HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS
Hiroshima Peace Institute Vol.10 No.1 July 2007

The Shooting of the Nagasaki Mayor andthe Nagasaki Peace Declaration<The Shooting of the Nagasaki Mayor>
This is the Nagasaki Institute for Peace Culture’s first contribution to
Hiroshima Research News since joining the Peace Research Institute Networkof Western Japan. As a member of a peace institute in Nagasaki, I am compelled
to write first about the shooting of our Mayor Iccho Itoh, allegedly by a memberof an organized crime gang. The shooting took place on April 17, during theNagasaki mayoral election campaign. The suspect was arrested on the spot. The
police are now investigating his motives and accomplices, discovering, as apossible motive, that the suspect had a long-standing dispute with Nagasaki City
over compensation for damage related to an auto accident. On the other hand, anewspaper on the following day printed comments with different interpretations.
For example, a recent member of the City Assembly is quoted as saying: “I haveno idea why he was shot. The Nagasaki Peace Declaration might have triggered
something.” An aide to the governor of Nagasaki said: “I had gotten used toright-wing campaign vehicles driving around City Hall for the past two years
and paid them no special attention.” We have to promote the public stance that
violence can never be condoned for any reason, and expand our campaign toeliminate all violence. At the same time, we must demand an impartial
investigation of the shooting by law enforcement authorities, including an
investigation of the suspect’s political background.
In January, 1990, Hitoshi Motoshima, then-Mayor of Nagasaki, was shot
and wounded by a member of a right-wing organization. The attack was inspiredby his statement in December 1988, concerning Emperor Showa’s war
responsibility. At that time, an appeal titled “The Voices of All Citizens in
Nagasaki City and Nagasaki Prefecture Are Necessary to Eradicate the Root ofViolence” was produced by teachers in universities in Nagasaki City andPrefecture. The appeal came from the belief that they could by no means
overlook a violent action intended to suppress arguments or opinions different
from one another, because such actions deny basic human rights as guaranteedby the Japanese Constitution. Such actions also return Japan to the hideous dark
prewar years that led to the war. The motive for the shooting of Mayor Itoh issaid to be “Violence Against the Administration and Staff.” The suspect used theopportunity presented by the mayoral election campaign, in which candidates
for mayorship present their policies and opinions directly to local residents. Hiselimination by force of one candidate against whom he had a grudge is an attack
against the foundations of democracy and local autonomy, and against basic
human rights regardless of the motive.
Motoshima is quoted by The Mainichi Newspapers, on April 27, as saying,“I don’t know why Itoh was shot. I heard some rumors about him, but that’s
normal for politicians. He was not so bad as to invite someone’s rancor to that
degree...The shooting against me was terrorism against my argument about
Showa Emperor’s war responsibility. Strange as it may sound, I can somehow
understand why I was shot. At first, I didn’t want people to put Itoh’s shootingin the same category as mine. The two shootings are different in nature and I
take pride in my statement. But the fact that a mayor was shot is the same in bothcases. Everything goes easier the second time. The shooting against me might
have been on the suspect’s mind. I wonder why I feel so uncomfortable now.”

CONTENTSThe Shooting of the Nagasaki Mayor and the Nagasaki Peace Declarationby Masato Ohya …………………………………………………………………… 1<Reflections from Hiroshima: The 5th in a Series>
Hibakusha Are My Teachers by Nanao Kamada ……………………………… 2~4
Peace Research Institute Network of Western Japan ……………………………… 4<HPI Research Forum>
The Discovery of Global Warming by Spencer Weart …………………………… 5<HPI Research Projects>
Politics of Regret ………………………………………………………………… 5
An Exploration of the Atomic Bomb and Nuclear War in Art
and Popular Culture in Japan and the United States ……………………………… 6
Bombing and the Civilian ………………………………………………………… 6<Publication of HPI Research Project>
Senso hanzai no kozo [Patterns of War Crimes] ………………………………… 7<Forthcoming HPI Symposium>
Re-committing to Nuclear Disarmament ………………………………………… 8
Diary ………………………………………………………………………………… 8

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.10 No.1 July 2007

By Masato Ohya

We request impartial justice by judicial authorities and the preparation of all
possible countermeasures by the City Assembly and administrative authorities
to eradicate violence, and call for a full accounting of the incident so thisshooting will not become just one of many incidents in the development of a“lunatic age” dominated by irrationality. On May 17, one month after theshooting, several gatherings are scheduled to be held in Nagasaki City toremember the shooting.
<Nagasaki Peace Declarations>
I would like now to turn to the Peace Declaration read aloud by the
Nagasaki Mayor every year on August 9. Historical analysis of the Declarations
issued prior to 1992 appears in Hiroshima/Nagasaki no heiwa sengen: Sono
rekishi to kadai [Peace Declarations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Their
Histories and Tasks], published by Heiwabunka in 1993. Mayor Itoh wrote
about the drafting of a Nagasaki Peace Declaration and efforts to abolish nuclear
weapons in chapter five “Nagasaki o saigo no hibakuchi ni” [To Make Nagasaki
the Last A-bombed City] in Omoshiro jittai seijigaku [Interesting Politics inReality], published by Iccho Itoh Campaign Club in 2002.
Nagasaki officially hosted a cultural festival in Matsuyama Town for the
first time on August 9, 1948, three years after the atomic bombing. In thefestival, Taro Mizokami, vice-chairperson of the Nagasaki City Assembly, read
aloud the first Nagasaki Peace Declaration on behalf of Nagasaki citizens. Since
1954, Nagasaki mayors have always read a Peace Declaration at the Nagasaki
Peace Ceremony, which is organized by Nagasaki City. In 1974, the Drafting
Committee for the Peace Declaration was set up under Mayor Yoshitake
Morotani. At first, the committee was administered by Nagasaki City with adeputy mayor in charge of administrative work serving as chairperson of thecommittee. In 1980, Nagasaki Municipal Government’s Drafting Committee for
the Nagasaki Peace Declaration was established, chaired by then-Nagasaki
Mayor Motoshima. The number of committee members has increased since thenand now consists of 19 opinion leaders, university scholars and A-bomb
survivors in addition to the mayor. The committee comes up with and examines
the draft of a declaration through three conferences. Then a sub-committee
refines words and phrases as well as the construction of the draft. Only then does
the mayor make the final decisions on the Declaration.
Iccho Itoh criticized Mayor Motoshima’s administration, saying “peace
activities alone will not vitalize the local economy in Nagasaki City” and won
the mayoral election. Still, he presented accounts of A-bomb survivors thoughts
along with then-Hiroshima Mayor Takashi Hiraoka at International Court ofJustice in The Hague in November 1995. In his capacity as vice president of theWorld Conference of Mayors for Peace through Inter-city Solidarity, he made aspeech at the NPT Review Conference held at U.N. headquarters in New Yorkin May 2000. After attending the Hague Appeal for Peace 1999 in May, 1999,
his belief that the world can be moved by citizens cooperating with each otherwas strengthened. The following September he proposed to the City Assemblythat Nagasaki hold an international NGO conference. In November 2000, thefirst conference of “The Nagasaki Global Citizens’ Assembly for the
Elimination of Nuclear Weapons” was held, co-organized by citizens’ groups,
Nagasaki Prefecture, Nagasaki City and the Nagasaki Foundation for the
Promotion of Peace, hosted by the executive committee of the assembly. In the
opening speech at the third Global Citizens’ Assembly held in October, 2006,
Itoh said, “I believe that the Nagasaki Peace Declaration issued every year
represents a pooling of everyone’s wisdom and is the starting point ofNagasaki’s peace movement.”
I hope that, as an A-bombed city, Nagasaki City will continue its tenacious
efforts to accomplish its historic mission of nuclear abolition through the spreadof nuclear-free zones worldwide, making the most of lessons learned in the pastand combining the power of A-bomb survivors, citizens, peace-related NGOs,
and local governments. At the same time, we must continue calling on theJapanese government to “uphold the peaceful intentions of the constitution,
enact into the law the three non-nuclear principles, and work for theestablishment of a Northeast Asian Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone” as stated in the
Nagasaki Peace Declaration in 2006.

