。

  这四点立场,是弱国外交最低限度,如果对方犹能设身处地为东方民族作为一个远大
的打算,不想促成两国关系达于关头,不愿造成中日两国世代永远的仇恨,对于我们这最
低限度的立场,应该不致于漠视。

  总之,政府对于芦沟桥事件,已确定始终一贯的方针和立场,且必以全力固守这个立
场,我们希望和平,而不求苟安;准备应战,而决不求战。我们知道全国应战以后之局势
,就只有牺牲到底,无丝毫侥幸求免之理。如果战端一开,那就是地无分南北,年无分老
幼,无论何人,皆有守土抗战之责,皆应抱定牺牲一切之决心。所以政府必特别谨慎,以
临此大事,全国国民必须严肃沉着,准备自卫。在此安危绝续之交,唯赖举国一致,服从
纪律,严守秩序。希望各位回到各地,将此意转于社会,俾咸能明了局势,效忠国家,这
是兄弟所恳切期望的。
 
后退
顶部