2011年06月17日

朝日新聞2011年6月7日(FRI)アフガンへ陸自派遣要求

<朝日新聞国際版1面見出し>
アフガンへ陸自派遣要求
米ブッシュ前大統領、サミット時に
08年外交公電


<asahi.com 見出し>
米国、アフガン支援「陸自の大型輸送機派遣を」 米公電

2011年6月17日3時2分
http://www.asahi.com/special/wikileaks/TKY201106160680.html

[リード] 日本政府がアフガニスタン復興支援拡大を検討していたさなかの2008年7月、北海道洞爺湖サミットに合わせて行われた日米首脳会談で、ブッシュ米大統領が福田康夫首相(いずれも当時)に対し、アフガン本土への自衛隊派遣を具体的な選択肢を挙げて要求していたことが分かった。

 朝日新聞が内部告発サイト「ウィキリークス」から提供を受けた米公電の中に記述があった。

 08年8月にバウチャー米国務次官補(当時)が訪日するのを前に、東京の米大使館がシーファー大使(同)名で同次官補あてに送った事前説明の公電に、同年7月6日に洞爺湖であった日米首脳会談に関する記述が盛り込まれている。

 それによると、ブッシュ氏は首脳会談で福田氏に対し「日本はアフガンに中身のある支援をする必要がある」「形だけの貢献は適当でないし、歓迎もされない」と強い調子で要求した。「(陸自の)CH47大型輸送ヘリを派遣するか、軍民一体型のPRT(地域復興チーム)を担当するか」と具体的に求めた。

 しかし福田氏は「陸自の大規模派遣は不可能」と返答したという。米側は、自らの政権基盤の弱さを理由にしたと受け止めた。

 日本政府は08年初夏、イラクでの空自による輸送支援を打ち切るのに合わせ、アフガンへの新たな復興支援策を検討中だった。CH47を使った多国籍軍基地間の輸送や、PRTに自衛隊員を送る案も検討項目にあがっていた。だが、自民と連立を組む公明党が反対し、野党だった民主党が参院の多数を握る状況で、必要な新法を通すめどはたっていなかった。

 サミット前の6月、東京の米大使館が米国務省に送った複数の公電には、防衛省や外務省の幹部が、「政治家や世論の合意を得ることが困難」と、アフガン本土での支援活動は困難という見通しを米大使館幹部にすでに伝えていたことが記されている。

 6月に在日米大使館がシーファー大使名で国務省に打電した、日本のアフガン支援策づくりに関する分析がある。この公電からは、米側関係者らが、日本がホスト国となるサミットの時が日本をアフガン本土での支援活動に引き込む好機と考え、首脳同士による直接要求を仕掛けたことがうかがえる。

 この公電は末尾で「気候変動など、ほかの政策で日米間の意見の相違が見えてきた結果、日本はサミットの成功をますます気にかけるようになっている。サミットの準備段階が、日本に実質的なアフガン貢献をさせる最大のチャンスだ」と強調していた。

 洞爺湖サミットで主要議題だった気候変動問題で米国側から譲歩を引き出し、会合を成功裏に終わらせるため、日本はアフガン本土での支援活動を決断するのではないか。その読みから、公電は「国務長官と大統領がそれぞれ、日本で会談相手に要求すれば結果を得られるかもしれない」と結論づけた。

 だが、日本の内政はそうした政策決定に至るだけの状況になかった。福田政権、続く麻生政権は自衛隊のアフガン本土派遣を見送る。民主党に政権が代わった後も、09年に鳩山政権が発表した追加支援策は、5年間で50億ドル(当時のレートで約4500億円)という財政支援だけに限られた。(段落の区切りかたが紙面と違うが内容はほぼ同じ)



以上が朝日新聞国際版1面掲載の記事(1面トップは「福島県民30年健康調査 内部被曝先行測定」)で、三面に分析記事。この記事はasahi.comには掲載されておらず、デジタルページ(有料)にあったのでとりあえず見出しのみ拾っておく。



<朝日新聞国際版3面見出し>
米、日本説得へ包囲網
「共同戦線で要求 肝要」

公電分析


[中見出し 「丸め込める」一時自信]

[図 主要国のアフガンへの部隊派遣]

[カコミ 米の影響力低下 交渉手法に反映 孫崎亨・元外務省国際情報局長の話]



議論を呼びたいのであれば、朝日新聞は公電関連の記事は全面的に公開すべきだ。日本では朝日新聞1社ががエージェントになっているのだから、それは義務だとさえ言える(それに宅配契約で売る日本の新聞は記事の一部を公開したところで販売数に響くとは思えない)。

それどころか、ウェブサイトでは紙面ではできないことも展開できるはず。記事のベースになった公電を朝日のウェブサイトに取り込むこともできるし、公電の全訳を付けろとまでは言わないから、せめてウィキリークスの該当ページへのリンクぐらい張ったらどうだろう。公電分析チームのブログやツイッターがあればasahi.comの訪問者が増えるだろうし、そうなればasahi.comへの広告出稿の価値が上がる。



【朝日新聞の最新記事】
posted by nfsw19 at 08:00| Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | 朝日新聞 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

2011年06月16日

<アサンジと午餐>がe-bayに登場。<ジジェクと午餐>の企画も同時に進行中

アサンジがファンドレイジングのために午餐の企画をオークションにかけている。定員8名。7月2日にはスロベニア人のマルクス主義哲学者ジジェクも午餐を企画しており、この午餐のあとジジェクとアサンジの対談のイベントがあるようだ。濃いなあ。会場のTroxyはグレード2指定(歴史的建造物として外観保全指定された建物)のアールデコビルだそうで、機会があったら行ってみたい。
http://www.londoneastside.co.uk/venue/204/Troxy.html



WikiLeaks auctions lunch with Julian Assange
Bidding for eight seats under way on eBay as whistleblowers seek funds in UK

Haroon Siddique
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 15 June 2011 18.46 BST
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jun/15/wikileaks-auctions-lunch-julian-assange

For those who like their meals to come with a side of indiscreet chatter, WikiLeaks may have an appetising opportunity.

The not-for-profit organisation is offering eight people the chance to dine with founder Julian Assange to raise funds for its work. While Assange is said to often go long periods without eating, he is unlikely to be short of conversation given that he has become one of the most recognisable media figures over the past year and is rarely shy of offering an opinion.

The places are up for auction on eBay's UK site and bidding for one place had reached £620 on Wednesday. It says 100% of the final sale price will support WikiLeaks.