−1−

Ohya is professor at Nagasaki Institute of Applied Science andinstitute member at Nagasaki Institute for Peace Culture

Visit HPI’s website at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

＜Reflections from Hiroshima: The 5th in a Series＞

Nanao Kamada, Chairman of the Board of Directors, Hiroshima A-bomb Survivors Relief
Foundation / President, Kurakake Nozomi-en (Nursing Home for A-bomb Survivors)

Hibakusha (A-bomb Survivors) Are My Teachers
Interview and editing by Motofumi Asai
(Interviewed on April 23, 2007)

Dr. Nanao Kamada worked at the Research Institute for Radiation Biology
and Medicine (RIRBM) of Hiroshima University from 1962 (including aperiod at RIRBM’s predecessor), serving as Director from 1997 to 1999. His
major publications include the coauthoring of Bakushinchi-Sei to shi no 40
nen [Ground-Zero: 40 Years of Life and Death], co-translation of U.S.Japan Reassessment of Atomic Bomb Radiation Dosimetry in Hiroshima
and Nagasaki [Genbaku senryo saihyoka: Hiroshima oyobi Nagasaki ni
okeru genshi bakudan hoshasen no nichibei kyodo saihyoka (Japanese
title)], hereinafter called DS86, co-editing of Genbaku hoshasen no jintai
eikyo 1992 [Impact of A-bomb Radiation on the Human Body 1992], and the
publication of Hiroshima no Obaa-chan [English edition:One Day In
Hiroshima-An Oral History] as a text for peace education.
I prepared three topics for this interview, namely: “your relationship withhibakusha,” “your view on peace” and “your view on Hiroshima.” However,Dr. Kamada shared his experience and opinions in such an intense andprofound manner that the space and time afforded for this interview are only
enough to cover the first topic. Therefore, I decided to schedule anotherinterview for the other two topics, which I will share with readers at a later date.
I reproduced some of our conversations in this article to convey the Dr.
Kamada’s actual words and to make his admirable personality better known
to readers. (Current ministry names, i.e., Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare,and Ministry of Defense are used in this article.)

I received the most funds from the Ministryof Education, Culture, Sports, Science, andTechnology (MEXT), which appreciated myresearch projects from an academic point ofview. Funds from the Ministry of Health, Labourand Welfare (MHLW) were quite limited
because they provided them only to showlawmakers and the public that the Ministry wasproperly fulfilling its responsibilities. Thus,
RIRBM has conducted research activities for“academic” purposes sponsored by MEXT.
Dr. Nanao Kamada──Interesting.
I know what you are getting at. This shows a lack of communication
between MEXT and MHLW.
──It’s interesting that the two Ministries took different positions
regarding this matter. Did you rely primarily on subsidies from MEXT?
Yes. Until 2006, MEXT had a special subsidy program for studies on
A-bomb survivors. Currently, national government agencies, including
MEXT, are providing no subsidies for such studies. In any case, I would liketo stress the difference between MHLW and MEXT.
──So, despite its reluctance to provide support for A-bomb survivors
suffering from radiation diseases, the national government did notinterfere with the subsidies from MEXT?
MEXT has not made any comment about that.

<Research on the Chromosomes of A-bomb Survivors><Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF)>
I joined RIRBM in April 1962 and started on my first assignment:
examining the chromosomes of A-bomb survivors. No other institutions
were conducting such studies on human chromosomes for the purpose oftreating disease. After a few fruitless months, I found that patients withchronic myeloid leukemia had defective chromosomes. I remember that wasaround October 20, 1962. I was so encouraged by such a significant finding,achieved in a rather short period of time, that I began working even harderon the study.
I have mostly focused on chromosomes throughout my career at
RIRBM, examining a total of 17,655 chromosome samples in 38 years. Of
these, 3,339 samples were leukemia-related and 10,000 were associatedwith other blood diseases. I also conducted gene analysis on thosesamples. Bone marrow left unused by these research programs has been
kept in the form of frozen cells and DNA samples that are used forresearch even today. All of the collected data are stored in computers. If
you were to print all the data out, it would amount to two large books. I
doubt that any other researchers have conducted chromosome analysis on
this scale.
I led two major projects relating to the A-bomb at RIRBM. One of themis entitled “Comprehensive Medical Research on Survivors from the Atomic
Bomb Hypocenter.” Many research reports from this project have been
published as academic papers; thus far, 29 titles have been issued (threereports were published after my retirement from RIRBM). The 30th reportwill be released soon. The other project, also ongoing, has the title“Cytogenetic and Molecular Genetic Study on Hematopoietic Malignancies,”with research currently underway on both chromosomes and genes. A totalof 81 reports have been issued regarding this project. Although medical
research is costly, we have successfully executed the two projects thanks togovernment subsidies for specific cancer studies, international cancer
projects, comprehensive research and experimental studies.

<The National Government’s Attitude toward A-bomb-related
Medical Research>──Has the national government maintained a cooperative attitude
toward A-bomb-related medical research programs and provided
assistance?
Yes. The government has provided support for programs, such as
specific initiatives for A-bomb survivors, since around 1970.
──Does the government provide support for such initiatives eventhough it has set very strict criteria for certification of A-bomb diseases?

Visit HPI’s website at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

──Isn’t RERF concerned about its survival, considering that the U.S.
government might lose interest in A-bomb related research after all the
A-bomb survivors pass away?
That is possible. By my calculation, the number of A-bomb survivors
will decrease to less than 10,000 by 2035 and will become zero between
2035 and 2040. Therefore, we have to determine by 2025 to 2030 what weshould do after that.
──Is there any planning relating to war-related programs?
For example?
──The mission statement for the Forum for Institutes Engaged in Abomb Survivors’ Medical Care (*see note at end) suggests that thoseinstitutes try to survive by involving themselves in national programs todeal with nuclear attacks, in anticipation of nuclear attacks. Do you think
this is true?
I don’t think so. If we are to develop measures for dealing with nuclear
attack, we have the Emergency Medical System for Radiation Exposure to
conduct preventive studies. There are also two major recognized institutes:
the National Institute of Radiological Sciences in Chiba and Hiroshima
University. If RERF were to seek to strengthen relationships with these
institutes, there would be significant concern over the possibility you justmentioned. However, as long as RERF continues to focus on hibakusha, it ishighly unlikely that RERF will be involved in defense programs of thenational government.
──Isn’t it possible that RERF will work with Hiroshima University orother institutes and contribute to defense programs to impress thenational government with their significance, thereby securing continued
funding?
I don’t think so. It is beyond the capacity of RERF to involve local
universities and cooperate with the national government in developing
measures for dealing with nuclear attacks, unless RERF drastically redefines
its roles and scope.
──Hasn’t RERF considered redefining its roles?
The purpose of establishing the Forum might read that way. However, I
don’t think they are really working to do so.
──Is it possible that they will go beyond their scope to raise additional
funds? Aren’t they trying to involve the Ministry of Defense?
RERF has no capability that the Ministry of Defense or MHLW can use
for such a purpose. What RERF is supposed to do is research, not treat thediseases A-bomb survivors suffer in their lifetime.

