By Yusuke Yamada

The News that Noriaki Imai, Nahoko Takato, and Soichiro Imai were abducted by militants in Iraq on April 7 shocked Japan and raised the question in the government about the victim's responsibility. The responsibility dispute was caused by Japanese nationals being taken hostage despite the government's ban on non-military persons from going into Iraq. This controversy was expanded because their family demonstrated against the government and conducted a campaign to collect signatures in order to withdraw the troops from Iraq. The captors demanded the Self Defense Force troops in Iraq be withdrawn in exchange for the three's release, so the families thought the cause of kidnapping was the dispatch of the SDF to Iraq. The fundamental difference in the concept of responsibility between the government and the victims caused this problem.

The government thought they couldn't easily withdraw the troops from Iraq because the sending of the SDF was the decision of the Diet, which represents the people. If the government withdraws the troops from Iraq and NGO's assume their activities, is it a good choice? If the troops weren't in Iraq, would Japanese citizens still be safe there. The answers to these are not clear questions. Therefore, Japanese citizens who enter Iraq should firmly have their own responsibility. Though the Islamic Clerics Association said that the Japanese government hadn't taken any actions to release the captives, the government said they were entirely devoted to making an effort. Therefore, the truth was unknown. Prime minister Junichiro Koizumi criticized the ex-hostages for saying that if they had an opportunity to go to Iraq again, they would like to go. Koizumi said, "Given the fact that many govermental officers devotedly made every possible effort to gain their release, why would they say that they want to go again? They should have more responsibility." Koizumi's comment isn't wrong in terms of governmental responsibility, but the non-governmental activity is significant and important, because there are certainly some things only they can do through close contact with the Iraqi people.

On the other hand, the victims' families thought that the three were taken hostage because the government sent troops to Iraq, so the government should bear responsibility. The demand of $24,000, airfare and medical bill of the three, from the government and the critical reaction of ordinary Japanese toward the victims were harsh. It is doubtful, however, that the government should take responsibility for them being taken hostage in Iraq, because their families should have been against their entering Iraq. In addition, they needed to understand the dangers if they enter a country such as Iraq.

Were the ex-hostages and their families opposed to the dispatch of SDF when it was decided? If they weren't, they are off the mark to expect the government to take responsibility when such an incident occurs.

In the future, if such incidents happen in dangerous countries, how should Japan deal with it? The government can't absolutely ban Japanese citizens from going over to other countries even if it's a country in the midst of war. Therefore, some Japanese non-governmental members will surely go. However, if Japanese nationals are taken hostage again, the government must make every effort to release them, because it is a national responsibility. Japan needs to activate the SDF's humanitarian missions by giving the Iraqis jobs and winning their trust in order to prevent further incidents. Now Japan aids North Korea with 250 thousand kilos of food and $10 million in medicines. Japan should give that same kind of aid to Iraq, too. Also, Japanese should go to Iraq with firm responsibility. When we go to any country, we need to be responsible. Next time, if we only call for the responsibility of the government, we can't improve the situation.

Now the issue which we should discuss will be the agreement and cooperation between non-governmental people and the government.