Slovenian Marxist philosopher Slavoj Zizek will also be at the three-hour lunch at "one of London's finest restaurants" on 2 July. The pair will be giving a talk at the Troxy, east London, later the same day, "discussing the impact of WikiLeaks on the world and what it means for the future".

WikiLeaks is dependent on public donations. It suffered a blow when companies including Mastercard, Visa and PayPal stopped processing payments citing illegality after the site leaked US state department cables. But a board member of Germany's Wau Holland Foundation, one of the whistle-blowing platform's main funding channels, said in December last year that despite the blocking of payment channels, funding was booming and that in two-and-a-half months it had collected more than €900,000 (£790,000) on behalf of WikiLeaks.

Assange is on bail in Britain as he fights extradition to Sweden on allegations of sexual misconduct against two women. He denies the allegations and claims they are politically motivated. A separate fund is paying for his defence.

US authorities are investigating whether WikiLeaks broke the law by releasing thousands of secret government documents.

Earlier this month, Assange was awarded the 2011 Martha Gellhorn prize for journalism. The annual prize is awarded to a journalist "whose work has penetrated the established version of events and told an unpalatable truth that exposes establishment propaganda".

Zizek, international director of Birbeck Institute for the Humanities, described Assange as "a real-life counterpart to the Joker in Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight" in an essay for the London Review of Books, adding that the Joker was "the only figure of truth in the film".
タグ:J Assange
posted by nfsw19 at 07:00| Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Guardian | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

朝日新聞2011年6月16日(THU) クラスター禁止条約への日本加盟をめぐる公電分析

<朝日新聞国際版一面見出し>
クラスター弾禁止条約
米、日本加盟を懸念

米外交公電
「在日米軍に制約」


<asahi.comm見出し>
クラスター弾禁止条約、米が日本加盟に懸念 米外交公電

2011年6月16日3時0分 朝日新聞
http://www.asahi.com/special/wikileaks/TKY201106150692.html

[リード] 深刻な不発弾被害が問題になるクラスター爆弾の禁止条約作りに加わった日本に対し、規制に反対する米国が、在日米軍再編への悪影響などを理由に懸念を表明していた。朝日新聞が内部告発サイト「ウィキリークス」から提供を受けた複数の米外交公電に、その過程が記されていた。

 クラスター爆弾禁止条約は2007年2月、ノルウェー・オスロでの会議で交渉が開始。日本も批准して10年に発効した。米国はクラスター弾は作戦上有用として条約に反対、署名していない。米国は条約上義務は負わないが、同盟国日本の加盟で、クラスター弾を使った在日米軍の活動が制約されると強く懸念していた。

 公電によると、オスロ会議の約2カ月後、日米当局者がクラスター爆弾問題を協議。ルジェロ国務次官補代理が「クラスター爆弾の使用が規制されれば、米国の友邦防衛に影響を与える」と述べ、日本を防衛する在日米軍の能力が損なわれると主張した。

 在日米軍のラーセン副司令官は、日本が規制に加われば「自衛隊や日本の請負業者はクラスター爆弾を取り扱えなくなり、それだけ米兵が余分に必要になる。在日米軍部隊の削減交渉をしている矢先に部隊を増やすことになる」と発言。在日米軍再編への悪影響にからめた具体的な米側の指摘に「日本側の参加者はひどく驚いていた」と公電は記している。

 条約作りが大詰めに入った08年4月にも、在日米軍当局者は外務、防衛両省当局者との協議の場で「米軍が日本でクラスター爆弾を保管、搭載できなくなれば、有事の際、米軍戦闘機を日本に持って来られない」と、具体的な作戦上の問題を挙げた。

 日本側は米側の懸念に理解を示していたようだ。07年4月の米大使館の公電は「米国との安全保障の取り決めを最大限に重視し、日米の防衛関係の妨げになるような議論は認めない」との心証を日本側から得たと記している。

 日本側は、在日米軍の活動に影響させない条文にするための交渉を行った、とも米側に伝えている。

 クラスター爆弾の「取得」は、条約草案の段階から禁止対象だった。公電によると、日本は条約の文言が合意された08年のダブリン会議で、この「取得」禁止条項を条文から削ろうとし、失敗した。代替策として、「取得」は所有権まで含んだ概念だという日本独自の条文解釈を、会議で一方的に宣言した。有事に自衛隊が米軍のクラスター弾を輸送しても、所有権が米側から日本側に移っておらず「取得」ではない、という理屈だ。

 こうした日本側の動きもあり、結果的に在日米軍は引き続きクラスター爆弾を持ち、使用できることになった。一方、自衛隊が保有する計約1万4千発(10年10月現在)のクラスター爆弾は、条約加盟で8年以内に廃棄することになった。(青字部分は紙面になし)



以上が朝日新聞国際版1面掲載の記事(1面トップは「脱原発」に関する知事アンケートで、これも興味深かった)だが、実は三面の解説記事/分析記事のほうがずっと面白かった(個人的には英国の立ち回りかたが特に興味深かった)。しかし、この記事はasahi.comで見つけられなかったのでとりあえず見出しのみ拾っておく。



<朝日新聞国際版3面見出し>
クラスター禁止条約に参加
日本官僚二つの顔
米国には消極姿勢繰り返す

米外交公電分析


[図表1/写真 オスロ・プロセスの動き]
[図表2 クラスター禁止条約をめぐる主要国の立場]
[キーワード解説 クラスター爆弾]

[中見出し 世論・メディアの圧力強調
      都合の悪い情報「穏便に」
]


タグ:日本
posted by nfsw19 at 06:00| Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | 朝日新聞 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

クラスター爆弾禁止条約をめぐる日本政府の二枚舌。在日米軍は「温存」を協議

そもそも「専守防衛」に徹するはずの日本軍(自衛隊)がクラスター爆弾を持っていた/いること自体が矛盾。どこに埋設したかや数を記録できる(したがって後から確実な排除が可能な)地雷と異なり、不発弾がいくつどこにあるかもわからないクラスター爆弾を、内戦状態でもない自国で使用する軍隊はない。



<クラスター爆弾>在日米軍「温存」協議 米外交公電を公表

毎日新聞 6月16日(木)11時45分配信
http://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20110616-00000033-mai-int

【ワシントン古本陽荘】不発弾被害が深刻なクラスター爆弾について、日本政府が禁止条約締結後も、在日米軍のクラスター爆弾を「温存」させるため、国会対応や世論対策について米政府と協議していたことが、内部告発サイト「ウィキリークス」が15日公表した米外交公電で明らかになった。