−2−

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.10 No.1 July 2007

＜Reflections from Hiroshima: The 5th in a Series＞<A-bomb Survivors Are My Teachers>
In 1970, I was working on research activities at RIRBM to finddefective chromosomes in the bone-marrow cells of A-bomb survivors.
While I was compiling a report that concluded that A-bomb survivors haveno such defective chromosomes, a significant defect was found in thechromosomes of bone-marrow cells taken from Mr. M, who had been
exposed to radiation approximately 700 m from ground zero. Close review
revealed that such defects had not been found previously because we had
only used samples taken from those who had been exposed to radiation 1.1
to 2 km from ground zero. After the new finding, we began to focus on those
who had been proximally exposed to radiation in all our studies, excluding
those exposed 1 km or more from ground zero. It was Mr. M who taught methat we should focus on massive radiation exposure if we were to understandthe full impact of radiation. Mr. M corrected my inaccurate understanding ofradiation exposure.
I also learned from A-bomb survivors what exposure to residual
radiation really was. Since I was convinced that we should focus only on
proximally exposed survivors in our research, I had long overlooked those
who had been exposed to residual radiation. In June two years ago, I was
asked by a government institute to share my opinion regarding why some Abomb survivors had experienced hair loss despite having been more than 2
km from ground zero at the time of the bombing. I began to review the pastdata to identify the reasons. Re-evaluation of the data led me to realize thatmy understanding of exposure to residual radiation was completely wrong.
I originally believed that those who had entered the damaged area after
the bombing had received little impact from radiation. However, close
examination of records compiled by the University of Tokyo, Kyoto
University and a medical school for military doctors showed me that those
who had entered the city immediately after the bombing had been exposed
to significant amounts of radiation. In some cases, we had to consider thatthe amount of radiation exposure was at least 0.5 sieverts or even more,which could have resulted in the development of leukemia. There was no
denying the relationship between leukemia and exposure to residual
radiation. Showing the scientifically proven data, I told the government
institute’s personnel clearly that people who had entered the city
immediately after the bombing had been exposed to radiation. They quickly
accepted this.
This also led me to focus on exposure to residual radiation. For studies
on leukemia in those who had entered the city after the bombing, wecollected records on those individuals that include information about theiractivities after entering the bombed area. By closely reviewing the records,
we were able to identify their locations at that time. Based on the research, I
gave a presentation at a workshop held in Nagasaki last year, in which I
stated that those who had been exposed to residual radiation were 3.4 times
more likely to develop leukemia than non-exposed people. At this year’s
workshop, I intend to demonstrate the reason, showing that at least in somepatients, we can prove exposure to radiation of 0.5 sieverts or more byexamining the condition of their white blood cells (WBC) and chromosomal
defects.
How can this be proved now? I have surveyed 78 survivors, including
those who had been in subterranean spaces at the time of bombing, such as
underground shelters and the basements of the Bank of Japan or of the
Fukoku Mutual Life Insurance Company buildings. They were not exposedto the initial radiation because it was gone in approximately 0.3 seconds.
Studies of their chromosomes, however, showed that they had been exposed
to radiation of 0.9, 1.9 or 3.3 sieverts. If their WBC had decreased to 3,000
or less, that means they were exposed to secondary or residual radiation
when they escaped from the shelters or basements. Those engaged inradiation studies all know that a reduction in WBC to 3,000 or lower meansa radiation exposure level of 0.5 sieverts or more.
Why did physicists assert that residual radiation has no effect? Mycolleagues and I translated DS86, in which there is no statement regarding
elements other than manganese, aluminum, sodium, cobalt and scandium inthe soil. This means that this book was written on the assumption that thecity of Hiroshima was like a desert, comprised only of sand. However, there
were people living there, and every metal object, including furniture,
became radioactive as a result of the A-bombing. Radioactive metal objects
are not mentioned in the book at all. In reality, it did happen. Therefore, it is
not surprising that those who entered the city immediately after the bombing

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.10 No.1 July 2007

experienced hair loss.
──So, it was two years ago that you first realized the problems causedby exposure to residual radiation?
I used to think that radiation disease was caused only by proximal
exposure to radiation within 2 km from ground zero.
──Do you mean that you thought the DS86 conclusion was correct until
two years ago?
I used to think it was completely correct.
──If an expert like you thought so, do you think that other researchers
thought the same way?
Yes. I was beginning to notice that there were many cases of leukemia
among those who had entered the city immediately after the bombing, but it
was only two years ago that I started to compile a proper report to prove it.
──After you left RIRBM?
Yes. Because all the data and records are managed by computers casesof secondary radiation exposure can be easily extracted. There are 113
records of secondary radiation exposure. Of these, the development ofleukemia was reported in 5 cases during 10 years of observation, 6 cases in
10 to 19 years, 15 cases in 20 to 29 years and 3 cases in 30 years or longer.
Thus, we have followed these cases of secondary radiation exposure over 15
years, 30 years or longer. By classifying the data, we were able to confirm
that those who had been exposed to residual radiation also had defective
chromosomes.
──Didn’t you already find that out when you were conducting the
research?
Although I had the impression that those who had been exposed tosecondary radiation had developed leukemia at higher rates, the denominator(those who entered the affected area after the bombing) itself was not clearly
defined. In the meantime, a system for managing data from individuals wascompleted at RIRBM in 1967, and data for 290,000 people affected by the
A-bomb were stored in the system. As a result, the numerator (leukemia
patients) for 20 years from 1970 to 1989 was defined. Furthermore, of the
290,000 survivors, we successfully confirmed the number whose entry into
the affected area on August 6 could be proven. The percentage of leukemia
patients was obviously high among these people. This is how my longstanding question was answered scientifically using data already in thecomputer.
Most applicants for A-bomb disease certification were rejected if they
had symptoms, only because they had entered the city after the bombing.
──Do you think your report affected recent rulings for the certificationof A-bomb diseases?
It’s possible. Notably, there is a statement in the ruling by the Osaka
District Court that refers to my findings.

