世界は軍備拡張戦争中だ。 米国、ロシア、中国、イスラエル、ウクライナ、欧州だけでなく、日本、韓国も軍備強化のために予算を増額し、相互協力のために同盟国づくりに努めている。 岸田首相のフランス訪問もこれと無関係ではない。
米国は半導体の安全保障のため、自国の生産基地に莫大な規模の支援金を支援している。 日本も熊本TSMC工場に大規模な支援を行った。 半導体は今後、経済だけでなく安保にも直結する重要な資源だ。 そのため、各国は現地採用の増加という経済的利点のほか、安保的側面からも半導体産業を育成している。
軍事力、経済力は現代国家においてなくてはならない重大な要素だ。 国家維持のための必須要素だ。 現在、世界で起きている戦争を見れば、軍事力と経済力が勝敗を左右する姿を簡単に見ることができる。
だからだろうか？ 韓国政府と日本政府は、軍事と経済だけに偏ったハードパワーだけに偏っているようで、残念な気がする。
両政府は国民から多くの非難を浴びている。 両政府は最近の選挙で惨敗した。 韓国政府は野党との交渉なしに拒否権を乱発し、物価上昇で庶民が苦しんでいるが、ひたすら法人税減免など企業優待政策だけに固執している。 日本政府は、多くの与党議員が金銭的問題と関連しているにもかかわらず、反省する姿を見せず、信頼を失っている。
特に日本政府の場合、野党が韓国のように強くない状況で、過去の侍のように自分の責任に対して堂々と認め、切腹するそのような姿が見られない点が残念だ。 問題になった議員たちが侍のように謝罪し反省する姿を見せていたら、このように事態は大きくならなかっただろう。 切腹のように死ねという意味ではなく、侍の素敵な認める姿を期待したのだ。
日本は侍精神が再び蘇らなければならない。 映画と本で出てきた「将軍」を多くの西洋人が感嘆する理由がまさに侍精神だ。 日本という国が素敵に見える理由だ。 そんな精神が今の日本を存在させた。
韓国政府は極端なハードパワーだけを強調している。 親企業政策、北朝鮮との極限対立など、対話や外交が全く見えない。 民間交流のようなソフトパワーのない平和維持は、いつでも問題が発生する可能性がある。
イスラエル、ハマス、ロシア、ウクライナ戦争も、戦争前に十分な外交的対話と民間交流があったなら、ここまで相手を憎む事態は起きなかっただろう。 相手を理解するための歴史、宗教、文化、芸術交流があったなら、このような惨憺たる戦争の痛みは経験しなかっただろうと思う。（Qの希望）

The world is in the midst of an arms race. Not only the United States, Russia, China, Israel, Ukraine, and Europe, but also Japan and South Korea are increasing their budgets to strengthen their military capabilities and are striving to build alliances for mutual cooperation. Prime Minister Kishida's visit to France is not unrelated to this effort.
The United States is pouring vast amounts of funding into its own semiconductor manufacturing facilities to ensure semiconductor security. Likewise, Japan has made significant contributions to the TSMC factory in Kumamoto. Semiconductors are an essential resource that directly affects not only the economy but also national security. Therefore, countries are cultivating the semiconductor industry not only for the economic benefits of local employment but also for national security reasons.
Military power and economic strength are critical elements in modern nations. They are essential for the survival of the state. Observing the wars currently taking place around the world, it's easy to see how military and economic strength often determine the outcome of conflicts.
Perhaps because of this, it's unfortunate that both the South Korean and Japanese governments seem overly focused on hard power, emphasizing military and economic strength to the exclusion of other aspects.
Both governments face significant criticism from their citizens. Both governments recently suffered defeats in elections. The South Korean government has been accused of overusing its veto power without engaging in negotiations with the opposition party, while ordinary people are suffering from rising prices, yet it insists on corporate-friendly policies like corporate tax cuts. The Japanese government has also lost public trust, with many ruling party members being implicated in financial scandals but showing no signs of remorse.
In particular, in the case of the Japanese government, it’s regrettable that, unlike in South Korea, where the opposition is stronger, politicians don't seem to acknowledge their responsibility with the same dignity as the samurai of old, who would own up to their faults and even commit seppuku. If the problematic lawmakers had publicly apologized and shown a samurai-like sense of responsibility, the situation wouldn't have escalated to this point. This doesn't mean they should literally commit seppuku, but rather that they should embrace the samurai's noble spirit of accountability.
Japan needs a revival of the samurai spirit. The reason many Westerners admire Japan, as depicted in movies and books like "Shogun," is precisely because of the samurai ethos. It's what makes Japan appear so impressive. It's the spirit that has sustained Japan until now.
The South Korean government seems to emphasize extreme hard power. It adopts pro-corporate policies and takes a confrontational stance against North Korea, with little evidence of dialogue or diplomacy. Without the soft power that includes civilian exchanges, there is always the potential for issues to arise.
Conflicts like those between Israel and Hamas, or Russia and Ukraine, might have been mitigated if there had been adequate diplomatic dialogue and civilian exchanges beforehand. If there had been historical, religious, cultural, and artistic exchanges aimed at mutual understanding, perhaps these painful wars would have been averted.(Q's hope)