表向きはクラスター爆弾の使用に反対しながらも、実際には米軍のクラスター爆弾に頼ろうとしていた日本政府の二面性が浮き彫りになった。

ウィキリークスが公表した08年11月11日付公電によると、同年10月7日、東京で開かれた外務・防衛当局による協議で、日本が同年5月に表明した「クラスター爆弾禁止」後の対応を協議。日本側は、「在日米軍が所有するクラスター爆弾についても国会議員から保有に疑念の声が上がる可能性がある」と説明。そのうえで、「防衛省、外務省とも米軍にクラスター爆弾廃棄を求めるような事態は避けたい。情報を交換し、国会対応や世論の圧力に対処するための方策を検討したい」と協力を要請した。

この際、防衛省は、「国会対応のため日本は人道目的で廃棄することを公言するが、欠けた能力については米軍に頼る」とのシナリオを提示したという。

これに対し、米側は「クラスター爆弾の代替兵器はなく、日本は(担うべき)役割、任務の一部を放棄することに等しい」と懸念を表明した。

一方、同じ公電は核政策についても報告。少人数の別の会合で、日本側が北朝鮮の核開発を念頭に、間もなく誕生するオバマ政権が、日本への「核の傘」(拡大抑止)政策を変更するのではないかとの懸念があることを伝達。「日本国内で核保有の議論が起きている」と警告したという。
タグ:日本
posted by nfsw19 at 06:00| Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | 日本語マスメディア | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

2011年05月10日

ジュリアン・アサンジ、シドニー平和賞を授与される

シドニー平和賞ゴールドメダルを受けるにあたってのアサンジのスピーチの一部が以下の記事中に引用されている。

この中のある一節、特に「客観的であることは中立であることと同じではない objectivity is not the same as neutrality」に強く共感する。対立するふたつの勢力に明らかな力(権力)の差があるとき、両者を同じもののように扱う中立的な態度は、その力の差を考慮しないという点で客観性を欠いている。小学1年の男児と横綱を同じ土俵で戦わせようとはだれも思わないのに、それとおなじような構造の戦いが、両論並記という「中立性を保持する編集の所作」を通して、あたかも横綱どうしの戦いのように扱われている。

ウィキリークスの日本におけるパートナーとなった朝日新聞が、客観的であるように見せかけながら、その実、著しく客観性を欠いた両論並記の悪癖から一日も早く脱却することを望む。



ジュリアン・アサンジ、フロントラインクラブにてシドニー平和賞を受ける
Julian Assange receives Sydney Peace Prize at Frontline


by Ryan Gallagher on May 10, 2011 7:16 PM | posted in the category Politics
http://www.frontlineclub.com/news/2011/05/julian-assange-receives-sydney-peace-prize-at-frontline.html

WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange was awarded the Sydney Peace Prize gold medal for Peace with Justice at the Frontline Club this afternoon.

Assange is now one of just four people to have been given the award. Nelson Mandela, the 14th Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatso and a Japanese Buddhist leader Daisaku Ikeda are the only others to have received the medal in its fourteen year history.

The awards ceremony was a fairly low-key, invite-only affair, with a small selection of international media present. It began with an introduction from Emeritus Professor Stuart Rees, director of the Sydney Peace Foundation.

“For 14 years we’ve awarded the Sydney Peace Prize, but only on three occasions in 14 years have made an exception to the rule and awarded a gold medal for ‘exceptional courage in pursuit of human rights,'” Rees said. “We make the award for an unusual act that challenges conformity to cultural and political orthodoxy. We don’t seek somebody who’s perfect. Julian – you’ll be very reassured to know that.

“We think that the struggle for peace with justice inevitably involves conflict, inevitably involves controversy. If it was a stumbling towards some kind of consensus nothing would ever happen.

“In that respect we think that you [Julian] and WikiLeaks, have brought about what is a watershed in journalism and in the freedom of information, and potentially in politics. We think you’ve made an enormous contribution to people’s understanding of what democracy might be about in terms of responsibility to hold powerful people accountable, in terms of enthusiasm for freedom of information, and in terms of the presumption of innocence.

“We also think that that commitment to democracy asks many of the rest of us – journalists, lawyers, teachers, academics – to stop being so shy about challenging the establishments; to stop having their thoughts embedded consciously or unconsciously to mainstream points of view.

“Luckily for us there’s been a company of dissenters from Thomas Paine through to Daniel Ellsberg; the independent Australian MP Andrew Wilkie and yourself [Julian], who have told us that the emperor has no clothes, that we shouldn’t be deceived by the false claims of people in government, in corporations or indeed in the military.

“We were also motivated in November to make this award, because we were ashamed of the behaviour of the Australian government. And we wanted in some way to repudiate their cowardice ... we were also appalled by the violent behaviour of major politicians in the United States. You will know that some of them said that WikiLeaks should be defined as an international terrorist organisation and that several politicians – among them Sarah Palin – said that you [Julian] should be hunted down like [Osama] bin Laden. Well, we now know exactly what that means.”

Rees also took a moment to speak about the alleged whistleblower Bradley Manning, who has been in prison for ten months without trial – eight of which were in solitary confinement.

“The bestial behaviour of the US government towards that man is more than appalling,” he said. “They don’t seem to understand that the harshest possible punishment and forms of humiliation teaches no one a lesson ... it certainly makes no contribution to civility.”

Rees then read out two quotes. One was a message from Noam Chomsky to Assange.

Chomsky wrote: “I thank you profusely for the way in which you have excersied your responsibilities as a citizen of free societies, thus enabling citizens to know what their government is doing.”

The other was a 300 year old quote from the English writer Daniel Defoe:

“Extol the justice of the land who punish what they will not understand. Tell them I stand exalted there for speaking what they would not hear.”

*****

Former SBS World News Australia presenter Mary Kostakidis was next to speak.

She said it was a “great privilege” to honour Assange with the medal and described WikiLeaks as an “ingenious and heroic” website that “exposes what governments get up to in our name”.

[WikiLeaks has] contributed to enhancing democracy globally,” she said. “It’s ensured that critical evidence is made available to citizens all over the world in their struggle for justice – by providing a safe and secure way for whistleblowers to upload material anonymously."

Kostakidis added that among recent WikiLeaks revelations were cables that showed the Australian government privately lobbied with the United States to weaken a key international treaty banning cluster bombs.