<As Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Foundation andPresident of Kurakake Nozomi-en>──You used to be in a position to observe A-bomb survivors as
patients, and now you are managing a facility that cares for A-bomb
survivors. Is that a natural progression for you?
Yes, absolutely. Although my salary has decreased to one-third of what
it was at RIRBM, I am extremely satisfied. Since I long received researchsubsidies funded from tax money, I would like to give something back tosociety now that I have retired from the institute. I hope I can return tosociety even a small portion of what I have been given.
──The A-bomb survivors living here are not patients to you, are they?
They are my colleagues.
──There are 300 residents here. How are they doing?
Around 20% are bed-ridden and 75% are suffering from dementia.
More precisely, 25% suffer from dementia too severe to be measured, 25%
are in better but still severe condition, and 25% need support in daily
activities, their conditions varying from day to day. Those free fromdementia comprise no more than 10%.
──I’ve heard that you have 500 residents in the foundation’s facilities
altogether, and 1,337 people are waiting for admission. Is the waiting list
becoming longer?
Yes, the number of waiting survivors is increasing.
──Do you have admission criteria?
Yes. Prefectural or city governments determine the criteria. My
understanding is that the governments assess the conditions of the 30−3−

Visit HPI’s website at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

＜Reflections from Hiroshima: The 5th in a Series＞

applicants at the top of the waiting list and offer preferential measuresaccording to severity such that applicants who need professional care areadmitted to the institutes sooner.
──While the number of A-bomb survivors is decreasing, the number of
those who need such institutions is increasing because of aging.
Yes. Although a third special care facility, with a capacity of 100
residents, was completed this year, the number of applicants will increase
very rapidly in the next few years.
There are nearly 180 staff members in the foundation’s facilities. At mywelcome party, I took pictures of all the staff members at tables to create aname list with photos so as to remember their names and faces. I did thesame for the 300 residents here. Otherwise, I cannot visualize their faces
when necessary. I also had similar lists made to cover the other two
institutions. I visit Kandayama Yasuragi-en and Funairi Mutsumi-en several
times a year. There are 100 residents in each of those facilities. Now I canremember their faces.
Soon after I became President, I reprimanded the cooking staff saying:“Are you preparing food for pigs?” They were cutting ingredients into
pieces that were too large, and foreign objects were found in the food. A
total of 28 such cases were found four years ago. Eight cases were reported
last year, of which five involved hair fallen into food. Although training thecooking staff to pay appropriate attention and maintain compassion for the
residents can prevent most problems, it is difficult to completely prevent
hair from getting into the food.
──Is there a system in place to ensure that all problems are reported
to you?
Yes. We place the greatest emphasis on food safety. We definitely must
prevent food poisoning. To ensure food safety, I ask that all data and records
concerning foods be brought to me for review. I also check to be sure thetemperature of the food is appropriate when served, and how the food tastes.
Once, some of our elderly women stopped drinking juice processed in amixer. I asked the cooking staff if they had checked the taste before serving
the item and their answer was “No.” After research, we found that somevegetables, such as celery, become bitter, and oranges become sourer when
they are ground up. This case revealed that the cooking staff had been
indifferent to the taste of the liquid diet.
I have also introduced a new health check-up method for staff members.
It is important to help them maintain proper weight and mental health. A

letter with the heading “To all staff members” is sent on a monthly basis to
all employees, including those on leave. The 60th letter has already been
sent out. We send the letter to those on leave to provide them with the latest
information about their workplace so they can resume their roles smoothly
when they return. Since employee cooperation is crucial, I always talk to
employees about the attitudes and mindset staff members should have. It isalso essential to have a basic understanding of emergency measures to betaken within 15 minutes in case something happens to a resident. Last April,
we decided to have a 2-minute information-sharing session immediately
before 9 a.m. every morning, with the participation of 15 department
managers. This is very effective. Because we are dealing with people in ourwork, we must do our utmost to eliminate errors in our procedures.
Asai is president at HPI(Note) The purpose of establishing the Forum for Institutes Engaged in Abomb Survivors’ Medical Care (held on May 24, 2006) is described asfollows in the circular of the forum. (Underline added by the author)“The number of A-bomb survivors both in and outside Hiroshima isdecreasing; there are less than 70,000 A-bomb survivors residing in
Hiroshima. It is estimated that the number of A-bomb survivors dying ofcancer will peak between 2020 and 2030. Therefore, it is expected that
research and development efforts for the medical treatment of radiationdiseases will confront difficulties as the number of survivors decreases.
Against this backdrop, medical institutes for A-bomb survivors should
work on a wider range of research regarding the impact of radiation on
health conditions, departing from the traditional purposes of conducting
laboratory and clinical studies for A-bomb survivors. Medical institutes for
A-bomb survivors are required to further cooperate with each other to workon new initiatives, including the provision of expertise to deal with radiation
damage caused by possible accidents at nuclear power plants and terrorist
attacks or wars, using extensive research data accumulated in institutions
such as RERF.
Therefore, this Forum was established to provide an opportunity forpeople of these medical institutes to meet and discuss their future tasks, suchas the future plans of RERF, collaboration between medical institutes for Abomb survivors and effective use of collected research data.”

Peace Research Institute Network of Western Japan
Since assuming the office of president at the Hiroshima Peace Institute in
April 2005, I have had a keen interest in promoting communication andinteraction among peace research institutes in Japan. One of the reasons isthat HPI was established in 1998 and is still in the process of establishingitself. In creating our vision for the future, we need to learn from preceding
peace institutes that have already accumulated much know-how aboutorganizing and running such institutions. I believe it would be quite
beneficial for all peace institutes to participate in a network through which
they can interact with each other, exchange information, and share research
results and understandings of peace-related issues. Besides, theenvironment both at home and abroad is increasingly severe with respect topeace. It is therefore very important that we form a network to enhancecommunication and interaction among peace research institutes. Anotherreason is that, when faced with important peace-related issues or events, a
network would enable us to share our responsibilities, to reach a consensus,
and to co-host peace-related symposia, all of which will lead to more
effective action to influence Japanese and, hopefully, international society.
Based on these two concepts, we approached the Nagasaki Peace
Institute, the Nagasaki Institute for Peace Culture at Nagasaki Instituteof Applied Science, the Kyoto Museum for World Peace at Ritsumeikan

Visit HPI’s website at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

University, and the Institute for Peace Science at Hiroshima University
and obtained their agreement in this effort. Since then, we have had three
preliminary meetings (on July 18 and November 14, 2006 and March 7,2007), and then decided formally to create the Peace Research InstituteNetwork of Western Japan (PRIN), starting in fiscal 2007.
During the present stage, we plan to carry out the following joint
tasks: 1) cooperation and interaction among the institutes, 2) a joint
symposium or workshop on important peace-related issues, 3) exchangeof periodicals, and 4) anything else agreed along the way by the network
members. Though these items might appear rather unspectacular, we
think it advisable not to aim too high initially.
As mentioned above, peace in Japan and abroad faces an increasingly
severe climate. Accordingly, peace institutes around the world will be
required to strengthen partnerships and work more cooperatively thanever before. I expect PRIN to fulfill a significant role, eventually winning
recognition as a vital first step toward those ends. HPI intends to be an
active PRIN member, learn a great deal from our more experienced
counterparts, and, thereby, enhance our raison d’etre.

−4−

By Motofumi Asai, president at HPIHIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.10 No.1 July 2007

HPI Research Forum
February 19, 2007

Title: The Discovery of Global Warming
Speaker: Dr. Spencer Weart, Director of the Center for History ofPhysics, the American Institute of Physics
How did humans figure out that global warming
was happening? When did people begin to see it asa problem comparable to war? These were thequestions that guided the HPI Research Forum on
February 19th by Spencer Weart, the Director of
the Center for History of Physics at the American
Institute of Physics at College Park, Maryland,
U.S. He is the author of many seminal books in the
Dr. Spencer Wearthistory of science, including Scientists in Power,
Nuclear Fear, Never at War, and The Discovery of Global Warming.
Weart spoke to a group of several dozen members of the Hiroshimacommunity at HPI while visiting for an HPI Research Project workshop.
Weart began by telling the group that people in ancient times
suspected that human activity could change the climate. Then, in 1896 a
Swedish scientist published a new idea. He suggested that as humanity
burned coal and other fossil fuels that add carbon dioxide to the Earth’s
atmosphere, we would raise the planet’s average temperature. This theory
became known as the “greenhouse effect.” But over the next half-century
only one lone voice, the amateur G.S. Callendar, insisted that greenhousewarming was actually taking place. In the 1950s, Callendar’s claims
provoked a few scientists to look into the question with improved

HPI Research Projecttechniques and calculations. The new studies showed that, contrary to
earlier crude estimates, carbon dioxide could indeed build up in theatmosphere and would cause warming.
Painstaking measurements drove home the point in 1961 when thelevel of CO2 was shown to be rising year by year. A 1967 calculationsuggested that average temperatures might rise a few degrees within thenext century.
Earlier scientists had sought a single master-key to climate, but by
the 1970s-80s they were coming to understand that climate is an intricate
system responding to a great many influences. To the surprise of many,studies of ancient climates showed that astronomical cycles had partly set
the timing of the ice ages. Apparently the climate was so delicatelybalanced that even small perturbations could set off a great shift. Greatly
improved computer models began to suggest how such jumps could
happen, and experts predicted droughts, storms, rising sea levels, andother disasters.
Weart explained how, since 2001, scientific advances haveconfirmed that we are fast approaching one of the most serious challenges
our civilization has ever faced. Improved computer models and anabundance of data have strengthened the conclusion that several degrees
of warming are likely within this century. In the minds of many, the threatof global warming has come to replace the threat of global nuclear war asa believable cause of the “end of the world.” A detailed presentation of
Weart’s work on global warming can be found at the following website:
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/index.html
By Robert Jacobs, assistant professor at HPIPolitics of Regret: Collective Memory in Northeast Asia

Present political and economic issues relevant to China, Japan, and Korea
are keyed to the collective memory of each nation. Prime Minister Abe’s
government has made overtures to China and South Korea, butreconciliation of past criticisms with the present appreciation remains apivotal issue. Northeast Asia provides an excellent setting for addressing
this concern. During the past two to three decades, China and Korea havebegun to threaten Japan’s role as Asia’s leading economic power, and theresulting political shift within the Northeast Asian community has
affected the area’s sense of history by intensifying its “memory wars.”
Scholars in history, political science and sociology tried to address
the questions raised above while participating in a workshop held in
Arlington, Virginia, U.S., on March 27-28, 2007. Thirteen papers were
presented at the workshop, and three were submitted in lieu of physicalattendance. The following is a list of participants and paper titles:¡Donald Baker (University of British Columbia, Canada):“Exacerbated Politics: The Legacy of Political Trauma in South
Korea”;¡Bruce Cumings (University of Chicago, U.S.):“The Korean War: What Is It That We Are Remembering toForget?”;¡Julian Dierkes (University of British Columbia, Canada):“Who Are the Japanese?: How Postwar Japanese History Textbooks
Define Collectivities”;¡Gary Alan Fine and Bin Xu (Northwestern University, U.S.):“Memory Movement: Opportunity Structure, Mobilization, andFraming in the Chinese War Reparations Movement Against Japan”;¡Kazuya Fukuoka and Barry Schwartz (Georgia Institute of Technology
and University of Georgia, U.S.):“Regret and Responsibility in Japanese Memory”;¡Akiko Hashimoto (University of Pittsburgh, U.S.):“Why Did We Fight That Unwinnable War?”;¡Christine Kim (Georgetown University, U.S.):“The Once and Future King?: Popularizing Korea’s Monarchist
Past”;¡Mikyoung Kim (Hiroshima Peace Institute, Japan):“Peace As a Moral Utilitarian Concept: Hiroshima’s Memory
Debates, 1985-1994”;

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.10 No.1 July 2007

¡Tim Liao, Gehui Zhang and Libin Zhang (University of IllinoisUrbana Champaign, U.S.):“The National Anthem of China: A Presentation of the Past, a Format
for the Future”;¡Xiaohua Ma (Osaka Kyoiku University, Japan):“War Memory and Nation-Building: A Comparative Analysis of War
Museums in China and Japan”;¡Mike Mochizuki (George Washington University, U.S.):“The Yasukuni Conundrum: Japan’s Contested Memory and Its
Internationalization”;¡Jeffrey Olick (University of Virginia, U.S.):“The Politics of Regret: Analytical Frames”;¡Jae-Jung Suh (Cornell University, U.S.):“Historicizing Historical Contentions in Northeast Asia”;¡Guobin Yang (Barnard College, Columbia University, U.S.):“Contested Memories of the Chinese Cultural Revolution”;¡Xiaohong Xu and Lyn Spillman (Yale University and University ofNotre Dame, U.S.):“Coming to Terms with the Nanjing Massacre in China: Memory,
Cultural Repertoire, and Politics.”−5−

By Mikyoung Kim, assistant professor at HPIVisit HPI’s website at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

HPI Research Project

An Exploration of the Atomic Bomb and Nuclear War
in Art and Popular Culture in Japan and the United States

The second workshop for the HPI Research Project titled “AnExploration of the Atomic Bomb and Nuclear War in Art andPopular Culture in Japan and the United States” was held fromFebruary 19-21 at HPI. This project is unusual in that it is a group ofboth scholars and artists working together across disciplines. Eightproject members were able to attend the workshop, while anotherfour submitted work for discussion.
The project consists of seven scholars, one visual artist, one
photographer, one prose writer, one poet and one animator. Mick
Broderick presented his collection of atomic ephemera and hisanalysis of why people respond to toys and household items withatomic symbolism on them. Jerome Shapiro talked about the natureof museum commemoration of the atomic experience and how it
reflects public and institutional memory. Kenji Ito presented a paperon the depiction of robots in Japanese popular culture and how thisdepiction changed from before World War II to after it, and theinfluence of atomic issues on this change. Spencer Weart presented
his work updating his classic book, Nuclear Fear, and discussed
how nuclear imagery and public narratives have changed since1986. And Robert Jacobs presented his work on the relationship of
the icon of the Whole Earth to the bombing of Hiroshima andNagasaki. In addition, the group read a paper submitted by Yuki
Tanaka about the relationship of the movie Godzilla to the Bravo
nuclear test.
In addition to the scholars, the artist participants also presented
their work. Judy Hiramoto presented slides of several different
pieces she has created utilizing atomic themes. These include both
two dimensional prints, and three dimensional art installations thatshow the impact of nuclear weapons on both victims and creators of
the weapons as well as the installation of a peace garden. Carole

Gallagher presented her work of both portrait and landscapephotography related to the American nuclear weapon testing site in
Nevada. Her portraits depict those affected in many different ways
by atomic testing, including downwinders and test site workers.
Minoru Maeda, a local Hiroshima animator, showed his film “TheSun Was Lost,” which he is converting to manga form for the
project. This film is based on his father’s childhood and experienceof the bombing of Hiroshima. In addition to those artists attending,
Tom Engelhardt submitted a short prose piece about growing up asa child in the United States with the bombing of Hiroshima as alegacy. And John Canaday submitted his poems depicting thecreation and use of the atomic bombs through the voices ofhistorical participants in those events.
The workshop was a great success and this unique project now
moves towards completion.