“If we don’t support whistleblowers and their publishers, we will get the society we deserve,” she said. “Many of us have come to journalism because of its core purpose to scrutinise the decisions and actions of those in authority because of the impact of those decisions and actions on the lives of many people ... [We need to guard against] arrogance, contempt for truth, contempt for justice, contempt for other people’s lives.”

Kostakidis then presented Assange with his medal. “This award is made infrequently and for extraordinary achievement,” she said.

*****

Julian Assange began his acceptance speech with a “status update”.

The Australian government, Assange explained, this year found that WikiLeaks has breached no laws. It has now halted its inquiry into the organisation. “That is not due to the Australian government,” he said. “It is not due to the sense of the people it was working with in Washington; it is entirely due to the Australian people and the people who fight for us ... you’re actions have made a difference.”

But WikiLeaks is still under threat from the US government, Assange said, adding: “The Pentagon publicly declared an 120 man operation into us, working 24 hours a day seven days a week.”

The fact that a CIA task squad has also been assembled to look in to WikiLeaks – and also failed to confirm or deny whether they were plotting to assassinate Assange – has serious implications, he said, for him and for WikiLeaks' staff and volunteers.

He continued: “The real value of this award is that it makes explicit the link between peace and justice. It does not take the safe feel good option by uttering platitudes. [...]

“With WikiLeaks there is no doubt that we are all engaged in a struggle – a generational struggle for the proposition that is no more radical than that citizens have a right – indeed a duty – to scrutinise the state and to scrutinise states."

Quoting the words of the poet Mae Sarton, Assange said, “you have to think like a hero in order to act like a decent human being.”

He went on: “And that has always been our promise to whistleblowers and sources – that if you have the courage to act like a hero, then we will have the courage to act like merely decent human beings as publishers. That is why we have never unpublished anything that we have published, no matter what kind of threats have been levelled against us.

We are objective but we are not neutral. We are on the side of justice – objectivity is not the same as neutrality. We are objective about the facts, when it comes to recording and not distorting facts, but we are not neutral about what kind of world we would like to see. We would like to see a more just world and this means giving people access to the information that is the power behind justice. Without this free flow of information, an organised minority will always dominate the disorganised majority. That means most people cannot participate in power and until people can participate in power we will not have a just world.

“Our work at wikileaks has surprised many people, including some journalists, who have reacted in a hostile manner. And I would argue in a manner hostile to the basic ethics of journalism, which is to hold power to account.”

Paraphrasing journalist John Pilger, Assange said: “it is not WikiLeaks the United States government is afraid of, it is not Julian Assange that they are afraid of. What does it matter what I know, what does it matter what WikiLeaks knows? It matters not at all – what matters is what you know. These organisations are scared of what you know, and they are scared of what the general population knows. They want to put a stop to us because they want to put a stop to you knowing.”

Assange thanked the Sydney Peace Foundation for giving him the award. “Not because it is merely an accolade,” he said. “But because it is a certification to attract the support of people ... who are committed to bringing peace with justice.

“It is a sign that we are doing what journalists ought to be doing every day: afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted as Chicago writer Finlay Peter Dunne once put it.

“WikiLeaks will always strive to be an intelligence agency of the people. And will always, as long as whistleblowers are willing to act like heroes, act merely like decent people.”

There was then a Q & A section. A full report of this will appear tomorrow. And full audio & video will soon follow.

タグ:J Assange
posted by nfsw19 at 00:00| Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Frontline club | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

2011年05月08日

ウィキリークス、日本の原発の暗い歴史を大量放出

ウィキリークスの公電ページに日本発の公電14通が一挙に出た。

WikiLeaks releases cables on Japan's history with nuclear power
ウィキリークス、日本の原発の歴史に関わる公電を放出


http://www.wikileaks.ch/reldate/2011-05-07_0.html

06TOKYO442 JAPAN CONDUCTS NUCLEAR TERRORISM DRILL AT PLANT ON
2006-01-27 2011-05-07 SECRET Embassy Tokyo

06FUKUOKA9 NUCLEAR ENERGY POLITICS IN WESTERN JAPAN: KYUSHU ELECTRIC'S
2006-02-09 2011-05-07 UNCLASSIFIED Consulate Fukuoka

06TOKYO1592 LOCAL COURT ORDERS SHUTDOWN OF NUCLEAR REACTOR
2006-03-27 2011-05-07 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Embassy Tokyo

06TOKYO6346 CIVIL PROTECTION DRILL IN IBARAKI PREFECTURE
2006-11-02 2011-05-07 UNCLASSIFIED Embassy Tokyo

06TOKYO6730 VISIT TO JAPAN,S KASHIWAZAKI-KARIWA NUCLEAR POWER
2006-11-27 2011-05-07 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Tokyo

07TOKYO19 VISIT TO JAPAN'S SHIMANE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT,
2007-01-05 2011-05-07 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Tokyo

07TOKYO805 NUCLEAR TERRORISM CONVENTION: ""NUDGE"" COULD HELP
2007-02-26 2011-05-07 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Tokyo

07TOKYO3263 JAPAN: NUCLEAR POWER: EARTHQUAKE CAUSES FIRE AND
2007-07-17 2011-05-07 UNCLASSIFIED Embassy Tokyo

07TOKYO3296 JAPAN: NUCLEAR POWER: ADDITIONAL MISHAPS AT
2007-07-18 2011-05-07 UNCLASSIFIED Embassy Tokyo

07TOKYO4442 U.S./JAPAN DISCUSSIONS ON PHYSICAL PROTECTION AND
2007-09-25 2011-05-07 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Tokyo

08TOKYO498 PHYSICAL PROTECTION: MOFA SUPPORT FOR US/JAPAN
2008-02-26 2011-05-07 CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN Embassy Tokyo

09SAPPORO30 TOMARI: JAPAN'S NORTHERNMOST NUCLEAR COMMUNITY
2009-07-29 2011-05-07 UNCLASSIFIED Consulate Sapporo

09TOKYO2718 MOFA DG UMEMOTO ON SECRET AGREEMENT INVESTIGATION
2009-11-27 2011-05-07 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Tokyo

10TOKYO228 U.S.-JAPAN SECURITY SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING
2010-02-04 2011-05-07 SECRET Embassy Tokyo
タグ:日本
posted by nfsw19 at 18:30| Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | WL cablegate page | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

2011年05月07日

WSJ紙設立のWL型告発サイト「セーフハウス」は信用に足りず

ウィキリークスに対抗してウォールストリート・ジャーナル紙が設立した内部告発サイト「セーフハウス」が、公開後わずか1日で、利用者に匿名性を保証できない失敗サイトの烙印を捺されたようです。

Wall Street Journal faces backlash over WikiLeaks rival
SafeHouse criticised as a 'total anonymity failure'
by web security and privacy experts


Josh Halliday

guardian.co.uk, Friday 6 May 2011 14.21 BST
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/may/06/wall-street-journal-wikileaks-safehouse


The Wall Street Journal is facing a backlash from web security and privacy experts over its WikiLeaks-inspired whistleblowers' site, SafeHouse.

SafeHouse, which launched on Thursday to allow anyone to upload documents to the Journal, has been described by one encryption analyst as a "total anonymity failure" that could compromise the security of whistleblowers.

Other researchers have told the Guardian that SafeHouse needs "basic improvements" and that – in its current state – should not have been launched.

"These are technical issues that only technical experts will notice," said Rik Ferguson, a security analyst at Trend Micro. "But given the kind of data that the Journal will hope to get from this, if I [was a whistleblower] there would absolutely be enough for me not to choose that site to upload to.

"There are certainly some relatively basic improvements that could and should have been made before the site went live."

Jacob Appelbaum, a security researcher and senior developer on the Tor online anonymity network, was also critical of SafeHouse: "They're negligent and this is the wrong project to beta-test on an open internet," he said.

Within hours of SafeHouse being launched, security experts pointed out that the site has an insecure way of redirecting whistleblowers who visit the unencrypted version of the site. "This leaves any potential whistleblower open to the chance of getting their traffic – and any documents they're uploading – intercepted by someone on the same network," said Ferguson.

SafeHouse's terms and conditions includes a disclaimer that it "cannot ensure complete anonymity" of whistleblowers who opt to use the most secure form of uploading to the site – and recommends using "cloaking" tools such as Tor, which hide the online identities of web users.

However, uploading from Tor did not work on Thursday or Friday when tested by security researchers. "This is quite worrying and makes you think that it's quite risky if you're going to put information on there," Paul Mutton, a web security tester, told the Guardian.

Mutton added it was also "surprising" the Journal had not opted for an independently-verified SSL certificate – as used by PayPal and other companies which transmit sensitive information – which notifies site visitors of its enhanced protection with a green address bar.

"Not only would this instil more confidence in submitters, but it would also be more difficult for someone else to impersonate the site," Mutton said.

SafeHouse is also facing criticism for its terms and conditions, which state the Journal "reserve[s] the right to disclose any information about you to law enforcement authorities or to a requesting third party, without notice, in order to comply with any applicable laws and/or requests under legal process [...]".

The Journal confirmed to the Guardian on Friday that it would shortly update SafeHouse in an attempt to eliminate some potential vulnerabilities.

Ashley Hutson, a spokeswoman for the Journal, said: "We take these issues very seriously. Development for eliminating the Flash dependency, which is required for Tor compatibility, is complete, and we expect to implement the update within 48 hours.

"In addition, our system has been updated to limit the types of less secure connections it will accept. As is standard procedure, we will continue to assess new specifications and analyse any potential situation that may impact the privacy of our users.

"Our priority is to ensure that SafeHouse fulfils its mission as a secure location that provides sources with access to highly skilled, experienced journalists."

posted by nfsw19 at 22:00| Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Guardian | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

2011年04月18日

合衆国がシリアの反体制派をバックアップ

U.S. secretly backed Syrian opposition groups, cables released by WikiLeaks show
合衆国はシリアの反体制グループを密かにバックアップしていると、ウィキリークスが暴露した外電が解き明かす。

By Craig Whitlock, Sunday, April 17, 11:01 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us_secretly_backed_syrian_opposition_groups_cables_released_by_wikileaks_show/2011/04/14/AF1p9hwD_story.html

The State Department has secretly financed Syrian political opposition groups and related projects, including a satellite TV channel that beams anti-government programming into the country, according to previously undisclosed diplomatic cables.

The London-based satellite channel, Barada TV, began broadcasting in April 2009 but has ramped up operations to cover the mass protests in Syria as part of a long-standing campaign to overthrow the country’s autocratic leader, Bashar al-Assad. Human rights groups say scores of people have been killed by Assad’s security forces since the demonstrations began March 18; Syria has blamed the violence on “armed gangs.”

Barada TV is closely affiliated with the Movement for Justice and Development, a London-based network of Syrian exiles. Classified U.S. diplomatic cables show that the State Department has funneled as much as $6 million to the group since 2006 to operate the satellite channel and finance other activities inside Syria. The channel is named after the Barada River, which courses through the heart of Damascus, the Syrian capital.

The U.S. money for Syrian opposition figures began flowing under President George W. Bush after he effectively froze political ties with Damascus in 2005. The financial backing has continued under President Obama, even as his administration sought to rebuild relations with Assad. In January, the White House posted an ambassador to Damascus for the first time in six years.

The cables, provided by the anti-secrecy Web site WikiLeaks, show that U.S. Embassy officials in Damascus became worried in 2009 when they learned that Syrian intelligence agents were raising questions about U.S. programs. Some embassy officials suggested that the State Department reconsider its involvement, arguing that it could put the Obama administration’s rapprochement with Damascus at risk.

Syrian authorities “would undoubtedly view any U.S. funds going to illegal political groups as tantamount to supporting regime change,” read an April 2009 cable signed by the top-ranking U.S. diplomat in Damascus at the time. “A reassessment of current U.S.-sponsored programming that supports anti-[government] factions, both inside and outside Syria, may prove productive,” the cable said.

It is unclear whether the State Department is still funding Syrian opposition groups, but the cables indicate money was set aside at least through September 2010. While some of that money has also supported programs and dissidents inside Syria, The Washington Post is withholding certain names and program details at the request of the State Department, which said disclosure could endanger the recipients’ personal safety.

Syria, a police state, has been ruled by Assad since 2000, when he took power after his father’s death. Although the White House has condemned the killing of protesters in Syria, it has not explicitly called for his ouster.

The State Department declined to comment on the authenticity of the cables or answer questions about its funding of Barada TV.

Tamara Wittes, a deputy assistant secretary of state who oversees the democracy and human rights portfolio in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, said the State Department does not endorse political parties or movements.

“We back a set of principles,” she said. “There are a lot of organizations in Syria and other countries that are seeking changes from their government. That’s an agenda that we believe in and we’re going to support.”