Hibakusha (A-bomb Survivors) Are My Teachers

HPI Research Project

By Robert Jacobs, assistant professor at HPIBombing and the Civilian: A Twentieth Century History

The second workshop for our project “Bombing and the Civilian: A
Twentieth Century History” was conducted on December 8 and 9,
2006 in San Francisco, at the same venue where the first workshop
was held early last year. This research project involves 11
researchers from America, Australia and Japan, although this time
three were unable to participate due to prior commitments. As at thefirst workshop, all those who attended participated energetically,
engaging in heated discussions on various relevant topics over thetwo days.
The main purpose of our study is to examine critically thehistorical process of how indiscriminate bombing first occurred. We
aim to analyze its “strategic necessity” and “military justifications,”
and how such bombing intensified and expanded during certain
major wars, eventually culminating in the atomic bombing ofHiroshima and Nagasaki. We are also trying to understand why
indiscriminate bombing is still widely practiced in various wars andviolent conflicts.
In the first workshop we analyzed some important cases ofindiscriminate bombing that took place during nearly 100 years
between World War I and the recent Iraq War. The early cases
clearly incited the wider practice of indiscriminate bombing.
Having grasped this historical overview, we also discussed thediscord between the theory of “just war” and “morals” against theacceptance of aerial attacks on defenseless civilians.
At the recent workshop, discussion focused on some of the

Visit HPI’s website at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

papers revised based on the comments made at the first workshop,
as well as on two newly included papers. Currently we aregathering the final drafts of each paper for publication as an edited
book. As an American publisher has already expressed interest in
publishing this volume, we hope that the final product will beavailable by the end of this Japanese financial year (March 31,2008).
The sad news associated with this project is that in February
this year we suddenly lost Professor Eric Markusen, of Southwest
Minnesota State University, from our research team. A worldrenowned authority on the study of genocide, Professor Markusen
learned shortly before the second workshop that he had advanced
terminal cancer and only a few months to live. Despite thisdevastating information, he bravely attended the workshop,
believing it would be his last opportunity to attend a scholarly
meeting. We greatly admired his courage and appreciated his
indispensable contribution to our teamwork. It is a great honor for
all the members of this project team to include his paper as a chapter
in our book. In 2003, Professor Markusen participated in our annualinternational symposium in Hiroshima. His academic commitment
to the anti-nuclear cause will long be remembered in Hiroshima andaround the world.

−6−

By Yuki Tanaka, professor at HPIHIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.10 No.1 July 2007

Publication of HPI Research Project

Yuki Tanaka ed., (Tokyo: Otsuki Shoten Publishers, 2007)

Senso hanzai no kozo [Patterns of War Crimes]
Response from a Rehabilitated Japanese War Criminal to the Publication
In February 2007, our book Patterns of
War Crimes was published in Japaneseb y t h e O t s u k i S h o t e n P u b l i s h e rs
in Tokyo. The book was the final
product of collaborative work by nineresearchers, who participated in the“Military Violence Against Civilians”
research project, funded by HPI between
2002 and 2004.
The main purpose of this project
was to illustrate distinctive characteristics
of Japanese military violence by examining, in chronologicalorder, several war crimes that Japanese troops committed against
civilians. It is also aimed to examine the historical reasons why
modern Japanese military forces adopted the habit of brutality
against non-combatants from the very early stage of combat.
A few days after copies of the book Patterns of War Crimes
were placed on the shelves of bookshops throughout Japan, one
reader contacted me through the publishing house. He is 90 years
old, a retired medical doctor in Tokyo by the name of Yuasa Ken.
Dr. Yuasa started working at the Komagome Hospital inTokyo, after graduating from the Jikei University School of
Medicine in 1941. In October that year, he was drafted into the28th Infantry Regiment in Asahikawa, Hokkaido. Having
completed two months of training in December 1941, he was sent
to the Luan Army Hospital in Shanxi Province of northern China,
which was under Japanese occupation at the time. For most of thefollowing three and a half years, until the end of the Asia Pacific
War in August 1945, he served as a military doctor at the Luan
Army Hospital, except for a few months when he was sent to thefront line.
While working at this army hospital, he participated in seven“medical operations,” in which Chinese “prisoners” arrested by
Japanese military police-suspected of being “anti-Japaneseelements”-were used as guinea pigs. Altogether 14 Chinese men
were killed as the result of the vivisections in which Dr. Yuasa
took part. In one case, for example, a Chinese man was operated
on to extract bullets from his body after he had been shot in thestomach three or four times, while other doctors were amputating
his leg and conducting a tracheotomy at the same time. Dr. Yuasa
also participated in training regarding the use of bubonic plague,
under the instruction of General Ishii Shiro (General Ishii headed
the notorious Unit 731, a Manchukuo unit that developed
biological weapons and tested them on more than 3,000 Chinese
prisoners). During Dr. Yuasa’s training, Ishii also gave a lecture
about frostbite experiments on Chinese “prisoners.”
Even after Japan surrendered to the Allied forces, Dr. Yuasa
stayed on in northern China and soon started working as a medical
officer for the Kuomintang (Chinese Nationalist) Army in the socalled Second War Zone, fighting against the Chinese Red Army
led by Mao Tse-tung. He was one of about 2,600 soldiers from the
60,000 troops of Japan’s First Army of North China Expeditionary
Force who were more or less forced by their commander to remain
in China and help the Kuomintang fight the communists. These