The State Department often funds programs around the world that promote democratic ideals and human rights, but it usually draws the line at giving money to political opposition groups.

In February 2006, when relations with Damascus were at a nadir, the Bush administration announced that it would award $5 million in grants to “accelerate the work of reformers in Syria.”

But no dissidents inside Syria were willing to take the money, for fear it would lead to their arrest or execution for treason, according to a 2006 cable from the U.S. Embassy, which reported that “no bona fide opposition member will be courageous enough to accept funding.”

Around the same time, Syrian exiles in Europe founded the Movement for Justice and Development. The group, which is banned in Syria, openly advocates for Assad’s removal. U.S. cables describe its leaders as “liberal, moderate Islamists” who are former members of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Barada TV

It is unclear when the group began to receive U.S. funds, but cables show U.S. officials in 2007 raised the idea of helping to start an anti-Assad satellite channel.

People involved with the group and with Barada TV, however, would not acknowledge taking money from the U.S. government.

“I’m not aware of anything like that,” Malik al-Abdeh, Barada TV’s news director, said in a brief telephone interview from London.

Abdeh said the channel receives money from “independent Syrian businessmen” whom he declined to name. He also said there was no connection between Barada TV and the Movement for Justice and Development, although he confirmed that he serves on the political group’s board. The board is chaired by his brother, Anas.

“If your purpose is to smear Barada TV, I don’t want to continue this conversation,” Malik al-Abdeh said. “That’s all I’m going to give you.”

Other dissidents said that Barada TV has a growing audience in Syria but that its viewer share is tiny compared with other independent satellite news channels such as al-Jazeera and BBC Arabic. Although Barada TV broadcasts 24 hours a day, many of its programs are reruns. Some of the mainstay shows are “Towards Change,” a panel discussion about current events, and “First Step,” a program produced by a Syrian dissident group based in the United States.

Ausama Monajed, another Syrian exile in London, said he used to work as a producer for Barada TV and as media relations director for the Movement for Justice and Development but has not been “active” in either job for about a year. He said he now devotes all his energy to the Syrian revolutionary movement, distributing videos and protest updates to journalists.

He said he “could not confirm” any U.S. government support for the satellite channel, because he was not involved with its finances. “I didn’t receive a penny myself,” he said.

Several U.S. diplomatic cables from the embassy in Damascus reveal that the Syrian exiles received money from a State Department program called the Middle East Partnership Initiative. According to the cables, the State Department funneled money to the exile group via the Democracy Council, a Los Angeles-based nonprofit. According to its Web site, the council sponsors projects in the Middle East, Asia and Latin America to promote the “fundamental elements of stable societies.”

The council’s founder and president, James Prince, is a former congressional staff member and investment adviser for PricewaterhouseCoopers. Reached by telephone, Prince acknowledged that the council administers a grant from the Middle East Partnership Initiative but said that it was not “Syria-specific.”

Prince said he was “familiar with” Barada TV and the Syrian exile group in London, but he declined to comment further, saying he did not have approval from his board of directors. “We don’t really talk about anything like that,” he said.

The April 2009 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Damascus states that the Democracy Council received $6.3 million from the State Department to run a Syria-related program called the “Civil Society Strengthening Initiative.” That program is described as “a discrete collaborative effort between the Democracy Council and local partners” to produce, among other things, “various broadcast concepts.” Other cables make clear that one of those concepts was Barada TV.

U.S. allocations

Edgar Vasquez, a State Department spokesman, said the Middle East Partnership Initiative has allocated $7.5 million for Syrian programs since 2005. A cable from the embassy in Damascus, however, pegged a much higher total − about $12 million − between 2005 and 2010.

The cables report persistent fears among U.S. diplomats that Syrian state security agents had uncovered the money trail from Washington.

A September 2009 cable reported that Syrian agents had interrogated a number of people about “MEPI operations in particular,” a reference to the Middle East Partnership Initiative.

“It is unclear to what extent [Syrian] intelligence services understand how USG money enters Syria and through which proxy organizations,” the cable stated, referring to funding from the U.S. government. “What is clear, however, is that security agents are increasingly focused on this issue.”

U.S. diplomats also warned that Syrian agents may have “penetrated” the Movement for Justice and Development by intercepting its communications.

A June 2009 cable listed the concerns under the heading “MJD: A Leaky Boat?” It reported that the group was “seeking to expand its base in Syria” but had been “initially lax in its security, often speaking about highly sensitive material on open lines.”

The cable cited evidence that the Syrian intelligence service was aware of the connection between the London exile group and the Democracy Council in Los Angeles. As a result, embassy officials fretted that the entire Syria assistance program had been compromised.

“Reporting in other channels suggest the Syrian [Mukhabarat] may already have penetrated the MJD and is using the MJD contacts to track U.S. democracy programming,” the cable stated. “If the [Syrian government] does know, but has chosen not to intervene openly, it raises the possibility that the [government] may be mounting a campaign to entrap democracy activists.”


whitlockc@washpost.com

posted by nfsw19 at 23:00| Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Washington Post | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

米国核(原子力)規制委員会は規制より振興に熱心?

菅が原子力発電の見直しを口にしたらサルコジが来た。>菅は原子力発電継続を指示。
菅が原子力発電の見直しを口にしたらが来た。

Exclusive: U.S. nuclear regulator a policeman or salesman?
合衆国核規制委員会はポリスマン? それともビジネスマン?

By Ben Berkowitz and Roberta Rampton
NEW YORK/WASHINGTON | Mon Apr 18, 2011 8:50am EDT

(Reuters) - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission exists to police, not promote, the domestic nuclear industry -- but diplomatic cables show that it is sometimes used as a sales tool to help push American technology to foreign governments.
米国核委員会は国内の核(原子力)産業を振興するためではなく取り締まるために存在する。しかし、時には、アメリカの技術を外国政府に押しつけるのを助けるためのセールスツールとして委員会が使われることがあると外電が明らかにする。

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/18/us-nuclear-industry-nrc-idUSTRE73H0PL20110418

The cables, obtained by WikiLeaks and provided to Reuters by a third party, shed light on the way in which U.S. embassies have pulled in the NRC when lobbying for the purchase of equipment made by Westinghouse and other domestic manufacturers.

While the use of diplomats to further American commercial interests is nothing new, it is far less common for regulators to be acting in even the appearance of a commercial capacity, raising concerns about a potential conflict of interest.

The subject is particularly sensitive at a time when there are concerns about whether the operator of the stricken Fukushima nuclear power plant, which was designed by U.S. conglomerate General Electric Co., had been properly supervised by the NRC's equivalent in Japan.

The NRC's own chairman has said that in the nuclear business, avoiding conflicts of interest is paramount.

"The important point is that all countries should strive to maintain a strict independence between the regulator and the industries that it oversees," Gregory Jaczko said in an April 2010 speech to an international forum in Seoul.

EMBRACING THE MODEL

But the cables -- from 2006 to early 2010 -- show that the NRC's role in promoting its regulatory model around the world can easily turn it into an advocate for U.S. nuclear technology, whether its officials realize it or not.

For example, an unclassified January 2009 cable from the U.S. embassy in Kuala Lumpur noted that the Malaysian government, as it pursued a nuclear policy, preferred to work with contractors the NRC had already approved.

The diplomatic corps there was quick to point out how that might be used to financial advantage.

The stance "places the (U.S. Government) and US companies in a favorable position to build stronger relations with both representatives and (Government of Malaysia) officials," the embassy said.

In other countries the message was even more pointed, as in Italy in late 2009. Former NRC Chairman Dale Klein, then still a commissioner, visited the country to discuss nuclear cooperation as the government looked to restart the country's civilian nuclear program and build as many as 10 new plants.

Klein was there to talk regulation, but he also unwittingly figured in the embassy's efforts to promote American vendors.

"Commissioner Klein's visit gave additional support to U.S. nuclear energy companies. A (embassy) co-sponsored public forum on nuclear energy featuring Commissioner Klein as keynote speaker and U.S. companies as panel members attracted a large audience of senior public and private Italian officials and local press coverage," a cable said.

Klein, now a vice chancellor at the University of Texas System and a board member at two utility companies with nuclear operations, said that while he was a firm believer in the NRC playing a more international role, commercial advocacy was never part of his job.

"As a regulator we would never take a position of recommending one reactor over another. The NRC's position was safety and security, and you can get the safety and security in a variety of ways," Klein said. "I never recall having been asked the question of what reactor should a country use."

ALLERGY TO COMMERCIALISM

The NRC was created in 1975 because its predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission, had been criticized for conflicts in both policing and promoting an industry. The NRC was tasked with regulation, while a separate agency, later folded into the Energy Department, promoted nuclear power.

It's common for NRC staff and commissioners to be asked to attend international meetings, but they accept only invitations where they can press for strong safety regulations, said Margie Doane, director of the NRC's international programs, who declined to comment directly on the cables.

"You want to talk about safety right at the very inception of someone's thinking about nuclear power," Doane said.

"As long as we make sure our role is only safety and only regulation, it's a very important aspect, and it doesn't have anything to do with whether they buy U.S. technology or not," she said. "If we're invited into something which looks promotional, we make sure that there's a good opportunity for us to get the safety message out, and that it's going to be understood in the right way."

BEAT THE FRENCH

The fear for diplomats is that U.S. equipment companies need government help, lest they be elbowed aside by foreign state-owned competitors such as France's Areva.

The main concern is for the two nuclear reactor builders most closely tied to the United States -- General Electric Co.'s nuclear joint venture with Japan's Hitachi Ltd and Westinghouse Electric Co, the U.S.-based nuclear reactor builder 77 percent owned by Japan's Toshiba Corp. and 20 percent owned by Shaw Group.

That beat-the-French theme comes up over and over again in cables from around the world -- embassies noting with a sense of urgency that foreign competitor X is already on the ground meeting with government officials, and U.S. interests need to act fast at the highest levels to counteract the threat.

"U.S. company representatives and their Italian allies are apprehensive that absent high-level U.S. lobbying, French pressure will push the decision toward a purchase of their technology. We clearly need to engage at the highest level, given the stakes involved ...ens of billions of dollars in contracts and substantial numbers of high-technology jobs could be involved," a cable from the Rome embassy said in February 2009.

In some cases, NRC officials, while not lobbying for American companies, may have smoothed their way. In February 2007, former NRC commissioner Jeffrey Merrifield visited Hanoi to discuss cooperation on nuclear regulation with Vietnam.

According to the embassy, the Vietnamese told Merrifield they had already been approached by French and Japanese companies about a proposed nuclear plant scheduled to start up by 2020. Merrifield, the embassy said, responded in kind that the Vietnamese should expect to hear from American firms like GE and Westinghouse as well.

A spokeswoman for Merrifield's current employer, Shaw Group, was not available for comment.

That push for American counter-action sometimes resulted in overt lobbying, but sometimes the response was more subtle. One striking example came from South Africa in November 2008.

The embassy in Pretoria, so the story goes, helped the American Society of Mechanical Engineers hold a workshop on nuclear codes and standards in Johannesburg. The workshop was sponsored by Westinghouse and Areva, and featured speakers including NRC engineering officials.

While the official purpose of the event was to promote ASME standards to South African suppliers looking to participate in the global nuclear supply chain, the embassy was not shy about explaining its real purpose.

But the embassy indicated there was another purpose: "The unofficial purpose of the workshop was to support Westinghouse's bid as a global supplier committed to localization in South Africa and the ASME standard in its global supply chain, although ASME was technically neutral on the bidding competition," it said.

Their argument was subtle but unmistakable - standards are important, and Westinghouse uses a key international standard, but Areva doesn't, so go Westinghouse instead.

An ASME spokesman declined to comment.

One NRC critic said the very idea of the commission was to divorce the commercial from the professional.

"The whole point in creating the NRC was to get out of the business of looking like they were in the business of promoting anything other than safety," said Henry Sokolski, a conservative nuclear proliferation expert.

"That they should somehow be seen as advantageous to making people comfortable about getting into the business so to speak is itself an abomination. They should be allergic to that," Sokolski said.

(Reporting by Ben Berkowitz in New York and Roberta Rampton in Washington, Editing by Martin Howell)

posted by nfsw19 at 21:00| Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Reuters | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

2011年04月16日

ナイジェリア:WL革命の機は熟したか?

Nigeria: Ripe for a WikiLeaks revolution?
Leaked cables helped expose high-level corruption, but will those revelations impact upcoming elections?

Jacqueline Head Last Modified: 15 Apr 2011 16:46 Akjazeera English
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/spotlight/nigeriaelections/2011/04/201141514313670141.html

It is only months since the US diplomatic cables released by whistleblowing website WikiLeaks made headlines around the world with their revelations about Nigeria.