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.10 No.1 July 2007

Japanese soldiers continued to fight as regular members of theKuomintang Army until they were finally crushed in 1949. It was
only in 1956 that the surviving Japanese soldiers were finallyallowed to return to Japan. Ever since that time, the Japanese
government has refused to accept the demands of these returned
soldiers for payment of military pensions or pensions for bereaved
families, claiming that the soldiers remained in China of their own
free will and voluntarily joined the Kuomintang Army.
Dr. Yuasa was captured and taken to a POW Camp of theChinese Liberation Army (CLA) in 1951. At the end of thefollowing year, he was detained in the prison at Taiyuan with 140
other Japanese suspected war criminals, as information on his
wartime activities became available to the CLA. The Chinese
communist government adopted a policy of re-educating Japanese
war criminals by making them honestly confess the crimes thatthey had committed during the war. This involved repeatedly
criticizing themselves until they fully accepted their own
responsibility. Although it took many years, this unique method ofmaking assailants thoroughly aware of their own crimes helped
the Chinese authorities succeed in firmly implanting the conceptof human rights in the minds of Japanese war criminals and thus
helping them regain their own humanity. In total, about 1,100
Japanese war criminals were arrested by the Chinese communist
regime, but only 45 men were prosecuted in the end and no one
received capital punishment. Subsequently, many of those
returned soldiers have been contributing to building friendshipbetween Japan and China.
In contrast, more than 5,700 men were tried as war criminals
at the B & C Class War Crimes Tribunals conducted by each of theseven Allied nations, namely the United States, Britain, France,
Holland, Australia, the Philippines and China (Taiwan). Following
these trials, 984 men were sentenced to death. Comparing theresult of the Allied nations’ treatment of Japanese war criminals
with that of China, it becomes clear that the Chinese policy-basedon the principle of “detest the crimes but not the criminals” -wasextraordinarily humane, and that in a long perspective, it was awise and carefully aimed plan to build a good relationship withJapan in the future.
Dr. Yuasa was acquitted and returned to Japan in 1956, having
re-educated himself in the Chinese prison over the course of four
years. He then worked as a doctor at Nishi-Ogikubo Clinic in
Tokyo for many years while being active in peace movements- in
particular, the movement against medical doctors’ collaboration in
war. Having read our book Patterns of War Crimes, Dr. Yuasa
strongly agrees with my statement in the editor’s acknowledgementon “the necessity of moral imagination that recognizes the pain of
victims.” Dr. Yuasa shares my concern that current Japanesesociety is so dispirited that people have lost moral imagination
with respect to others and creative ideas for establishing a peacefulworld. It is important to understand that any study of war crimes
must encompass a critical reassessment of our own quotidian
thinking and life-style.

−7−

By Yuki Tanaka, professor at HPIVisit HPI’s website at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

Forthcoming HPI Symposium
Re-committing to Nuclear Disarmament: From Central to East Asia
In September 2006, leaders of five Central Asian states signed a treaty creating a
Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone in the region. Since the nuclear tests conducted by India
and Pakistan in 1998, the danger of nuclear proliferation, including the emergence ofa nuclear black market, nuclear tests by North Korea and enrichment of uranium by
Iran, has been growing. The U.S., the nuclear superpower, has shown no interest in
global nuclear disarmament, especially after the 9.11 terrorist attacks. Reflecting
these trends, the 2005 NPT Review Conference failed to create any positive result.
Given the strong current against nuclear disarmament, the conclusion of theTreaty in Central Asia is an important positive step forward. Since the beginning of
the negotiation, the U.N. Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and thePacific and its Director, Mr. Tsutomu Ishiguri, have been actively involved in theprocess. In Asia, it followed the de-nuclearization of Mongolia in 1990s.
The Hiroshima Peace Institute will sponsor an international symposium titled“Re-committing to Nuclear Disarmament: From Central to East Asia” in August
2007. The purpose of the symposium is to examine ways to utilize the experience ofCentral Asia toward the de-nuclearization of East Asia.
In this symposium, Mr. Ishiguri will present a keynote speech in which he will
examine the negotiation process, significance, obstacles to, and future tasks of theCentral Asian treaty. Then, panelists from Mongolia, China, South Korea, and Japan
will make presentations on “The Prospects of De-nuclearization in East Asia” inwhich the positive and negative conditions and the roles of each nation will be
reviewed. Lastly, a Hiroshima-born staff of the “Global Article 9 Campaign”
organized by NGOs will make a presentation regarding the role of youth in nuclear
disarmament, based on her experience of nuclear abolition movements in Japan andabroad.

<Keynote Speaker> Tsutomu ISHIGURI, Director, U.N. Regional Centre for Peace andDisarmament in Asia and the Pacific<Panelists>
ENKHSAIKHAN Jargalsaikhan, Former Mongolian Ambassador to the U.N.
WANG Shan, Deputy Director, Institute of Japanese Studies, China Institutes ofContemporary International Relations
HA Young-Sun, Professor, Department of International Relations, Seoul National
University
Haruka KATARAO, Staff of “Global Article 9 Campaign”
Motofumi ASAI, President, Hiroshima Peace Institute<Moderator> Kazumi MIZUMOTO, Associate Professor, Hiroshima Peace Institute<Date and Time> August 5 (Sun.), 2007 1:30 p.m.-5:00 p.m.
<Venue> Himawari Room, second basement (B2)International Conference Center Hiroshima (Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park)
1-5 Nakajima-cho, Naka-ku, Hiroshima<Host> Hiroshima Peace Institute<Collaboration> Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation<To Attend> Send a postcard to reach Hiroshima Peace Institute by August 1. Write your name,address, and telephone and fax numbers. Reservations can also be made by phone, fax or email. Up
to 300 people can be accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis.
Address: Hiroshima Peace Institute, Ote-machi Heiwa Building 9th floor, 4-1-1, Ote-machi, Naka-ku,
Hiroshima 730-0051, Japan
Tel:+81-82-544-7570 Fax:+81-82-544-7573 E-mail: office-peace@peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp

March 1- June 30, 2007
◆Mar. 1 HPI President Motofumi Asai gives lecture on “North Korea’s Nuclear Tests and Japan’s
Peace” at 53rd anniversary of Bikini Day, organized by Japan Congress Against A-and H-Bombs, in
Shizuoka Prefecture.
◆Mar. 3 Hiroko Takahashi gives lecture on “Classified Hiroshima-Nagasaki” at symposium“Concealed Menace of Nuclear Weapon” organized by and held at Meiji Gakuin University in Tokyo.
◆Mar. 4 Asai gives lecture on “For Enhancement of Pro-Constitution Campaign” at 2007
international women’s meeting in Hiroshima Prefecture, organized by Hiroshima Senior High School
Teachers and Staff Union, in Hiroshima Prefecture.
◆Mar. 5 Mikyoung Kim gives lecture on “History Problems in Northeast Asia” at Graduate Schoolof International Studies, Seoul National University, South Korea.
◆Mar. 7 HPI holds 3rd meeting for new organization networking HPI and other peace researchorganizations.
◆Mar.11 Kazumi Mizumoto gives lecture on “Current Situation and Problems in Reconstruction of
Cambodia and Future Tasks of International Cooperation” at 2nd seminar for international
understanding titled “Shouting for Love at Center of Cambodia,” organized by and held at Hiroshima
International Center.
◆Mar.14 Mizumoto and Takahashi attend, as regular members, annual general meeting of ResearchGroup on Reference Materials of Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, at museum.
◆Mar.17 Asai gives lecture on “Peace in East Asia and Japan’s Choice” at lecture meeting organized
by Kagoshima Branch of Japan Scientists’ Association, in Kagoshima Prefecture.
◆Mar.18 Asai gives lecture on “Facing My Granddaughter with Disabilities” at lecture meetingorganized by Kagoshima Mothers’ Club, in Kagoshima Prefecture.
◆Mar.21 Yuki Tanaka gives lecture on “Japan’s Peaceful Constitution Seen from Nation That
Dropped Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki” at meeting of Article 9 Association (A9A) Groupin Hiroshima City, at Hiroshima YWCA.
◆Mar.25 Makiko Takemoto gives lecture on “Peace Thought of the Weimar Intellectuals” at 17th
Meeting of Society for the Study of Modern German History in the Western Japan, in Yamaguchi
Prefecture.
◆Mar.26 Mikyoung Kim attends conference on “Future of the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia
after February 13 Agreement” and participates in discussion with a White House official, policy makers
and academics from the U.S. and Korea, at Georgetown University, U.S.
◆Mar.29 Mikyoung Kim conducts interviews with a journalist and U.S. State Department officials on
security issues in Northeast Asia in Washington, D.C., U.S.
◆Apr. 4-May 8 Takahashi gathers research materials on nuclear tests in U.S. and Canada.
◆Apr. 7 Robert Jacobs presents paper “Radiation as Cultural Talisman in Cold War Popular Culture,”
to Popular Culture Association/American Culture Association Annual Meeting, Boston, U.S.
◆Apr. 9-13 Jacobs gathers research materials on psychological study of atomic test participants at
Columbia University and NBC News Archives, New York City, U.S.
◆Apr.19-27 Jacobs gathers research materials on psychological study of atomic test participants at the
University of California and HUMRRO Archives and the UCLA Film Archive, U.S.
◆Apr.25 Asai gives lecture on “My Thoughts on Peace Education in Hiroshima” at 1st peaceeducation meeting organized by Society for Junior High School Education in Hiroshima City, in
Hiroshima Prefecture.
◆Apr.28 Asai gives lecture on “So-called ‘Revision’of Japanese Constitution” at public meeting to keep
Japanese Constitution from harm, organized by pro-Constitution Forum in Tottori, in Tottori Prefecture.
◆Apr.29 Asai gives lecture on “Human Dignity and Law for Independence of Persons with
Disabilities” at 1st anniversary lecture meeting organized by Eastern Hiroshima Liaison Conference toProtect Life and Rights of People with Disabilities, in Hiroshima Prefecture.
◆May 2 Asai gives lecture on “So-called ‘Revision’ of Japanese Constitution” at Okayama meetingfor 60th anniversary of enactment of Japanese Peace Constitution, organized by Okayama Prefectural
Peace Center, in Okayama Prefecture.
◆May 3 Asai gives lecture on “For No Change in Japanese Constitution” at 5. 3 Constitution Meeting
2007, organized by its executive committee, in Tokyo.
◆May 6 Asai gives lecture on “Now is Time for Article 9” at inaugural lecture meeting of A9A
Group in Iwakuni City, organized by its executive committee, in Yamaguchi Prefecture.◆◆May 22 Yoshiaki Sato gives lecture on “Draft Charter of East Asian Community” at CREP Monthly
Seminar organized by Institute of Social Science and held at University of Tokyo.
◆May 23-25 Mikyoung Kim presents paper on “History Textbook Issues in Northeast Asia” atconference titled as “Historical Memories and Resurgence of Nationalism in East Asia” at University ofCalifornia-Santa Barbara, U.S.
◆May 26 Asai gives lecture on “No Change in Japanese Constitution” at meeting organized by “I”
Women Conference, in Hiroshima Prefecture.▽Mizumoto attends, as coordinator, 1st meeting ofHiroshima Peace Forum, organized by Hiroshima City and Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation andguides group discussions on meaning of Hiroshima experience, held at International Conference Center
Hiroshima.
◆May 28-31Mikyoung Kim conducts interviews on security in Northeast Asia with scholars at
Stanford University and journalists, in San Francisco, U.S.
◆May 30 Tanaka gives lecture on “Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki” and “Tezuka
Osamu’s ‘Story Manga’” for group of visiting students from Randolph College of the U.S., at
Hiroshima Jogakuin University.
◆Jun. 1 Tanaka gives lecture on “Re-examination of Atomic Bombings in History of Indiscriminate
Bombing” at 7th International Conference of International Society for Universal Dialogue held in
Hiroshima Prefecture.
◆Jun. 2 Mizumoto gives lecture on “Hiroshima & Peace” to U.S. students studying at Sophia
University for program by Council on International Educational Exchange at Hiroshima National Peace
Memorial Hall for Atomic Bomb Victims.
◆Jun. 3 Jacobs gives lecture on “Two Hiroshimas” at Council on International Educational
Exchange, held at Hiroshima National Peace Memorial Hall for Atomic Bomb Victims.
◆Jun. 5 Jacobs presents paper on “Curing the Bomb” to International Society for Universal
Dialogue, in Hiroshima Prefecture.
◆Jun.10 Asai gives lecture on “U.S. World Strategy and Japan-U.S. Alliance” at 33rd education
course for executives, organized by General Workers’ Union of Tokyo Doken, in Shizuoka Prefecture.
◆Jun.11-30 Narayanan Ganesan, as member of Konrad-Adenauer Stiftung-sponsored team ofacademics, visits Myanmar and engages in training civil servants and academics at Yangon University.
◆Jun.13 Asai attends, as reporter and discussant, 2007 Gwangju Peace Conference, organized by
Arirang International Peace Foundation, held in Gwangju, South Korea.
◆Jun.16 Mizumoto gives lecture on “Current State and Tasks of Peace Research” at educational
program for Level II qualified nursing care manager system organized by and held at Hiroshima
Prefectural Nursing Association.
◆Jun.21 Asai gives lecture on “Guarantee of Rights of People with Disabilities” at workshop
organized by National Liaison Council for Counseling and Support of People with Disabilities, in Chiba
Prefecture.
◆Jun.24 Asai gives lecture on “Offensive for Constitutional Revision and Our Position” at inaugural
meeting of A9A Group in Higashi Hiroshima City, in Hiroshima Prefecture.
◆Jun.26 HPI holds the 1st meeting of Peace Research Institute Network of Western Japan, at HPI.
◆Jun.30 Mizumoto gives lecture on “How to Link Experience of Atomic Bombing with World
Peace?” and guides group discussions at 6th meeting of Hiroshima Peace Forum held at International
Conference Center Hiroshima.
−Visitors to HPI−
◆Mar. 7 Dr. Temario C. Rivera, Professor of International Relations, International Christian
University (ICU), Rumiko Aruga, Coordinator, Rotary Peace Center, ICU, and Gina Ballesfin and 7
other members of Rotary World Peace Fellows.
◆Mar.12 Gerald Keddy, Member of Parliament, Conservative Party of Canada and 5 other membersof delegation from Canada.
◆Mar.16 Eugeniusz Smolar, President, Center for International Relations, Poland.
◆May 15 Dr. Elspeth Jones, Dean, Leslie Silver International Faculty, Leeds Metropolitan University,and Dr. Edward Francis Halpin, Associate Dean, Research, Partnerships and Consultancy, Leslie SilverInternational Faculty, Leeds Metropolitan University, U.K.

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS

Vol.10, No.1 July 26, 2007
Copyright 2007 HPI All rights reserved●Publisher: Hiroshima Peace Institute, Hiroshima City University; Editor: Ayako Yoshida
TEL +81-82-544-7570 FAX +81-82-544-7573
Ote-machi Heiwa Bldg. 9F/10F 4-1-1 Ote-machi, Naka-ku, Hiroshima 730-0051, Japan. E-mail: office-peace@peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp●Printed by Takatoo Print Media co., ltd.

Visit HPI’s website at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm−8−

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.10 No.1 July 2007