Among them, allegations that Nigeria's government dropped legal action against pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, which is accused of running a clinical trial that killed and disabled children, after the drugs company threatened to investigate the attorney-general.
http://nfwl.seesaa.net/article/173715426.html

Others revealed that oil firm Shell had infiltrated every level of government and alleged that it was politicians, rather than fighters in the oil-rich Niger Delta, who stole oil wealth and used it to fund arms deals.

Despite attempts by Nigerian leaders and state-run media to discredit WikiLeaks, the cables have been a powerful reminder for residents and the international community on the extent of corruption in the country and how deep its problems go.

But as voters head to the polls for presidential and regional elections, how many will be influenced by the material published over the last few months, and could such revelations bring about real change?

'WikiLeaks revolution'

In other nations, WikiLeaks has claimed credit for naming corrupt administrations, empowering voters by releasing secret government documents, and helping to topple governments.

Julian Assange, the website's founder, said last year that WikiLeaks had "changed the result of the Kenyan general election" in 2007 when it released a secret report into corruption perpetrated by the family of the country's former leader, that the-then government had done nothing to tackle.

A stronger claim was made for Tunisia, which some, to the annoyance of many protesters, called the first "WikiLeaks revolution". The release of a June 2009 cable that spelt out the corruption present in the country's ruling family appeared to act as one catalyst for change in a country struggling with rising inflation, unemployment and repression.

Surely then Nigeria, which has suffered corruption and sporadic violence for decades and now benefits from relatively high levels of internet and mobile access, is ripe for a reaction to these latest revelations.

Dele Olojede, a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, set up his newspaper Next several years ago in an attempt to provide a lone independent and credible voice in Nigeria. Through a third party, his publication has obtained US cables from WikiLeaks, and used them to show the "truth" about the politicians Nigerians are set to elect.

"We believe we are doing a public service [by releasing these documents]," he said. "They had a public interest ... revealing things that were closer to the truth."

The releases include one cable in which a state governor reports to US diplomats that Goodluck Jonathan, the incumbent president, had voted four times in elections in 2007, although his government strongly denies the claim.

Despite being an advocate for releases such as these, Olojede is more sceptical about the change they will bring.

"We have published stories over the past two years that were absolutely explosive in the sense that a rational person reading them would think that heads must roll, but nothing happened!" he said, adding that at other times, a seemingly insignificant story would have repercussions.

"It's not clear at this stage what impact these releases will have. A voter takes many things into consideration. I think what the WikiLeaks documents show is what most people already knew about their leaders. However the cables do have the advantage of being specific and naming individuals."

Ethnic divisions

Olojede's view, that most Nigerians are aware of their leaders' faults, may be one of the reasons that while people around the world felt a sense of shock and outrage from the US diplomatic cables, they did little to provoke anger in Africa's most populous nation.

"I don't think WikiLeaks will have much influence. People already know that Nigeria is corrupt and that politicians don't work in their interests," Dr Patrick Wilmot, a London-based commentator on Nigerian affairs and former lecturer there, said.

"They know through the grapevine, the bush telegraph, that their leaders are completely corrupt, that they don't spend their money on schools or public hospitals ... or anything of benefit to the public."

He believes that Nigerians will respond to claims of corruption by simply not taking part in elections, rather than casting a protest vote, and so such revelations will having no bearing on the poll.

The divisions within Nigeria are also a factor in the country's failure to galvanise popular support against a government, he says.

The United Nations estimates there are between 250 to 400 ethnic groups in Nigeria, and two major religions, Christianity and Islam. It is this diversity, Wilmot says, that prevents a situation similar to the one in Tunisia from arising.

Peter Cunliffe-Jones, head of AFP online in London and author of My Nigeria: Five Decades of Independence says Nigeria’s long history of corruption has meant people have learnt to have low expectations of their leaders.

"This is a country that has been ruled by the military for years. Many leaders stole billions during their presidencies. It's very difficult to shock a Nigerian of the baseness of their government."

Feeding the status quo

So why then, in a mineral rich nation with around 150m people, is there not a greater fight against endemic poverty, inequality and injustice?

Nearly one third of the population has access to the internet, the highest rate in the region.The majority of people are under the age of 35. These are two factors that have helped spark protest movements elsewhere.

"There are a very large number of reasons," Cunliffe-Jones says, as to why Nigerians are not out on the streets.

"Most people around the world concentrate on their daily struggle - finding food and shelter. It's a lot easier in the UK for example to stage a protest, but in Nigeria there's a reasonable chance police will shoot you."

"These elections have shown some signs of change. There's been a move against the ruling party and some support for Nuhu Ribadu," the country's former head of the anti-corruption agency.

"But in Nigeria it can't be the shock of revelations that makes the change. I think there is a fair bit of evidence that WikiLeaks had an impact in Tunisia, but in Nigeria people have been writing about high level corruption since the 1960s.

"The Tunisian press were very tightly controlled, with not a hint of criticism. The Nigeria press is vastly different. They have been howling outrage about their leaders but that's where the belief that it's not possible to change comes from.

"The WikiLeaks revelations only feed into the status quo. It needs to be a revelation coming from the other way – such as 'here's a good governor doing a good job'," Cunliffe-Jones says.

Olojede says that no one can predict the outcomes of news reports, and Nigeria does not tend to take cues from movements sweeping other nations.

"I would have been the happiest person if WikiLeaks revelations had caused people to rise up.

"But in Tunisia how does one know that one person's decision to self immolate would spark something that would consume the whole region?"

"It cannot be guaranteed ahead of time ... it can't be WikiLeaks itself [influencing these events]."

Prospects for change

There have been some small indications, however, that change could be on its way.

An online social movement, called Enough is Enough, has held demonstrations over the past year calling for electoral reform and solutions to ongoing violence and power shortages.

Olojede says social media, such as text messaging, has created a more level playing field for information dissemination.

"Social movements probably do have a certain appeal to the young generation because they have a shared experience: they grew up in the internet age.

"They think in a certain type of way that over time will bring about change.

"It's a good start."

posted by nfsw19 at 19:00| Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Aljazeera | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

広告


この広告は60日以上更新がないブログに表示がされております。

以下のいずれかの方法で非表示にすることが可能です。

・記事の投稿、編集をおこなう
・マイブログの【設定】 > 【広告設定】 より、「60日間更新が無い場合」 の 「広告を表示しない」にチェックを入れて保存する。